News-Record.com

It's easier to get weed than alcohol if you're underage, at least, in a college town.

And just how does the writer expect Law Enforcement to replace revenue used to buy cool new toys when drug cash and property seizures are no longer allowed?

And what about the overloaded court system and prisons? Decriminalizing recreational drugs would cause layoffs. Those court employees have a right to work and we should do everything we can to make sure there's enough work for them.

Some folks are so heartless.

Hugh, like tobacco and alcohol, recreational drugs would be taxed to the hilt.

Interesting a college professor is publicly advocating the legalization of cocaine. Not surprising, but interesting.

I'd go for legalization of pot but not the hard stuff.

"I'd go for legalization of pot but not the hard stuff."

Funny, but this is where I really have a problem. Why not legalize it, so that the crackheads and junkies could actually get help and we could reduce the crime caused by drugs? Why not legalize it and take the big money out of drug cartels? Oh, I know the right wing religious answer to the questions, but for serious people, why can't we figure out a way to actually end the scourge on our communities? We've been losing the "war" on drugs from day one, but no one is willing to take the bold moves to eradicate the problem.
Legalization would not immediately or completely solve the problem---but neither does our current system of locking up drug offenders. Break-ins and robberies are MOSTLY linked to drug crime. Murders are being committed as gang turf wars for the distribution of drugs.
Does anyone want to venture out and look for some way to to address the problems, WITHOUT the usual drivel from the right wing nutjobs who just think they have the ONLY way to do something? We can ALL agree that drug use is bad and leads to a life of crime---now let's look at solving the problem even if it means thinking outside that tiny little box we've been in forever.

Note to Hugh:
If you've never seen "Reefer Madness" get a copy and laugh yourself silly. I just love the piano player who is going nuts on weed. It is really funny.

Note to Dan: Don't go off on some morality screed. We all know how you feel--just sit on the sidelines if you can't add anything constructive--Please!

It is curious that those who cry "nanny state" at every juncture, want the government to keep throwing money down a hole under the name of "war on drugs". Those same folks will vote against bonds to build jails, or will protest when money is needed for more police, but don't have a problem with fighting 'the war on drugs' and wasting precious dollars. They will call anything that works to end addiction, a "liberal giveaway program" but they have no problem with the money spent to fight "the war on drugs".

We need to say no to the moronic thinking that continues going down the path of no results. What we need are leaders who are willing to take unpopular stands now so that maybe in our lifetime, real progress can be made.

If there is no demand for the product, the production will cease---buggy whips, etc. Yes, some drug mules will be out of work, but that's the nature of things.

Can't wait to hear some right wing nutjob tell me that that drug dealers are private enterprise and should be free from government interference! Don't laugh, with some of the wackos who post here, it would not surprise me one bit.

Let's see some serious ideas and not some bible thumping moral crusader telling us how bad drugs are--WE ALREADY KNOW THAT! OKAY?!!

~

It strikes me as a little strange that we approach an undesirable activity issue of which we have not gotten control by saying, "Let's stop trying. We've failed thus far, so, if ya can't beat 'em, join 'em."

This same approach could be applied to any number of serious activities that we heretofore have deemed illegal. Use your imagination.

Certainly, if carried to a broad enough extent, it would eliminate the need for a new jail, and the associated tax burden.

Am I the only one who finds it odd that we, as a society, are considering legalizing cocaine and banning plastic grocery bags; or legalizing heroin while banning incandescent light bulbs?

Yeah, I probably am.

~

Through taxes and institutional control, revenues from drug sales would go to the state, just as revenue from alcohol sales go to the state now.

Since the price of drugs is directly related to the risk of providing them, the value of narcotics would plummet, and violence caused by drug profits would vanish.

Our prison populations would diminish by half to two-thirds, drug addiction-fueled larcenies would evaporate and a prime source of revenue for international terrorism would be eliminated organically.

Considering the violence and destructive lifestyles spawned by Prohibition in the '20s, Edmund Burke and David Lefkowitz are exactly right: "Those who don't know history are destined to repeat it."

I read that US soldiers in Afghanistan are not allowed to destroy opium poppy fields as they come across them. The reason given by the military brass is that they do not want to upset the local growers. But, the Taliban taxes the growers and the Taliban uses the money to buy weapons that are used to kill US soldiers.

"We all know how you feel--just sit on the sidelines if you can't add anything constructive"

Lesse, you ask for constructive ideas yet your posts contain:

"the moronic thinking'
"right wing nutjob"
"bible thumping moral crusader"
etc, etc.

Take a look in the mirror, try not to laugh, and try being constructive yourself.

You make some interesting points but as usual they are drowned out by your insults.

BTW, I voted for the jail bond.

**********************************************

Prag, you seem to think that if drugs are legal and taxed there will be no black market and the prices of drugs would fall correct?

If that is the case, can you explain the black market for prescription drugs, particularly oxycontin, and the associated crime in obtaining such drugs? It too is used as a recreational drug.

As you seem in favor of legalizing drugs should drugs like oxycontin be sold over the counter?

You guys can argue all you want for the legalization of drugs, but in reality what are the chances of hard drugs being legalized in your lifetimes?

I think this issue is more complex than is indicated in the posts thus far. My initial reaction is much like Jack's, the "if we can't beat um, join um" mentality that is prevalent is not a good reason to legalize drugs, imho. However, on the surface, there are many reasons to consider such a step.

My problem with the legalization of some of the hard drugs is it would spawn a whole new crop of "easier to afford" drugs. Legalization would cause the price to increase due to all the taxes and administrative costs the government would levy on "legal" drugs. This, in turn, would cause an increase in an outbreak of cheaper, easier to get drugs like cheese and crank. Kids can get these drugs with half their daily lunch allowance. When the alternate, cheap drugs proliferate, what will the government do? Legalize them also?

This sounds like a never-ending proposition to me. While I have no issue with weed since the potential for sudden death is almost nil, the hard drugs scare me. Too many kids dying to take such a cavalier attitude towards hard drugs.

I doubt legalizing drugs would lower the crime rate as much as Prof Lefkowitz hopes. Addicts would continue to commit crimes to fund their habit.

Allow me to humbly suggest an alternative solution to the drug problem. Bring back prohibition. Doing so would make alcohol the illegal drug of choice; marajuana & cocaine use would plummet.

TLC offers the strongest argument for not legalizing drugs: namely, the utterly predictable demand for "treatment" by nanny-state advocates. Addiction to X would become the new "disease" (like alcoholism and breast cancer), and so of course we would need to fund massive new entitlements to deal with the "disease."

The drug trade represents the triumph of capitalism and its inexorable laws of supply and demand over governmental intervention. Personally, I'd support the legalization of everything short of heroin, crack, and meth (where the social costs seem too great), but only on the condition that people accept responsibility for their choices.

Good points, Dan. But, I'd ask this: why is there a black market for Oxycontin? And, why is it known as "the poor man's heroin"?

Prohibition does nothing to quell consumption, nothing to combat abuse and everything to fuel violence and devastation. I detest drugs- they destroy lives, but far- FAR- more of those lives are destroyed by the violence, economics and criminal consequences of drugs than are destroyed by the drugs themselves.

The Volstead Act was a high-minded mistake. Its repeal did not end alcoholism, but did ease many of the scourges of the provision of its source.

Perhaps the same could be said of the war on drugs.

I am no right-wing "nutjob" but I have to disagree with many people on this thread concerning legalization of drugs. Yes, the war on drugs is a joke. Yes, drug trafficking is a major contributor to organized crime, which is truly global at this juncture. Yes, our criminal justice system does little to discourage drug use and lots to make occasional users into full-time addicts.

However, I don't think legalizing drugs will solve any of these problems. First, even if we legalize hard drugs, the black-market prices will still be cheaper than the "official" government price. Therefore, many addicts will resort to the black-market anyway. Second, how do you propose we actually get the newly "legal" drugs to the US? Most, if not all, countries ban illegal drugs so we would not be able to import them. Therefore, most drugs will be imported illegally anyway and thus would not solve the organized crime problems. Encouraging the planting and manufacture of these drugs here would get even more people involved in the the drug trade, not fewer. And there is no guarantee that much of the product would not go to the black-market. Finally, this talk of "personal responsibility" is nonsense. A person who is willing to commit crimes to feed his/her addiction has disclaimed any personal responsibility for his/her actions. Therefore, the society MUST take responsibility, if for no other reason than self-preservation. Since the government is the primary instrument of the collective will of our society, it is the government's job to minimize the harms posed by the drug addicts. Now, that does not mean I advocate putting them all in jails, only that some ACTION is required.

The bottom line is that legalization of drugs is unlikely to bring any tangible benefits and is almost certain to unleash a waive of new problems. Yes, the current system stinks. But, short of finding some biological solution - I hear they are developing drugs that may short-circuit certain chemical addictions, I just don't see legalization as panacea.

The drug war is all about funneling money into the incarceration industry.

Prag, there is a black market for oxycontin because it is used as a recreational drug in addition to it's prescribed purpose. And it is HIGHLY addictive.

People who take oxycontin as part of a pain management program have to submit to periodic urine drug screens to ensure they test positive for oxycontin, meaning they are using the drug, not selling it to others, and not mixing with other drugs.

Read this article and see what kind of violence has spurred from oxycontin addicts and those who steal the drug to resell it.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/health/2004321621_oxycontinthefts02m.html

I appreciate the posts of Yvonne and others. I don't see this issue as a "right wing nut job" or "bible thumping moral crusader" issue. Many people of various political persuasions do not favor legalization of hard drugs for many reasons and you guys provided some good ones.

You are correct Yvonne. Pot won't kill you in short order like the hard drugs can.

One time I went to the beach for a weekend with some buddies when I was in college. One of them brought some cocaine. They all tried some so I decided to as well. The high was terrific but once the high wore off I felt depressed and realllllllly wanted more. Thankfully there was no more. I quickly realized how addictive that stuff is. First and last time I ever tried it.

I don't see the benefit of legalizing it and other hard drugs and getting even more people hooked on the stuff. As CT states there will still be people committing crimes get get coke and/or the money to buy it. Perhaps it will worsen the problem as more people may be using it.

Another issue is public safety. Who wants more impaired drivers on the road? Who wants to get on a plane with a pilot coming off a coke high from the previous night?

Legalization of things like marijuana and LSD are about as far as I'd be willing to go. There'd be an adjustment period for sure, but I think that, eventually, most people would use the legal methods of attaining the drugs.

Dan's right, cocaine, heroin, other hard drugs are too powerful and too addicting.

"If you've never seen "Reefer Madness" ...."

... there's another - same era - called "Marijuana" that is pretty wild - bare titties from pot-fueled vixons.

... an interesting side note to the "War On Terrorism" .. the Brit's suggested to Bushy that Opium from Afghanistan - apparently the pharm' industry could really use this legit' product - be federally collected. A Cash Crop to help the "terrorists" develop a capitalist attitude ...

... an interesting idea of course quicky rejected (obviously sans thought) by the bushies.

Dan said:

" ... can you explain the black market for prescription drugs, particularly oxycontin, and the associated crime in obtaining such drugs? It too is used as a recreational drug."

I learned that from rush .. my hero ... they don't call him RUSH for nothing ..

Nice attempt at humor JDR but drug addiction is not a pretty sight. I've done consulting with drug/alcohol rehab facilities, trust me.

Give Rush credit, he admitted the problem, sought treatment, and is now clean. That's the way it is supposed to work. He started using pain killers after an unsuccessful spinal surgery and got addicted to them. Oxycontin is a very powerful addictive drug.

Drug and/or alcohol addiction knows no politics, race, creed, gender, age, ethnicity, nationality, sexual orientation, or income status.

I find it highly (no pun intended)hypocritical that the one's who want narcotics legalized are the same who want tobacco products outlawed.

"Give Rush credit, he admitted the problem .. "

Bull. He got caught.

Going deaf was not enough incentive to seek "treatment" and go "clean". He got caught.

After years of saying those abusing drugs should rot in hell, he got caught.

After years of saying "treatment" was liberal fantasy, he got caught.

Call it what is was, Dan: He got caught ... or is Rush such a dummy he did not realize "Oxycontin is a very powerful addictive drug".

He got caught.

-------------------------------
I have had to sit back and shake my head at the ignorant comments made about legalization of drugs.
Those comments have proven, it is too early to even try. At least it brought out some real "thought" as to the issue, but became bogged down (as I predicted) with moronic items such as DEFENDING RUSH LIMBAUGH!
How can you discuss anything intelligently when you get crap like:
"Give Rush credit, he admitted the problem, sought treatment, and is now clean."

Dan, Rush is a joke. He railed against drugs and when it came out he was doctor shopping, buying drugs from the maid, and lying about it, he did the ONLY thing left to do, to save his right wing empire. Your "apologizing" for him is indicative of your intellectual depth. You ARE smarter than our President, though. (That's no compliment to either of you)
--------------------------------

Sometimes it's worth repeating something:

"Drug and/or alcohol addiction knows no politics, race, creed, gender, age, ethnicity, nationality, sexual orientation, or income status."

I have experience in the industry, do you guys? Some people get caught, some keep on abusing, some kill themselves, some voluntary seek treatment, some seek it or risk losing their job and/or families, some are ordered to do so in the penal system, etc. etc.

People seek help for a variety of reasons, it should be applauded whenever they do regardless of the reason.

You two are so blinded by partisanship that you cannot realize this. Sad for you.

"I have experience in the industry, do you guys?"

Wow! Two revelations in one week!

Dan, you first admitted your recreational use of cocaine, while at the beach with your 'friends' and now you admit your "experience in the industry".

Like the premise from the old television series, "It Takes a Thief" I suppose the one who knows the subject inside and out is the rehabilitated one. Explains a lot. Explains quite a lot.

Intellectual note:
I've never tried any drug nor have I smoked, but I do not mount some moral crusade against those who do or have. Instead, I give the hypocrites who preach abstinence while screwing the public, pure "T" Hell!

Dan,
I realize this particular "Conservative" speaks in words you have to look up, but please give this a gander and listen to what he says:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lNw2r-qmopI

http://www.nationalreview.com/12feb96/drug.html

After watching and reading you may find that you are not really a "conservative" but rather a moralist.

Dan .. if Rush had not made a career and millions off being a self-righteous holier than thou, it would not be an issue. Since he did .. he EARNED the ridicule.

Do I have experience in the industry? Yes, and I'll bet a finger I have more personal friends (than you have) who "experienced" drug addiction.

Experience in the industry = I have worked in the drug rehab industry, still do with several clients. Demon Deacon musta thought I was a drug pusher, why am I not surprised. Read the rest of the paragraph Demon Deacon, it refers to drug treatment. I'll try to make it more simple for you next time.

JDR, you win the bet, it's not a bet I'd want to win. I had a childhood friend ruin his life with drugs, that was enough. It is encouraging to see those who seek help kick their habits.

Dan,
Your self admitted recreational use of cocaine aside, did you watch famed "conservative" William F. Buckley link? Didn't think so.

I've got to quit giving you credit for having intellectual curiosity. My bad.

James,
It's too funny how people not only listen, religiously, to Rush Limbaugh but believe he is some "moralist", like our Dan.

Limbaugh goes on and on about the sanctity of marriage, but that dope addict has been married three or four times! Guess his "sanctity" and mine are different.
Of course, Dan and other "ditto heads" just eat his drivel up with a spoon, as Limbaugh drives to the bank.

Dan says,
"One time I went to the beach for a weekend with some buddies when I was in college. One of them brought some cocaine. They all tried some so I decided to as well."

Just a fun day at the beach for our local moralist!

No wonder Dan loves Rush Limbaugh so much! They're two peas in the same pod!

Overtaxed has a point--some of the people who want drugs legalized also insist that tobacco use be banned. I know people who were killed by drunk/drug-impaired drivers, but not by smoking drivers.

Perhaps we could stop arresting for mere possession of drugs and instead really clobber people who hurt or kill others as a result of using substances that impair. I mean crack down on the very first DWI--no mercy--lose your license, go to jail, pay for the victim's funeral, etc. Put all our energy into punishing those who hurt people other than themselves--bcause that's where they cross the line between their freedom and our freedom. What do you all think?

"Just a fun day at the beach for our local moralist!"

I knew you'd have fun with that one Demon Deacon and I was spot on. That's not the primary reason I posted it, but it was in my mind. It should give you good cause to post future idiotic statements worthy of the archives. Carry on!!

BTW, your hero Obama admitted to previous cocaine use.