Redstate

have been dissected, analyzed, discussed, and at least partially answered. If you are unaware or just dismissive of the large body of work in this area then I suggest the following:

Smoke and Mirrors: The War on Drugs and the Politics of Failure by Dan Baum

Why Our Drug Laws Have Failed: A Judicial Indictment Of War On Drugs by James Gray

Drug War Crimes: The Consequences of Prohibition by Jeffrey A. Miron

Drug War Heresies: Learning from Other Vices, Times, and Places by Robert J. MacCoun and Peter Reuter

Ain't Nobody's Business if You Do: The Absurdity of Consensual Crimes in a Free Society by Peter McWilliams

Undoing Drugs: Beyond Legalization by Daniel K. Benjamin, Roger LeRoy Miller

Drugs in America: The Case for Victory : A Citizen's Call to Action by Vincent Bugliosi

"Nothing works like freedom, Nothing succeeds like liberty"
Kyle

Freedom of Religion not Freedom from Religion

"Nothing works like freedom, Nothing succeeds like liberty"
Kyle

I will not spend my time reading a bunch of ignorant people talk about legalizing drugs as if that is some panecea for the problems of drug addiction and incarceration.

Oh and don't call me ignorant again.

Freedom of Religion not Freedom from Religion

A person who does not even want to discuss an issue, nor enter into any meaningful dialog, A person who spits on the scholarship of others even noted lawyers, doctors, and authors.
But more than that, a person who scoffs at the scholarship without even having sampled it.

Sorry, you condemn yourself by thinking you already know all there is to know on the subject when in fact you know little or nothing, or what you do know is probably wrong.

No doubt you will come back with all sorts of personal anecdotes but those hardly support sound policy.

"Nothing works like freedom, Nothing succeeds like liberty"
Kyle

and if my arguments cannot be based on my experience than what what in the hell shall they be based upon?

Freedom of Religion not Freedom from Religion

I'm usually not a fan of Jaded but you are way out of line here.

"I will look for people in the cast of John Roberts, Samuel Alito, and my friend the late William Rehnquist – jurists of the highest caliber who know their own minds, and know the law, and know the difference." - John McCain

and if you can define where I am out of line...please explain!

Freedom of Religion not Freedom from Religion

Just a typical, small town, white girl...

but our new sign at work is EXCUSES ARE FOR LOSERS.....
which I totally agree with....I really have a long week of many debates that have devolved badly and I had "trigger" fingers...again I apologize.

Freedom of Religion not Freedom from Religion

Freedom of Religion not Freedom from Religion

he admitted that he was not going to bother reading any of the books I recommended after first posing many questions, and casually dismissed all arguments in toto. Obviously he wan not really interested in answers. How is that not willfully ignorant?

"Nothing works like freedom, Nothing succeeds like liberty"
Kyle

It's name calling, pure and simple.

I agree with your overall point, but it's just not the way to go about it.

I've resisted the urge to say similar things lately even though I frequently have the same impulse.

We all need to cool it. This place has gotten too heated.

"I will look for people in the cast of John Roberts, Samuel Alito, and my friend the late William Rehnquist – jurists of the highest caliber who know their own minds, and know the law, and know the difference." - John McCain

BTW, I agree with you that the War on Drugs is a huge waste of federal money and does more harm then good. I'm not in favor of full legalization, but I do think we need to change a LOT about our drug policies.

"I will look for people in the cast of John Roberts, Samuel Alito, and my friend the late William Rehnquist – jurists of the highest caliber who know their own minds, and know the law, and know the difference." - John McCain

Jets. Cool. Both.

Drink Good Coffee. You can sleep when you're dead.

nm

these types have been whining over legalization for many, many years and still can't prove their point worthy of acceptance.

They are kind of like BHO...talk about all the wonder ideas and things that could/would happen, but when asked how to do it they have no freaking clue. Dreamers....it's kind of cute.

You have a problem with the WoD...fine, let's change the battle plan..I agree, it's not working so well. But comparing the present situation with drugs to Prohibition is a joke.

" Got to love the Lord for making things like that."
Morally Compromised

Freedom of Religion not Freedom from Religion

whiny crap about the poor ole Maye guy...tough crap.

It doesn't matter how much dope they found in his place, a tiny bit or a couple pounds. They found dope, which makes him part of a crimminal enterprize that has been targeted by law enforcement to better society as a whole....oh yeah, and he killed a cop.... you now what they say about life...

" Got to love the Lord for making things like that."
Morally Compromised

Those who do not learn the lessons of Prohibition will repeat the failures of Prohibition.

This is an article about Law Enforcement with regards to Prohibition 2.0.

Similar things happened under Prohibition 1.0.

They're happening again.

Getting rid of Prohibition 1.0 got rid of a great deal of corruption on all levels of government and, on top of that, it got rid of raids on the houses of citizens who were not hurting anybody else in the privacy of their own homes.

These things keep happening.

And they will continue to keep happening.

Man is free at the moment he wishes to be. --Voltaire

See this is where you pro-dope activists got it wrong...

Just because you use dope in your own home, doesn't mean you are not hurting anyone else...as much as you would like to make it that cut and dry ( :) ) for your side of the discussion.

Thank god most people realize that any consumption of illegal drugs enables others to be thugs, savages, and outright scumbag crimminals. Yes, even you highly educated, Saab driving, suburban living "recreational users" are part of the overall problem.

As I said, you might have a solid point about addressing the actual tactics in the war, but good luck convincing the masses that this war doesn't need to be fought.

As to Prohibition, sorry, saying we got that wrong and were able to correct it doesn't make your point float. You pro-dope types need to spend a lot more time at the drawing board....quite a bit actually.

" Got to love the Lord for making things like that."
Morally Compromised

I don't smoke dope.

While I can appreciate that you think that the only reason that the power of government should be limited is because we're a bunch of pot-smoking homosexuals who want to legally marry our dogs in a government-recognized Satanist church, there are a handful of us who merely believe that Prohibition was a mistake then and it's a mistake now and people are being jailed for stuff that is none of the government's business.

I'm sure you'll be back to ideas of limited government when you see what a president who wants to 'work with' a Democratic Congress is in the White House again.

Man is free at the moment he wishes to be. --Voltaire

that you did...sorry if you took it that way.

As for your point in this...you are welcome to it. I will take it seriously when the legalize drugs crowd actually makes a reasonable case for their views...so far it's pretty obvious that a poor job has been done trying to make the point on a large scale.

" Got to love the Lord for making things like that."
Morally Compromised

Analogies between the families ruined by loved ones imprisoned?
Analogies between the black markets created?
Analogies between the organized crime in charge of the black markets?
Analogies between the crime that existed before and the crime that existed after?
Analogies between the amount of Federal government power exercised by the 18th Amendment and the amount of Federal government power exercised by the DEA without one?

All of these do no good?

Could you give me an example of the form of an argument that *MIGHT* theoretically change your mind?

Man is free at the moment he wishes to be. --Voltaire

but I will later...sorry

" Got to love the Lord for making things like that."
Morally Compromised

...in most of your questions should provide sufficient answers.

And pointing out other vices in an attempt to show a slippery slope type of argument is a little over the top considering the numerous "legal" vices that have the same impact and didn't lead to the end of the wold.

I'll respect your view, Jaded, if you don't agree but I don't think you've outlined a convincing argument why ending the war on drugs is a not in our best interest.

Founder and contributor to The Minority Report and Editor for The Hinzsight Report

thread....I will not be supporting any candidate who talks about legalizing drugs in any context...and the truth of the matter is it will not be happening in my lifetime....there is no groundswell of support for it...so I will just leave your thread to those who agree with you.

Freedom of Religion not Freedom from Religion

...I'll just say that legalizing drugs was a personal afterthought as the main issue and one I think we can agree on is that we need to end the phony "war on drugs" for the fact that it doesn't work and is a huge wast of time and money.

Founder and contributor to The Minority Report and Editor for The Hinzsight Report

for crack users which largely tend to be poorer people is wholly out of line for the sentences for powder cocaine use....I have thought that since the 80's. I don't think drug charges are warranted for a personal amount of pot either but when you enter the realm of dealing and are caught with large amounts and in possession of weapons the charges are warranted.

I also believe that we need more money for rehabilitation and less money on "swat" type operations...there is no doubt that police departments across the US have become very militerized...and that should definitely be addressed by local, state and federal politicians...we have a lot to agree on and work to change but wholesale drug legalization is not the answer for me.

Freedom of Religion not Freedom from Religion

...I'm also of the opinion that we as conservatives should be owning this issue and leading the reform.

Founder and contributor to The Minority Report and Editor for The Hinzsight Report

I go every year to the Fairfax County Government Building to speak on behalf of rehabilitation to try to secure more funds for drug addicts and alcoholics and the money gets less because of other items...ie: ESL and schools which by the way always get more money and yet they remain the same.

I have spoken with my congressman office and my Senators office on this issue and still nothing because there is not a tidalwave of public support for this particular issue....it's just not there...but if you have a plan let me know and we can get to work.

Freedom of Religion not Freedom from Religion

...of drugs from one of criminalization to one of health care!!!

By treating drugs as a health problem instead of a criminal problem we could refocus funds from fighting a war to education and rehabilitation.

And for the record drugs were made illegal not for what they do but for the potential harm non-white races taking said drugs may commit on whites (white women to be exact) -- time to move way past that!

Founder and contributor to The Minority Report and Editor for The Hinzsight Report

like exactly what democrats were saying in the late 70s and early 80s regarding drug use. The "health problem" not "criminal problem" mantra became particularly prominent in the mocking of Mrs. Reagan's "just say no" campaign.

The democrats eventually dropped the issue because it made them look weak on crime and on society standards more generally.

Maybe it takes a Nixon to go to China, but I just don't see this viewpoint garnering any level of political support in the next 20 years.

I strongly disagree with the racial analysis. Urban city kids on crack commit crimes against other urban city residents.

...but at some point we're going to have to look clearly at this issue and realize that our current strategy is just plain ridiculous!

People need to realize 2 important things

1) Decriminalizing drugs won't turn everyone in the country into addicts that's a myth we need to dispel ASAP! It hinders the discussion.

2) The waste of money and manpower is a complete missuse of tax dollars!

As to the racial analysis: I suggest looking into the history of U.S. drug banning. For instance -- The US banned the drug not because it was harmful, but because they were worried that Chinese immigrant men would use it to seduce their women.

Founder and contributor to The Minority Report and Editor for The Hinzsight Report

if you're a lawyer, a drug dealer, an "investor" in recreational substances, a police department that wants more money, more positions, and more really neat toys just like the military has. It doesn't, however, do much to reduce drug use and abuse and I'd offer probably contributes to the problem by making the whole "industry" much more lucrative.

In Vino Veritas

Founder and contributor to The Minority Report and Editor for The Hinzsight Report

The moment I saw this title I knew, just knew, someone would be along to focus on the word "drug" instead of reading the Maye story and thinking about the un-necessary militarization of our civilian police force. And then wring their hands over the thought that someday we might decide some activities engaged in by adult citizens don't require incarceration, let alone SWAT raids based on shaky informants that needlessly put both police and citizens at risk of injury, or death.

But ok.

... will the government or businesses who are selling these drugs be financially reponsible when the drug users/addicts kill someone ...

Do you think they should be? Try applying whatever logic you use when considering whether gun manufacturers and salesmen should be held responsible for criminal activities and murders committed using their product or whether Budweiser should be made to cough up cash for DUI fatalities we can connect their product with and get back to me.

Will the government be taking care of these user/drug addict's babies when they are taken away because the user/drug addict is not cognizant of their responsiblities ...

Do you think we should handle this the same way we do for alcoholics who can no longer care for their children? Why or why not?

Will we make gambling legal in all the states as well?

Hey, how about instead of that, we have the government manage all gambling operations, casinos, and lotteries and market them on radio and television to citizens, while at the same time using SWAT teams to bust up low bid poker games played by senior citizens? Oh, wait...

Will businesses be able to exclude user/drug addicts from gainful employment? I mean it will be legal.

I guess not, just the other day I heard about a guy who went to work drunk as a skunk and well, heck, they couldn't stop him from performing heart surgery because after all, he's over 21 and drinking is legal for him! Oh well!

If you are user/drug addict will you be legally able to buy a gun?

What do you think? Contrast your position with how you feel we should regard the Second Amendment rights of alcoholics, lottery addicts, or persons subject to home foreclosure.

Hey I've seen some reasonable arguments against changes from status quo on drug policy (what happened to zuiko?), but that salvo fell well short.

Prostitution is a little outside of the scope of this one. I'll just say that I dream of the day that people boinking is the worst thing happening in society so that police officers are going after that rather than, say, people who download music illegally. Or litterers.

But you ask: "...will the government be giving or selling needles and or crack pipes to these users/drug addicts....and will the government or businesses who are selling these drugs be financially reponsible when the drug users/addicts kill someone behind the wheel or in the process of robbery to buy their drugs or will the insurance industry be selling insurance for that?"

I would make a comparison to Big Alcohol and how the government does not give out shot glasses to alcoholics and is not held accountable for people who drive drunk (though it does prosecute them). Courts have found, if I recall correctly, that breweries are not responsible for drunk drivers. (Analagously, there was a law passed recently that said that gun manufacturers were not responsible for criminals using guns in crime.)

As for people stealing to buy drugs after Prohibition 2.0 ends, the best analogy I can make is to the drop in crime after Prohibition ended. Is there really a problem with people stealing to buy a bottle of Mad Dog 20/20? How does it compare to the rates of crime when Mad Dog 20/20 was illegal?

You go on to ask: "Will the government be taking care of these user/drug addict's babies when they are taken away because the user/drug addict is not cognizant of their responsiblities...which of course means the tax payer."

Well, once again, I turn to Prohibition 1.0. Let's look at what Wikipedia says about the Temperance movement. Here's a good line.

The famous evangelist Billy Sunday staged a mock funeral for John Barleycorn and then preached on the benefits of prohibition. "The reign of tears is over," he asserted. "The slums will soon be only a memory. We will turn our prisons into factories and our jails into storehouses and corncribs." Since alcohol was to be banned and since it was seen as the cause of most, if not all, crime, some communities sold their jails. One sold its jail to a farmer who converted it into a combination pig and chicken house while another converted its jail into a tool house.

Now, I am not going to make the bold promises made by Temperance Leaders like Billy Sunday... but after alcohol was made illegal, crime went *UP*, not down. Moreover, this crime harmed far more parents than mere alcoholism ever did. It threw parents into jails leaving their children to be raised by, you guessed it, the tax payer.

I ask you: How many parents have been thrown into jail because of drug policies? Who is raising those children if not the taxpayer? Do you think that more or fewer taxpayer dollars would be spent if drugs were decriminalized?

I look at Prohibition 1.0 to make these comparisons for myself, mind.

You go on to ask: "Will we make gambling legal in all the states as well? I mean certainly people who want drugs legalized will want all "sin" to be legal...I mean we certainly can't pick and choose...can we?"

Well, I will immediately point out that most states have a scratch lottery, if not lotto, if not powerball. Colorado Springs has a number of Bingo parlors (in my youth, I took my dates to play bingo. It was a lot more fun than dinner/movie). Moreover, Colorado is one of two states where home poker games are allowed (the other is, unsurprisingly, Nevada).

All that to say: Gambling is legal in pretty much all of the states and, as someone who plays nickel/dime/quarter every month or so in my friend's garage, I ask you why in the heck you think this game of mine shouldn't be legal.

If you say that you didn't mean gambling like playing poker with friends... I ask you what you mean when you say "make gambling legal" because, as I hinted at earlier, home poker games are illegal in 48 states. Yes, even nickel/dime/quarter. Personally, I think that consenting adults getting together to play nickel/dime/quarter every month is an unalloyed good. So, yes. I hope that gambling becomes legal in more places.

You ask: "Is there anything that the government shouldn't sanction?"

How about violence? How about interactions where at least one of the actors does not consent to the action? How about stealing? How about public urination?

"Will businesses be able to exclude user/drug addicts from gainful employment? I mean it will be legal."

I have no problem with a company saying "we're drug free!" and hiring only straightedge kinda folks. Test for booze, test for cigarettes (insurance is expensive, after all), test for pork products. I think that a company should have the right to fire employees at will. I also think that the "two-week notice" rule for employees is BS. But I am also one of those people who says stuff like "you aren't entitled to a job".

And you go on to ask: "If you are user/drug addict will you be legally able to buy a gun? I mean it will be legal..I don't think you will be able to discriminate against them...right? There second amendment rights will be intact because they are legally using these government sanctioned drugs."

I'll look at the 2nd Amendment. "Something something something shall not be infringed."

Yeah, I'll say that drug users will legally be able to buy a gun.

Unless, of course, they live in DC. I understand that guns are illegal there.

You conclude: "Thanks for any answers you can provide to my questions."

I rejoin: Don't mention it.

Man is free at the moment he wishes to be. --Voltaire

"Nothing works like freedom, Nothing succeeds like liberty"
Kyle

And I'm not trying to make a convert today.

I'm just trying to plant a seed.

Man is free at the moment he wishes to be. --Voltaire

Freedom of Religion not Freedom from Religion

Fat chance, buddy.

And Rightly So!

I dream of the day that people boinking is the worst thing happening in society

The way to reduce the use of drugs is to increase the quantities of sex and rock-and-roll. This works on Islam as well.

Drink Good Coffee. You can sleep when you're dead.

Lord knows that I smoked in college due to not having near enough...

Well, let's just say that I had enough rock and roll.

Man is free at the moment he wishes to be. --Voltaire

Founder and contributor to The Minority Report and Editor for The Hinzsight Report

Founder and contributor to The Minority Report and Editor for The Hinzsight Report

potency of a substance have to do with anything? Everclear is a more potent form of deadly alcohol, but I can buy it anytime I want to.

"Nothing works like freedom, Nothing succeeds like liberty"
Kyle

dangerous than others.

Have you seen what crystal meth can do to a person? There are functioning cocain users out there. People on crystal meth do not function for long. No way.

Its a question of probabilities. If a drug is instantly addictive to 95% of the population, I am not going to vote to legalize it.

We have laws on the books about suicide and suicide prevention. At some point, laws on drug use are the same concept.

nt

The cost of alcohol during prohibition was astronomically more IIRC than it is now. The same thing would happen-th dealers are going to become obsolete once I can pick up a pack of Malboro Greens for 10.00 a pack. All of the incentive to deal is gone because its all of the risk with none of the financial reward. I don't see any good in throwing users of any drugs in jail-rehab makes far more sense if we are insistent on housing people.

Someone's got to punch the hippies.

Those were two disjointed thoughts.

Marlboro Greens...I'm sure they can't wait.

is that all of Big Tobacco has a large mount of pot growing ina legal undisclosed location, and if by some waving of the wand weed was legalized today, it would be in the stores tomorrow. But we'll probably never know at least not for a good 20 years IMO.

Someone's got to punch the hippies.

having managed the tobacco department in several Walgreens sotres...tobacco companies aren't that organized.

But they do have the hottest sales reps...better than drug companies I think.

that.

Don't you think the issue comes down to the specific substance?

There are illegal drugs with addition rates in the same neighborhood as alcohol. There are also other drugs that are pretty much instantaneously addicative 99% of the time.

and the problems that come with them, I have no desire to expand the menu. I see the logic in your comment and would be glad if we lived in a world (politics/government) that operated in a logical manner where we could apply it- but we don't.

For example if I could legalize pot and ban alcohol, I would do it in a heartbeat. I like neither, but think alcohol causes far more damage in our society. Of course all I would get if I proposed this is alcohol and pot both legal with a huge lobby of activists screaming for the next drug in the queu.
_________________
Thou art the Great Cat, the avenger of the Gods, and the judge of words...-Inscription on the Royal Tombs at Thebes

It is substance that can generally be used in moderation without negative effects. Of course, there are more than 100 million Americans who are of drinking age, so the number of incidents relating to alcohol are higher than for pot.

Crystal meth on the other hand is pretty much instantaneously addictive for 99% of the population. My understanding is that there are no functioning crystal meth users, so that is a substance that needs to be banned.

If we shifted focus to the crystal meth side of the equation, and left the pot heads and shroomers alone, I think resources would be put to better use.

Potheads rarely hurt anyone, and they are taking up too many spots in prison that would be better suited for more violence-oriented crimes. That goes for both users and dealers.

sentencing, and other options, but I am against any legalization.
_________________
Thou art the Great Cat, the avenger of the Gods, and the judge of words...-Inscription on the Royal Tombs at Thebes

I think some level of public debate on these things is a good idea.

War on poverty
War on drugs
War on terror

These things should be discussed. Making them off limits is bad.

Reducing penalties for pot is de facto legalization, which you say you support.

tactics and alternative sentencing... fines, drug testing, community service, recovery classes all come to mind.

I do not support direct or de facto legalization so please do not imply that I have said this.
_________________
Thou art the Great Cat, the avenger of the Gods, and the judge of words...-Inscription on the Royal Tombs at Thebes

You seemed to be implying that our positions were not that different. I apologize for the presumption.

I've got to call it a night, but I do believe we probably agree on much more than we disagree. Things need to change, that is for sure.
________________
Thou art the Great Cat, the avenger of the Gods, and the judge of words...-Inscription on the Royal Tombs at Thebes