"Thomas Heger" wrote in message
...
Am 10.10.2011 22:37, schrieb John Smith:
On 10/10/2011 10:48 AM, Thomas Heger wrote:
Am 10.10.2011 07:29, schrieb John Smith:
On 10/8/2011 7:26 PM, RHF wrote:
On Oct 8, 5:39 pm, John wrote:
On 10/8/2011 5:13 PM, Thomas Heger wrote:
..


It wasn't until this century began that drugs were illegal ... I can
remember that my grandmother still had supplies of opium and cocaine
and
guarded them religiously ... doling them out for a toothache here,
someones insomnia here, etc.

The original argument, why to make drugs illegal, was basically that
people were duped into becoming addicted and supporting the "medicine
show man" selling his "tonics."

Well, times have a changed, everyone knows about drugs ... we can
decriminalize them now ... the only people who will become addicted are
those who wish to ... no one is going to be duped into it ...

Any substance is somehow a drug. So let's talk about narcotics - maybe.

If you consider all the suffering related to these drugs: mental and
health problems, loosing jobs, families and friends, a LOT of money and
possibly life. So warnings should be there. But it's not really a
question of the law and criminal investigation, if someone is taking
these substances.

On the other hand, this is not wanted neither, because consume has
negative side effects. But making this stuff illegal and consume a crime
makes matters much worse, since the addiction cannot be properly
treated, the stuff is mixed with any kind of toxins and the price for
the dose is getting very high, what inevitable leads to related crimes.

This is all a great big ugly mess. Most countries do not really solve
these problems, but have half-baked programs, that can make matters even
worse.

So people should start to think it over and calculate the benefits
against the costs and find a possible solution.

..



In the end, all I see left on the table, once the BS is wiped up, is
control freaks and crooks ...

Or, simply, those who do not get a reward from controlling others, or
are making no profit from drugs being illegal, simply have no interest
in consuming billion or even trillions of tax payer dollars to imprison,
otherwise, law abiding citizens ...

Unless some other crime is committed, the simple act of consuming a drug
(or narcotic, specifically) is simply a victimless crime ... and
certainly NOT WORTH PAYING $40,000+ USD to punish someone for (lock them
in a prison) ... besides, it only ends up, really, punishing the tax
payers and society at large ... but, if you are not making any money off
of the drugs themselves, exploiting the American tax payer for your
paycheck is yet another option (paid public servant, policing authority,
court employee, etc.)

All of this punishment, criminalization and illegality of drugs does is
"put fleas on the tax payers back", to suck 'em dry ...


You still don't see the entire scale of the problem.
The prison is only the 'tip of the iceberg'. But try to imagine all the
other negative side effects.


And you are only focused on the "negative side effects" and ignore any of
the positives

E.g. the addictive person steals a car, for example yours. To get you out
off the car, he points a gun at you. Now we have some sort of extreme
situation, but lets imagine you are rescued by somebody, that shoots at
the criminal.


1) Very few addicts bother getting guns. They are too busy using what
wealth they have to pay for drugs.
2) Very few addicts do car-jackings. They are far more occupied with
scoring and enjoying the high.
3) Why should someone else rescue me, when I can put a bullet in the
car-jacking druggie, the moment I get a chance
4) If I pull my gun, I will most likely unload it into the druggie, to
make sure he's not a threat any more
5) I may be "in shock" after the shooting, but I'm alive and still have
my car.
6) The druggie is dead.
7) The police have little to do except advise the DA that it was a good
shoot.
Problem solved

Now we have a person under shock and a badly injured criminal and the
police has a lot of work. The costs here are not only, what all these
people earn (policemen, hospital, prison wards, lawyers, ambulance drivers
and so forth), but somehow the negative effects on quality of life, what
has a value, too.


That's only true in your worst-case scenario
IN the alternate scenario with a dead carjacking druggie, the only costs are
1) hauling off the body to the morgue
2) Autopsy
3) police filing a good shoot report
4) buying ammo to replace what was used.



Streetlife has a value. That is the possibility to use public spaces
without fear. If you are afraid of being ripped off, than your
possibilities are reduced.


And the reverse, is that if there are armed citizens, street scum are less
apt to try to rip off people since the thing they fear the MOST, ABOVE ALL
ELSE, is an ARMED CITIZEN

The reduction of personal liberties, due to the 'war on drugs' is also
worth to mention.


Change of subject noted


Then income goes into generally wrong canals, because large revenues are
made through means, that are against the society in general. That income
attracts young people and guides them away from useful work into drug
related 'business'. This money feeds the criminals and let them use that
income, to finance other unwanted activities.

E.g. that money enables them, to bribe and corrupt officials, policemen or
politicians. These people can do real damage, if they don't function like
intended.



Don't disagree with you there
Prohibitions of any kind tend to
1) fail badly
2) result in unintended and usually negative side-effects.