Drug poll

[Stschil]

The only issue I see with these last two ideas is that we already have an extensive underground network for manufacturing, transporting, and selling this stuff. Aren't we blindly assuming that these groups will begin following the law? I think we'd have to make sure that it was more profitable to follow the regulatory guidelines than to skirt the law. Also, there will be groups that won't go through the trouble of government hoop-jumping and will continue to sell it on the side, or they will undercut the legitimate businesses. Basically, I think we'll continue to have this war on drugs in some form simply because the illegitimate means are already in place.

I'd still like to see some discussion regarding prescriptions as well. Should a person be able to stop by CVS and get some OxyContin for recreational use, or should they still need a prescription? What sense would it make to legalize heroin for anyone to use, but not a prescription drug that can be used for the same purpose?

I think, without delving deeper into history and the end of prohibition, that the black marketeers would soon be either put out of business or they would legitimize they're networks. Think of it like this, if Sally and Biff want to share a bong, why go through the trouble of setting up a clandistine meeting with black beard if they can skip down to the corner market and buy a half ounce. Convenience stores charge higher prices than grocers, yet you don't see underground slushy markets. Sure there would be some growing pains working into a new system, but I believe that IF the long arm of uncle Sammy is kept out as much as possible, things would iron themselves out fairly quickly.

As far as prescription drugs are concerned open the doors. Put an age limit on it and make people sign waivers if for recreational use (med use could still be prescribed) if they have problems, it's on their dime for treatment. If they can't pay for treatment they get dried out the hard way. In the pokey, while they are making small rocks out of big ones. If they survive good, if they don't. They chose badly.

 

[rambone]

Here are a few more reasons why the War on Drugs is ruining the country. It promotes more bureaucracy, more money blown, more innocent people killed in the crossfire, more money blown, more cops killed needlessly, more restrictions on our freedom, more shredding of the 4th amendment, more no-knock raids, more militarization of police, more money blown, more harmless people going to prison, more police state.



Local Grannie gets pinched buying cold medicine

How $31 of pot gave mom a 10-year-prison sentence

SWAT kills grandpa in botched drug raid

The Government's License To Steal

GPS Tracking Beacon placed on 'drug suspect' vehicle without warrant

"Knock-and-Talk" : Police fishing expeditions at your doorstep

Oregon Top Cops Want To Deny Gun Permits To Patients

FDA cracks down on unapproved cold and allergy drugs

Warrants to "sneak & peak" in your home while you are away -- without your knowledge

School bus pat-downs and interrogations -- in Terre Haute, IN

Tennesee Law Enforcement Shakedown

The War on some Drugs - Helmet Cam Edition

Tennessee bill mandates forcible blood draw on drivers

Florida mandates drug tests for welfare recipients

The Murder of Jose Guerena

Report: U.S. Drug War Spending Is Unjustifiable

What Happens To You When You Defend Your Home Against SWAT

Tucson No-Knock Raid that killed U.S. Marine

Man spends 10 years in prison for defending his family

Willie Nelson faces jail for possessing plants

Police raid wrong house looking for drugs

Iraq veteran & family ripped from their own home at gunpoint!


Finally...
SWAT agents throw 7 grenades and kill 2 dogs in paramilitary drug raid...

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ng6mfpZ2kR4[/ame]

Is this still the land of the free?

 

[rambone]

I think the War on Drugs hurts this country's future & freedom worse than the War on Terror, because it has taught cops for 40 years that they need to be up in everybody's business, looking for an excuse to search them. One burned out lightbulb and the government is chasing you down and scrutinizing your every move, trying to conduct that fishing expedition.

Now the transition to looking at everybody as a potential terrorist comes naturally. The citizens have been seen as the enemy for decade. Any one of them could have had those evil drugs on them, no matter how polite and harmless they were acting.

 

[rambone]

So, rambone, you're of the idea that people should be allowed to have anything they want, whenever they want. Would you want there to be an age limit like there is currently for alcohol? Also, do you support any kind of government regulation? For example, would you disband the FDA, county health department, OSHA, etc?

Regarding everything you just mentioned...

That malarchy should never ever be found at the Federal level. Allowing the Feds to have all-powerful, godlike agencies to dictate all 50 states is a recipe for tyranny. Federalism is the last check on a Federal dictatorship. Liberty has a better chance of surviving under a union of sovereign states that look out for themselves & compete with each other.

On a state level, I would still rather not pay bureaucrats to regulate my health care decisions. I want to live in an unintrusive state with low taxes. That doesn't happen when we pay cops to chase around high-schoolers for drinking beer in cornfields, and checking lemonade stands for permits. Your health and bodies are your own responsibilities. I'm not a fan of such things and I don't think they save lives like they advertise.

 

[Bitter Clinger]

I am against legalization of drugs. We have enough trouble with drunks, we don't need a bunch of potheads.

 

[justjoe]

So, rambone, you're of the idea that people should be allowed to have anything they want, whenever they want. Would you want there to be an age limit like there is currently for alcohol? Also, do you support any kind of government regulation? For example, would you disband the FDA, county health department, OSHA, etc?

DEA=war on drugs, total failure
BATF=alcohol is legal, taxes are only problem, firearms are a right
Dept. of education=total failure, education levels have gone steadily down since its inception
Dept. of Agriculture=exists to give our money to undeserving land owners in form of subsidies
Dept. of energy=total waste, we are much more dependent on other countries for our energy needs then when it was established.
need I go on? What does our government do other than waste our tax dollars

At one time people were responsible for their own actions and their children, including when they can drink, now we expect the government to hold our hand and wipe our a**es

 

[Crashn2me1961]

Legalize it all and remove all government safety nets.

Only in a perfect world. The government won't leave our guns alone. They tax and re-tax cigs and alcohol. People who can't afford health care are in the hospital receiving free treatment for their addictions for both legal and illegal drugs. The government funds all types of programs handing out clean needles and condoms like candy. Try legalizing drugs and at first we won't be taxed, but social programs will be funded leading to more taxes. Insurance rates will go up for health care and auto (you don't think that the insurance companies won't jump on the bandwagon?). Only in a perfect world and a less intrusive government that doesn't make the taxpayer pay for other's mistakes/misfortunes would decriminalization of drugs work.

 

[mrjarrell]

I am against legalization of drugs. We have enough trouble with drunks, we don't need a bunch of potheads.

Yeah, because no-one smokes pot now.

 

[Bummer]

I think, without delving deeper into history and the end of prohibition, that the black marketeers would soon be either put out of business or they would legitimize they're networks. Think of it like this, if Sally and Biff want to share a bong, why go through the trouble of setting up a clandistine meeting with black beard if they can skip down to the corner market and buy a half ounce. Convenience stores charge higher prices than grocers, yet you don't see underground slushy markets. Sure there would be some growing pains working into a new system, but I believe that IF the long arm of uncle Sammy is kept out as much as possible, things would iron themselves out fairly quickly.

As far as prescription drugs are concerned open the doors. Put an age limit on it and make people sign waivers if for recreational use (med use could still be prescribed) if they have problems, it's on their dime for treatment. If they can't pay for treatment they get dried out the hard way. In the pokey, while they are making small rocks out of big ones. If they survive good, if they don't. They chose badly.

Well said, with one qualification: I think think there should be fairly serious control on antibiotics. If enough people abuse them, even if out of ignorance (They won't work for viruses, for example - I consider using an antibiotic for a virus to be abuse. That is the only form of drug abuse I'm concerned with.), they quit working for everyone.

 

[Stschil]

Only in a perfect world. The government won't leave our guns alone. They tax and re-tax cigs and alcohol. People who can't afford health care are in the hospital receiving free treatment for their addictions for both legal and illegal drugs. The government funds all types of programs handing out clean needles and condoms like candy. Try legalizing drugs and at first we won't be taxed, but social programs will be funded leading to more taxes. Insurance rates will go up for health care and auto (you don't think that the insurance companies won't jump on the bandwagon?). Only in a perfect world and a less intrusive government that doesn't make the taxpayer pay for other's mistakes/misfortunes would decriminalization of drugs work.

Exactly what Aren't we paying for already? I would hazard a guess that funding for treatment (which is already in place) would not raise to the level of funding for the alphabet agencies to wage their "War on Drugs", supply the Mexican Cartels with weapons and equipment, and waste vast amounts of other funds on TV ads, public service anouncements, and print media.

People look at decriminalization like it will incur more need for funding, yet they somehow seem oblivious to the est $400 billion wasted since the "war" started.

 

[level.eleven]

What if the question was phrased differently? How much more should you be taxed or money be borrowed and printed, in order to win the War on some Drugs?

Its a given that law enforcement is in on the game. Both local and federal. Heck, just follow the Gunwalker story. So perhaps a better question, along with how much more we should be taxed, is how do we stop governments from war profiteering?

 

[Bummer]

I am against legalization of drugs. We have enough trouble with drunks, we don't need a bunch of potheads.

Marijuana is the Nation's largest cash crop by far. There are countless potheads, you just can't tell it. Potheads sit on the couch, watch the tv while listening to music, and pass around a bag of Cheetos and a joint. Drunks go out, get into fights, and cause outlandish levels of mayhem. Quite a few of our politicians are "social drinkers". What politician will admit he inhaled, much less got toasted? Look at the evil those guys are responsible for.

I think we'd be a lot better off if we legalized pot and made booze illegal. (I'm not actually in favor of alcohol prohibition. It didn't work the first time, why should it work now? The prohibition of recreational drugs certainly isn't.)

 

[level.eleven]

Marijuana is the Nation's largest cash crop by far. There are countless potheads, you just can't tell it. Potheads sit on the couch, watch the tv while listening to music, and pass around a bag of Cheetos and a joint. Drunks go out, get into fights, and cause outlandish levels of mayhem. Quite a few of our politicians are "social drinkers". What politician will admit he inhaled, much less got toasted? Look at the evil those guys are responsible for.

I think we'd be a lot better off if we legalized pot and made booze illegal. (I'm not actually in favor of alcohol prohibition. It didn't work the first time, why should it work now? The prohibition of recreational drugs certainly isn't.)

I would say the average "pothead" is actually gainfully employed and pays taxes. Of course, that depends on your definition of pothead. I've worked in the engineering departments of 3 separate Fortune 500s and the nation's largest non-for profit in its respective category. If people think the only ones who smoke pot are unemployed, shiftless losers, they are sadly mistaken.

 

[jbombelli]

I would say the average "pothead" is actually gainfully employed and pays taxes. Of course, that depends on your definition of pothead. I've worked in the engineering departments of 3 separate Fortune 500s and the nation's largest non-for profit in its respective category. If people think the only ones who smoke pot are unemployed, shiftless losers, they are sadly mistaken.

+1.

There are a lot of sadly mistaken people out there. Those people only encounter the stupid potheads who would be stupid anyway, with or without the weed.

 

[NYFelon]

I have a high school buddy who is a reasonably successful stockbroker who smokes marijuana regularly, and has even been known to toot a little bit more than his horn on occasion. Yet he manages not to be a criminal monster, and instead is a productive citizen.

hooda thunkit.

 

[level.eleven]

+1.

There are a lot of sadly mistaken people out there. Those people only encounter the stupid potheads who would be stupid anyway, with or without the weed.

Regardless of where I have been, the functioning alcoholics are the worst. No energy, hungover until lunch, quality of work suffers. But, for some reason, all the departments are a-ok with "going our drinking" or "happy hour" or "beer league softball". Its mind blowing actually. Heck, some of the places provided the drugs!

 

[Bummer]

I would say the average "pothead" is actually gainfully employed and pays taxes. Of course, that depends on your definition of pothead. I've worked in the engineering departments of 3 separate Fortune 500s and the nation's largest non-for profit in its respective category. If people think the only ones who smoke pot are unemployed, shiftless losers, they are sadly mistaken.

I absolutely agree. My comment related to the recreational side, not the work ethic (which pot doesn't seem to impact nearly as much as booze).

 

[Libertarian01]

While I generally agree with the rest of your post this makes no sense.

300~ million Americans. 6.7 billion non Americans who get antibiotics over the counter and the vast majority are, in theory, less educated due to their "third world" status.

That figure alone makes your argument a non starter.

Also the government controlling the only thing that can cure you? Well, we see how the FDA is currently abusing that power, I doubt it will change.

Prometheus,

My thinking on this is a bit liberal and "for the greater good." Before you choke on this, hear me out because on rare occasion this is not unreasonable.

If any other type of chemical is abused, the only person directly harmed is the abuser. Even indirect harm is severely limited. In a normal worst case scenario a drunk/stoned passenger pilot could kill 1,000 people, tops. Everyone on board dead along with a few hundred poor souls on the ground. Terrible tragedy, yet numbers in the grand scheme of things very low.

If we allow people to take antibiotics anytime they want, most of the time they will be useless as many of our illnesses are caused by viruses, and thus immune to antibiotics anyway. This could then lead to an outbreak of a superbug that could kill millions as all medical treatment is impotent.

What this would do over time, and is already happening, is to create super strains of bacteria that are immune to almost all antibiotics, thus producing a much more lethal strain of disease.

Even in foreign countries the use of antibiotics is medically controlled. They aren't over the counter. When I was in Switzerland the pharmacist broke the rules by giving me something for my illness but refused to give me antibiotics without a doctors prescription.

I have heard many media stories that we are already on a path of creating super bugs by our constant use of antibacterial soap and other such things, even shoes. They say children should be exposed to more diseases and bacteria, as our exposure builds our own bodies immune system.

If you can provide evidence that my logic is flawed I will reconsider my thinking. I am not committed to this course and you may be correct. I think we may already be on our way to creating super bugs and weaker immune systems. I just don't want to expedite the process.

Regards,

Doug

 

[beararms1776]

Well, often times folks want Liberty without responsibility.

 

[Double T]

I would legalize marijuana. All the other controlled substances are quite dangerous if mixed with anything.

The thing with booze and pain meds...pain meds and pain meds goes like this.

Drink 2 cans of beer, and it's like drinking two beers.

Drink 2 cans of beer with a percocet, could be like drinking a 6 pack or more (depending on your metabolism and other factors.)

Definitely not for ALL drugs legality, just marijuana. Remember when people could get Opium? Or when cocaine was in coca cola. We have learned from our mistakes. Morphine is a big respiratory depressant and requires a fine line between therapeutic and potentially life threatening.