Federal Drug War Rethought

[5stringJeff]

Bob Barr, out with his opinion/policy statements on teh War on Drugs. Only silence on this issue from McCain and Obama.

---------------
As both a U.S. Attorney and Member of Congress, I defended drug prohibition. But it has become increasingly clear to me, after much study, that our current strategy has not worked and will not work. The other candidates for president prefer not to address this issue, but ignoring the failure of existing policy exhibits both a poverty of thought and an absence of political courage. The federal government must turn the decision on drug policy back to the states and the citizens themselves.

Link (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bob-barr/federal-drug-war-rethough_b_125458.html)

[Immanuel]

Bob Barr, out with his opinion/policy statements on teh War on Drugs. Only silence on this issue from McCain and Obama.

---------------
As both a U.S. Attorney and Member of Congress, I defended drug prohibition. But it has become increasingly clear to me, after much study, that our current strategy has not worked and will not work. The other candidates for president prefer not to address this issue, but ignoring the failure of existing policy exhibits both a poverty of thought and an absence of political courage. The federal government must turn the decision on drug policy back to the states and the citizens themselves.

Link (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bob-barr/federal-drug-war-rethough_b_125458.html)

As a non user and a never have used individual, I have to say that I think the War on Drugs is a failure, just as the War on Terrorism is going to be a failure.

First Terrorism, the idea of fighting terrorism is great, but, we can't stomp out terrorism and even when we do, we will never know if in fact we have actually defeated terrorism or if the next SOB with a bomb is right around the corner.

Second, Drugs, scanning Mr Barr's statement, I agree with him. The War on Drugs is a failure. Rethinking our methods would help a lot. Return the issue to the states and freedom to the people including the freedom to make stupid decisions. Then the states could allow certain drugs to be marketed and taxed taking the sale of drugs off the black market (which would reduce the cost and crime associated with it) and even more important allow people who are addicted to begin seeking help to break their addictions.

Immie

[5stringJeff]

Towards the end of the article, Barr nails it: "treating what is, at base, a moral, spiritual, and health problem as a matter of federal criminal law has solved nothing." People shouldn't use drugs, from a moral and a health standpoint. That doesn't mean the government should lock people up for getting high.

[theHawk]

Its always going to be ineffective as long as we have an open borders policy. We should also bomb the drug lords in South America.


And Immie, its only called the "War on Terror". Its really a War on Islamic Jihad. But you are right, we won't win until we get a leader and a nation behind him with the will to do what is necessary to win that war - and that would be to wipe out most of the Islamic countries.

[5stringJeff]

Its always going to be ineffective as long as we have an open borders policy. We should also bomb the drug lords in South America.


And Immie, its only called the "War on Terror". Its really a War on Islamic Jihad. But you are right, we won't win until we get a leader and a nation behind him with the will to do what is necessary to win that war - and that would be to wipe out most of the Islamic countries.

Is there anyone we shouldn't bomb? Have the Canadians pissed us off lately?

[MtnBiker]

Should the government attempt to lock people up that are involved in illegal economic activity?

[5stringJeff]

Should the government attempt to lock people up that are involved in illegal economic activity?

Such as what? Fraud? Bribery?

[MtnBiker]

Selling drugs, especially to children.

[5stringJeff]

Selling drugs, especially to childern.

I would make selling drugs to adults legal. I would not make it legal to sell drugs to children, just as selling tobacco or alcohol to children is not currently legal.

[Immanuel]

Selling drugs, especially to children.

Mr. Barr addressed that. Also, selling liquor to minors is illegal. I'm sure drug laws would involve the same kind of prohibitions.

Point noted: Hawk and agreed although, not the part about wiping out most of Islamic countries. That is not up to us.

Immie

[MtnBiker]

So, every drug dealer that is currently selling drugs illegally would become lawful and comply to state laws in regard to selling drugs, declaring revenue and paying taxes?

Making laws that allow drug sells legal will eliminate a black market of drug trafficing?

What percentage of drug users are under 18?

[MtnBiker]

Mr. Barr addressed that. Also, selling liquor to minors is illegal.

And that has prevented the use of alcohol by minors?

[Immanuel]

So, every drug dealer that is currently selling drugs illegally would become lawful and comply to state laws in regard to selling drugs, declaring revenue and paying taxes?

Making laws that allow drug sells legal will eliminate a black market of drug trafficing?

What percentage of drug users are under 18?

What percentage of people who drink alcohol are under 18?

Would making drugs legal and regulated stop illicit drug sales? No, not stop completely, but it would cut it significantly. Putting dope on the market in liquor stores and such would reduce the profit of the black market and most dealers would seek a new line of work. Okay... maybe they would simply fall back on Welfare. Have to think about that.

Immie

[5stringJeff]

So, every drug dealer that is currently selling drugs illegally would become lawful and comply to state laws in regard to selling drugs, declaring revenue and paying taxes?

Making laws that allow drug sells legal will eliminate a black market of drug trafficing?

What percentage of drug users are under 18?

Would every drug dealer become a legitimate businessman? Likely not. But some businesses would begin to sell these drugs, legally - and better quality drugs, at that, in better places than the corner of a rough neighborhood... the thug drug dealers would be run out of business in short order. And those who weren't would, like Al Capone, be brought up on tax evasion charges. Now, I'm no fan of the IRS, but I understand the need for the government to raise revenue, and cheating on taxes like that ought to be punished. The "underground" drug scene would shrink significantly, although I'm sure it wouldn't be eliminated.

[MtnBiker]

Well I am certainly not for prohibition, I do like a beer now and then and also a glass of wine with dinner from time to time. And it is important to recognize that alcohol is legal for sale in the US. I suppose the sale of alcohol is the closest thing of comparision to drugs, therefore there is an argument that because we allow the sale of alcohol we should also allow the sale of drugs.

Ok. I must admitt I'n not a drug user. I have little knowledge of the effects of drugs on the human physiology. But let me ask some question. First of what drugs would be legal? Marijuana, cocaine, meth, crack, LSD, herione? Let's assume all of these drug would be regulated and legal for use. Do drug users use these drugs because of the taste? Do they use these drugs because it compliments a meal? Or is the purpose of using these drug is to soley get high?

Now, is the sole use of alcohol to get high?

[Immanuel]

Mtnbiker, my friend, does the fact that alcohol use by minors is illegal stop them from using it? Neither will making drugs legal for adults, but neither will continuing to keep it illegal for adults.

If we were to make it legal for adults and cut down on the black market suppliers by reducing their profit, and make it easier for adults to seek help without risking jail time then things can only improve.

As long as it is illegal adults are forced to hide their habits and prevented from seeking treatment unless they want to do jail time first. They also commit serious crimes in order to get the fix they need.

Will making drugs legal solve all the drug problems? No, but just like drilling for oil off our own coasts won't solve all of our energy problems, doing nothing won't solve them either.

Immie

[MtnBiker]

I'm not convinced that making drug use legal is good for our society, or that the current drug use will only increase.

Abortion was made legal and greatly increased.

[avatar4321]

Is there anyone we shouldn't bomb? Have the Canadians pissed us off lately?

When dont they piss us off?;)

[Immanuel]

I'm not convinced that making drug use legal is good for our society, or that the current drug use will only increase.

Abortion was made legal and greatly increased.

Well, hopefully, drug usage would DEcrease, but there is no guarantee to that.

I think crime associated with drug usage would certainly decrease and not just because it would no longer be a crime.

Immie

[MtnBiker]

Would every drug dealer become a legitimate businessman? Likely not. But some businesses would begin to sell these drugs, legally - and better quality drugs, at that, in better places than the corner of a rough neighborhood... the thug drug dealers would be run out of business in short order. And those who weren't would, like Al Capone, be brought up on tax evasion charges. Now, I'm no fan of the IRS, but I understand the need for the government to raise revenue, and cheating on taxes like that ought to be punished. The "underground" drug scene would shrink significantly, although I'm sure it wouldn't be eliminated.

Drug dealers would not go away easily. Their product would not be regulated, would not have a mountain of bureaucracy chained to them. Drug dealers would be able to bring the product to market cheaper, and directly to the customer. Honestly, the idea of that illegal drug sales would be reduce to much of a suggnificant amount is fantasy.

[MtnBiker]

Well, hopefully, drug usage would DEcrease, but there is no guarantee to that.

I think crime associated would drug usage would certainly decrease and not just because it would no longer be a crime.

Immie

For some, buying drugs from Joe in the back alley and illegally is enough deterent to using drugs. But if you could walk into any Walgreens and by meth along with some cold medicine it would chang the dynamic of possible drug users.

[5stringJeff]

Well I am certainly not for prohibition, I do like a beer now and then and also a glass of wine with dinner from time to time. And it is important to recognize that alcohol is legal for sale in the US. I suppose the sale of alcohol is the closest thing of comparision to drugs, therefore there is an argument that because we allow the sale of alcohol we should also allow the sale of drugs.

Ok. I must admitt I'n not a drug user. I have little knowledge of the effects of drugs on the human physiology. But let me ask some question. First of what drugs would be legal? Marijuana, cocaine, meth, crack, LSD, herione? Let's assume all of these drug would be regulated and legal for use. Do drug users use these drugs because of the taste? Do they use these drugs because it compliments a meal? Or is the purpose of using these drug is to soley get high?

Now, is the sole use of alcohol to get high?

I understand your questions, but the retort is: does it matter why people use drugs? Should we be protecting people from themselves? Again, as a moral stance, I don't think people ought ot use drugs like meth, coke, acid, E, etc. They're bad for you, and can kill you. At the same time, if people choose to use them, why is that the government's business? I don't know if you shoot heroin with red meat or white meat, but I do know that if people wish to use drugs, that's none of the government's business.

[5stringJeff]

Drug dealers would not go away easily. Their product would not be regulated, would not have a mountain of bureaucracy chained to them. Drug dealers would be able to bring the product to market cheaper, and directly to the customer. Honestly, the idea of that illegal drug sales would be reduce to much of a suggnificant amount is fantasy.

First of all, this is America, where no industry goes unregulated any more. Even so, I think drug dealers would go away, because drug companies (not Big Pharma, necessarily, but companies that marketed drugs) would be able to prove that their drugs were better, purer, led to a better high, etc. After a while, companies that could "certify" that their drugs met some type of standard would be bought over the street dealer's coke with an unknown aount of "cut" in it.

[IrishCop]

I am very conflicted with this issue. I do think that marijuana should be legalized, taxed and sold like alcohol. My professional experience is that a whole lot of folks smoke dope, most of them basically honest, hard-working citizens. There are a few people who develop a severe addiction to weed, but it doesn't usually result in the types of crime that addiction to cocaine, meth or heroin do (Oh! and don't forget presription pills. A MUCH larger problem than most people realize). I know that I have never had to fight a pothead...NEVER. Drunks, cokeheads, crackheads, crankheads...lots of times. The drug murders I have worked were almost exclusively coke and meth related. If pot was there, it was just to take the edge off the stimulants. I can't see legalizing something as destructive as cocaine or methamphetamines. The average methhead will not be able to hold a job and make money to supply his habit. They will still rob and steal (same with coke and heroin, probably just takes a little longer to get there). What's the answer? Beats me. 15 years in law enforcement and I still don't know.

[emmett]

How about this angle! There are currently over 300,000 people in jails across America for non-violent drug offenses. For each one of those cells that was available to a child molestor currently on parole, burgler or other unsedireable we win!

It makes no sense to me that a pot smoker would be in jail while a child molester romes the streets! Somebody spin that one for me.....I'm just dying to hear another opinion!

[CatalystOfChaos]

459,823 people are imprisoned on drug charges.

The minimum amount of years in New York for possessing 4 ounces of the more dangerous narcotics, Coke or Heroin, is 15 years.

Rape charges? Minimum of five years.

So possessing a recreational drug is considered more serious than raping someone and traumatizing them for life.

We, as taxpayers, are paying for the prison system to hold almost a half million people caught in possession or sales of drugs.

When these people get out, our rehabilitation programs are craptastic or non existent. No one will hire someone who has committed a felony. They can't get work. They get right back in trouble again.

With how much we put into prison systems, we could reallocate that money to the true problem, which is education.

But why would we? Prisons/Jails are huge economical bankrolls.

[CatalystOfChaos]

So toss the pot smoker in prison, but if I go look on Megan's Law's website, i can see all kinds of sexual offenders within a city block of where I live.

I'd much rather my neighbor be a pot smoker than a child molester or a rapist.

[MtnBiker]

First of all, this is America, where no industry goes unregulated any more. Even so, I think drug dealers would go away, because drug companies (not Big Pharma, necessarily, but companies that marketed drugs) would be able to prove that their drugs were better, purer, led to a better high, etc. After a while, companies that could "certify" that their drugs met some type of standard would be bought over the street dealer's coke with an unknown aount of "cut" in it.

"a better high", Wow! Do any distilled alcohol, wine or beer manufactures and distributors market their product as a better drunk? No they don't, quite the opposite, "Drink responsibily".

So basically making drugs legal would encourage marketers to sell their product based on the high users would obtain.

Is alcoholism the government's concern? I suppose it is not, but it certainly is societies concern. Anybody here like to volunteer to be a child of an alcoholic?

Is drug abuse the government's concern? Anybody here like to volunteer to be a child of a drug abuser?

[MtnBiker]

Well, hopefully, drug usage would DEcrease, but there is no guarantee to that.



It will likely increase. Let's look at the beer companies as an example. There are alot of beer manufacturers and distributors in the country. That means alot of competition. In order to survive in the market place sells must ever increase. If sells are flat or decreasing that is an indication that the competitor is outperforming in the marketplace.

The same would apply to drug sales, there would be pressure to survive by outperforming the competition. Manufacturers and distributiors would be forever trying to increase their market share. They would seek out and try to expand potential customers in an effort increase marketshare. Thus drug use would very likely increase.

Anbody see a Cialis commercial recently?

[emmett]

So toss the pot smoker in prison, but if I go look on Megan's Law's website, i can see all kinds of sexual offenders within a city block of where I live.

I'd much rather my neighbor be a pot smoker than a child molester or a rapist.


Thanks for the fine tuning of my numbers COC! I think you got the point though. Excellent post!

BUT.........................................


90% of us will go right back and vote for the same two tired ass parties that created and have sustained this failing ass process.

[diuretic]

Some stuff is so dangerous it should be prohibited and producers should be chucked in the slammer and left there.

Other stuff isn't dangerous if it's used properly (I'm not a pharmacist or a chemist so I don't know much about the technicalities). That stuff should be available to adults, not to children.

Some stuff is dangerous if it's misused. That stuff should be available to adults but they need to be educated about safe use. Some of that education could go on responsible drinking programmes. As IrishCop says, the worst bastards in the world to fight are drunks. Dopers are funny, but many drunks are just nasty bastards who want to kick you in the nuts.

[5stringJeff]

"a better high", Wow! Do any distilled alcohol, wine or beer manufactures and distributors market their product as a better drunk? No they don't, quite the opposite, "Drink responsibily".

So basically making drugs legal would encourage marketers to sell their product based on the high users would obtain.

Is alcoholism the government's concern? I suppose it is not, but it certainly is societies concern. Anybody here like to volunteer to be a child of an alcoholic?

Is drug abuse the government's concern? Anybody here like to volunteer to be a child of a drug abuser?

I don't think anyone would like to be the parent of an alcoholic or a drug addict. Again, I don't think, from a moral and a health standpoint, that people ought to use drugs. But people do choose to use them, and I don't think the government ought to jail people based on that personal choice.

[MtnBiker]

By making the sale of narcotics legal in the effort to stop expenditures on the war on drugs the ineveitable bloating of other government agency would happen. The sale of narcotic drugs like perscription drugs would have oversight by the FDA.


It's about time. The FDA is one of the most dangerous government agencies out there. People die because of its inactivity.

BTW, why cannot any person buy any perscription drug without a prescription from a doctor? If a person chooses to take pain killers to get high why should it be regulated? Heck for that matter it might be much simpler to make all perscription drugs available to over the counter sale. Drug users could buy those drugs rather than illegally imported narcotics.