Time to Legalize Street Drugs

I am not a user of street drugs. I did engage in marijuana use over a period of three years, but more than 20 years. I used tobacco during a period of 12 years. Today, my drug is limited to seasonal allergy medicine, a daily caffeine habit, and the few alcoholic beverages. Yes, tobacco, caffeine and alcohol are drugs. Alcohol is just as intoxicating as street drugs. Nicotine is more addictive than some street drugs. Caffeine is becoming stronger and stronger.

I am not trying to promote the use of street drugs. They create medical problems in your body, destroy your sense of moral and ruins around you. I have no pity for the users, and I do not buy the argument that addiction is a disease. The government should discourage the use of these drugs, but not prohibit. The prohibition does not work with alcohol and do not work with street drugs. Prohibition is responsible for street violence. He limited the offer high enough prices for suppliers to engage in violent criminal behavior and risk jail time.

Throughout its history, the ban has cost us trillions of dollars. Billions to the cost of bloated bureaucracy, direct foreign aid, military operations in South America, monitoring of borders, internal monitoring, prison construction and operations, legal costs, charges medical, the creation of para-military police forces, crimes against property costs, these costs through the ripple many parts of our society.

If you are a conservative and you remind the Liberals that the thousands of billions of dollars they spent on public assistance has not mad a difference, please take a look at your moral holy war drugs. Like welfare, prohibition exacerbates the problem it seeks to solve. We criticize the Liberals to show their compassion by failing to support a program like welfare as we showcase our hard on crime by supporting a failing war on drugs.

The ban is a violation of your privacy. I realize the Constitution does not give us the right to privacy expressed, but it is implicit in our culture (abortion can not use this argument. You're dealing with another life.). The government should not get involved in your personal behavior, unless you put others in danger (eg, driving under the influence). The government used the war against drugs to confiscate private property (asset forfeiture). The government used the war against drugs to control your personal finances (the laws on money laundering) and to confiscate more taxes. The government hates difficult to track cash transactions and passes laws disguised as anti-drug laws to try to regulate transactions in cash. I should be able to enter and leave this country with a suitcase full of money, without being investigated. It's my money.

SOME HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVES

Street drugs bring health problems, but how are they spread? Drug abuse destroys the lives of some users, but the size of a problem of society is it? Consider the latest drug hysteria that you heard more of methamphetamine. It seems that every teenager in the country will be hooked on crystal methamphetamine by 2010. Of course, drug abuse and methamphetamine meth labs are a public danger, but have not we heard this story before? The last plague in our society was Oxycontin (hillbilly heroin) in 90 years. Before that he was the crack in the 80s. I remember growing in the late 60s and early 70s, fearing my older brothers who become addicted to LSD, heroin or angel dust. Remember, "Reefer Madness?" This is a film made in 30 years about the dangers of marijuana use. They have exaggerated the effects of marijuana is not even close to the power of things is there now. The children were turned into crazy killers who listened Are you ready for this? Jazz music! Do you think there is a racist, he harmonic?

Race and immigration have always been the source of the drug wars. Marijuana was originally a border issue with Mexico. The regulation of drugs came in the early 20th century after we became involved in Asian affairs. Cocaine, the drug of choice for our 19th century white intellectuals, was included in the regulation of Harrison Narcotics Act of 1914 because of stories coming from the south on the "black cocaine crazy" to attack white women . Look to the execution of cocaine in the 70s and 80s. When it was the drug of choice for the rich white rock stars, celebrities and politicians, nobody really cared. But when the price affordable and most powerful crack hit the black community in 80 years, law enforcement and politicians have begun a new war on the drug.

With racism, we must discuss classism (No, I'm not a liberal, I hate inconsistencies.). If a rich person becomes addicted to OxyContin and used his fortune to buy illegally, we use the euphemism, "the prescription of drugs." Once they are caught, the group hugs for everyone at a tony $ 100,000-a month's rehabilitation clinic. If a poor person becomes addicted to her and illegal drugs has reached, we call it "hillbilly heroin" and to slam a taxpayer submits $ 1,000-a month's imprisonment. The rich victim left the clinic after 30 days, wrote a book, appears on Oprah, and the public admired for overcoming his demons. The redneck is 5-10 years and long crime record. I am not in class envy. I just try to be consistent. Although I am a Rush Limbaugh fan, I do not see drug addicts like him and Brett Favre to be treated differently from addicts like Billy Bob and Cletus.

Drugs has also led to the creation of more zeal, more armed forces to local militarized police. These SWAT teams are needed for drug busts, robberies, hostage, first response to the terrorists, etc, but their presence is becoming increasingly standard, their cost must be justified and will be used for less dangerous routine arrests. These agents are the most aggressive members of your local police force. They are better trained and better equipped. Do not you think that this could make them more anxious for a confrontation? I have no problem with aggressively confronting armed criminals. These streets are animals that must be dealt with severely. But the SWAT teams are used for less potentially lethal activities are more likely to escalate violence.

INCONSISTENCIES

We have already discussed how alcohol, cigarettes and caffeine are drugs. But how many of our warriors in the war on drugs "experienced" of drugs in their youth? "Experience" is the cowardly euphemism for "used". At some point they realized that they were against smoking and quit. Thus, with an attitude of self-righteous on the hardcore addicts.

How many of these travelers of morality or abuse of the road are based on prescription drugs? Three of four of my closest neighbors "women are on some type of prescription medications for mental disorders. This information is anecdotal, but if you watched my neighborhood, it seems that the middle class is rapidly Huxleysian Soma society while the poor take street drugs.

How many of our children are doped on Ritalin and other psychotropic drugs? We educate our children in schools on the use of illicit drugs and to explain (correctly) how not to make their lives easier, and lead us to the throat prescription meds to calm them down and try to make our lives easier.

Prohibition simply does not work

We tried to attack the demand side of the drug problem. Arrests are more and more drugs each year, the courts are behind, and our prison population is increasingly more important. There are treatment centers, education programs for schoolchildren, ads, etc. But the demand is still there.

We tried to attack the supply side. We have directly assisted in military operations to eradicate coca production in one part of South America only to see it emerge in others. We tried to eliminate the cultivation of opium in Afghanistan to see more farms gathering in Iran and Pakistan. We tried the eradication of marijuana in California to watch the production of Oregon and Washington. We prevailed on the supply of chemicals necessary for production of amphetamine in the United States only to see the change in production in Mexico. We raged against the supply routes along the Mexican border to see an increase in the Caribbean or Canada. It is a great game.

People have the spirit of drug use since ancient times for pain, sexual gratification, relaxation, religion, escape, etc. prohibition has not stopped and does increase the price of criminal providers and richer more likely to engage in violence and illegal behavior. If we legalize we need fewer prisons, fewer police, and we can reduce some foreign aid. Taxpayers would save billions of dollars in tax on the size of government shrinks. But maybe our politicians do not want that to happen. Maybe they want us to believe that we are about to win the war against drugs. And maybe they do not want to give up one of their proven vote getters, a campaign on hard drugs position.

Legalization will be followed by regulation and it will protect consumers by standardizing the quantity and quality. We do this with other drugs. This means less overdoses, less garage explode laboratories, and reduced medical costs. The same thing happened when prohibition was repealed and toxic bathtub gin, radiator alcohol, and the explosion of whiskey went fixed. The trick is not to over-regulate (to make the production cost) and force the industry underground. Taxation will be the next step which will bring income. Again, we must resist the urge to tax too much and create a black market. Fees must be used as a means of discouraging employment and income. Receipts can be used for treatment facilities for abuse. We should ban advertising, and to vigorously drugged drivers, anyone providing drugs to children and anyone who commits a crime under the influence.

Illegal immigration needs to calm down a bit. There will be fewer mules that come and go over the border. National and local resources that have to fight against drugs can be moved to border security. Lower prices also means less money for terrorists in South America and Afghanistan.

There will be a host of other benefits of legalization. This includes direct benefits such as fewer crimes against property committed by drug addicts and research on medical benefits of some of these street drugs. You can even see new types of industry created.

Do not expect that to happen soon. Social change is always slow, especially when the policy is committing political suicide. We could start small with limited legalization in limited areas. Drug use and drug prices first go in these areas that the stoners to hear about it and create more demand, but the market will eventually stabilize. Some employers, such as military, public safety, jobs, factories with dangerous machinery, school workers, etc, can still prohibit use. If you want to use these drugs, you should find work elsewhere. May encourage some employers liability of drugs. I prefer a truck driver who is on a small Hyped against a speed that is a bit sleepy.

Prohibition of alcohol did not work and gave us organized crime and the Kennedy dynasty. The prohibition of drugs has not worked and gave us the Crips, the Bloods and MS-13. Why do not we learn? We must stop fighting against this problem and learn to manage it.