The gross misuse of this nation's money.

[Combat-wombat]

Of several things we could do to save some money, and maybe lower taxes, one is the war on drugs. This really makes me mad that we're spending billions of dollars of taxpayers' money on something that threatens individual liberty and causes crime. The war on drugs is wrong, and it wastes our money. One of the reasons drugs are so profitable is that they are illegal. Fight against the "war on drugs"!!!

 

[DeltaElite]

I agree, it is a waste of money, time and resources.

 

[Frohickey]

Making drugs illegal makes them more expensive and profitable.

How about legalizing drugs, imposing more severe penalties for causing accidents while under the influence, and taxing the legalized drugs?

Thats gotta put some cash into the government, take some cash out of the drug runners, and also cut down on the non-violent prison population.

Not to mention, it will spur more businesses for pizza places as more people get the 'munchies'.

 

[Airwolf]

How about legalizing drugs, imposing more severe penalties for causing accidents while under the influence, and taxing the legalized drugs?

But, but, but... that would mean requiring that the individual take personal responsibility for their actions and face the consequences for actions that damage others. GASP! What a horrible thought! <liberal mode OFF>


Works for me!

 

[answerguy]

So why doesn't it happen!?! Ending the war on drugs that is. There isn't a message board that I go to that doesn't have the majority of people thinking that ending the WOD would be a good idea. That includes liberal websites and conservative websites.
When will it happen? What do we have to do?

 

[Justin]

So why doesn't it happen!?! Ending the war on drugs that is. There isn't a message board that I go to that doesn't have the majority of people thinking that ending the WOD would be a good idea. That includes liberal websites and conservative websites.
When will it happen? What do we have to do?

Because no politician in the world has the guts to stand up and say that they've been wrong for the last 30+ years, and besides, none of them would be brave enough to even entertain the idea of pink-slipping the DEA, much of the FBI, and a lot of other federal employees who are part of the 'War on Drugs.'

The 'War on Drugs' makes sure that the gov't has plenty of pork flowing towards it. Seems to me that drugs are indirectly a cash crop for the US gov't.

Besides, then we wouldn't get to hear the witty, and oh-so-logical banter of Nick and Norm!

 

[Waitone]

I just love it when libertarians (little L) take a shot at the war on drugs. I identify with the need to have people take responsibility for their own decisions. I think it is quite therapeutic for people who screw up to live with the consequences. Found only in an ideal world.

Problem is we don't live in an ideal world. We live in a world where people stand in line to protect people from the consequences of their decisions. While I agree with the goals of eliminating the war on drugs I can in no way support it. Why? 'Cause the taxpayer will be saddled with it consequences. We live in a society where we have yet to de-couple actions // consequences in the minds of taxpayers.

If a bill were presented before congress that said, "1>Cease the war on drugs, and 2>no use of the treasury will be made for drug rehabilitation programs. 3>You screw your life up with drugs and you're on your own, Bubba. Maybe next time you'll think twice." I'm in complete support. But it ain't gonna happen.

So does that mean we keep spending filthy lucre on an ineffective war? Nope. We just gotta go after those who benefit from a drug culture; government officials at all levels and others who hide behind pinstrip suits. Don't like asset forfieture laws? Neither do I as currently constituted. Make the money return to the state level and remove any incentive at the local level to bust drug trafficers and harass taxpayes. It is idiotic for a government to place local law enforcement in a position to financially benefit from their actions. Law enforcement ought to be interest in law, not profit.

 

[Navy joe]

Make the money return to the state level and remove any incentive at the local level to bust drug trafficers and harass taxpayes.

So it's okay for the state police to be financially motivated to find criminals real or made for purpose?

 

[Sergeant Bob]

I used to kind of sit on the fence on this issue until....my neighbor's son was murdered and hung from his tree stand because he found a large quantity of marijuana growing in his father's cornfield and reported it to the police. Prohibition does not work! (Unless your name is Joe Kennendy or Al Capone)
Combat-wombat , that name isn't in reference to a Hodaka motorcycle is it?

 

[DevilMayCry]

Goverment collected taxes=50% corruption, 25% waste, 25% idiotic social programs that dont work, 10% to something useful (national defense, hwys., wildlife management, etc.) Sure the numbers dont add up but then the govt doesnt either.

 

[pbman]

All drugs should be regulate by the FDA, and if any currently illegal drugs get aproval, they have to face the pit bull atorneys from texas, when people are harmed by their use.



No one could afford to sell drugs, so you wouldn't be any better off.

Should "cocain" companes get a pass that the tobbaco compnaies don't.

 

[JPM70535]

I am going to take the opposing viewpoint as regards the war on drugs, and state that I believe that to legalize drug use would do nothing to ease either the financial, criminal or medical burden imposed on society by such drug use.

As regards the financial burden imposed on society, if the use of drugs, and for the sake of argument lets say only recreational drugs, (marijuana and cocaine) were legalized, there would not be a significant reduction in the price of a joint of grass, or a line of coke. The suppliers would merely limit production and distribution to maintain a stable price. In fact the price could well go up as demand increased.

The addicts would still have to pay for their drugs, and since the addicts who were committing the burglaries, muggings, armed robberies, etc. would still need to pay the dealers for their drugs, crime would not diminish, in fact since the drugs were legalized there would likely be many more addicts to commit the crimes.

Lastly, although those in favor of legalizing drugs are fond of saying that Marijuana and Cocaine can be used without becomeing addicted to same, The fact is that any drug addict hooked on Heroin or Crack or any other substance will admit that he or she started with Marijuana, HARMLESS MARIJUANA!!! Those addicts will still need the same medical care as before legalization. They will still contract HIV by sharing dirty needles, and those who run afoul of the law (DUI) will still have to be detoxed at public expense. Again since drugs would have been legalized, the numbers of those affected would have increased thereby increasing costs.

While I oppose Government interference in personal freedoms, I just can not justify in my own mind ceasing the war (so called) on drugs. IMO it needs to be redoubled.


Lets hear it

 

[Tamara]

The suppliers would merely limit production and distribution to maintain a stable price. In fact the price could well go up as demand increased.

Exactly. That's why Anheuser-Busch only releases a tiny trickle of product annually in the years since the Volstead Act was repealed: to keep unit prices up.

 

[Preacherman]

I'm with JPM70535 on this one. He makes good points, and there are others:

1. It's medically proven beyond any doubt that marijuana use kills brain cells, slowly but surely. After a period of several years using the stuff, brain power is measurably and irreparably harmed. This happens even faster with drugs such as cocaine, crystal meth., etc. So who gets to pay welfare and medical bills for the ageing and impaired addicts?

2. Addicts would still have to fund their habit, even while that habit was making them unemployable. Ergo - crime would not decrease, it would probably increase, since legalized drugs would tend to make for more users.

3. When on drugs (or drunk), one's moral sense is impaired at best, perhaps even totally short-circuited. This is why seducers have traditionally relied on alcohol and "date-rape" drugs like GHB to have their way with their victims. Anyone like to bet on the likely outcome of legalized drug use with regard to date rape, unwanted pregnancy, spread of venereal disease, etc.?

4. What happens to impaired driving if the availability of drugs suddenly increases due to legalization? Is anyone suggesting this would decrease? Methinks the opposite would be true, with all the horrific consequences of dead and maimed victims.

For these and other reasons, I remain unshakeably opposed to the legalization of narcotics. It would cost far, far too much in damage to individuals, and to society as a whole. It's not just a question of an individual's right to do as they please: it affects everyone.

 

[Sergeant Bob]

The fact is that any drug addict hooked on Heroin or Crack or any other substance will admit that he or she started with Marijuana, HARMLESS MARIJUANA!!!

Don't believe everything you see in those documetaries like "Reefer Madness". They probably had a few drinks before they tried the evil weed, and I'll bet when they were little kids they used to spin around in circles till they got dizzy and fell down too. That was my first buzz, but since there is no 12 step program for breaking that habit, I had to do it on my own with no taxpayer money.

 

[schild]

If drugs are legalized who will pay for the increase in medical costs to care for more addicts? Who will pay for the children who's parents are now incompetent? Who will pay for the increase in car insurance from more drug users operating vehicles? Who will pay the increased workmans comp rates, more claims from working stoners? No matter how you look at it, cheaper drugs increases availability, increases the number of users, increases the cost to society.

 

[Greg L]

All of the above plus the fact that no politician will ever support such a thing because he knows that the next time he runs for reelection that his opponents will have a field day making up mud slinging ads "Congressman Bob wants to get your kids hooked on heroin. He supports them being able to walk into any convienence store and shooting up." An outright lie as there would be the same sort of age restrictions that we currently have on alcohol/tobacco, but you easily have a sound bite rebuttal to that.

Greg

 

[Bob Locke]

Sarge beat me to it, but I'll restate:

Alcohol is, far and away, the biggest "gateway drug" out there. Anyone clamoring for marijuana, cocaine, or any other drug to remain illegal because it leads to "worse" drugs needs to begin the battle at its source: booze.

To do otherwise is hypocritical.

 

[CZ-75]

Marijuana may be a "gateway" drug, but every pothead I've ever met was far less belligerent than most drunks I've met.

I'd aver that a certain bait-and-switch tactic is responsible for the fact that mary j is pinned as a "gateway." That would be that suppliers can get those who use marijuana to move up to the next level, which is more profitable to them.

I also know many people who hold professional jobs and still use marijuana. Same could be said for cocaine, though I think that coke produces severe burnout after a while.

So back to the point here: If the profit motive is gone, who is going to be supplying the vast quantities of drugs necessary to addict all these new addicts?

 

[Atticus]

Decriminalize drugs- ship the tens of thousands of militarized LEO to fight the WAR on WAR in Iraq. Bout time the taxpayers get to properly utilize the money spent on machine guns, vests, flashbangs, APC's, German shepards, etc. Seems more fitting to use those items against the enemy instead of Americans.

 

[ojibweindian]

"Alcohol is, far and away, the biggest "gateway drug" out there. Anyone clamoring for marijuana, cocaine, or any other drug to remain illegal because it leads to "worse" drugs needs to begin the battle at its source: booze.

To do otherwise is hypocritical."

And that's the problem. There are tens of millions of hypocrites out there, and they don't care about their flawed thinking. That, and the pols don't wanna give up the power they've created for themselves by giving up on the WOD.

 

[Owen]

Preacherman,

So how is Marijuana any different from alcohol?

Owen