Which is more harmful to society, drug use or the war on drug use? Many people on the left (including me) would argue the latter.
Here is a link to an article written last Aug with information that I found shocking:
TAKEN Under civil forfeiture, Americans who haven’t been charged with wrongdoing can be stripped of their cash, cars, and even homes. Is that all we’re losing?
If there is interest in this topic I think I could easily find links re the number of drug offenders filling up our prisons, ruining their lives and costing society a bundle.
Should other states follow Colorado's lead and legalize pot or would it be better to just give a very light sentence/fine to people caught using?
Monday, January 6, 2014
Save Society, Legalize Drugs?
A guest Post from Laurie. Enjoy.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
10 Ways the Drug War Is Causing Massive Collateral Damage to Our Society
#10 says half a million locked up on drug charges in USA.
Last time I looked at this it was brought up that the Netherlands had a far more lenient drug policy re: marijuana. We were told when we were there not to go into a "coffee shop" expecting to buy coffee, and it was true. BUT, laws against other drugs were very harsh, and they have since sharply restricted marijuana use and sale. I hesitate to ever say Europe is a model for the US, but I think this is nonetheless instructive. The "drug war" Has gotten out of hand as far as police go, particularly for the "milder" drug of marijuana. I don't think legalization is right for that particular drug, but surely you are not suggesting legalization of cocaine, heroin and methamphetamines?
I think there is a middle course, and it is supposedly the law in Minnesota but I have never heard of it being applied. It should be. The premise is this: government permits the possession of small quantities of any drug someone wants to take. However, every drug must have a tax stamp affixed to the package, just like cigarettes do today, and the cost of the stamp would be set based on 100% of the street price of the drug. Dealers would be permitted to buy the stamps anonymously and could not be prosecuted for drug dealing based on that purchase. Of course, the tax would take all profit out of the sale and so dealers would not buy them. Therefore, every time the police pick up a drug user, they are going to look for drugs that do not have a stamp. "Possession" will be more loosely defined because no one has to prove that you intended to sell the drug or use the drug, simply that it was under your control and was not stamped, making YOU liable for the tax. If you didn't have the money for the tax, you could get a reward for turning in the "tax cheat" who sold it to you. Slick, eh?
Editors at the National Review think it is time to get
sensible on weed
Far be it from me to agree with NR, but it does make sense, with the following provisos. First, I want it medically established that THC is no worse in terms of addictive behavior, brain damage and other health problems than is alcohol. Next, I insist that purveyors of the drug be absent a criminal connection, just like any other business and that growers must certify they sell ONLY in the state where it is legal. Third, there should be strong penalties for DUI-marijuana and public nuisance, as well as equal legal restrictions to those placed on tobacco use. And lastly, I would up the tax to at least match that on cigarettes and booze-- a "sin tax" of which the government is so fond. All that is "sensible," yes? Or do you intend something else?
Apparently, legalizing marijuana is a bad idea.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/jan/21/obamas-white-house-drug-experts-contradict-his-mar/
Post a Comment