Similarly, do you think those government departments managing welfare want fewer "clients"? <By establishing methadone clinics the government created an entire class of people who's livelihood depended on having a sufficient number of "customers" addicted to methadone. I want to point out again that these are observations from a long time ago, but... I suspect that the law of unintended consequences is still there >
When OPM is involved, there is strong incentive to keep the whole boondoggle going.
There are swarms of people making a LOT of money from the War on Drugs. The last thing they want is to leave plant poison consumption up to the people who want to ingest the stuff, for whatever reason.
There is serious money to be made. And if it's legal to ingest plant poisons, the price will plunge to similar prices as growing tomatoes, corn, beans and other crops. So the suppliers quite like their products to be illegal as it keeps prices high, competitors out, and maintains the "cool factor" in consumption. Instead of just being a drug addled loser, one is suddenly cool by defying the government edicts and laws.
Make it all legal so anyone can poison their brain and the number of people choosing to do so will reduce. Or, even if it increases, that's their problem, not mine. Paying money to harass and even kill [by police fire and other violent aspects of illegal drug selling] is daft. We have heard of "to save the village we had to kill them all". There is a similar logic in the War on Drugs.
Mqurice |
