Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Commodities - The Coming Bull Market -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: craig crawford who wrote (1158)	3/19/2002 1:04:05 AM
From: Stephen O	Respond to of 1643

The countries where drug use is endemic or well tolerated makes me want to see them stay illegal. Look at the mess countries like Jamaica, Pakistan, Algeria, Yemen are or have become.

To: craig crawford who wrote (1158)	3/20/2002 12:14:46 PM
From: grusum	Respond to of 1643

Craig, I haven't advocated anything yet. I was just asking you for your view. I wanted to know if you were familiar with the arguments for legalization.. Lets try this analogy, the prohibition of drugs and the prohibition of alcohol. From the libertarian web site: " In the 1920's, alcohol was made illegal by Prohibition. The result: Organized Crime. Criminals jumped at the chance to supply the demand for liquor. The streets became battlegrounds. The criminals bought off law enforcement and judges. Adulterated booze blinded and killed people. Civil rights were trampled in the hopeless attempt to keep people from drinking. When the American people saw what Prohibition was doing to them, they supported its repeal. When they succeeded, most states legalized liquor and the criminal gangs were out of the liquor business." And: "Today's illegal drugs were legal before 1914. Cocaine was even found in the original Coca-Cola recipe. Americans had few problems with cocaine, opium, heroin or marijuana. Drugs were inexpensive; crime was low. Most users handled their drug of choice and lived normal, productive lives. Addicts out of control were a tiny minority. The first laws prohibiting drugs were racist in origin -- to prevent Chinese laborers from using opium and to prevent blacks and Hispanics from using cocaine and marijuana. That was unjust and unfair, just as it is unjust and unfair to make criminals of peaceful drug users today. Some Americans will always use alcohol, tobacco, marijuana or other drugs. Most are not addicts, they are social drinkers or occasional users. Legal drugs would be inexpensive, so even addicts could support their habits with honest work, rather than by crime. Organized crime would be deprived of its profits. The police could return to protecting us from real criminals; and there would be room enough in existing prisons for them." My comment is yes, the drugs came first… Making them illegal started in 1914, for reasons that we would laugh at today. In the name of 'the war on drugs' (which is nothing less than a war on the USA's own citizens) we have jailed the highest percentage of any country's population on earth. We have given profitability to the drug trade. The drug lords certainly don't want to see drugs legalized. In the name of 'the war on drugs' we have seen our financial privacy invaded, and our property at risk of confiscation with very little or no evidence. Certainly drugs should be regulated so they aren't easily available to children. But as it stands right now, drugs are very easily available to children. And the only reason they are available is because they are so profitable. As you said this 'war on drugs' hasn't worked and won't work…