Decriminalization and/or legalization of illicit drugs in the United States?

[Silence_Dogood_1]

See the links Ive cited in my past posts, do the research, and then give some serious comments that are less than flippant !

In other words, you can’t answer the questions.

Funny, but I would think it would be very easy to answer those questions for someone who claims to have been a prosecutor.

Frankly, I find the idea of a “prosecutor” who believes it’s the government’s role to enforce religious laws to be a little disturbing.

 

[CPA2]

Prohibition caused an increase in organized crime. Crime had always existed, but now it became more prevalent. Organized crime, bootlegging and corruption among police rose to unprecedented levels during prohibition. Bootlegging became a very profitable business. Gangsters made huge amounts of money supplying underground saloons with smuggled alcohol. The chance of getting caught was slim and the fines were minor. Corruption and bribery became commonplace.

A sad commentary on prohibition was the corruption of our legal system. Bootleggers made millions selling alcohol, and they used the money to bribe government officials and judges. For example, there were about 3,000 treasury agents in 1919. Their pay was poor. There was not enough money to fund good law enforcement. Many treasury agents accepted bribes from bootleggers. More corruption and violence soon followed.

 

[Silence_Dogood_1]

Sad, The Catholic Answer is don’t abuse the body God gave you.

And that’s very good advice. There is no question that drugs are harmful and, in my opinion, anybody who does drugs is an idiot.

But the problem comes when the government decides it’s the irresponsibility to tell people what is and isn’t good for them and to mandate the behavior of individuals.

Whether or not the government or I may agree with an individual’s behavior, as long as that individual doesn’t harm another person, then he has every right to engage in behavior I may disagree with.

Again, if the concern is what he may do while under the influence, we already have laws that cover virtually every circumstance. So why punish a person pre-emptively, who statistics show will not commit a crime while under the influence?

 

[karoleck]

I participated on the thread 'is smoking marijuana a mortal sin? This is a different type of question .The USA always has had a rather hard line on a lot of internal moral /social issues.Take for example the slave issue,the separation of Americans by the colour of their skins,the right to have personal guns,the “drink” wars and laws,war objectors,clubbing and jailing anti -abortion people etc.The USA has a very high prison population,a lot of money,effort seems to be spent putting people into prison!! How is this working for you?

I was a follower of Timothy Leary(Politics in Extasy --his" bible"),his was a drug culture-a way of life.Basically he taught that the way to solve Americas’ problems was–do not fight the system–just drop totally out of the society,alter your mind by taking LSD and society will crumble around you! (spent his last years in jail for tax evasion–for the money he got from LSD-he created the synthetic substance).In a sense this happened(the hippie generation),the result has been full jails!! At the age of fifteen I was already drinking underage at the pubs. I was very nineteen when I started to smoke dope,then to hash–hash oil–LSD.I stopped with doing "the solid line"of heroin though, some hash was laced with opium,so I know the shaking hand and tightness.It was only by the grace of God that I was able to get away from this useless culture of drugs.At the age of twenty two I reverted to following Jesus Christ in my Catholic Faith.

I only say this because I can see from both sides of the fence,thankfully I was never “busted”,but two people I knew were caught for dealing.They got off with a large fine and the irony of it was that the two "character references"at the court hearing were full on drug takers.They looked very respectable people in their suits and tie,fooled the Judge bigtime!( one was a Vet and the other a Masters degree in Science-his wife got pure LSD for us, as she was a “shrink”,at that time :it was a legal experimental type of thing -a sort of clockwork orange cure! So “justice” is not always done–it is not always what you know but who you know!

Would puting me in jail ,if I was caught have helped me? I do not know but a lot who did time in jail lost the plot! From what I know,I think that a compusory rehab program would better serve society.Sure if a huge crime was committed ,as well as a drug problem, justice demands that this be taken into consideration.Perhaps a rehab programn in a jail type setting would be a solution there;Also no registered police record for a first offender caught with drugs,unless a big time dealer.

I do not believe decriminalization and/or legalization would be best for the common good of society or the person involved.

In the end these people come from individual families,like me from a good,caring catholic parents,a good catholic school(then),single parents,broken or blended families and those who nobody loves! I know I an ex heroin user and dealer,a “jail bird”-a frequent flyer-in and out.He only converted because Bl. Mother Theresa’s sisters showed him the love of Christ in prison and then laught him a systematic catholic way of life after release.He now started a new religious community to help others get straight,using religious structures that he found so effective!Jail as such never helped him kick his addiction-always went back to using! He now suffers for the rest of his life from Hept.C :-----

a dentist told me that 60percent of prisoners in this jail had hepatitisC ! A lot catch this in jail.

I know about rehab places ;as I went to a state one first and then gratuated with full honours at a Catholic place run by the St.John of God Brothers (God is Love is their motto).I was in good company in both places.At the private one I had fellowship with a Doctor,A religeous Brother etc,they were 30/40 years older; as they took their comfort from a glass! At least these places can give a person a chance to start again–jail has a hugh repeat offenders history–not really a smart place to put our drug taking human beings, is it?

 

[CPA2]

Alcohol is a dangerous substance. It destroys more lives each year than anything else. The Women’s Christian Temperance Unions and Anti Saloon Leagues wanted to close all saloons in the early 1900s. They knew that alcohol was evil and that prohibition was for our own good. Their dream came true on January 16, 1919. Congress ratified the 18th Amendment. Billy Sunday, the leading crusader against Demon Rum, said, “The reign of tears is over. The slums will be only a memory. We will turn our prisons into factories and our jails into storehouses and corncribs. Men will walk upright now, women will smile, and the children will laugh. Hell will be forever for rent.”

By 1933 even the Women’s Christian Temperance Unions and the Anti Saloon Leagues recognized that** prohibition caused more problems than it solved**. On December 5, 1933 Franklin Roosevelt signed the repeal of the 18th Amendment. America was no longer dry. However, many laws involving drinking and driving have followed since the repeal of prohibition. Additionally, there is strict government control on the selling of alcohol.

We still have the liquor problem. Alcohol is still an evil that destroys more lives than any other dangerous substance. **Prohibition teaches us that government is impotent to protect us from alcohol and all dangerous substances. It is not the government’s responsibility to protect us from ourselves. We need to be free to choose what risks we want to take with our lives. ** The “reign of tears” will be over when free men choose to drink in moderation, or not to drink at all.

 

[d97c]

If you could promise me that drug users would stay in their homes, never get out of the house, never interact with others, never abuse their family, never work, never use the public medical system, never drive, and would manufacture whatever they use (so as not to mess with the underground drug business and suppliers)…your argument about “whatever someone does in their home is their business” might make a little sense,. But you know that is why drugs are illegal. Because drug users make other individuals lives MISERABLE and their use cost millions in treatment, rehab, medical etc. Do you ever read the newspaper?? Do a little research about the problems drugs cause in society and then maybe the “flippant” comment wouldn’t apply to so much of what you have said.
Jail and mandatory treatment and rehab for dealers and manufacturers… probation, community service and mandated rehab for simple users ! No giving in to the drug problem.

 

[Beau_Ouiville]

I wrote my thesis on the de-criminalization of drugs. As shown by the experiences of drug use de-criminalization in Holland and Portugal, making drugs available on a prescription basis would not really make for a quantum increase in the number of drug users. What it would do is destroy the illegal drug industry by providing a better, safer product.

Unfortunately, legalizing or de-criminalizing drugs is unpalatable politically.

 

[CPA2]

I wrote my thesis on the de-criminalization of drugs. As shown by the experiences of drug use de-criminalization in Holland and Portugal, making drugs available on a prescription basis would not really make for a quantum increase in the number of drug users. What it would do is destroy the illegal drug industry by providing a better, safer product.

Unfortunately, legalizing or de-criminalizing drugs is unpalatable politically.

Legalizing drugs would also take most of the profit out of dealing with drugs. I agree that legalizing drugs would destroy the criminal drug industry.

I have never been drunk and I have never taken drugs. However, the war on drugs does not benefit me! The war on drugs makes the criminals rich and the government more powerful.

 

[Silence_Dogood_1]

d97c;:

If you could promise me that drug users would stay in their homes, never get out of the house, never interact with others, never abuse their family, never work, never use the public medical system, never drive, and would manufacture whatever they use (so as not to mess with the underground drug business and suppliers)…your argument about “whatever someone does in their home is their business” might make a little sense.

And, again, you don’t really believe your own argument. If you did, then you’d want to hold anyone who drinks alcohol to the same fascistic standards.

I find the idea that someone who claims to have represented our legal system stating that recreational drug users do not have the same liberties and Constitutional protection as the rest of us to be extremely disturbing.

But then, maybe that’s why you’re a “former” prosecutor.

]But you know that is why drugs are illegal. Because drug users make other individuals lives MISERABLE and their use cost millions in treatment, rehab, medical etc.

First of all, you’re confusing the average recreational drug user with the addict on the street.

The average user just wants to relax after a hard day’s work. He doesn’t need treatment or rehab, and doesn’t bother anybody else.

Second, again, if you really believed your own argument, you’d be lobbying for the prohibition of alcohol. You’d also be lobbying to outlaw obesity, given the billions of dollars obesity costs us. But I doubt we’ll ever hear you say, “Officer, arrest that fat guy!”

Do a little research about the problems drugs cause in society

Why do you assume I’ve never researched it?

As a sociologist, I’ve researched it quite a bit more than most people.

Jail and mandatory treatment and rehab for dealers and manufacturers… probation, community service and mandated rehab for simple users ! No giving in to the drug problem.

Why punish someone who hasn’t done anything wrong, other than to posess a substance you don’t think he should have?

 

[Texas_Roofer]

I wrote my thesis on the de-criminalization of drugs. As shown by the experiences of drug use de-criminalization in Holland and Portugal, making drugs available on a prescription basis would not really make for a quantum increase in the number of drug users. What it would do is destroy the illegal drug industry by providing a better, safer product.

Unfortunately, legalizing or de-criminalizing drugs is unpalatable politically.

Legalizing drugs would also take most of the profit out of dealing with drugs. I agree that legalizing drugs would destroy the criminal drug industry.

I have never been drunk and I have never taken drugs. However, the war on drugs does not benefit me! The war on drugs makes the criminals rich and the government more powerful.

de-criminalizing drugs also helps unclog the legal system because the system largely fines people rather than arrest people for small amounts of drug use or possession

 

[edwest2]

And that’s very good advice. There is no question that drugs are harmful and, in my opinion, anybody who does drugs is an idiot.

But the problem comes when the government decides it’s the irresponsibility to tell people what is and isn’t good for them and to mandate the behavior of individuals.

Whether or not the government or I may agree with an individual’s behavior, as long as that individual doesn’t harm another person, then he has every right to engage in behavior I may disagree with.

Again, if the concern is what he may do while under the influence, we already have laws that cover virtually every circumstance. So why punish a person pre-emptively, who statistics show will not commit a crime while under the influence?

That is completely untrue. That individual who is responsible for their behavior ends up in the ER the moment they do something responsible like mixing illegal drugs with alcohol. The “oops, I didn’t know excuse” means nothing while they’re lying on a stretcher. And if they can’t pay for their treatment? Guess what? You do.

Stop with this “I’m responsible for myself” nonsense and realize that everyone is our concern. The guy hitting himself in the head for kicks should get some good advice. Self-abuse should not be a protected class of behavior. It’s wrong. It’s dysfunctional. And if we claim to be civilized then we will encourage others to be functional and not self-abusive for any reason.

The alternative is anarchy and promotion of behaviors that are not good for the individual or the society around him.

Peace,
Ed

 

[Texas_Roofer]

If you could promise me that drug users would stay in their homes, never get out of the house, never interact with others, never abuse their family, never work, never use the public medical system, never drive, and would manufacture whatever they use (so as not to mess with the underground drug business and suppliers)…your argument about “whatever someone does in their home is their business” might make a little sense,. But you know that is why drugs are illegal. Because drug users make other individuals lives MISERABLE and their use cost millions in treatment, rehab, medical etc. Do you ever read the newspaper?? Do a little research about the problems drugs cause in society and then maybe the “flippant” comment wouldn’t apply to so much of what you have said.
Jail and mandatory treatment and rehab for dealers and manufacturers… probation, community service and mandated rehab for simple users ! No giving in to the drug problem.

The problem is drug laws were passed so we do not have those problems. If we have drug problems it would mean the drug laws do not work. So the same research proves failure of the drug laws to achieve the objective for which they were passed. Again I thank you for your service and apologize for the negitive comments from others

 

[Silence_Dogood_1]

That is completely untrue. That individual who is responsible for their behavior ends up in the ER the moment they do something responsible like mixing illegal drugs with alcohol. The “oops, I didn’t know excuse” means nothing while they’re lying on a stretcher. And if they can’t pay for their treatment? Guess what? You do.

How does that make any of what I said untrue?

Stop with this “I’m responsible for myself” nonsense and realize that everyone is our concern.

OK. Do you think that alcohol should be illegal? How about obesity?

The guy hitting himself in the head for kicks should get some good advice. Self-abuse should not be a protected class of behavior. It’s wrong. It’s dysfunctional. And if we claim to be civilized then we will encourage others to be functional and not self-abusive for any reason.

I agree that we should encourage people not to do drugs. Is trongly disagree that it is up to the government to regulate our behavior.

The alternative is anarchy and promotion of behaviors that are not good for the individual or the society around him.

No, the alternative is individual liberty, even the liberty to do stupid or harmful things, and government in its rightful place.

 

[edwest2]

Well 70+ years of utter failure makes that a reasonable assumption. I believe decriminalization of practically all drugs is a win - win scenario. Now unlicensed mfg, and sale probably should remain criminal. Criminal levels should be based on maybe 120 total or 30 day supply outside the home. “Legalization” is a word of little meaning. I would not support open legalization of minors in possession of drugs.

A lose-lose scenario if ever there was one. The kids see mom, dad, aunts and uncles getting high all the time. An older guy offers to go to the dope store and buy illegal/legal drugs for them. Dope is not risk free and there are physical and mental effects that lead to long-term damage. Everybody loses.

Organized crime wil, of course, offer the stuff that’s still illegal and they’ll have no qualms about selling anything to kids or their designated representative.

Oh and taxes. The mega-corporations who pay nothing now will continue to pay nothing.

I can see the Presidential candidates getting grilled now. “Senator? Is it true that you’ve used this or that illegal/legal drug in the past? A drug that is known to cloud a person’s judgement after only a short period of time? Can the American people trust you to make good decisions?”

If people want to walk aound with diminished capacity or deal with drug related problems later in life – nobody wins.

Peace,
Ed

 

[portarica]

DA: “No - that’s not how it works. Intellectual honesty, debate protocol, common courtesy, and (I believe) the rules of this forum require that if you are going to make such an assertion, it is necessary to provide support for it.”

If somebody else posts something as evidence and then I read it and refer to them it is the same as reciting them. I understand that you probably didn’t actually read what he cited and only took his conclusion as evidence, and assumed what he cited supported his conclusion.

DA “I agree - this is a problem. They should be in prison to pay their debt to society. Let them go to school on their own dime and their own time – when they’re in prison, they’re in prison.”

You didn’t understand the part about the “grad” school being one administered by the criminals themselves. The criminals learn more about being more effective criminals in prison.

 

[JLChamberlain]

Reply to D97c

You don’t mention that the problem with the crime is about getting the money for the drugs, not the drugs themselves.

 

[portarica]

JLChamberlain, lets just look at two of your conclusions.

1.) " is easier to buy pot than cigarettes for children. Children are the best advertisers for other children."

2.) And make it easier for children to get their hands on it and think that all drugs are OK.

If it is now easier for kids to get pot than cigarettes and we regulate pot like cigarettes, then your second conclusion is wrong.

So is your first or second conclusion wrong?

Peace

 

[portarica]

JLChamberlain:" cost thousands of dollars to treat drug addicts on the street without arresting them. Your arguements are weak. A drug pusher in China who pushes drugs on the Chinese gets executed. But a drug grower in China who exports to the US to poison Americans is rewarded by the government. Why is that?

It costs $29,000 + a year to incarcerate a person. out patient treatment is cheaper than that and even a combination of treatments would be cheaper than the 29,000.

As to china, they kill people for opposing anything the government says. I guess you would like them to kill people who are opposed to abortion. Seeing how the Chinese killed more of there own people beginning with Mao than any other entity in human history probably lends moral support for your killing drug dealers argument, if China says so it must be OK.

But then again they put poison in their milk and cat food.

Peace

 

[stringbeanduck]

I’m surprised by some of the responces here. I mean yes I agree with decriminalizing marijuana, but legalizing all drugs would be a huge mistake. In fact that would counter the possitive affect that just legalizing marijuana would have. High risks drugs need to be kept out of the public.

 

[portarica]

I’m surprised by some of the responces here. I mean yes I agree with decriminalizing marijuana, but legalizing all drugs would be a huge mistake. In fact that would counter the possitive affect that just legalizing marijuana would have. High risks drugs need to be kept out of the public.

Agreed.

Peace