• From DRCNet. • Present URL: Week Online #256 • Projected archive URL: Week Online Archive, projected move by 10.11.2002 I'll try to remember to update the URLs when I get a chance, but the Present URL is where it's at as of this moment, though I expect the page to move to the archives quickly; its dated a week ago, and that's how long they stand. The Projected URL is where I expect it will go after the Present URL ceases to indicate WOL #256. The issues: The War on Drugs just suffered a serious blow. Not only have Britons shown their intent to smoke pot, but now we see an important British government official conceding what many of us have thought of as an obvious fact: And, just for kicks, Mowlam gets a shot in at the US: • "May I suggest that rather than bombing innocent civilians in Muslim countries, the United States and Britain begin to take a more intelligent approach to the drug trade: namely, to legalize it." Anyway, I'm one who tends to agree with Mowlam on this, and am therefore quite glad to have her on board. (Note: Mowlam does not appear to be a fan of the current American administration.) But in the end, a quick recap of the assertions on behalf of legalization: • Drug-related crime will decrease. In the 1980s and early 90s, the city of Tacoma encountered a massive wave of drug-related crime specifically tied to the gangs who arrived from California and elsewhere to deal cocaine. While we do hear horror stories about crackheads going nuts and beating people or shooting them, and while we do hear about coke addicts stealing from their families, these stories are common to most vice: sex, gambling, intoxicants, &c. Just as we saw an increase in alcohol-related crime following the institution of Prohibition, and a decrease in the same following the repeal, it is painfully obvious to some that we cannot win a war against drugs because, illegal or not, people are determined to use them. • Treatment becomes easier. A very basic argument. Imagine: you are an addict. You are at the end of your rope. You don't know what to do. Someone offers you help, but in order to receive that help, you must first confess to multiple crimes, some of which are severe felonies (distribution) which can land you twenty years in prison. • Tax revenues. Does anyone realize how much money Americans spend on marijuana alone? In the 1980s, marijuana surpassed all American cash crops, and presently sits about fourth or fifth. • Product diversity. Hemp paper lasts longer than wood paper. Hemp paper is a more quickly-renewable resource. Hemp for paper provides a tenfold yield compared to wood. Hemp cloth is a great product, as anyone who has worn it can attest. It makes all manner of clothing, from burlap-feeling weaves to fine, silky weaves. Hempseed is an excellent food source, and don't tell me that American innovation could not find a way to make it more appealing. Marijuana is a powerful aide in fighting symptoms of cancer and HIV; George Zimmer, of "Men's Wearhouse" fame, came to support medical marijuana after his mother used it. (Cocaine and opium still have medical uses.) She didn't win, but it made losing that fight much more gentle. An old Popular Mechanics contained an article about a car constructed entirely of and driven exclusively by hemp. • Prison space. Despite a prison-building frenzy in the 1990s, bedspace for violent criminals in prisons suffered a reduction due to the number of drug possessors and distributors filling the prison system. • Police resources. Every once in a while, if you pay attention, you get to see a certain nexus of facts. Such as the time I saw three police cruisers stopped alongside the road; as I drove by, one of the officers had in his hand a bag unmistakably containing marijuana, and also something that looked the approximate size of an insulin kit. Coincidentally, ten blocks away, a rape-stabbing occurred at approximately the same time. What would you rather your police were doing? But yeah, if you watch closely, it does happen that way from time to time. • Economic potential. Okay, this is a little pie-in-the-sky, but I do live in Seattle, and as anyone from LA to Alaska will tell you, the market-grade marijuana produced in Washington and BC is incredible, and friends of mine who have been to Amsterdam were disappointed with the overall quality of the dope, but dazzled by the variety. Point being: we grow good pot around here. What would be the economic potential of becoming the world's leading supplier of marijuana for any purpose? • Substance regulation. This just occurred to me. There are two factors involved here. First, as we regulate drug use in this country, we can implement quality standards. For instance, in Portland, Oregon, it occurred in the mid-90s that junkies suddenly started dying at an alarming rate. And then the trend stopped. From the medical data and a little bit of speculation, the explanation offered was simply this: Someone got hold of some heroin, who didn't know what he had. Obviously, he knew it was heroin, but, being an ignoramus about such things, sold the heroin pure. This is a bad idea for two reasons: you can charge the same price for cut heroin, and also the junkies are expecting cut heroin. Result? Shoot up the normal amount, get twice the dose, die. Secondly, and this is a personal stake: I happen to like opium resin, and on the one hand I'm glad it's so tough to find. But one day I happened to mention to a friend that I was frustrated that there was so much heroin coming in and no resin. Well, it's simple economics: it's all illegal and equal before the law in that sense. So it makes sense to transport heroin instead of opium resin. It's stronger, and it's worth more per volume. See, the thing is that, having done opium resin, I don't know why anyone would ever stoop to heroin, except for desperation. • Prevention. It will be much easier to prevent drug use among children when we don't have prohibition gagging the educators. DARE, for instance, has been shown to increase the chances that a youth will try drugs. Part of the problem is that DARE was not honest. It didn't tell the truth. And, like many of the pre-DARE generation, when people learned that what was told them about marijuana was a lie, they transferred that lie exploitatively to other drugs. I still know people who don't believe cocaine or methamphetamine can hurt you. And so it is. Here's to the Brits for showing the US the way. And here's to Mo Mowlam, who frequently frustrated me on affairs relating to the Irish. It's nice to have this moment of accord. Comments, issues, and even your deepest desires (er ...) are welcome. Let's hear it. Oh, and if we legalize ... drugs won't be worth as much money to the terrorists. Opium resin at $20/g? Not if it's legal. (I have no clue how much heroin costs, so resin will work. After all, Afghanistan, prior to the Afghani-Bush War, supplied as much as 75% of the world's opium. Strangely, we didn't hit the opium fields.) thanx, Tiassa Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
"Oh, and if we legalize ... drugs won't be worth as much money to the terrorists. Opium resin at $20/g? Not if it's legal. (I have no clue how much heroin costs, so resin will work. After all, Afghanistan, prior to the Afghani-Bush War, supplied as much as 75% of the world's opium. Strangely, we didn't hit the opium fields.)" Yeah and there just might be less drug dealers walking the street to! I would imagine that someone would buy it from a 7-11 if they could, instead of buying from the local gang related drug dealer. All in all it doesnt sound like a bad plan...... I dont do drugs though.Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Correction Correction to Topic Post--George Zimmer • Marijuana is a powerful aide in fighting symptoms of cancer and HIV; George Zimmer, of "Men's Wearhouse" fame, came to support medical marijuana after his mother used it. The above statement, extracted from the topic post, is erroneous. Specifically, it misrepresents the facts of Mr. Zimmer's testimony regarding his mother and medicinal marijuana. Mr. Zimmer's mother never used medical marijuana during her fight with cancer, but her illness seems to be a catalyst of Mr. Zimmer's support for medicinal marijuana. Mr. Zimmer's position is most accurately described by himself, which he did in support of California's Prop 215: Apologies all around, and especially to Mr. Zimmer. thanx, Tiassa Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
I'm not a drug user and not terribly educated on the subject but IF drugs were legalized then would anyone be realistically prevented from adding them to the products that most humans consume? Hell, why not mandate that everyone use drugs or have to be penalized with a higher tax rate? Sarcastically yours ...
Hmmmm...., The same restrictions on Tobacco and Alcohol would apply to drugs since they would be a controlled substance. It would be up to the FDA. Though the thought of Betty Crocker "Marijuana Brownies", does intrigue me...Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
I encourage drug use. Fewer braincells for everybody else means it will be easier to get high paying jobs and find a good mate and fill the genepool with my offspring. Drug use also lowers fertility. For that matter I also encourage suicide. It removes competition. THIS is how an animal thinks.
I too, believe that it would at least put drug use where it should be. On the user. It would relieve a lot of the problems that are not working at this time. Jail crowding, financing crime and terrorist plots, increasing the spread of disease through dirty needles that could be easily remedied with clean needles, putting taxes to better work serving the public, increasing the tax base to do so with, removing the stigma of smoking pot as being the equivalent of more serious law breaking activities, ect. No one has won the war on drugs except the drug czars. Who else has the money? Those that use drugs pay outragous prices for their drugs and the quality and consistancy leaves a lot to be desired. It is one of the major parts of the American economy and the government doesn't get a dime out of the trade. Further more, a lot of the money leaves the country. How, pray tell does that help the American people? No amount of warring on drugs has had any effect to stem the tide of the drugs and it is so prevalent with our society that at almost any small town across the US you may obtain illegal drugs. Yet the government has spent mucho bucks trying to slow or stop it. All to no effect. I do not use drugs, or at least no illegal drugs. (I am fond of caffenine) Yet a good portion of my tax dollars will go towards the funding of the war. A war that is apparently not going to be won. In otherwords we are wasting valuable resources for an effort that will only bring misery all around. At least with legalization there would be a drying up of the drug trade. Inflation should take a nose drive. Users would be far easier to track. We would need no where near the amount of jail space and upkeep costs and would probably see the closing of some of them from lack of need. The government would be better off and I would certainly be better off with a tax break. ( I doubt that I would see that hypothetical tax break as law makers are always looking for a source of funding for their next pet project.) It would be nice to see it going for something that isn't a throwaway project or something that, by typical american standards seems to be; "Throw money at it till it goes away."
It would relieve a lot of the problems that are not working at this time. Jail crowding, financing crime and terrorist plots, increasing the spread of disease through dirty needles that could be easily remedied with clean needles, putting taxes to better work serving the public, increasing the tax base to do so with, removing the stigma of smoking pot as being the equivalent of more serious law breaking activities, ect. While I agree with you wet1 it seems that there would be worse repercussions. Yes clean needles might stop aids and such but it wont stop a pregnant user from making her baby a retard, or even result in its death. No one has won the war on drugs except the drug czars. Who else has the money? Those that use drugs pay outragous prices for their drugs and the quality and consistancy leaves a lot to be desired. It is one of the major parts of the American economy and the government doesn't get a dime out of the trade. Further more, a lot of the money leaves the country. How, pray tell does that help the American people? No amount of warring on drugs has had any effect to stem the tide of the drugs and it is so prevalent with our society that at almost any small town across the US you may obtain illegal drugs. Yet the government has spent mucho bucks trying to slow or stop it. All to no effect. No it doesnt help, all we do is loose money in the so called "War on drugs" So yes we should tax the hell out of it and give every bit of it to the government but guess who else is going to make money? Where do you think that all these drugs are going to come from? Most of them would probably be imported from South America and cuba and such. So the bad guys can make money. I do not use drugs, or at least no illegal drugs. (I am fond of caffenine) I dont do drugs either and Im very fond of caffenine (look at the name). Other then what stated above, I agree with you 100% wet1, we just have to think about the wellbeing of our citizens first.Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Unfortunately, at present it doesn't prevent those who want drugs that bad from considering their state of pregenacy, prenatal care is a luxury for those. It could, at an earlier stage, make say a medical assistant alert that there was a potential mother who needed some help. Not early enough to help the baby as that does not show physically till later in development. But far sooner than such would be without any help available till delivery time. Or any notice by anyone who could offer some recourse to divert the actions of one so determined. The trick behind this to have those who would use drugs be exposed to different choices that could be made available to help. It is hard to believe that anyone can help when you are on your own and have nowhere to turn. Add a drug dependancy to it and it makes for a difficult problem to break out of the cycle. As far as making the money from whoever is the crop farmer, more money might actually go to the dirt poor farmer who chooses to grow coca plants rather than corn because his family might be a little better off. He would not need to fear that he had put his family in jeopardy because of not falling into line with whatever stance his paymaster had at the time. Most of this emormous profit is not seen by the lowly farmer. The farmer merely chooses that which helps him provide for his own better, the same as any legit farmer stateside would do. So would he be better off if there was no serious market for coca leaves? I question that there would be a huge difference for him. What it would do is eliminate the middle man, The drug lord. Maybe that is not the correct way to word it as there will always be middlemen. Someone has to run the market, someone has to transport, someone has to warehouse, distribute, and account for the product. If it is legal though, emormous profits are not there to be made. Only what the market will allow and that will be far less than what we see today. The street pusher would be the new class of unemployed.
I had not thought of it that way wet1. I would only like to see pot legalized though, its not as harmful as crack and that other crap out there.
