White House Czar Calls for End to 'War on Drugs'
- Thread starter nauc
- Start date
Finally someone hip comes into that position.
Just legalize it already.
He wants to end the ONE war we could have won. 
As a person from Seattle (where Kerli was the former police chief) I find that statement very ammusing.
I am too lazy to do it, but if you put his name in a search on the SeattleTimes site you will find all sorts of articles on how people are befuddled this guy got any job after CofSPD, let alone Drug Czar.
Yup. I'm of the opinion that if you're dumb enough to do some of the stuff out there, you deserve to be taken out of the gene pool. Interesting method of natural selection.
And Alcohol and Tobacco industries easily dwarf the others regardless
Heroin at the very least needs to be legalised as the variance in dose/quality resulting from its illegality presents the greatest danger to its users.
Many years ago, I saw a documentary on a small town in England ( don't remember ) that changed it's policy to treat drug addiction as a health issue. They set up clinics where junkies could receive a pre-measured dose of heroin or methadone and be treated for dependency if they so chose. The towns crime rate almost disappeared.
Too many fearful individuals with no personal experience with addiction in this country fail to recognize this as a health issue. The idea that if drugs were legalized, usage would increase to the point that users would be doing so in every possible public location is ridiculous. Not everyone who drinks is an alcoholic, but a lot are. It is of course legal, has the potential to ruin lives, but is accepted as an illness that is treatable. Why not treat drugs the same way ?
The nature of an addict is a personality trait. They have a need and causes for their behavior that existed prior to active drug addiction. Addicts are going to seek out drugs whether they are legal or not. It's an illness plain and simple.
Too many fearful individuals with no personal experience with addiction in this country fail to recognize this as a health issue. The idea that if drugs were legalized, usage would increase to the point that users would be doing so in every possible public location is ridiculous. Not everyone who drinks is an alcoholic, but a lot are. It is of course legal, has the potential to ruin lives, but is accepted as an illness that is treatable. Why not treat drugs the same way ?
The nature of an addict is a personality trait. They have a need and causes for their behavior that existed prior to active drug addiction. Addicts are going to seek out drugs whether they are legal or not. It's an illness plain and simple.
No don't legalize it.
Decriminalize it.
If you Legalize it the tobacco/pharma companies will be in boots and all and that would very very bad....... Possibly alcohol and fast food companies too.
i agree. whether or not the substance is legal makes no difference to the addict. people that are willing to ruin their bodies with narcotics aren't exactly the law abiding type in the first place.
i did like the last paragraph:
change the laws, don't ask cops to look the other way.
if you ever remember the name of that documentary, let me know please, id like to watch it!
thanks
Ending the war on drugs would radically reduce the number of people in prison, greatly reducing the fiscal outlay. Given that the US govt is only 3 months away from needing to raise the debt ceiling again, which, after the large increase in attention it got just a few weeks ago, would be very near the beginning of the political grandstanding for elections. No incumbent will want to have a) a red mark of raising the debt ceiling again, right befor their election, or b) the red mark of letting the us govt go into technical default by over spending the legal debt limit. it will be far better to let the petty criminals out of jail for "minor drug offenses". While it would surely come with a short term spike in crime, the longer term effects of reduced expenditure and reduced drug related crime would be boon. Plus, if the y can hold off on packing the prisons for 10-15 years, they might clear a generation of professional criminals that were petty criminals when they went into prison, but hardened upon release...
Legalize it. Tax it. Here's why:
Currently, drugs are illegal, and as such when you are caught with them you get thrown into the US legal system. Our legal system is not cheap, and it is funded by taxpayer dollars. Your taxpayer dollars, and my taxpayer dollars. The tax dollars of people who never have or will touch an illegal drug in their life. Yet they are paying to prosecute and imprison people for doing them (and in many times, its people who are otherwise on the straight and narrow, but that's besides the point).
Now, if drugs were legalized and taxed, the amount of money raised by these tariffs would be astounding. Estimations of the legalization and taxation of marijuana alone is in the billions of dollars. So, there is a sudden influx of tax money. Also, there is a sudden lightening of the load so to speak on the court system, as many people who use these substances recreationally and commit no other offences is suddenly gone. This will decrease the financial burden on the legal system*. For those individuals who still get incarcerated for other crimes (and are also drug users), there is an increased amount of funding available with which to deal with them (because prisons ain't cheap!) So now instead of drawing tax money away from things that need it (schools, infrastructure, etc), drugs users who commit crimes can now be handled in the court system with money from other drug users.
Granted, I know a lot of this is very simplified, but I think the point is clear. More tax revenue is a good thing. And we're sitting on a gold mine.
*I know that with the sudden legalization of substances, there may be a surge in drug use, but only temporarily. I doubt someone who tries drugs for the first time (hypothetically being now legalized) would also run out and start robbing convenience stores.
Currently, drugs are illegal, and as such when you are caught with them you get thrown into the US legal system. Our legal system is not cheap, and it is funded by taxpayer dollars. Your taxpayer dollars, and my taxpayer dollars. The tax dollars of people who never have or will touch an illegal drug in their life. Yet they are paying to prosecute and imprison people for doing them (and in many times, its people who are otherwise on the straight and narrow, but that's besides the point).
Now, if drugs were legalized and taxed, the amount of money raised by these tariffs would be astounding. Estimations of the legalization and taxation of marijuana alone is in the billions of dollars. So, there is a sudden influx of tax money. Also, there is a sudden lightening of the load so to speak on the court system, as many people who use these substances recreationally and commit no other offences is suddenly gone. This will decrease the financial burden on the legal system*. For those individuals who still get incarcerated for other crimes (and are also drug users), there is an increased amount of funding available with which to deal with them (because prisons ain't cheap!) So now instead of drawing tax money away from things that need it (schools, infrastructure, etc), drugs users who commit crimes can now be handled in the court system with money from other drug users.
Granted, I know a lot of this is very simplified, but I think the point is clear. More tax revenue is a good thing. And we're sitting on a gold mine.
*I know that with the sudden legalization of substances, there may be a surge in drug use, but only temporarily. I doubt someone who tries drugs for the first time (hypothetically being now legalized) would also run out and start robbing convenience stores.
Legalize it. Tax it. Here's why:
Currently, drugs are illegal, and as such when you are caught with them you get thrown into the US legal system. Our legal system is not cheap, and it is funded by taxpayer dollars. Your taxpayer dollars, and my taxpayer dollars. The tax dollars of people who never have or will touch an illegal drug in their life. Yet they are paying to prosecute and imprison people for doing them (and in many times, its people who are otherwise on the straight and narrow, but that's besides the point).
Now, if drugs were legalized and taxed, the amount of money raised by these tariffs would be astounding. Estimations of the legalization and taxation of marijuana alone is in the billions of dollars. So, there is a sudden influx of tax money. Also, there is a sudden lightening of the load so to speak on the court system, as many people who use these substances recreationally and commit no other offences is suddenly gone. This will decrease the financial burden on the legal system*. For those individuals who still get incarcerated for other crimes (and are also drug users), there is an increased amount of funding available with which to deal with them (because prisons ain't cheap!) So now instead of drawing tax money away from things that need it (schools, infrastructure, etc), drugs users who commit crimes can now be handled in the court system with money from other drug users.
Granted, I know a lot of this is very simplified, but I think the point is clear. More tax revenue is a good thing. And we're sitting on a gold mine.
*I know that with the sudden legalization of substances, there may be a surge in drug use, but only temporarily. I doubt someone who tries drugs for the first time (hypothetically being now legalized) would also run out and start robbing convenience stores.
Currently, drugs are illegal, and as such when you are caught with them you get thrown into the US legal system. Our legal system is not cheap, and it is funded by taxpayer dollars. Your taxpayer dollars, and my taxpayer dollars. The tax dollars of people who never have or will touch an illegal drug in their life. Yet they are paying to prosecute and imprison people for doing them (and in many times, its people who are otherwise on the straight and narrow, but that's besides the point).
Now, if drugs were legalized and taxed, the amount of money raised by these tariffs would be astounding. Estimations of the legalization and taxation of marijuana alone is in the billions of dollars. So, there is a sudden influx of tax money. Also, there is a sudden lightening of the load so to speak on the court system, as many people who use these substances recreationally and commit no other offences is suddenly gone. This will decrease the financial burden on the legal system*. For those individuals who still get incarcerated for other crimes (and are also drug users), there is an increased amount of funding available with which to deal with them (because prisons ain't cheap!) So now instead of drawing tax money away from things that need it (schools, infrastructure, etc), drugs users who commit crimes can now be handled in the court system with money from other drug users.
Granted, I know a lot of this is very simplified, but I think the point is clear. More tax revenue is a good thing. And we're sitting on a gold mine.
*I know that with the sudden legalization of substances, there may be a surge in drug use, but only temporarily. I doubt someone who tries drugs for the first time (hypothetically being now legalized) would also run out and start robbing convenience stores.
Speaking from a first hand, been there perspective of the little slice of the "war" that is counter narcotics surveillance, just the cost savings of bringing deployed personnel, all the support that they require back, plus the savings of operating cost of the P3 Orions that are used and the frigates and destroyer groups, that in itself is a gold mine.
Not to say we wouldn't have to maintain surveillance for illegal shipments, but no where close to the extent we do today.
Plus, it'd shut Chavez up if we left Curacao and quit flying by his little mad house of a country!
Not to say we wouldn't have to maintain surveillance for illegal shipments, but no where close to the extent we do today.
Plus, it'd shut Chavez up if we left Curacao and quit flying by his little mad house of a country!
Bingo.
I honestly don't think pharma companies and certain other industries would wanna TOUCH drugs. From a business perspective, I'm sure they'd love to, but for their PR, it would be 9/11 times one million.
Tobacco companies, definitely.
Idk, Anheiser Busch is a toss-up for me. Most of their customer base is from in-land America, aka the Bible belt. Christians hate drugs almost as much as they love hypocrisy. So I dunno if they would approve of such overt drug sales.
Jesus and meth go together like Larry Craig and gay airport bathroom sex.
The heartland will be fine. They'll be too tweaked to care...
What pharma company gives a flying **** about PR? No one associates drug brands with the parent company. Pharmas are happy to be as sleazy as they need to be. While saving lives and providing boners for everyone, of course.
Every single one of them.
Wrong again.
Eh, I'll admit that certain pharma co's have some very questionable practices, but that doesn't hold true across the board.
I'm guessing from your NJ location you have a pretty well-informed opinion, but I haven't seen evidence of what you're suggesting. I've never seen above the line advertising of Pharma parent brands, I've never seen spokepeople from the brands on the evening news. Mostly they try to fly below the radar.
IMO, their real opposition to any kind of legalization is it allows that much more over-the-counter self-medication which cuts directly into their top line. They don't want people medicating in any manner except via (expensive) prescription paid for by insurance premiums.
Out of curiosity, has anyone actually seen or read anything from the pharma companies, alcohol, tobacco or any other industry trying / lobbying to keep MJ illegal or trying to legalize it so they can market it?
I have heard that in California the prison guard/police lobby try to keep it illegal as decriminalization/legalization would remove too many people from prison thus reducing the number of guards/deputies needed. (ie. loss of jobs) Now I have never really done any research into this, and have just read about it online in various articles but would like to know how accurate these statements are.
Personally I'd like to see it legalized. I also believe that the amount of tax it would generate would be far less than people think. Still a significant amount but I don't think it's going to end all of our budget woes.
I have heard that in California the prison guard/police lobby try to keep it illegal as decriminalization/legalization would remove too many people from prison thus reducing the number of guards/deputies needed. (ie. loss of jobs) Now I have never really done any research into this, and have just read about it online in various articles but would like to know how accurate these statements are.
Personally I'd like to see it legalized. I also believe that the amount of tax it would generate would be far less than people think. Still a significant amount but I don't think it's going to end all of our budget woes.
Last edited:
NPR did a piece a couple months ago about the CA prison guards and that very thing and their (guard union, BoP contractors) reluctance to over turn 3 strikes. If I can pull the link, I'll send it.
In regards to the tax, again, factor in that as well as the savings (billions every year) you would save by not having to utilize military and customs for that specific tasking. Granted, they would be re deployed to other areas, but there is still a cost savings benefit, albeit on paper.
As hard as it is to believe, the tobacco industry isn't interested in weed. It's just not cost effective for them.
And before ya'll jump on me about backing up that statement, it was relayed to me by a tobacco exec., in person.
And before ya'll jump on me about backing up that statement, it was relayed to me by a tobacco exec., in person.