Coloradokari, is the answer “D”?

This is just so much drivel coming from the Puritanical Society Against Pleasure, a.k.a. the Republican/Democratic party; Catholic & Mormon Churches. The people who want to take your money and tell you what to think.

Getting high is a universal pursuit, from pollinating bees to berry-eating birds all the way up to man smoking cannabis, tobacco; drinking alcohol, taking other substances. If you’re Peruvian sure it’s a few leaves of coca or a snort of something stronger; if you’re Irish it’s Guinness; whatever is the custom. I know I paint better & often solve problems after some really good outdoor grown sativa; yeah I know the Christians want to demonise me for that & everything else I stand for.

Whatever gets them through the night; me, I love to shift states of consciousness & clear out the cobwebs from time-to-time. It never gets in the way of anything else. And how many cannabis users have you seen living on the street?

It seems to me drug use should be a private matter unless something done by drug users or providers, as such, impinges on the lives of others, in which case whatever social pressures are brought to bear should be as constructive and non-coercive as possible.  Doesn’t that sound like common sense?  That’s why they (our lords and masters and their brilliant advisors, like Antonio Maria Costa) will try that method last.

We should, of course, insist that purveyors of drugs state fully and exactly what it is they’re purveying.  No more talcum in the heroin.

I am somewhat dubious about full legalization in a capitalist world, however, since some addictive drugs have already become major vehicles of profit.  There needs to be some limit on the propaganda used, lest millions of not-so-smart people be inveigled into situations they can’t handle.  One thing I’ve thought of is holding advertising sellers responsible for the ill effects of what they advertise, since they are actively and profitably advocating use.  That would eliminate not only propagandizing for opiates and so forth, but also for tobacco and alcohol, and put a nice big crimp in some of the more damaging activities of big pharma as well.

“Drug law reformers saw Costa’s words as a significant sign in the debate over the “war on drugs”. However, he said that legalization was not the answer.”

Wow! Have the answer “legalization” then toss it out again. A loser half-way to nowhere. Till they learn from their mistakes the failures get larger and longer with no end in sight. Isn’t 94 years enough?

The growth of the prison industry, fines, confiscation, tax money, police/military and erosion of our civil liberties are a win for them. The state is heavily addicted to the ‘drug war’ even as pharmaceutical companies make a killing with their own drug war, only we are the ones assaulted by their legal drugs. [Not FDA approved either.]

{.......} Prey on the weakest of society, they use the newest technology, have large orginizations and are armed with the best weapons. They are in “bed’ with the judges and the politicians. They derive their wealth from the “War on Drugs”

A} Taliban
B} Drug Dealers
C} Law Enforcement
D} All of the Above

If only Obama had not received all that pharmaceutical money during his campaign… or most Congressmen/women and senators during their campaigns for that matter.

(sigh)

Sadly, boggs is quite correct: The “war on drugs” is big business, just like the “war on terror.” Effective or Rational?... no. Profitable?... extremely.

“An intriguing strategy”, like its never been considered, contemplated or debated. They wanted to fill the prisons with all the black and brown skin young men they could cramm into them. Its big business. A big part of our CAPITALISM.
They don’t really want to destroy all those big profits, hell don’t you imagine there are some big pay-offs from those drug lords.

““His call for international law enforcement to target traffickers rather than users came as it was announced that there is a worldwide growth in synthetic drugs.”“
***************************************************

Now, I ask you, why would such an agenda work? It won’t. Case in point, just suppose that the accompaning picture with this post is really a huge cache of illegal drugs, would you really believe that much illegal drugs would be destroyed or would the political and law enforcement units think it MORE profitable to ’ just say that it will be destroyed’ but turn around and sell it as would have been for a take for their own profit? Remember, most any government institution today is likely a criminally infested institution out for one thing, MONEY.

And answer me this, when is the last time that a drug cache such as this was verified destroyed?
It would take a lot to convince me that this particular batch will still find its way into the streets illegally.

Thus, I say legalization of certain drugs that are less dangerous than alcohol, absolutely need to be legalized.