End the War on Drugs [Ron Paul]

U.S. Rep. Ron Paul, R-Tex., 14th District ^ | 2009-03-30

[Peter ODonnell]

One suspects that the current White House is not exactly a drug-free zone; one wonders how many residents and employees are also crack users, forget about marijuana, I imagine that’s available on speed-dial.

[takenoprisoner]

I’d love to ask Ron where the meth should come from to be sold in the “coffee-house dispensaries”.

You are kidding right? I can’t answer for Ron, but I’m thinking for those who like that sort of high, they could get it in a pure pill form like they did before the govt declared war on amphetimines. No such meth labs existed before the govt declared it’s war on amphetimines.

If there were a cease fire, who would want to smoke or snort such a toxic lethal concoction? Especially if they were able to acquire the same level of euphoria from a simple pure pill like they were able to do before the war?

[CzarChasm]

I had such high hopes for our conversation.

But now they've gone up in smoke.

Did you even read what you wrote? It makes no sense.

Very sad.

Thanks anyway, and have a great week!

[CzarChasm]

Prohibition was doomed to fail from the start. They take a substance that had been legal and widely used legally since the dawn of time and try a "Prohibition" but don't prohibit its use.

OMG I just got what you were saying. Are you serious? Do you really think that Prohibition failed because it didn't go far enough?

ROFLMAO! Since mere posession of illegal drugs today is a crime, nevermind consumption, has that made today's prohibition more successful?

Good night, Gracie.

[elkfersupper]

We'll deal with legalizing the drugs later.

Right now, I would like to see firearms, hamburgers, tobacco, alcohol, gasoline and whatever vehicle I would like to drive legalized.

[GLDNGUN]

I’d love to ask Ron where the meth should come from to be sold in the “coffee-house dispensaries”. You are kidding right? I can’t answer for Ron, but I’m thinking for those who like that sort of high, they could get it in a pure pill form like they did before the govt declared war on amphetimines. No such meth labs existed before the govt declared it’s war on amphetimines. If there were a cease fire, who would want to smoke or snort such a toxic lethal concoction? Especially if they were able to acquire the same level of euphoria from a simple pure pill like they were able to do before the war?

No, I'm NOT kidding. Do you really think the government just decided one day "hmmm, how about we declare WAR on amphetamines!" and then crystal meth use went up? I'm afraid you have bass ackwards. Crystal meth came along and the government has been fighting it ever since. Same with crack cocaine. First the problem, THEN the response.

Evidently you didn't read the other posts; otherwise, you would have learned with the tweekers prefer smoking or injecting over popping a pill, but I will say I got a hearty laugh at this line: "who would want to smoke or snort such a toxic lethal concoction?".

ROFL! Drug addicts! That's who! LOL

[GLDNGUN]

I had such high hopes for our conversation.

Interesting choice of words.

But now they've gone up in smoke.

Where there's smoke, there's...

[GLDNGUN]

OMG I just got what you were saying. Are you serious? Do you really think that Prohibition failed because it didn't go far enough?

Is that what I said? You quoted me, then ignored the quote. Perhaps reading comprehension is not one of your strengths. Were you high? I said: "Prohibition was doomed to fail from the start." See? Then I said "They take a substance that had been legal and widely used legally since the dawn of time" See? It's very hard to effectively "prohibit" something that has always been legal and for the most part, socially acceptable. Then I said "try a "Prohibition" but don't prohibit its use." See? When you ADD that fact to the aforementioned ones, it is extremely easy to see why "Prohibition" failed. Add to the fact that it wasn't even enforced with rare exceptions, and it becomes a "no brainer".

Since mere posession of illegal drugs today is a crime, nevermind consumption, has that made today's prohibition more successful?

Obviously if possession and use of a substance is illegal it's going to be easier to prohibit it and enforce than if neither possession or use is illegal. This would be the epitome of common sense.

[takenoprisoner]

“Do you really think the government just decided one day “hmmm, how about we declare WAR on amphetamines!” and then crystal meth use went up?”

Ah yea, that’s exactly what happened. You do know before the govt declared war on amphetimines, they were available over the counter at the corner drug store? You know this right? I’m asking this because right now, I’m thinking you might be one of those blissful kinda folk, you know the type, the one’s with a big drooling mouth and a pea-sized brain?

Speaking of blissful states, do you think the ignorant poor, both the rural and urban folk, who comprise the majority of folk who do this toxic waste of a compound, that the majority of them, actually know what the ingredients are? If so, how do you know?

[CzarChasm]

thanks for the clarification, i didn't think a FReeper could really be that obtuse!

i am greatly relieved.

of course, the exact same reasoning applies to any prohibition, since by definition all prohibitions are about making some illegal that was previously legal.

so i'm glad that we agree: all prohibitions are doomed to failure.

the question then becomes: does the prohibition do more harm than good? i think the answer is clearly "yes"...

[Ken H]

-m-

[humblegunner]

Well D'UH!!!!!!!! w/ who else should it be?

Burn down with the cops I guess.

Although alone by the river is nice too...

[rebellious49]

Anyone thinking that drug use is down in this country is living in a cave. Really, you need to get out more. The demand by us for recreational drugs is astounding, and getting worse. If it weren’t there wouldn’t be billions being made in the trade. Time for the govt to realize we’re wasting money in this effort. Corrupt govt’s overseas will see that our need for these items continues regardless.

[philman_36]

Anyone thinking that drug use is down in this country is living in a cave. Really, you need to get out more.
Really, you are talking to the wrong person.
Did you intend your comment for, perhaps, death2tyrants to whom I was responding to in reply #115.

[paleocongeezer]

Thank you for making a thoughtful and rational post, one of the very few on this thread.
the first drug laws were made to harass Chinese and Hispanics.
The drug laws that followed in last 50 years or so were to protect the CIA and government monopolies.

[Diego1618]

Obviously, Paul hasn't been around people who have ruined or are ruining their lives with that stuff.

If folks are ruining their lives with that "stuff" anyway, then why go to the time, trouble and expense in trying to keep it away from them? Obviously....it's not working...... and just encourages the criminal element to participate....and profit.

I would rather see all the drug warriors, attorneys, judges and sundry law enforcement officers that feed off the illicit drug trade (and you, the taxpayer) go to work at Burger King. I'm tired of paying for their 30 days vacation, their 100% medical and full retirement after 20 years.

At least, then...... these poor, stupid jerks that use this "stuff" could turn their $100.00 a day habit into a $2.00 a day habit and wouldn't have to break and enter your house for goodies to sell.....to support their stupid habit!

No, I don't use drugs....never have....never will.

[krb]

Ending the “drug war” isn’t going to end the violence.

I would love to see the country test your theory.