Big Drug War News (Congressman Dan Burton on the drug war)

The Agitator ^ | 17 December 2002 | Radley Balko

[jmc813]

So Burton is a George Soros loving liberdopian, right?

[MrLeRoy]

Not when KLEZ has ravished my files......

This also inspires no confidence in your remebered stats.

[Texaggie79]

No. Alcohol prohibition, being that alcohol is so widely accepted in our culture, would result in disastrous results

[muggs]

I'd imagine he would have a much more difficult time if it were heroin or cocaine he were addicted to. Legal or no.

I really doubt it.

[FreeTally]

No, because the VAST majority of users of alcohol do not need support groups. They are not addicted.

The first sign of addition is denial.

[tpaine]

Tex, -- dont feel like an idiot for misspelling 'heroine'.
Feel like it for your near total ignorance of historical fact.

Texaggie79:
Have you any idea how many people were addicted to heroine before it was criminalized?

How many?
66 - MrLeRoy

I don't have exact numbers, but the majority of the population.
69 - tex79

Good grief.

[hove]

It's absolutely amazing how long it takes commen sense and logic to creep into the minds of some men. It's simple economics. If you want to destroy the drug trade....you legalize drugs and give them away. It will completely destroy the entire underground drug economy. And it would save billions of taxpayer dollars wasted on the war on drugs. That is the solution. Yes there would be a percentage of the population stupid enough to stay addicted....but they seem to be doing that anyway. The drug war has been a boondogle and complete failure. It's time more of our leaders get a clue...as Burton is starting to...and deal with the real drug problem once and for all!

[mvpel]

No because, as illustrated by MILLIONS of users, alcohol can be enjoyed responsibly. When is the last time you had a little crack with your meal?

Crack is a byproduct of the drug war.

Because of the harsh penalties for large weights of drugs, and the profit margins involved, it makes economic sense for dealers to offer a highly concentrated, highly compact product at a low unit cost with an extremely high profit margin.

If the penalty was the same for possessing a bottle of wine vs. a bottle of white lightning, which would you sell, bottles of wine or sips of white lightning?

Coca Cola used to have a small quantity of cocaine in every bottle, back when it was "the pause that refreshes."

[mvpel]

Each one would tell you that after leaving their support group meetings, they would be much more challenged to stay clean if they saw their drug of choice sitting in front of their face at a Wal-Mart, dirt cheap, and ready to use, than knowing they would have to pay out the butt for a crap drug at their dealers place.

Any alcoholic would tell you exactly the same thing, especially around the holidays and football season.

[Texaggie79]

I'll look when I'm not at work. The numbers aren't easy because opiates were used in many different ways. Surely you will not deny that the majority of the population TOOK cocaine and or heroin. They sold them like candy of the shelves. Said to cure toothaches, impotence, depression, headaches, appetite suppressants, ect, ect. They were the miracle drugs. House wives, and working men were getting to the point of NEEDING their cocaine or heroine powder.

1903 was when heroin or opiate addiction was at it's worst in America. FAR worse than it is today.

[Texaggie79]

I agree. But far too many citizens enjoy alcohol responsibly to merit banning it.

[Texaggie79]

If you introduced crack to people of that time, it would be just as big. People don't buy crack just because if the economics of it. They buy crack because NOTHING else gives them that rush. They would still buy crack over powdered cocaine even if both were legal. Hell, if only powdered cocaine were legal, they'd make their own crack.

[MrLeRoy]

Surely you will not deny that the majority of the population TOOK cocaine and or heroin.

I have no knowledge that this was the case. And it certainly doesn't prove that anything close to a majority was addicted.

1903 was when heroin or opiate addiction was at it's worst in America. FAR worse than it is today.

And yet 1903 is generally regarded as (in social aspects) a better time. What does that tell us?

[tacticalogic]

No. Alcohol prohibition, being that alcohol is so widely accepted in our culture, would result in disastrous results

Is that the only reason to be opposed to alcohol prohibition? Would a propaganda campaign to associate alcohol use with terrorist activity help?

[Cultural Jihad]

Keep the faith, comrade. The worker's revolution to cast asunder the chains of wage-slavery is just around the corner, too, O fellow true believer!

[Texaggie79]

It tells me that you must be smoking something. They criminalized it because it was such an epidemic. Do you REALLY think they would have banned such a profitable product unless it was an absolute detriment to society?

[MrLeRoy]

Alcohol prohibition, being that alcohol is so widely accepted in our culture, would result in disastrous results

Drug prohibition is having disastrous results, too. And we seem to be surviving legal alcohol rather well.

[MrLeRoy]

Do you REALLY think they would have banned such a profitable product unless it was an absolute detriment to society?

Governments love power; if government loved profit more, federal regulations of business wouldn't fill entire libraries.

[Texaggie79]

Well, I oppose it because I believe that society can handle it being legal.

I know you want to make this a "It's my damn body, I'll do what I want." issue, but that only goes as far as the FED. When it get's down to the state level, communities can set limits on the risks they are willing to take. If they don't like the risk of alcohol, they can ban it. Many counties do. And if you don't like it, you can leave.

[MrLeRoy]

People don't buy crack just because if the economics of it. They buy crack because NOTHING else gives them that rush. They would still buy crack over powdered cocaine even if both were legal. Hell, if only powdered cocaine were legal, they'd make their own crack.

Provide evidence for your claims.