Professional Soldiers ® - View Single Post - Colombian Bio-War?

Cincinnatus · 06-10-2005, 12:56

Reaper,

I've only anecdotal evidence to draw from on the Dutch experience, but I don't think that it serves as a valid example in this case. The Netherlands has relaxed laws on marijuana and hashish, but they have relatively open borders and are surrounded by countries with less enlightened attitudes. So they get a disproportionately high percentage of users/ abusers. Also, there is the phenomenon akin to that of a vacation city (think NOLA during Mardi Gras) where people behave in a manner that they would never do at home.

If we as a nation were to decriminalize drug use we'd be unlikely to see any sort of, statistically significant, increase in users/ abusers rushing to our shores. If one state were to decriminalize drug use, they could count on an influx of users/ abusers, and those who prey on them, and would likely see at least some increase in crime (as is the case with jurisdictions that legalize gambling.)

Sacamuelas,

I made it clear that I recognized adapting a program such as I propose would not be a panacea, but I think some of your criticisms are unreasonable.

People who don't pay their traffic tickets, won't pay their dope tickets. When caught they get prosecuted. The majority of drug users are "casual users" who hold a job and are, at least marginally, productive members of society. Others are the rich kids and spoiled adults you mentioned. They will likely pay their fines and be more careful in the future. Some unemployed, and unemployable, people will use their unemployment, panhandle, con friends or family members into loaning them money, kite checks or steal it from the collection plate at church.

If they pay their fine, they get another chance. If they get caught stealing to pay their fine they're prosecuted, If they don't pay their fines, they're prosecuted. This can happen more swiftly because the courts aren't choked with drug cases. If they're convicted the jails now have room for them, because they are not filled to overflowing with people serving mandatory sentences for possession.

If upon getting ticketed they realize they've totally fucked their lives up and are in such dire straits that they will be unable to pay, they check in to one of the treatment centers, get clean, get out and move into a half way house, get a job and pay the fine off when they can. As long as it can be demonstrated that they are making progress the fine is held in abeyance.

Some people will be chronic fuck ups. They won't get clean. They'll use in jail if they can and their sentences will continually reset. The burdens of the system will weigh disproportionately on the poor.

All these problems are preferable to what we have now. We spend a staggering amount of money on interdiction, prosecution and incarceration, but the street price of drugs never rises. In our efforts to stem the flow of drugs we compromise other civil liberties (e.g., forfeiture of assets without due process, ever more restictive gun laws, etc.) and the problem doesn't get any better.

In addition to the above, there is the consideration of denying FARC and the Taliban the revenue stream. If street prices were to fall by only fifty percent, and that is a very conservative estimate, the blow to the finances of the narcotrafficantes would still be huge.

I've not spent any time in jail. I have spent a lot of time in NA and AA meetings. Almost fifteen years ago I organized an intervention on a friend of mine. He's been clean and sober ever since, is married, owns a home, has a bright and beautiful daughter, is active in the PTA. When he first got sober I made my self available to ferry him to meetings and in the first year or so probably attended 75-80 meetings with him. I think that I have a reasonable appreciation of the "target audience" and I recognize that some people are not salvagable. Many are, and while mine is an imperfect solution it's a hell of a lot better than what we're doing now.

A saying that one hears repeated in AA meetings is that "a pretty good definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting a different result." Though they are not necessarily talking about "the war on drugs" they might as well be.

06-10-2005, 12:56	#14
Cincinnatus Guerrilla Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Vermont Posts: 342	Reaper, I've only anecdotal evidence to draw from on the Dutch experience, but I don't think that it serves as a valid example in this case. The Netherlands has relaxed laws on marijuana and hashish, but they have relatively open borders and are surrounded by countries with less enlightened attitudes. So they get a disproportionately high percentage of users/ abusers. Also, there is the phenomenon akin to that of a vacation city (think NOLA during Mardi Gras) where people behave in a manner that they would never do at home. If we as a nation were to decriminalize drug use we'd be unlikely to see any sort of, statistically significant, increase in users/ abusers rushing to our shores. If one state were to decriminalize drug use, they could count on an influx of users/ abusers, and those who prey on them, and would likely see at least some increase in crime (as is the case with jurisdictions that legalize gambling.) Sacamuelas, I made it clear that I recognized adapting a program such as I propose would not be a panacea, but I think some of your criticisms are unreasonable. People who don't pay their traffic tickets, won't pay their dope tickets. When caught they get prosecuted. The majority of drug users are "casual users" who hold a job and are, at least marginally, productive members of society. Others are the rich kids and spoiled adults you mentioned. They will likely pay their fines and be more careful in the future. Some unemployed, and unemployable, people will use their unemployment, panhandle, con friends or family members into loaning them money, kite checks or steal it from the collection plate at church. If they pay their fine, they get another chance. If they get caught stealing to pay their fine they're prosecuted, If they don't pay their fines, they're prosecuted. This can happen more swiftly because the courts aren't choked with drug cases. If they're convicted the jails now have room for them, because they are not filled to overflowing with people serving mandatory sentences for possession. If upon getting ticketed they realize they've totally fucked their lives up and are in such dire straits that they will be unable to pay, they check in to one of the treatment centers, get clean, get out and move into a half way house, get a job and pay the fine off when they can. As long as it can be demonstrated that they are making progress the fine is held in abeyance. Some people will be chronic fuck ups. They won't get clean. They'll use in jail if they can and their sentences will continually reset. The burdens of the system will weigh disproportionately on the poor. All these problems are preferable to what we have now. We spend a staggering amount of money on interdiction, prosecution and incarceration, but the street price of drugs never rises. In our efforts to stem the flow of drugs we compromise other civil liberties (e.g., forfeiture of assets without due process, ever more restictive gun laws, etc.) and the problem doesn't get any better. In addition to the above, there is the consideration of denying FARC and the Taliban the revenue stream. If street prices were to fall by only fifty percent, and that is a very conservative estimate, the blow to the finances of the narcotrafficantes would still be huge. I've not spent any time in jail. I have spent a lot of time in NA and AA meetings. Almost fifteen years ago I organized an intervention on a friend of mine. He's been clean and sober ever since, is married, owns a home, has a bright and beautiful daughter, is active in the PTA. When he first got sober I made my self available to ferry him to meetings and in the first year or so probably attended 75-80 meetings with him. I think that I have a reasonable appreciation of the "target audience" and I recognize that some people are not salvagable. Many are, and while mine is an imperfect solution it's a hell of a lot better than what we're doing now. A saying that one hears repeated in AA meetings is that "a pretty good definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting a different result." Though they are not necessarily talking about "the war on drugs" they might as well be.
Cincinnatus is offline