Dave has an outstanding post up dealing with the drug legalization question. I’m always interested in the comments as a very rough gauge of popular sentiment.
A legalization fear I see a lot these days is based on “if we leave those people alone what will they do?”
Of course the question started gaining a lot of ground when the communists started asking questions about the capitalists. Such as: “What are they going to do? It is unpredictable and could be bad. They must be controlled.”
And worst of all they like what they are doing. What more proof do you need for the need for control?
BTW it has been my experience that once a person gets to the above point mentally (what will we do with zombies run wild?) it is not long before they throw in the towel on prohibition.
=======
And Dave. Look up Nixon’s methadone program. Reports back in the day said that 50% to 60% of the troops were on heroin in ‘Nam. Nixon was worried about the “drug epidemic” this would cause in the US. So he did methodone. The program was a roaring success. “Free” government drugs and supervision vs the chaos of the street. But after a year or so it seems that something like 80% or 90% of the enrollees dropped out. To become street drug users? No. The environment was better in the US vs wartime ‘Nam and they no longer needed drugs to cope. That left only the genetically susceptible.
Addiction Is A Genetic Disease
Everyone gets PTSD if the trauma is severe enough. The deal is: because of genetics 80% of us get over it in about 3 to 6 months. For the other 20% it can take significantly longer.
Always keep in mind that being in that 20% group is not enough. Genes don’t make you automatically an addict of anything but food, air, and water (No – I’m not going to nit pick the left out details). For you to get long term PTSD you must be not only be genetically susceptible but also traumatized.
I don’t know about you but Lets Make War On The Traumatized does not sound like marching orders. It sounds more like “I’m going to sit this one out”. I will not volunteer. But change that to “lets put extreme hurts to users of unapproved drugs who use them for unapproved reasons” and the support is just phenomenal. About $75 billion from Federal, State, and Local Governments alone. Not to mention your lovely local neighborhood war zone (Interzone?
So we come down to “who will bear the burdens of legalization” because we already know who is bearing the burdens of prohibition. The 10,000 or so murdered in the crossfire (2,000 just bystanders or sleeping quietly in a bedroom). The neighborhoods destroyed (only “those people” live there – in my town the shorthand is “West side” – when I lived in Chicago quite a few people actually called it “The Zone”), and the $75 billion a year taxpayers squander to keep the whole deadly farce running. And the folks who are generally anti-statist are those who most support the state on this question. Go figure.
Cross Posted at Power and Control
Comments
3 responses to “Bearing The Burdens – Or – What Will They Do?”
Just a side note. You touched one of my nerves. I was in Vietnam, the “I” Corps. 50 to 60% were NOT on drugs.
Every human on the planet is an addict. Do you have to have that morning cup of coffee to get your engine going? Do you have to have a Coke, Pepsi or Dr. Pepper while eating a meal? Do you enjoy smoking or using other tobacco products? Do you have a beer, cocktail or glass of wine when you return from work? How about that scoop or two of ice cream while your watching TV. Speaking of TV, how much TV do you watch? How much time do you spend surfing the net? All of us do something that is not good for us.
Imagine if the government said that caffeine, sugar and tobacco are now illegal substances. You would have an underground economy that would provide those substances at a cost. How many people would go to prison for smuggling or buying sugar and cigarettes? Would you have to go to court ordered ice cream rehab?
I do not understand why one adult has to control another adult’s actions. I don’t understand why government keeps taking away our freedoms because it is for our safety. I’ll worry about my own safety thank you very much.
I read an study about Portugal and drug use in that country. All drugs have been legal in Portugal for ten years now. The study indicated that the use of heroin, cocaine, marijuana, etc… has not increased during the ten years. Furthermore, the use of many of the substances went down. Kind of blows our government’s theory that legalizing drugs would cause harm to people. If a person has an issue with drug use, there are a wide range of services to help them with the problem. As a result their prisons are used for violent offenders and not drug users or dealers.
If they made heroin legal today I would not buy some just to check it out. Would you? Same goes for meth, cocaine and a wide range of prescription medications. I could go to my doctor and say I twisted my back and I need something for pain. She would write me a prescription to ease my pain. I don’t do it because I’m not in pain and I do not like how they make me feel.
If drugs were legal, violent crime in our inner city would go down. You would still have the same people addicted to drugs, that you have today but they would be going to rehab instead of prison. All of us are addicted to something.
bernie.
It was probably the REMFs doing the skag. Couldn’t say personally. The closest I got to the war was about 1,500 yards off Da Nang. It was a busy arty day that day. I can still hear it on the 4th.