We suffer about 300 deaths a year from riding bicycles. There are risks to everything.
Drugs should be de-criminalized. Apart from taking the huge profits out of them, it would perhaps give a greater incentive to addicts to come in from the cold and get themselves treated. It would cut down overdoses, and severely reduce the host of other crimes that stem from drugs. Thanks for the bone. Harry ********************************** Henry George School of Social Science of Los Angeles. Box 655 Tujunga CA 91042 818 352-4141 ********************************** From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Darryl or Natalia Sent: Sunday, June 17, 2007 1:37 PM To: Christoph Reuss Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Futurework] The Plan to Disappear Canada I was merely throwing Harry a bone. I know full well why you sent the piece. Please don't misinterpret a comment on will-weakening effects of drugs with that of the very complex issue of drug "liberalization". I don't think it is as black and white as you do, and I believe that THC derived drugs should be de-criminalized, while many legal drugs should become prohibited as improperly researched, lethal, mind numbing, depressive or devastatingly addictive -- just to mention a few associated problems. Law enforcement still only focuses on the user as the criminal mind, whereas it is the dealer/chemist/Pharma who are the masterminds at large because those who wish to control the masses want it that way. Appearance of justice, unfortunately, ruins young lives, and costs society far more than it would to provide treatment or actually eke out the pushers -- and by that I mean illegal or pharma/medical. I can't offer a sage comment on de-criminalization of hard drugs, except where I think it is criminal to send a user to prison when it is treatment that is the solution for an addict. I see both sides of the argument, for and against, while I think that letting a known owner/trafficker of a ton of cocaine or ecstasy get off scott free is unconscionable. People consume mind numbing foods, video games and TV too, but neither they nor the manufacturers will be held accountable. Cars, which kill far more people than drugs ever will, are legal, though they can't make them safe. Cigarettes are known killers, claiming up to 50% of their users, and alcohol is way up there, but should a person become devastatingly drunk in public, the manufacturer of his vodka will never be facing criminal charges. Dick Cheney can shoot his lawyer in the face because hunting is a legal risk associated sport, and neither he nor the gun manufacturer will be sentenced. Natalia Christoph Reuss wrote: I think Harry must be a touch proud of you... I didn't suggest that DDT was harmless. The point is the double standards of the genociders. As with asbestos, for example. The same lobby that uses class action lawsuits about asbestos as a strategic tool (e.g. to make ABB nearly go bankrupt, even though only a later-purchased subsidiary had to do with asbestos), didn't refrain from polluting NYC with asbestos dust just for the money. Lousy diet, education, drugs, and pollution can weaken will Good to hear this from an advocate of drug liberalization... Chris ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SpamWall: Mail to this addy is deleted unread unless it contains the keyword "igve". _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list Futurework@fes.uwaterloo.ca http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
_______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list Futurework@fes.uwaterloo.ca http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
