There is a percentage of EVERY population that will be addicted to something....This is simple fact and hardcore human nature.
On Jun 15, 3:08 pm, Sharon Fuentes <[email protected]> wrote: > I always love this argument....I would much rather be smoking pot and paying > taxes on it than pissing away billions of dollars to keep up this futile > effort. Can you see the coffee houses all set up like Starbucks? They > could be called "CannibusHuts" and equipped with drive thrus. Then we can > be the United States of Americadam and follow the lead of the Dutch. The > redlight district can be placed in Weiner's district so we will have Vegas > on the West, and Weinerworld on the East. Everyone will be a little calmer > and the men that like to venture out can get the fixes legally rather than > compromising thier politcal stature and sending photos to strange women. > > S > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 4:45 PM, MJ <[email protected]> wrote: > > *"The war on drugs costs American taxpayers over $40 billion a year. For > > the first half of our nation’s history there were no prohibitions against > > any drug. The war on drugs is not authorized by the Constitution. Tobacco > > kills more people every year than all of the people killed by all illegal > > drugs in the twentieth century. The war on drugs has done nothing to reduce > > the demand for illicit drugs. Numerous studies have shown that smoking > > marijuana is less dangerous than drinking alcohol. The war on drugs is the > > cause of our unnecessarily swelled prison populations. Alcohol abuse, not > > drug abuse, is one of the leading causes of premature deaths in the United > > States. The war on drugs has ruined more lives than drugs themselves. More > > people in America die every year from drugs prescribed and administered by > > physicians than from illegal drugs." > > > **The 40-Year War on Freedom > > *by Laurence M. Vance, June 15, 2011 > > > Although the U.S. government’s wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have taken > > center stage for the better part of the last ten years, there is another > > failed war that has been waged by the federal government for the past forty > > years. > > > The war on drugs was declared by President Richard Nixon on June 17, 1971. > > > Speaking at a press > > conference<http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=3047&st=&st1=>in > > the Briefing Room at the White House, Nixon announced his plan: > > > I would like to summarize for you the meeting that I have just had with > > the bipartisan leaders which began at 8 o’clock and was completed 2 hours > > later. I began the meeting by making this statement, which I think needs to > > be made to the Nation: America’s public enemy number one in the United > > States is drug abuse. In order to fight and defeat this enemy, it is > > necessary to wage a new, all-out offensive. > > > Nixon left no doubt as to the scope of his offensive: > > > This will be a worldwide offensive dealing with the problems of sources > > of supply, as well as Americans who may be stationed abroad, wherever they > > are in the world. It will be government wide, pulling together the nine > > different fragmented areas within the government in which this problem is > > now being handled, and it will be nationwide in terms of a new educational > > program that we trust will result from the discussions that we have had. > > > He went on to say how “essential it was for the American people to be > > alerted to this danger.” > > > In a special message <http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=3048> to the > > Congress on Drug Abuse Prevention and Control on the same day, Nixon > > declared drug use to be a “menace,” an “increasing grave threat,” and a > > “national emergency.” > > > He also continued his military rhetoric: > > > I am transmitting legislation to the Congress to consolidate at the > > highest level a full-scale attack on the problem of drug abuse in America. > > The problems of drug abuse must be faced on many fronts. > > To wage an effective war against heroin addiction, we must have > > international cooperation. In order to secure such cooperation, I am > > initiating a worldwide escalation in our existing programs for the control > > of narcotics traffic, and I am proposing a number of new steps for this > > purpose. > > The Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970 provides a > > sound base for the attack on the problem of the availability of narcotics in > > America. > > > Nixon then issued Executive Order No. 11599 establishing the Special Action > > Office of Drug Abuse Prevention (SAODAP) in the Executive Office of the > > President. He also appointed the first drug czar, Dr. Jerome H. Jaffe, as > > Special Consultant to the President for Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs. > > > Nixon’s war on drugs really took off after the formation of the Drug > > Enforcement Agency (DEA) in 1973 and the declaration of an “all-out global > > war on the drug menace.” > > > This does not mean that the federal government didn’t fight against drugs > > before Nixon declared his war. To the contrary, the feds have waged war on > > personal freedom via the drug war since the passage in 1905 of the first > > federal anti-narcotics law aimed at ending the opium trade in the > > Philippines. > > > This was followed by the Pure Food and Drug Act of 1906, the Opium > > Exclusion Act of 1909, the Harrison Narcotics Tax Act of 1914, the Marijuana > > Tax Act of 1937, the Narcotic Control Act of 1956, and the Comprehensive > > Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970. > > > And since the beginning of Nixon’s war, we have had the Anti-Drug Abuse Act > > of 1986, the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988, the Chemical Diversion and > > Trafficking Act of 1988, the Illicit Drug Anti-Proliferation Act of 2003, > > and the Combat Methamphetamine Epidemic Act of 2005. > > > And who can forget the D.A.R.E. school-lecture program, “Just Say No” > > clubs, and the Partnership for a Drug-Free America’s television ad featuring > > a hot skillet, an egg, and the phrase, “This is your brain on drugs.” > > > The case against the drug war has been made so many times that, at the risk > > of sounding like a broken record, I will limit myself to ten key points: > > > The war on drugs costs American taxpayers over $40 billion a year. For the > > first half of our nation’s history there were no prohibitions against any > > drug. The war on drugs is not authorized by the Constitution. Tobacco kills > > more people every year than all of the people killed by all illegal drugs in > > the twentieth century. The war on drugs has done nothing to reduce the > > demand for illicit drugs. Numerous studies have shown that smoking marijuana > > is less dangerous than drinking alcohol. The war on drugs is the cause of > > our unnecessarily swelled prison populations. Alcohol abuse, not drug abuse, > > is one of the leading causes of premature deaths in the United States. The > > war on drugs has ruined more lives than drugs themselves. More people in > > America die every year from drugs prescribed and administered by physicians > > than from illegal drugs. > > > To drug warriors, these things don’t matter: Because taking drugs is bad > > for one’s health and morally corrupting, the state has the duty to regulate > > and ban them. > > > But as true and important as these things are, the drug-warrior statists > > are right about dismissing them for in the end they really don’t matter. And > > there are many other things that don’t matter as well. > > > It doesn’t matter if the drug war can or can’t be “won.” It doesn’t matter > > if drug addiction destroys or doesn’t destroy lives and families. It doesn’t > > matter if marijuana is or isn’t a gateway drug. It doesn’t matter if the > > majority of Americans support or don’t support the drug war. It doesn’t > > matter if marijuana is or isn’t beneficial for pain management. It doesn’t > > matter if fighting the drug war is or isn’t a bipartisan issue. It doesn’t > > matter if cocaine and heroin are or aren’t addictive. It doesn’t matter if > > drug use would or wouldn’t increase if drugs were legalized. It doesn’t > > matter if advocates for drug decriminalization want or don’t want to get > > high. It doesn’t matter if smoking crack is or isn’t dangerous. It doesn’t > > matter if drug use is or isn’t immoral. It doesn’t matter if the war on > > drugs is or isn’t “worth it.” > > > What matters is personal freedom, private property, personal > > responsibility, individual liberty, personal and financial privacy, free > > markets, limited government, and the natural right to be left alone if one > > is not aggressing against his someone and is doing “anything that’s > > peaceful.” > > > Ending the war on drugs is not an esoteric issue of libertarians or a pet > > issue of those who want to get high. Once the government claims control over > > what a man smokes, snorts, sniffs, inhales, or otherwise ingests into his > > body, there is no limit to its power. As the economist Ludwig von Mises so > > eloquently said: “As soon as we surrender the principle that the state > > should not interfere in any questions touching on the individual’s mode of > > life, we end by regulating and restricting the latter down to the smallest > > detail.” The war on drugs is incompatible with a free society. > > >http://www.fff.org/comment/com1106o.asp > > > -- > > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. > > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum > > > * Visit our other community > > athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/<http://www.politicalforum.com/> > > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. > > * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
