I agree, but the bolded is exactly what some of our BGP brethren are supporting...

 

You did not ask what will happen in the War on Drugs. This was the question:

 

"What should be done to win or at least make progress on the war on drugs?"

 

Should being the key word. You did qualify it with don't say legalize it and I'm sorry to have gotten it so off-track by asking what if that's exactly what I wanted to do. But judging by the response in this thread, it seems that question took a one-post thread to a 100+ post thread.

Comparing drug use of a teen to an adult qualifies as a well-thought out response now?

 

The only person I saw in this thread ducking out of a well-thought out response was you in regards to guns...

You know me better than that. I've never ducked the gun issue. Ever. But what's good for one side is good for the other. In this argument, the gun issue has no bearing. Two separate entities.

No I've got a lot more out of this discussion, it is the pro-drug crowd that is so narrow minded. I started this thread with the question what can be done about the drug problem out side of legalizing drugs. The response to that question is near non-existent.

 

The Pro-Drug posters have not qualified any drugs not to be legalized. Jim is the first poster to have enough sense to realize that ALL DRUGS are not going to be legalized ever. But that is exactly what many of the posters have eluded to.

 

You're labeling us "pro-Drug" which implies we are encouraging its use. I don't think anyone on here is and shows me you aren't getting anything out of my posts nor any other "pro-drug" poster. I'm encouraging we take back responsibility for ourselves, educate people, and make it a social problem, not a criminal one.

 

We've offered numerous solutions. You have yet to provide 1 single piece of evidence showing the success of the 40+ years of the war on drugs.

I think both sides agree that the war on drugs is futile.

Pro-drug crowd is the the only one to offer a solution (except for the poster who would like to execute more people), but yet we are narrow-minded?

 

The fact that the response is near non-existent might tell you something about how hopeless this "war" is...

 

Ummm...at least be honest in your reference to my post. Was that part of my "solution"? Yes it was in certain circumstances...but there was MUCH more to it that just "executing people".

I think both sides agree that the war on drugs is futile.

 

So, the answer is to keep it up the way it is since nobody can agree on a different method of combating it?

So, the answer is to keep it up the way it is since nobody can agree on a different method of combating it?

 

I never said that, but don't think legalization is the answer. I'd guess that BGP would be more likely to come up with a solution than a house committee appointed to come up with alternative solutions or a drug task force of politicians.

 

Once again, you are operating under the notion that a dramatic spike in hard drug use will occur. These things are easily gotten now, it's the side-effects that deter people, not the illicitness.

 

While it might be easily obtained that doesn't mean you can go to a store and get it. You still have to know someone and you know the risks of buying/using it.

 

If its legal the same risks aren't there. I think its obvious usage would increase somewhat.

 

Comparing drug use of a teen to an adult qualifies as a well-thought out response now?

 

The only person I saw in this thread ducking out of a well-thought out response was you in regards to guns...

 

We have a constitutional right to own firearms. We do not have the same rights to shoot up heroin. The comparison to guns is an awful one.

 

You're labeling us "pro-Drug" which implies we are encouraging its use. I don't think anyone on here is and shows me you aren't getting anything out of my posts nor any other "pro-drug" poster. I'm encouraging we take back responsibility for ourselves, educate people, and make it a social problem, not a criminal one.

 

We've offered numerous solutions. You have yet to provide 1 single piece of evidence showing the success of the 40+ years of the war on drugs.

 

Have you provided one single piece of evidence that legalizing drugs is the answer?

You're labeling us "pro-Drug" which implies we are encouraging its use. I don't think anyone on here is and shows me you aren't getting anything out of my posts nor any other "pro-drug" poster. I'm encouraging we take back responsibility for ourselves, educate people, and make it a social problem, not a criminal one.

 

We've offered numerous solutions. You have yet to provide 1 single piece of evidence showing the success of the 40+ years of the war on drugs.

 

Pro-Drug term was just used for expediency in typing on my part, sorry if that offended.

 

I NEVER said the war on drugs was working, that's why I started this thread. I was asking what can/needs to be done to fight the drug problem in this country.

 

The only solutions given are legalization. Few have mentioned the root cause of the drug problem/culture in this country and how to change that. Your and others solution is, we can't fix it so let's legalize it.

 

I agree with you that it is a social problem, but how as a society can we change that. But as a social problem it does have a side effect of causing several criminal problems (not talking about drug crimes either but other non-victimless crimes).

 

Pro-Drug term was just used for expediency in typing on my part, sorry if that offended.

 

I NEVER said the war on drugs was working, that's why I started this thread. I was asking what can/needs to be done to fight the drug problem in this country.

 

The only solutions given are legalization. Few have mentioned the root cause of the drug problem/culture in this country and how to change that. Your and others solution is, we can't fix it so let's legalize it.

 

I agree with you that it is a social problem, but how as a society can we change that. But as a social problem it does have a side effect of causing several criminal problems (not talking about drug crimes either but other non-victimless crimes).

 

Jumper I think there are a lot more issues in the War on Drugs than simply stopping people from doing drugs. This "war" has resulted in policies of mass incarceration, untold amounts of spending, and a litany of encroachments on personal liberties (even if you don't do drugs the policies and legal justifications that allow the Fourth amendment to be discarded almost at will also affect you). So, when I look at how this "war" has not significantly curtailed the usage of drugs and has failed to do that at the expense of a host of externalities it's hard to justify continuing it simply because drugs are bad.

 

That might not necessarily mean legalizing all drugs, either. Perhaps even reducing the over zealous pursuit of them by the government would help curtail some of these excesses. Perhaps experimenting with investments into better rehabilitation clinics, needle exchanges, realistic education, etc., instead of mass incarceration would be a worthy of an attempt (and if you are concerned about the social issues that's result from drug use, why are people simultaneously so blasé about mass incarceration and the effects on society it leads to?). Perhaps we can also pursue different legalization policies that allow for access to certain drugs, such as marijuana, while also allowing limited and strict access to the more addictive/debilitating drugs in hopes of better controlling their access. Prohibition of alcohol did not eliminate it and it created a lot of negative externalities that parallel much of what we see now.

 

Jumper I think there are a lot more issues in the War on Drugs than simply stopping people from doing drugs. This "war" has resulted in policies of mass incarceration, untold amounts of spending, and a litany of encroachments on personal liberties (even if you don't do drugs the policies and legal justifications that allow the Fourth amendment to be discarded almost at will also affect you). So, when I look at how this "war" has not significantly curtailed the usage of drugs and has failed to do that at the expense of a host of externalities it's hard to justify continuing it simply because drugs are bad.

 

That might not necessarily mean legalizing all drugs, either. Perhaps even reducing the over zealous pursuit of them by the government would help curtail some of these excesses. Perhaps experimenting with investments into better rehabilitation clinics, needle exchanges, realistic education, etc., instead of mass incarceration would be a worthy of an attempt (and if you are concerned about the social issues that's result from drug use, why are people simultaneously so blasé about mass incarceration and the effects on society it leads to?). Perhaps we can also pursue different legalization policies that allow for access to certain drugs, such as marijuana, while also allowing limited and strict access to the more addictive/debilitating drugs in hopes of better controlling their access. Prohibition of alcohol did not eliminate it and it created a lot of negative externalities that parallel much of what we see now.

 

A lot of you keep bringing up education.

 

Almost anyone who uses meth or heroin knows its a risky choice and that both are addictive. How will education help?

 

Needle exchanges? Explain that one too.

 

As for mass incarceration...how many of those in jail for extended periods of time are there for first time possession charges?

Let me see if I understand how to combat the drug problem in our country.....Just Legalize it, Tax it (Government is such good stewards of our money now let's give them more), Educate about it (tell kids it's bad) and hope for the best.

For those of you in the legalize it camp and wanting the government to have less control, are you ok with them taxing it, regulating it, and having a hand in distribution, whether directly or indirectly?