You say the comparisons are absurd, but don't give any reasoning to support your claim. You accuse me of rationalizing. A rationalization is when someone takes valid premises and then uses an inconsistent chain of logic to try to reach their preferred conclusion, rather than using consistent logic and accepting the conclusion that flows from it (even if they initially disagreed with that conclusion). If I am rationalizing then it should be a simple matter for you to point out the flaw in my logic. After all, if you could demonstrate through facts, evidence, and reasoning that criminalization was a superior approach, it would be absurd for me not to accept your proof. Yet once again you don't support your contentious assertion. You make an invalid assumption that I am not interested in being educated, based on no evidence at all - just the fact that I disagree with you about something. There are various terms used to describe the kind of behaviour you are displaying - none of them very flattering.
I agree with you...its funny that some of the strongest proponents of individual rights and wanting government out of their lives also seem to be anti-drug legalization and assisted suicide.
No, it's just your rebuttals are nothing more that wild diatribes. I don't give a fuck about the law if it doesn't help addicts get clean. Legalization will not help one single addict get clean. What is it you don't understand about that? The illegality of drugs becomes irrelevant if one doesn't use drugs in the first place.
I would hope that the goal would be recovery from drug addiction, not just getting drug addicts "clean." Clean and sober have a meaning that is much different than simply not drinking or not doing drugs. We have watched a white knuckle sobriety president the past 8 years in the white house, and as much as he wants to praise his God for his not drinking, it is pretty clear that Bush was and is not a sober man...
Yes, clean and sober is the goal. Far as Bush goes I think you're confusing sobriety with competence. He's just a fuck up, drunk or sober.
CO, First, I'll concede two points. One, legalization won't get current addicts clean. Two, most users have to be hit between the eyes before the light begins to come on. As regards legalization though it is the condition that drugs are illegal that escalates the problem to its current level. Whether drugs are or are not legal there will always be some level of abuse. My contention is that if there were no prohibitions against them the problem would exist at a lower level. As Prohibition so clearly demonstrated, government involvement exacerbates the problem. Consider Pablo Escobar, who through the enormous profits that come from an artificial scarcity induced by criminalizing cocaine, was able to highjack an entire country and caused unspeakable horrors for its citizens. Untold billions were spent and continues to this day. In addition the United States engages in police/military exercises in foreign countries that can not realistically be expected to stop the trafficking, and end up as a public relations disaster from a foreign relations perspective. All this from demand being supplied at very high prices here because the drug is illegal. Would legalization end addiction? NO! But if the enormous profits associated with them were removed by admitting defeat in the War on Drugs, the supply would be reduced which in the final analysis would result in fewer addicts in the future, along with the additional reduction in official corruption and mayhem in the streets that comes not so much from the addicts but their suppliers. Your main concern here seems to be getting addicts straight. Kudos for that. I am simply arguing that from a big picture perspective, illegality of drugs is part of the problem.
Your argument for legalization seems plausible on the surface. Would it reduce actual supply? I don't know, it might. Addicts are resourceful people. They'll find a way to get high. I've stated over and over that I support treatment over imprisonment for 1st, 2nd, even 3rd offenders that are doing nothing other than buying for personal consumption. The problem is that treatment is an easy game to play for those that aren't serious. It's a revolving door. (I'll give you that the prison system is a revolving door as well.) Addicts tend to get a bit more serious about finding recovery when they're looking at some prison time. It's a problem that deserves more attention than it gets. I think reasonable people that really gave a damn could find a better solution, which might involve some compromise from both sides of the legalization argument. If some form of legalization would actually help, I'd support that. However, there does have to be something that, at some point, "hits them between the eyes". Treatment as that threat ain't much of a stick.
"drugs" and "booze" are fundemently different. booze is a product of the fermentation process of fruits and grains. "drugs" are concocted in labs, and have virtually no limitations on their potency. now, smoking a plant grown out of the earth I'm down with