St. Pete Times: All he was saying, give drugs a chance

[teach1st]

All he was saying, give drugs a chance
St. Petersburg Times, 11/26, by Robyn Blumner

In 1971, when Richard Nixon declared his "War on Drugs," calling for harsher penalties and stricter enforcement of drug laws, the renowned Nobel Prize-winning economist Milton Friedman had a John Lennon moment. He suggested we give peace a chance.

To Friedman, who died earlier this month at 94, drug prohibition was unsound public policy, economic insanity and inherently immoral. It wasn't the drug user who was immoral, as the political world asserted with so much vim and vinegar - the immorality stemmed from making users into criminals.

In a Newsweek article Friedman authored dated May 1, 1972, he took a step outside his realm of monetary policy and free marketeering and laid out in clear, unequivocal terms what kind of social disaster we were buying with Nixon's drug war. Thirty years later, we know he couldn't have been more right.

Friedman's views emanated from libertarianism. He resented the government's interference in an adult's free will. But the economist in him also recognized the inexorable market forces that drove the illicit drug trade. He understood that as long as there was demand there would be supply, and by making drugs illegal, those enriched by the drug trade would be a violent, corrupting element of society.

More

[acmejack]

1. We'll have it both ways thank you.

Just like State's Rights-only when convenient. Consistent policy is not these peoples strong point as you have undoubtedly observed. Pick and choose governmental philosophy seems to work best for them.

[Larry Ogg]

2. The War on Drugs

Legalizing drugs would be a terrible thing to do, because the CIA would loose a main source of revenue of which is used too supply weapons to terrorist groups like the Sandinista freedom fighters, and other illegal wars in which Democratic governments are overthrown for refusing to due the bidding of American crime bosses / political leaders like Nixon and the Bush crime family whom I’m sure manage to skim a little profit off the top for there hard efforts. And another thing legalizing marijuana would inevitably lead too the legal production of hemp, and that could lead too serious profit losses for the huge oil companies. Because hemp could be used (instead of oil) in the production of things like plastic, rubber cloth and other fibers, can you imagine biodegradable automobile body’s, panels and upholstery made from hemp, saving millions of barrels of oil per year. In addition paper could be made from hemp, and I’m not sure but I think the Decoration of Independence and maybe the Constitution are written on paper made of hemp, although I could be wrong, it seems logical though, after all the Republican party don’t seem too appreciate either one of those documents for some unknown reason, so maybe they are written on hemp. But none the less hemp could have a serious effect on the logging industry as well, and I don’t think we should do anything different as long as there are still a few pesky forest standing that can be mowed down, and huge fields of oil in far off distance lands that can be ravaged, fleeced and covered with blood of its inhabitants in even more money making illegal wars…