LEAPing to legal drugs

[kenichol]

Source: Alamogordo Daily News

Drug warriors from across the country are banding together to ask people to support the legalization of drugs.

Judges, prosecutors, prison wardens, corrections staff and police officers have organized to educate the public about the damage and cost of the war against illegal drugs.

The premise of Law Enforcement Against Prohibition, or LEAP, is the war on drugs cannot be won and the benefit of regulating, taxing and controlling these substances far outweighs the cost in tax dollars and human lives trying to suppress them.

"We are spending more than $80 billion a year to arrest, prosecute, and incarcerate people in the war on drugs," said Mike Jones, a speaker for LEAP who was visiting Otero County during the county fair this weekend.

Read more: http://www.alamogordonews.com/ci_13132692

---

We (Peace & Justice of La Luz - http://pajoll.org)have opened a discussion on drug legalization. We are located in Alamogordo - Southern New Mexico, a very conservative area, and we would appreciate DUers' commenting on the news article. Thank you.

[gateley]

1. The futility of the War on Drugs is beyond comprehension.

I was fucked up for about 25 years of my life, and during all that time, I didn't care if drugs were legal or not. And the people I know who DIDN'T do drugs, didn't NOT do them because they were illegal, they had their own, other reasons.

Someone said (and I wish I could remember the exact quote and context) something like If you want something to THRIVE, declare a war on it.

Thanks for posting this. On my way to comment! And keep us posted!!

[lib_wit_it]

2. "If you want something to THRIVE, declare a war on it." Well, that explains the RW inventing the

phony Liberals' War on Xmas!

And, hell yeah, legalize pot. Legalize it all.

[Uncle Joe]

3. Kicked and recommended for logical policies based on common sense and compassion.

Thanks for the thread, kenichol.

[Xicano]

4. K&R

Besides the war on drugs being largely a war based on corporate interests. The war on drugs is a war on experience and since our models of the world are built up based on our experiences, what this war is essentially saying is that this experience is off limits for model building. You can't include that in your model because it really isn't there in some sense.

In my mind experiencing altered states of consciousness is as much a part of being human as sexuality, personal independents, child rearing, etc. These are the things scripted into us as opportunities for exercising our phenomenon of being. And a society which would deny any of that is a society with an agenda toward the infantilization of its citizens. If we are not capable of dealing with these things, then who is? And are the people who made the rules, did they carefully, conscientiously and at dept explore these dimensions and decide they were unfit for human consumption? Or was it done more hastily, more mindlessly and with more fear. Obviously its the later.

One of the side effects from heavy doses of psychedelics on a society is the boundary dissolving aspects which comes from its dissolving of the ego. The ego is suppressed and with it the dominator culture is suppressed. This promotes a societal model which is more liberal since it will far less tolerate a model of haves and have not 's.

[Taitertots]

5. Depends on what drugs

Crack, heroin, and Meth should stay illegal.

The problem is that the government refuses to take the steps to stop the drug trade.

Shut down the border
Ban ephedrine
Police the inter city
Offer treatment to addicts
Legalize Marijuana

The government is causing the war on drugs to fail, by stacking the deck against itself.

[kenichol]

8. "Crack, heroin, and Meth should stay illegal."

At first glance that rings true. However, those would be the drugs that would revert to the criminal domain. Those are the drugs that would then be available to kids at school.

[Taitertots]

9. So making them legal is going to keep them away from children

All those high school parties seem to be getting plenty of kegs with alcohol legal. How is making them legal supposed to make them harder to get? I never had to drive more then 20 minutes to get as much alcohol as we could carry out of the store.

What school did you go to that had a crack, Heroin, or Meth problem? Would you say more people could get those than alcohol?

[Xicano]

10. All Drugs Should Be Legal.

There are various reasons. 1) It is not a criminal act to ruin your health and this is suppose to be a free country. If this is suppose to be a free country, then, what is a more basic freedom than to have autonomy over your own body?

2) Prohibition has not only never worked. It almost always causes more harm than good. The police can't even keep drugs and other contraband out of prisons. They're never going to win prohibition. In Genesis we see how effective prohibition laws are. Who was the authority? The big kahuna GAWD himself. How many people did he have to monitor? Two. How successful was GAWD? Unsuccessful.

3) Since the police are never going to effectively enforce prohibition. Prohibition only puts these substances in the hands of criminals. Enriching criminals and leaving quality control in the hands of criminals. Criminals also don't care to check for ID.

4) If they legalized crack, heroin or meth tomorrow. Would you go out and buy some? No? Why? Because you're aware of how dangerous these drugs are and its not worth it? Same here. On the other hand what if you wanted to try out some crack, heroin or meth. How likely is it that it being illegal would prevent you? What does history say about prohibition again? So in other words education and not the law is a more effective drug policy.


All drugs should be legalized and follow certain regulations. Such as not allowed to advertise where minors might see the advertisements. Require a form of ID which indicates you took and passed a health and safety knowledge test with respect to the drug you're wishing to purchase.

[Taitertots]

11. Well then

1) I'm not worried the damage you are going to do to your own body. That is not a reason a support narcotics prohibition

2)Why don't you try to buy a new machine gun, buy some c4, buy some radioactive materials, buy some child pornography? Because prohibition works when it is properly enforced.

3)The police should enforce prohibition. Their failure is not a failure of prohibition, but a failure of the police.

4)If they legalized them, I wouldn't now. I know for a fact I would have during high school. The time when I could only get the legal alcohol.

High schoolers across the nation are having absolutely no problem getting alcohol. It is far easier to get alcohol than it is to get crack, heroin, meth because it is legal. Making them legal is only going to assure that high schoolers across the nation have unobstructed access to them.

[Xicano]

13. Hmm

My take on those responses are:

2) Criminals do buy machine guns (one example: North Hollywood bank robbery) and child pornography. I'd say cost and scarcity are what prevents a large criminal market on machine guns, C4 and radioactive materials. Scarcity caused not by prohibition, but, by cost prohibited overhead to produce these items in a clandestine shop and the expected rate of return. There's not a bigger problem with child pornography because even criminals view this crime as unacceptable behavior. Not because of prohibition.

3) I see the police spending large amounts of time and resources on enforcing prohibition. Just look at the results of how many people we have incarcerated as compared to the rest of the world. What were the last numbers? Aren't they something like we have only ten percent of the world's population but have twenty five percent of the world's incarcerated? And the majority of those incarcerated in our prisons are there because of prohibition. Prohibition simply doesn't work when it takes incarcerating the majority of your population.

4) I have to disagree. Access to these drugs today are just as easy if not easier than access to alcohol because criminal pushers not only don't check for ID, they indeed target youth for sales. This is the whole bases Amsterdam enacted policy to tolerate marijuana and hash being sold in legitimate businesses. The reason is because they wanted to separate marijuana from the hard drugs. Criminals don't just sell marijuana, but, also hard drugs and they do indeed target youth. Therefore all the more reason why we need to legalize them so we can better regulate them. They are just too dangerous not to.

Secondly, if I were unfortunate enough to have a young family member to make that mistake, I'd much rather have them make it where they didn't have to get involved with the criminal element and also where they can at least trust the quality.


Education, not the law is the answer IMO.

[Taitertots]

15. Just for starters

I support marijuana legalization

Children can get alcohol significantly easier than drugs without question. Making them legal is going to make it dramatically easier for children to get them. Drug dealers don't ID, but neither do a lot of stores, and getting a 21 year old to go for you is not an impediment. No one was ever having trouble getting kegs when I was in high school, but almost no one ever had crack.


If the police refuse to take the correct actions to stop narcotics use it is the police's fault not prohibition's. The amount of money they are spending and the people incarcerated are examples of the failures of our current system, not failures of prohibition in general. Those other countries have narcotics prohibitions too, they seem to be handling it well.


There are many successful prohibitions. Machine guns, explosives, and child pornography are clear examples.


If you were unfortunate enough to have a young family member make that mistake, it would be far more likely with legal narcotics. It would also be far more likely they could get enough to cause physical addiction. Then you would watch someone YOU care about suffering the trauma of drug addiction.

[kenichol]

14. Prohibition doesn't work!

2) Not sure what your point is here.
3) Every time the police arrest a dealer, a dozen wannabes are there to take over and they all have guns. An arrest by the police is called a job opportunity by criminals. Anything short of a police state, such a China, would fail.
4) You might have to register as an addict to get some of these drugs. This is still in the talking stage. We are a long way from making a policy.

Prohibition doesn't work for anyone except for criminals.

[kenichol]

12. It's about harm reduction

It will be more difficult for kids to get drugs under legalization than under the present prohibition policies, because they would have to go to regulated stores to buy it outright. They could still get an adult to buy drugs for them, just like alcohol and tobacco products now. You are correct in saying that it would be possible for them to get drugs. However the drugs would be of a standard purity and potency under legalization. With the savings by stopping the drug war, it is conceivable that we would have better drug education and treatment. Harm reduction.

[Taitertots]

16. Harm reduction

It would without question make it easier for children to have access to narcotics than it is now.

If you think the current system makes it hard for children to get alcohol and tobacco then you are naive.

[Kievan Rus]

6. They're the VVAW of the Drug War

[Fly by night]

7. Unfortunately LEAP fired its most effective spokesman, Howard Wooldridge, recently.

Howard (who has ridden his horse cross-country twice spreading the LEAP message) was fired along with several other LEAP staffers for telling the truth about the incompetence of the current LEAP director. Howard has been in DC lobbying Congress for several years now and making some real progress getting the message to them. For his troubles (and his efforts), he was fired.

LEAP's message is important, but its tactics are as impotent as those of MPP and DPA. Too top-heavy with ass-hole egos, IMHO.