In article ,
says...

On Wed, 5 Aug 2009 10:26:06 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch
wrote:

The loser who shot those women at that gym was frustrated cuz he
couldn't get any sex. I wonder how ,many other crimes are committed
by frustrated losers. If prostitution was legal, I think we'd have a
much calmer society.
Likewise, many illegal drugs should be totally legal. Pot is mostly
harmless but we put people in prison for it, what madness and waste of
money. How many lives are lost due to pot being illegal? Cocaine
should also be legal for similar reasons.
Drug enforcement is a huge business and helps feed the prison-
industrial complex. This is not a Liberal vs Conservative issue
because both sides have vested interests in keeping the huge drug
enforcement industry and prison industry going.
It's a case of too many laws and not enough good sense.

I could go with the pot legality, but don't think I'm ready to do the
same for cocaine yet. I think cocaine is too addictive too rapidly.

Maybe the legalization of pot would lower the demand for cocaine.
Right now you're illegal either way, so folks may be tempted to get
the most bang for their illegal buck.

It would be interesting to give it a try.

What?? You wanna' try the pot or the Cocaine??? snerk

--
Wafa free since 2009

wrote in message
...
On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 16:00:38 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

It would be easy to agree with legalization until you put it into the
perspective of your own children having easy and legal access to
cocaine or pot. Long term users of both seem to suffer negative
consequences and certain personality types are prone to dependence.
We've already got legal alchohol and although very few would want a
repeat of prohibition, there is no disputing the high cost to society
of alchohol abuse. Do we really want easy and legal access to two
more substances with the same potential?

They already have easy access

I know there are a lot of people growing their own weed but cocaine
has to be illegally smuggled, distributed and sold. I would hope
that the taint of serious illegality would discourage at least some
people.

In the case of cocaine, I think the taint of illegality is a big part
of the attraction. The mystique is just about the only reason I can
think of for someone to pay $100 a gram for this stuff (usually to get
laid). As a drug the powder is really a pretty mild thing. It is
certainly a heart stimulant but if you snorted pure caffeine (or
smoked it) I imagine the effect would be similar.

I also think the problem is addictive personalities, not the drug
itself and you would actually end up with about the same number of
people addicted to something, no matter how many different chemicals
were around.
I do know a lot of abusive drunks who are less danger to society when
they just smoke pot.

As our friend a Federal prosecutor told me. We have not slowed down the
import of drugs over the years. And they reason we know that is the price
has not risen. Supply is keeping up with demand. So we might as well tax
and regulate the trade.

On Wed, 5 Aug 2009 21:25:45 -0700, "Calif Bill"
wrote:

As our friend a Federal prosecutor told me. We have not slowed down the
import of drugs over the years. And they reason we know that is the price
has not risen. Supply is keeping up with demand. So we might as well tax
and regulate the trade.

In 1970 weed was 15 bucks an oz and now it is 300. Coke has remained
steady at 100/gm. What is wrong with this picture?

Casady

On Thu, 06 Aug 2009 13:17:16 GMT, (Richard
Casady) wrote:

On Wed, 5 Aug 2009 21:25:45 -0700, "Calif Bill"
wrote:

As our friend a Federal prosecutor told me. We have not slowed down the
import of drugs over the years. And they reason we know that is the price
has not risen. Supply is keeping up with demand. So we might as well tax
and regulate the trade.

In 1970 weed was 15 bucks an oz and now it is 300. Coke has remained
steady at 100/gm. What is wrong with this picture?

Casady

Supply and demand?

How do you know these things?
--
John H

All decisions, even those made by liberals, are the result of binary thinking.

Another John wrote:
On Thu, 06 Aug 2009 13:17:16 GMT, (Richard
Casady) wrote:

On Wed, 5 Aug 2009 21:25:45 -0700, "Calif Bill"
wrote:

As our friend a Federal prosecutor told me. We have not slowed down the
import of drugs over the years. And they reason we know that is the price
has not risen. Supply is keeping up with demand. So we might as well tax
and regulate the trade.
In 1970 weed was 15 bucks an oz and now it is 300. Coke has remained
steady at 100/gm. What is wrong with this picture?

Casady

Supply and demand?

How do you know these things?
--
John H

Exactly what I was thinking!

In article ,
says...

Another John wrote:
On Thu, 06 Aug 2009 13:17:16 GMT, (Richard
Casady) wrote:

On Wed, 5 Aug 2009 21:25:45 -0700, "Calif Bill"
wrote:

As our friend a Federal prosecutor told me. We have not slowed down the
import of drugs over the years. And they reason we know that is the price
has not risen. Supply is keeping up with demand. So we might as well tax
and regulate the trade.
In 1970 weed was 15 bucks an oz and now it is 300. Coke has remained
steady at 100/gm. What is wrong with this picture?

Casady

Supply and demand?

How do you know these things?
--
John H

Exactly what I was thinking!

Maybey he knows someone who smokes weed, maybe he smokes it himself
(although I doubt he would be smoking commercial. Lot's of otherwise
law abiding people do.. probably more of your friends than you think...

--
Wafa free since 2009

JustWait wrote:
In article ,
says...
Another John wrote:
On Thu, 06 Aug 2009 13:17:16 GMT, (Richard
Casady) wrote:

On Wed, 5 Aug 2009 21:25:45 -0700, "Calif Bill"
wrote:

As our friend a Federal prosecutor told me. We have not slowed down the
import of drugs over the years. And they reason we know that is the price
has not risen. Supply is keeping up with demand. So we might as well tax
and regulate the trade.
In 1970 weed was 15 bucks an oz and now it is 300. Coke has remained
steady at 100/gm. What is wrong with this picture?

Casady
Supply and demand?

How do you know these things?
--
John H
Exactly what I was thinking!

Maybey he knows someone who smokes weed, maybe he smokes it himself
(although I doubt he would be smoking commercial. Lot's of otherwise
law abiding people do.. probably more of your friends than you think...


Oh, I know plenty of people who do such! Doesn't bother me whether
someone does or doesn't. Now cigarette smoking bothers me, because they
do it around other people whether they smoke or not, and after quitting
many years ago, the stench almost makes me puke!

wrote:
On Thu, 06 Aug 2009 15:05:05 -0400, NotNow wrote:

Now cigarette smoking bothers me, because they
do it around other people whether they smoke or not, and after quitting
many years ago, the stench almost makes me puke!

Be honest, smelling smoke makes you want a cigarette.

Although the stench is horrific and DOES make me want to puke, sometimes
I STILL want to smoke one. It's been about seven years, I believe.

wrote:
On Fri, 07 Aug 2009 11:24:02 -0400, Gene
wrote:

On Wed, 5 Aug 2009 10:26:06 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch
wrote:

The loser who shot those women at that gym was frustrated cuz he
couldn't get any sex. I wonder how ,many other crimes are committed
by frustrated losers. If prostitution was legal, I think we'd have a
much calmer society.
Likewise, many illegal drugs should be totally legal. Pot is mostly
harmless but we put people in prison for it, what madness and waste of
money. How many lives are lost due to pot being illegal? Cocaine
should also be legal for similar reasons.
Drug enforcement is a huge business and helps feed the prison-
industrial complex. This is not a Liberal vs Conservative issue
because both sides have vested interests in keeping the huge drug
enforcement industry and prison industry going.
It's a case of too many laws and not enough good sense.
For the most part, I agree. However, I'm a bit torn about drugs that
are highly addictive. I think there is no doubt that there will be a
cost to society. I wonder how that would be offset with the hit
organized crime would take, tax revenues, and the relief our law
enforcement folks and courts would see.....

This is not a political decision. It is a decision based on perceived
"morality." Politicking will emanate from the pulpit.


I think the most compelling reason to do this is to remove the
motivation for a lot of crime. What would the border gangs do if there
was no illegal drug trade?
It would certainly allow pot smokers to buy American. If CNBC is right
the best pot in the world comes from Northern California.

You might even find they can grow coca bushes here.

Shut all that international narco traffic and out flow of dollars
down. Sounds like a win-win to me. I certainly don't think there is a
junkie here who can't score now. We might as well keep those dollars
at home.

The border gangs would move their operations here and operate legally.
Careful what you wish for.

On Fri, 07 Aug 2009 12:54:24 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 07 Aug 2009 11:24:02 -0400, Gene
wrote:

On Wed, 5 Aug 2009 10:26:06 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch
wrote:

The loser who shot those women at that gym was frustrated cuz he
couldn't get any sex. I wonder how ,many other crimes are committed
by frustrated losers. If prostitution was legal, I think we'd have a
much calmer society.
Likewise, many illegal drugs should be totally legal. Pot is mostly
harmless but we put people in prison for it, what madness and waste of
money. How many lives are lost due to pot being illegal? Cocaine
should also be legal for similar reasons.
Drug enforcement is a huge business and helps feed the prison-
industrial complex. This is not a Liberal vs Conservative issue
because both sides have vested interests in keeping the huge drug
enforcement industry and prison industry going.
It's a case of too many laws and not enough good sense.

For the most part, I agree. However, I'm a bit torn about drugs that
are highly addictive. I think there is no doubt that there will be a
cost to society. I wonder how that would be offset with the hit
organized crime would take, tax revenues, and the relief our law
enforcement folks and courts would see.....

This is not a political decision. It is a decision based on perceived
"morality." Politicking will emanate from the pulpit.


I think the most compelling reason to do this is to remove the
motivation for a lot of crime. What would the border gangs do if there
was no illegal drug trade?
It would certainly allow pot smokers to buy American. If CNBC is right
the best pot in the world comes from Northern California.

You might even find they can grow coca bushes here.

Shut all that international narco traffic and out flow of dollars
down. Sounds like a win-win to me. I certainly don't think there is a
junkie here who can't score now. We might as well keep those dollars
at home.

Pot is one thing, cocaine is something completely else. Highly
addictive and crazy making. Not in favor.

Pot and prostitution would be enough to tip the balance in the right
direction but the smugglers would then concentrate on cocaine and
heroin.

Don't think helping people destroy their lives is a good answer.