John Larkin wrote:
On Thu, 15 Oct 2009 16:27:21 -0400, WangoTango
wrote:

We outlaw dangerous drugs and dangerous products. Do you object to
that too?
What is at question here is why you think you know better what a person
does with THEIR money, nothing more.

You didn't answer the question.

Actually we don't outlaw all dangerous drugs. Alcohol and tobacco do way
more harm to the public than either ecstacy or cannabis. Potentially
very dangerous and addictive drugs like cocaine are relatively benign in
their unrefined state as used in tea at high altitudes. UK toxicologists
made this point fairly recently and were rounded on by politicians for
telling the truth.

I think Switzerland and Holland have it pragmatically about right. There
is no point in criminalising drug addiction and so providing a massive
income for criminals dealing in illegal drugs. Just like with US alcohol
prohibition it doesn't work. The profits available are too high.

Like I stated before, if you are going to trumpet the successes of the
"War on Drugs" you are going to have your job cut out for you.

Education and treatment has always been more productive than
prohibition.

Do you believe that?

Yes. You can't cure everybody, but locking them up and not dealing with
their addiction problems just makes matters even worse.

And the US "War on Drugs" is a complete joke. The effect is only to fill
the jails with ever more people - good for jail operating companies but
bad for taxpayers to have all those people locked up and unproductive.

I don't.

Why not? The evidence is very clear cut.

Regards,
Martin Brown