[Vision2020] Failed Drug Policies from Nixon to Bush
Tom Hansen
thansen at moscow.com
Mon Mar 2 05:32:55 PST 2009
No more than alcohol, Arnold.
If you check out your history books, you will find that the bad guys made
BIG duckets ($) from the illegal transport and sale of alcohol. The 18th
Amendment (you know? That one that done did away with the Prohibition)
got rid of them there speak-easies and illegal taverns, thusly making it
legal to transport, sell, and consume alcohol. But only if you were above
a certain age and that the alkeehall that you done drunk was previously
taxed (along with a whole bunch of other rules that fit snuggly under the
gubmint label of "regulation").
Now, what's this about lowering the drinking age to 18? Instead of 18
year-olds copping phoney IDs, you'll have 15 year-olds copping phoney IDs.
Cheers, Moscow.
Tom "who's still tryin' to pass himself off as 21" Hansen
Moscow, Idaho
> Tom,
>
> What makes you think that our government would be successful in its
regulat> ion of drugs if it were to make them legal? What liability would
our
govern> ment have if it said it was OK to use cocaine, heroin, or meth?
How would
y> ou make sure its increased availability would be kept out of the hands
of
y> outh?
>
> What sort of influence do you think producers of exotic, expensive, and
hig> hly addictive drugs would have on our legal system, legislature, and
member> s of congress if they were legal?
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Donovan
>
>
>
> --- On Sun, 3/1/09, Tom Hansen <thansen at moscow.com> wrote:
> From: Tom Hansen <thansen at moscow.com>
> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Failed Drug Policies from Nixon to Bush
> To: "Sunil Ramalingam" <sunilramalingam at hotmail.com>, "vision 2020"
<vision> 2020 at moscow.com>
> Date: Sunday, March 1, 2009, 6:17 PM
>
> Thanks for mentioning that, Sunil.
>
> I was about to suggest that, in order to "control" the use/sale of
> illicit
> drugs, there are only two options that have shown any effectiveness . . .
>
> 1) In some countries, use and/or sale of illicit drugs is punishible by
> death. In some countries a trial isn't even necessary. I do not, in
> ABSOLUTELY any fashion, support this option and do not foresee our
> legislature adopting it.
>
> 2) Legalize and regulate the use and/or sale of illicit drugs.
Although>
> I support this option in relation to most drugs, inacting such
legislation>
> is open for debate.
>
> Tom Hansen
> Moscow, Idaho
>
> >
> > I don't think there are any policies that would accomplish what you
> want
> to> do, so I don't have any suggestions. I think that effort is a
> waste
> of
> > time, energy, and money.
> >
> > I would decriminalize drugs instead and reduce the price.
> >
> > Sunil
> > Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 17:41:33 -0800
> > From: donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com
> > Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Failed Drug Policies from Nixon to Bush
> > To: vision2020 at moscow.com; sunilramalingam at hotmail.com
> >
> > OK Suninstein,
> >
> > It is easy to be an critic. What policies would you create that would
be
> di> fferent, effective, and reduce the number of users of cocaine users
> fro> m less than 1% to a minuscule number of the population?
> >
> > Best Regards,
> >
> > Donovan
> >
> > --- On Sun, 3/1/09, Sunil Ramalingam <sunilramalingam at hotmail.com>
> wrot> e:
> > From: Sunil Ramalingam <sunilramalingam at hotmail.com>
> > Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Failed Drug Policies from Nixon to Bush
> > To: "vision 2020" <vision2020 at moscow.com>
> > Date: Sunday, March 1, 2009, 5:04 PM
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Donovan,
> >
> > I disagree.
> >
> > Our drug laws stand as a monument to our official inability to
recognize>
> a
> > simple truth about people: That we (not all us us, but enough) like to
> us> e substances that affect our consciousness. Some religions ban this,
> man> y states do, but people still want to do it.
> >
> > We are spending a ridiculous amount of money fighting human nature, and
> i> t isn't working. Because it's illegal it's more expensive,
> and there's
> en> ough money in it to make people take enormous risks.
> >
> > It's long been time to take a different approach. Our current one is a
> fail> ure.
> >
> > Sunil
> >
> > Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 16:44:15 -0800
> > From: donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com
> > Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Failed Drug Policies from Nixon to Bush
> > To: sunilramalingam at hotmail.com
> >
> > Sunil,
> >
> > I agree with you that we need to help people with their problems and
not
> us> e drugs as a solution, I think you are wrong on the supply side.
> >
> > The fact that the drug dealers are having to smuggle the cocaine over
the
> b> oarder, is very indicative that the American people have rejected this
> pr> oduct. We have spent billions on stopping it, and it is illegal in
> every
> > state and county in the country. That seems like a pretty overwhelming
> reje> ction of the drug. Less than one percent of the population uses
it.>
> >
> > The demand was created by "pushers" illegally as well, and the
> illegal
> an> d dangerous addictiveness of the product is what also keeps the
> demand. We
> > didn't create the demand, the demand was created for us.
> >
> > Best Regards,
> >
> > Donovan
> >
> >
> > --- On Sun, 3/1/09, Sunil Ramalingam
> > <sunilramalingam at hotmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > From: Sunil Ramalingam <sunilramalingam at hotmail.com>
> > Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Failed Drug Policies from Nixon to Bush
> > To: "vision 2020" <vision2020 at moscow.com>
> > Date: Sunday, March 1, 2009, 8:48 AM
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Donovan,
> >
> > I think your premise is wrong. No one is forcing drugs on Americans.
WE
> h> ave created the demand. It is a DEMAND problem, not a supply problem.
> >
> > Sunil
> >
> > Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2009 22:06:05 -0800
> > From: donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com
> > Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Failed Drug Policies from Nixon to Bush
> > To: vision2020 at moscow.com; sunilramalingam at hotmail.com
> >
> > Sunil,
> >
> > I took your question in a broader context.
> >
> > If the US was forcing cocaine into the a South America and creating
> violenc> e and death in their streets, yes, they would have the right to
> destroy> the crops in the US, or at least try to.
> >
> > Best
> > Regards,
> >
> > Donovan
> >
> > --- On Sat, 2/28/09, Sunil Ramalingam <sunilramalingam at hotmail.com>
> wro> te:
> > From: Sunil Ramalingam <sunilramalingam at hotmail.com>
> > Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Failed Drug Policies from Nixon to Bush
> > To: "vision 2020" <vision2020 at moscow.com>
> > Date: Saturday, February 28, 2009, 3:07 PM
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yes, Donovan, I missed the event when Central and South Americans
> attac> ked the biggest things in New York.
> >
> > 9/11, you say? My, that's one big cover-up if they were involved.
> >
> > At any rate, my question remains the same. Do our actions give our
> victi> ms the right to bomb us? If no, why not?
> >
> > Sunil
> >
> > Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2009 23:47:50 -0800
> > From: donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com
> > Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Failed Drug Policies from Nixon to Bush
> > To: vision2020 at moscow.com; sunilramalingam at hotmail.com
> >
> > Sunil
> >
> > They do blow "things" up here. In fact, they took out the two
> biggest
> thi> ngs in the biggest city. Perhaps you missed that
> > whole 9/11 thingy.
> >
> > Best Regards,
> >
> > Donovan
> >
> > --- On Fri, 2/27/09, Sunil Ramalingam <sunilramalingam at hotmail.com>
> wro> te:
> > From: Sunil Ramalingam <sunilramalingam at hotmail.com>
> > Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Failed Drug Policies from Nixon to Bush
> > To: "vision 2020" <vision2020 at moscow.com>
> > Date: Friday, February 27, 2009, 6:28 PM
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Donovan,
> >
> > Do the people we bomb have the right to try to blow up things here? If
> not> , why?
> >
> > Sunil
> >
> > Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2009 18:07:14 -0800
> > From: donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com
> > To: vision2020 at moscow.com; nickgier at roadrunner.com
> > Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Failed Drug Policies from Nixon to Bush
> >
> > What Nick doesn't realize is that it isn't the government's
> responsibility
> > to keep people off drugs. That is the responsibility of the individual.
> Onl> y you can decide not to use drugs and take responsibility for your
> behavior> and decisions to use or not use drugs, and what you put in
your>
> body.
> >
> > The government has made it clear to
> > anyone who will listen from 5 years old to 105 years old, DON'T USE
> DRUG> S. That is all they can do. They provide information to people for
> free,
> > and they offer free drug counseling, and help with getting off drug
> addic> tion.
> >
> > I use to drink heavily, and smoke up to three packs of cigarettes a
> day> , and I will not talk about anything else I did because this is a
> public
> > forum. But it was me, and me alone, that had the power to decide to
> use> and stop using products abusive to my body.
> >
> > People think it is
> > the responsibility of the government to do things for you. It is not.
If
> p> eople want to use drugs, they will. If they want to get off drugs,
> they> will.
> >
> > I as a taxpayer can only do so much, and refuse to take blame for the
> per> sonal decisions that people make with full knowledge of their
actions>
> and
> b> ehaviors.
> >
> > The Government didn't fail with drugs, only people that decided not to
> ge> t off drugs fail. Only people that refuse to take personal
> responsibility
> a> re the ones that fail.
> >
> > And who really gives a damn if bombing cocaine fields in South America
> make> s other nations mad. These people are doing wrong, and the US has
> every
> r> ight to protect themselves from people trying to do harm to our
> citizens.
> >
> > Best Regards,
> > Donovan
> >
> >
> >
> > --- On Fri, 2/27/09, nickgier at roadrunner.com
> <nickgier at roadrunner.com>
> > wrote:
> > From: nickgier at roadrunner.com
> > <nickgier at roadrunner.com>
> > Subject: [Vision2020] Failed Drug Policies from Nixon to Bush
> > To: vision2020 at moscow.com
> > Date: Friday, February 27, 2009, 8:51 AM
> >
> > Good Morning Visionaries:
> >
> > This is my radio commentary/column for this week. I had Ted Moffett
and a
> > friend who's an expert in this area look this over before I polished
> off
> th> e
> > rough draft.
> >
> > Ted suggested that I add the abuse of pharmaceuticals but the long
> version
> > was
> > already approaching 2,000 words. Besides Ted has already posted some
of
> > the
> > material here on the vision. Thanks, Ted, for your research which is
> th> e best on
> > the Vision on all the topics you cover.
> >
> > I just saw "Nixon/Frost" at the Kenworthy and I had to admit
> that I
> > began to empathize with the most despised of all presidents, but
perhaps
> > that
> > was because of the superb acting of Frank
> > Langella.
> >
> > The group Law
> >
> >
> > Enforcement
> > Against Prohibition (LEAP)has an excellent video at
> > <www.leap.cc/cms/index.php?name=Content&pid=28>.
> >
> > Nick Gier
> >
> > DRUG POLICY FAILURES FROM NIXON TO BUSH
> >
> > By Nick Gier
> >
> > Every one of the bastards that are out for legalizing marijuana is
> Jewish.>
> > What the Christ is the matter with the Jews, Bob?
> > --Richard M. Nixon to Robert Haldeman
> >
> > Nixon is the first post-war president to declare war on drugs. He was
> > determined to enforce a policy that placed marijuana in the same
category
> a> s
> > heroin. In the early days of Nixon's war, a person caught with any
> amount> of
> > marijuana could be sentenced to seven years in prison.
> >
> > In 1971 Nixon appointed Pennsylvania Gov. Ray Shafer to chair the
> National
> > Commission on Marijuana and Drug Abuse, which unexpectedly recommended
> th> at pot
> > possession be decriminalized. Always coarse and obscene, Nixon lashed
> ou> t
> > at
> > members of the
> >
> > Commission
> > calling them
> > "bastards" and
> > "Jews."
> >
> > Since the day Nixon rejected the recommendations of the Shafer
> Commission> ,
> > fifteen million Americans have been arrested for marijuana charges (88
> perc> ent
> > for possession only), but pot dealing and smoking continue unabated.
> Sinc> e 1980
> > the number of drug offenders incarcerated by states increased from 6
> percen> t to
> > 21 percent and those in federal prisons went from 25 to 57 percent.
> Sadly> , 80
> > percent of all those in prison for drug offenses are either Latinos or
> Afri> can
> > Americans.
> >
> > Paramilitary SWAT teams in U.S. cities have been overly aggressive
> against
> > suspected drug dealers. The libertarian CATO Institute has reported
that
> t> hese
> > units have entered the homes of 170 innocents and killed 43. The CATO
> webs> ite
> > also lists 23 nonviolent offenders and 25 police officers killed.
> >
> > Last year the U.S. spent $69 billion interfering in the lives of
> > North
> >
> > and
> > South
> > Americans, supporting
> > military activities and crop eradication that have
> > alienated millions of people south of the border.
> >
> > In 2007 one of the first acts of Mexican President Felipe Calderon was
to
> u> se
> > the army to crack down on Mexico's three major drug cartels. Calderon
> used
> > the army because local and regional police and many office holders had
> alre> ady
> > been bought off by the cartels. The results of Mexico's military
> solution
> > to drug smuggling have been disastrous. In the past two years an
> estimated
> > 8,790 people have been killed, including 800 soldiers and police
> office> rs.
> >
> > Mexico is the transshipment point for 90 percent of the cocaine coming
to
> t> he
> > U.S. The main source of this drug is Columbia, which has been the
focus
> > of U.S.
> > efforts of eradication and interdiction. Since 2000 the U.S. has
poured>
> $6
> > billion dollars into Columbia, but cocaine production has still
increased
> >
> > 4
> > percent
> > during that
> > time.
> >
> > Large
> > acreages of coca have been destroyed; the big cartels have been broken
> > up; left-wing guerrillas are in retreat; and the streets of Bogata are
> > safer.
> > But the coca farmers have simply switched to smaller plots closer to
the
> ju> ngle
> > and right-wing paramilitary units are still involved in cocaine
> production
> > and
> > smuggling.
> >
> > Nixon's war on drugs have turned entire nations against us. Evo
> Morales,> a
> > former coca grower, is now Bolivia's president. At recent speech at
> the
> > UN,
> > Morales held up a coca leaf and spoke about a World Health Organization
> (WH> O)
> > study that concluded that the ingestion of coca was not harmful and
that>
> it
> > might even have some beneficial effects. When I was in Peru in 2002,
my
> > guide
> > distributed coca leaves to our group as a remedy for altitude
sickness.>
> >
> > In 1989 I chaired the Borah Symposium on the topic "Cocaine and
> > Conflict" and our
> >
> > keynote speaker was Ethan
> >
> > Nadelman. Now the head of
> > the
> > Drug Policy Institute, he is a leading spokesman for drug
> legalization,> which
> > means legal regulation, not total free use (except of marijuana) of
hard
> > drugs.
> >
> >
> > Proponents of legal regulation contend that removing the illegal trade
> and
> > criminal gangs will have the same positive effect as the ending of
> Prohibit> ion
> > in 1933. A $250-350 billion business would become a source for much
> needed> tax
> > revenue that can be used to rebuild communities and rehabilitate those
> rela> tive
> > few who have been addicted to drugs.
> >
> > A 2007 Zogby Poll asked the following question of 1028 people: "If
> hard
> > drugs such as heroin or cocaine were legalized, would you be likely to
> us> e
> > them." Only 6 answered in the affirmative.
> > There are over 250 shops in the Netherlands where one can buy marijuana
> > legally, but only 16 percent of the adult population has even tried
> >
> > cannibals,
> > while 33 percent of
> > Americans
> > have. One commentator
> > quipped that the Dutch have
> > made smoking pot "uncool."
> >
> > Reading the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) website, one would
> thin> k that
> > liberalizing drug laws in Europe has been a complete failure. In
England
> do> ctors
> > used to prescribe heroin to addicts under controlled conditions and
their
> > numbers stabilized at 2,000, but since that program was abolished in
> 19> 70 the
> > number has risen to 300,000. Similar programs in Germany, Spain,
> Swi> tzerland,
> > and the Netherlands have proved effective.
> >
> > One of the most effective organizations for legal regulation of drugs
is
> La> w
> > Enforcement against Prohibition (LEAP). Since its founding in 2002,
> LEAP'> s
> > membership, former police officers, DEA agents, and city
> officials,> has grown to
> > 5,000. These men and women have seen first hand how Nixon's war on
> drugs
> > has devastated their communities and made
> >
> > criminals out of ordinary citizens.
> >
> >
> > As long as the
> > U.S. has the
> > highest drug use rate in the industrialized world,
> > this demand will drive the criminal drug trade and will continue to
> destabi> lize
> > all the countries south of the border. We should immediately un-declare
> the> wars
> > on drugs and terror. Police surveillance and investigation should
> replace
> > paramilitary over-kill. We should decriminalize the use of marijuana
and>
> we
> > should try the policy of legal regulation of all other drugs and see
if>
> it
> > works.
> >
> >
========================> =>
=======================> ==> =====
> > List services made available by First Step Internet,
> > serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> > http://www.fsr.net
> > mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> >
========================> =>
=======================> ==> =====
> >
> >
> >
========================> =>
=======================> ==> =====
> > List services made available by First Step Internet,
> > serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> > http://www.fsr.net
> > mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> >
========================> =>
=======================> ==> =====
> >
> >
========================> =>
=======================> ==> =====
> > List services made available by First Step Internet,
> > serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> > http://www.fsr.net
> > mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> >
========================> =>
=======================> ==> =====
> >
> >
========================> =>
=======================> ==> =====
> > List services made available by First Step Internet,
> > serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> > http://www.fsr.net
> > mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> >
========================> =>
=======================> ==> =====
> >
> >
========================> =>
=======================> ==> =====
> > List services made available by First Step Internet,
> > serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> > http://www.fsr.net
> > mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> >
========================> =>
=======================> ==> =====
> >
>
>
>
> "For a lapsed Lutheran born-again Buddhist pan-Humanist Universalist
> Unitarian Wiccan Agnostic like myself there's really no reason ever to
go>
> to work."
>
> - Roy Zimmerman
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------
> This message was sent by First Step Internet.
> http://www.fsr.com/
>
>
> =========================> =========================> =====
> List services made available by First Step Internet,
> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> http://www.fsr.net
> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> =========================> =========================> =====
>
"For a lapsed Lutheran born-again Buddhist pan-Humanist Universalist
Unitarian Wiccan Agnostic like myself there's really no reason ever to go
to work."
- Roy Zimmerman
---------------------------------------------
This message was sent by First Step Internet.
http://www.fsr.com/
More information about the Vision2020
mailing list