[Vision2020] Failed Drug Policies from Nixon to Bush

[Donovan Arnold]

"I think of cocaine as more along the lines of coffee."--Garrett

Sorry, but that statement is so outlandish it is hard to take anything else you say seriously.
Most everything else you said, I could see myself agreeing with, to certain extent. 

In high school, more people died of alcohol than cocaine, because alcohol is legal, and cocaine is not. 

Best Regards,

Donovan

--- On Mon, 3/2/09, Garrett Clevenger <garrettmc at verizon.net> wrote:
From: Garrett Clevenger <garrettmc at verizon.net>
Subject: [Vision2020] Failed Drug Policies from Nixon to Bush
To: vision2020 at moscow.com
Date: Monday, March 2, 2009, 3:10 PM

Donovan writes:

"First, there is HUGE difference between alcohol and cocaine. So comparing
them is ridiculous. I think you know that."


>From my limited exposure to alcoholics and coke heads, I would say there is
a difference, but not as big as some make it out to be. Alcohol tends to dull
the senses, whereas cocaine tends to make people more active. I had friends in
highschool kill and be killed due to alcohol, a legal drug. I had friends go to
rehab for cocaine addiction. The cokeheads weren't violent, just wasting
their money.

Any drug changes your perception of reality, but alcohol seems to be more
dangerous, especially in it's ability to make people do stupid things. 

I think of cocaine as more along the lines of coffee. It may give you energy at
the expense of taking care of yourself, but probably not much more than other
stimulents. It may be more addictive, but probaly not much more than nicotine. 

I think you need to be careful believing what you read about the affects of
drugs. It's easy to dramaticize their affects to scare people in an attempt
to keep them away. The problem is, if people realize those over-blown affects
aren't as bad as they are said to be, they tend to be skeptical of the real
affects. If you lose trust based on over-exageration, than people won't
believe anything you say. That is counter-productive.

I think the temperance movement was good at scaring people. They tried to make
alcohol illegal for decades, and they were able to finally do it by taking real
examples, and then exagerating the overall affects. They did that with
"Refer Madness" and the affect of marijuana. You can see that with the
supposed meth "epidemic." People think meth is this new drug that is
sweeping the nation, when in fact, this "epidemic" was called such in
the 1920's. That indicates to me that there will always be
"epidemics", and people exagerting that "epidemic", in an
attempt to garner resources and support to temper peoples abuse of drugs.

The ironic thing is, by creating a black market, you create a crime syndicate,
and drugs that are probably tainted with really dangerous substances, all while
apparently not really reducing overall consumption. It's a waste of
resources that could be used for treatment for addicts, education for kids, or
other things that don't seem like its just money being burned.

Legalize, regulate, and tax to raise money to educate and treat. That seems
like the best way to reduce the affects of drug use, to reduce the need to build
more prisons, and reduce the violent crime consequences.

gclev

=======================================================
 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
=======================================================



      
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20090302/5cf00fbb/attachment-0001.html