Why We Should Legalize Drugs

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Example of one of those "productive members of society"
.................................................. .........
Friday, 8 June 2007

Man sentenced for driving wheelchair drunk

A Canadian man was sentenced for drunk driving after being pulled over on his way home from the pub in his mother's motorized wheelchair, police said.

Patrick Shanahan, 35, was fined and placed on probation by a Toronto-area court in the impaired driving case.

"I don't need a licence to operate it, I don't need insurance and I don't need licence plates to operate it," Shanahan was quoted by the Torstar News Service.

"So how can I be charged with drunk driving?"

The charge stems back to December 2004, when an officer saw Shanahan driving the wheelchair at around 1:15 a.m. and assessed that he was drunk, a police spokesman said.

The self-described alcoholic, who has a prior impaired driving conviction – though not in a wheelchair – later admitted he shouldn't have been driving the three-wheeler at the time, Torstar reported.

Shanahan was prohibited from driving any motorised vehicle for one year, was fined C$600 (286 pounds), given 18 months probation, and ordered to seek counselling.

Red herring. Does he hold a job? Plenty of alcoholics that do.

Course, that depends on your def of alcoholic. According to AA, if you have 2 drinks or whatever, everyday, then you are an alkie.

That is what i'm referring to when I say functioning.

[GrnBay007]

The problem in this country is we treat addition as a criminal problem instead of a medical one.

Does it really matter if it's treated as a criminal problem vs. a medical one? Everyone knows an addict (drugs or alcohol) won't stop until THEY make the decision to do so.

Of course it makes a difference. If you treat it as a medical problem...rehab, therapy, whatever is alot different than incarcerating.

ONLY if they WANT to get better. Most times rehab and therapy are used as a last ditch effort (excuse) to stay out of prison.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

I could support legalization for marijuana, but not for the "hard" drugs. Legalizing "hard" drugs and supplying them to addicts strikes me as a horrible idea.

The drug problem is unsolvable because it is a result of bad individual choices (trying highly addictive drugs) leading to worse and worse choices (turning to crime/prostitution to fund the habit once it becomes an addiction). You can't force free people to make good choices no matter what you do. All you can do is provide positive and negative incentives.

A system where addicts are given drugs might reduce the incentive to make the "worse and worse" choices which come from feeding the addiction, but it does nothing to decrease the initial bad choice of trying highly addictive drugs in the first place. If anything, it provides further incentive to make that bad choice (as if the promise of a mind-blowing high is not enough), by providing the promise of free and unlimited future supply if you happen to get hooked.

It seems to me that this idea would create an enormous and growing underclass of government-funded addicts if implemented on a nationwide scale.

Meanwhile, the drug kingpins still become rich by providing legal product to consumers and the government (to supply the addicts), and instead of an expensive war on drugs and overcrowded prison system, we have an expensive government supply program and overcrowded "legal" drug ghettos.

I don't see this as an improvement.

Drug addicts can still be productive members of society. It is possible to have a habit and still work. Plenty of functioning heroin addicts on methadone.

Incentive: That is just a bunch of crap. Same ol bs as saying that sex ed/condoms gives someone the incentive to try sex. People are gonna do it regardless.

The problem in this country is we treat addition as a criminal problem instead of a medical one.

Again, I repeat, look at our history. We are a drug loving people...legal or illegal. What do you think all those cure alls were made of in the 1800s? You think it is called Coca cola by accident? Read de toqueville. This country has always and will always have a percentage of people on drugs.

Furthermore, there is probably a reason for drugs on the planet.

Not surprised at all that you don't get it. You want to make excuses for addicts, and I'm not buying it.

Sure, there are some people who can function while addicted to hard drugs, but you have to admit that many cannot. And what incentive is there for an addict to "function" when they don't have to do anything except get high all day and the government will take care of their needs? It's reinforcement of bad behavior.

You claim that people don't make decisions based upon incentives? That's a bunch of crap. You are right that some people will do "it" regardless, with no thoughts of consequences. But many others will not do "it" because there are negative consequences. Or is it your position that nobody at all considers consequences when making decisions?

I'd love to get high as a kite, but I don't want to run afoul of the law, nor do I want to become addicted, so that my only thought each moment is how I can get high again. (You seem to think crack cocaine addiction is funny, but in fact it is a tragic, constant and insatiable addiction.)

Take away the negative consequences (make it legal) and replace them with positive consequences (coddle addicts as "victims" and ensure they will always have free unlimited supply), and people will act accordingly. Not everyone, but some.

Why do we want to make it more attractive to become an addict? And why do we as taxpayers want to subsidize it?

Who is making excuses for them. I just know that you are always going to have non productive (using your standards) citizens. Always been that way, always going to be that way.

This country is one that loves drugs and the quick fix...be it legal or illegal.

Incentives/Consequences: You are flat out wrong. We lock people up, we imprison them..sentences have gotten harsher...yet, we don't see a reduction in drug use. I'm sure you would advocate even more draconian measures..LOL. We tried prohibition and it FAILED..failed miserably.

Attractive: Who is making it such? I'm not advocating glamorizing drugs. I'm advocating treating it as a medical condition.

CracK: Dude, you need to get a sense of humor. Considering that Chappel was widely popular, i'd say that you are in the minority. Furthermore, addiction has a long history of humor...Arthur, Otis the town drunk, etc.

Get a grip.

[GrnBay007]

We lock people up, we imprison them..sentences have gotten harsher...yet, we don't see a reduction in drug use.

Depends on what you are actually measuring. You lock up the meth user/dealer/manufacturer, you are not going to take a big chunk of drugs off the streets....someone is there to take their place. Locking them up may save their life though. Of course drugs are available in prison, but nowhere near the extent they are available on the streets. Time away from daily use can be the best treatment in the world.

Somewhere in this thread someone mentioned something to the affect of a work camp or environment. I'd be all for that. The life of a drug user in prison should be treatment...work....treatment....work. Maybe they would get the hang of it eventually.

[the_idle_threat]

Who is making excuses for them. I just know that you are always going to have non productive (using your standards) citizens. Always been that way, always going to be that way.

This country is one that loves drugs and the quick fix...be it legal or illegal.

Incentives/Consequences: You are flat out wrong. We lock people up, we imprison them..sentences have gotten harsher...yet, we don't see a reduction in drug use. I'm sure you would advocate even more draconian measures..LOL. We tried prohibition and it FAILED..failed miserably.

Attractive: Who is making it such? I'm not advocating glamorizing drugs. I'm advocating treating it as a medical condition.

CracK: Dude, you need to get a sense of humor. Considering that Chappel was widely popular, i'd say that you are in the minority. Furthermore, addiction has a long history of humor...Arthur, Otis the town drunk, etc.

Get a grip.

Do you even believe the crap you post?

Yes, you are right ... I have no sense of humor. That has been obvious ever since I started posting here.

My point about crack addiction is not that it is off limits for all jokes, but that the reality of it is very different from the jokes and is very unfunny. Given your apparent position on the issue of addictive drugs, I'm inclined to believe that all you know about crack addiction comes from the Chappelle Show.

I don't support more draconian measures in the "drug war." If you re-read my post above, you might notice that I'm not opposed to legalization in the case of marijuana, which I understand to be no more harmful nor addictive than alcohol or cigs.

However, I don't support legalization of everything, and definitely don't support supplying drugs to addicts as a way of keeping them "under control."

I don't care if you think I'm wrong and you think absolutely no people make decisions based upon incentives and consequences. Your position is too far-fetched and (frankly) stupid to be shared by many others.

[BEARMAN]

I have to disagree with you sir, I am on the front line of your so called war on drugs and from where I see it we are winning. I am a Narcotics/K9 Officer and deal with people using, selling, transporting,and buying drugs every day. I see, first hand the effects of drugs on kids, adults and families. I have been fighting the war on drugs for over 18 years, and have seem remarkable changes in people using,selling,transporting narcotics. The laws work. You deal to a minor you get hammered, you deal within 500 feet of a school zone you get hammered, you have in your possesion more then 27.9 grams of anything (narcotic) you get hammered. There are a ton of good people fighting hard in this so called war on drugs, and we do make a differance ! Legallizing any narcotic is a mistake ! My .02

Bearman;


I completely respect and appreciate what you do. Please don't take anything I say as a criticism of what you and other dedicated officers do.

It has been my impression, perhaps wrong, that when you catch and incarcerate one drug dealer, there may be a slight delay, but very soon another steps in to take his/her place. I have been told that instead of dealing across the street from schools, dealers now hit up the kids on the way to and from school. In some cases they simply moved a block further down the street.

I know some of the laws have been strengthened, penalties increased, etc. I'm all for that. But has there really been a decrease in the supply of drugs, or have we simply changed the manner in which the transactions occur? Have we really made any headway against the entire drug culture, as opposed to just removing individuals from it?

"Winning" maybe that isnt the right word to use, Drug use has been around for hundreds of years, it will be around for hundreds more to come, all I/we do is try and stem the flow, yes I/we take on dealer off the street and 3 more take his place in a week or two. I/we then do our best to take them down and so on and so on and so..... It is a never ending battle. However it is one I think is well woth the fight. Legallizing it is not the answer. Education, understaning and policing can help, maybe not "win" but help. I do not make the laws, I enforce them, Stopping the drug culture starts with the kids. Educate them, show them how harmful drugs are and give them the tools to make good decisions on their own.

TY for your kind words, believe me, I have done it this long because it means somthing to me, it matters, and I make a differance. I am not here to wave anyones flag, I am here to protect the kids !

[the_idle_threat]

007, you hit it right on the head with the point that addicts must WANT to get better in order to do so. This is why it should not be dismissed as just a medical issue. People with actual medical issues usually want to get better right away.

Addicts CHOOSE to pursue an addiction rather than seek help until they hit "bottom," when life as an addict becomes unbearable enough that they finally CHOOSE to fight the addiction.

Choosing to remain an addict rather than seek treatment is a bad choice. and I don't support removing penalties (legalization) while at the same time creating incentives (guarantee of free supply) as a way of dealing with the problem. This approach goes beyond throwing our hands in the air and giving up---it actually rewards the bad behavior.

Tyrone, you are right that there will always be some people who make bad choices regardless of what the penalties and/or incentives are. I made that point earlier. We seem to differ in that you seem to believe ALL people behave this way. I (along with the rest of the world) will have to agree to disagree with you there.

My point all along has been that we don't need to add to the problem by actually removing barriers and creating incentives so that an even larger part of the population crosses the line into addiction.

And with no criminal penalties and an unlimited supply of free drugs, who is going to then choose to fight the addiction? Where is "rock bottom"? It's a one-way street to disaster.

[GrnBay007]

I am here to protect the kids !

If you REALLY cared to protect the kids, you'd help to Win The War of reproducing more Bear fans!!!!!!! :P

[GrnBay007]

And with no criminal penalties and an unlimited supply of free drugs, who is going to then choose to fight the addiction once hooked? Where is "rock bottom"?

Easy answer: Death.

FYI, as I'm posting, I'm referring to drugs like crack, meth, coke, heroin ....and alcohol, though legal. Good ole legal alcohol can be just as bad as the others.

[the_idle_threat]

There are some severe alcoholics out there, but I wouldn't go so far as to say alcohol is generally as bad as crack, coke, meth, etc.

Alcohol can be used in moderation. I don't think those other drugs can---my understanding is that you're either high, coming down, or down and seeking another high.

Furthermore, many people who binge drink and "abuse" alcohol do so because it's social and fun and they want to (i.e. college students), not because it's chemically addictive. Cigarettes are far worse than alcohol in that respect.

And on another note, if we treat addiction by supplying drugs in order to feed and supposedly "control" the addiction, I think you are right ... pretty much the only end point is death.

In terms of incentives, I guess that is an incentive to not start: If you decide to try a "hard" drug and you become addicted, the government will grease the rails toward hardcore addiction and death!

[BEARMAN]

I am here to protect the kids !

If you REALLY cared to protect the kids, you'd help to Win The War of reproducing more Bear fans!!!!!!! :P

I(personally) am responsable for bringing 3 new BEAR fans into this world ! And am damn proud of it ! And, one of them have a new BEARS fan now ! (damn that makes me old?)

[GrnBay007]

There are some severe alcoholics out there, but I wouldn't go so far as to say alcohol is generally as bad as crack, coke, meth, etc.

Generally speaking I would say crack and meth are worse than alcohol, but in all honesty I've seen more deaths caused by alcohol abuse/addiction to alcohol then the others.

Alcohol can be used in moderation. I don't think those other drugs can---my understanding is that you're either high, coming down, or down and seeking another high.

Furthermore, many people who binge drink and "abuse" alcohol do so because it's social and fun and they want to (i.e. college students), not because it's chemically addictive. Cigarettes are far worse than alcohol in that respect.

Alcohol can be chemically addictive and it's a strange old bird. Some people can drink daily their whole life and never really be considered an alcoholic...as it's never taken control of their life. They've never "needed" a drink physically. Plus with alcohol there are two different addictions you don't usually find with hard street drugs. You have the mental addiction and the physical addiction. Even though someone is never physically addicted to alcohol...ie shakes when they don't get a drink, ect....they can be mentally addicted to alcohol, drink daily and eventually die from the disease due to either accidentally drinking too much for their body to withstand or their major organs have just had enough and fail.

I think meth is the monster of all monsters right now. We haven't yet seen the complete affects of it. We are just getting a glimpse of what it can do to unborn children when pregnant women are getting high. All those homes where meth is being cooked and innocent unknowing people are purchasing them afterward....we don't know how they will be affected long term. I read something recently ...stats...of the affects of police officers who were going in to these meth labs unprotected before they knew better. It was shocking the affects it had on them....way after the fact.

[GrnBay007]

I(personally) am responsable for bringing 3 new BEAR fans into this world ! And am damn proud of it ! And, one of them have a new BEARS fan now !

If you move quickly now you can still save them!!!!

....follow the Green and Gold....there is light at the end of your dismal tunnel!!

:P

[Partial]

More deaths from Alcohol than harder drugs because it is more readily available and served in public.

[MadtownPacker]

Most cops I have come into contact with know if you are stoned with a flashlight to the face. From what I understand when someone gets a DUI they get piss or blood test done at the jail. I aint heard pf even one of the homies say he crashed cuz he was stoned, ever.

More deaths from Alcohol than harder drugs because it is more readily available and served in public.

Again your lack of information on the subject pains me. You really need to get out more P.

Most or all states have hours where alcohol can't be bought (2am-6am in CA). Not the case with meth, that shit is 24/7 all day every day. The store never closes.

As for being served in public, the last thing a dope fiend wants is for other dope fiends to know he/she has some.