Thursday, June 02, 2011

Drug war?

I read this today:

"Instead of punishing users who the report says "do no harm to others," the commission argues that governments should end criminalization of drug use, experiment with legal models that would undermine organized crime syndicates and offer health and treatment services for drug-users in need.

The commission called for drug policies based on methods empirically proven to reduce crime, lead to better health and promote economic and social development.

Regarding the United States, former Colombian president Cesar Gaviria told The Associated Press by phone that the country should starting thinking about "alternatives."

"We don't see the U.S. evolving in a way that is compatible with our (countries') long-term interests," he said. " Read more:

And what do I think?

A) Anyone who has ever known a drug addict knows that they don't "do no harm to others." Junkies, for example, spend quite a lot of time committing burglary and violent crimes in order to get funds to find their next high. I can't call that "no harm." In addition, drug addicts destroy their families, abuse and neglect their children, end up on welfare because they can't keep a that No Harm? No. It leaves me immediately wondering what the agenda of the committee is.

Well, they made it clear in the last line.

and B) Columbia stands to make a LOT of money from the drug trade if it becomes legal in the US, and they don't have to handle any of the bad results. Of COURSE they are going to push legality of drugs in the US because we are their major customer, and they want us to stop sending our armies out to attack their biggest tax-revenue producers. Duh. So of course our policies are not in their best long-term interest.

But they ARE in our best long-term interest, and, quite frankly, it isn't our primary responsibility to provide tax money to other governments. We have to do what's right for our country--and it's easy easy easy to see that drugs aren't it.

No comments: