# Why I'm Going To Vote Libertarian...



## Matt Jones (Mar 6, 2002)

I want to see a vastly reduced government...
I want to see taxes slashed...
I want to see welfare abolished...
I want to see to drugs legalized...
I want to see my right to freedom of speech protected...
I want to see my right to bear arms protected...
I want to see ALL of my civil liberties protected...
I want to see the U.S. no longer being the world's police force...
I want to see a balanced budget and a decreasing deficit...
I want to see our legal system get tough on REAL crime...
I want to see more jobs being created...
I want to see an improvement in education...
I want to see the government quit wasting money overseas and put Americans first...
I want to see progression by a political party that isn't owned by special interests groups and corporations...
And finally, I'm sick and tired of voting for the lesser of two evils...

These are just some of the reasons why I'm voting Libertarian. If you feel that you might also be interested in learning more about the Libertarian party you can check out more of what the stand for at...
http://www.lp.org/issues/

Don't be fooled into thinking you only have two choices when voting this fall.


----------



## Dano2 (Oct 8, 2002)

Drugs legalized?


----------



## Matt Jones (Mar 6, 2002)

Yes.

http://www.lp.org/issues/relegalize.html

The war on drugs can never be won. It's been a giant waste of money and it's accomplished absolutely nothing with the exception of creating more criminals. Our country has tried prohibition before with alcohol and it didn't work...the same thing is happening today with drugs.

We need to quit throwing money down a rat hole and use it on rehabilitation and prevention. We also need to get tough on real criminals. The fact that the average rapist spends less time in prison than a small time drug dealer is ludicrous. We don't have enough room in our prisons to keep housing small time criminals who aren't a real threat to the public.


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

Matt you are absolutely correct about drugs! The drug war is the biggest farce and worst culprit at wasting money, losing personal freedoms, and causing misery in this country. Drugs should be legalized and all non-violent drug offenders should be immediately released from prison. What goes on in the name of the "drug war" is absolutely terrible.

By the way thats two new threads on politics( that I did'nt start), this is great :beer:


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

ANOTHER REASON TO END THE DRUG WAR

There seems to be some evidence that North Korea's lead gargoyle, Kim Jong Il, may be in the drug trade. They found a North Korean ship loaded with a huge cache of heroin last year in Australia. The fear is that North Korea may be selling hard drugs to get money for their nuclear program.

This only works because drugs bring such high profits - profits in the range of 10,000% and more. *And drugs only bring these huge profits because they are illegal! *

If you even the slightest hint of an open mind, you know what the solution is here.


----------



## Goldy's Pal (Jan 6, 2004)

Yeah, good idea, lets knock down the price of drugs so when my kid gets a paper route he or she can stock 100 kilos' in the basement!!

"Honey, where's the Christmas decorations??"

"Under the stairs, next to Juniors coke!!" 

The only bright bulb on that tree is maybe the price of beer will go down. :idea:

O.K I'm for it!! :beer:


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

Goldy if drugs were legal would you start taking them? I'll answer that for you NO! Point is people that want to use drugs are going to find them somehow so why not take the profit motive out of the drug business by making them cheap and legal. Then we could take huge amounts of money we're currently spending trying unsuccessfully to stop drugs and use it for treatment and educating the small portion of our society that would abuse them. 
In Holland drug use among highschool kids actually went down after legalization, kids didn't have the thrill of getting away with something to add to the attraction. The drug war hasn't made drugs harder to get it just drives up the price thus causing criminals to get into the business attracted by the great profits. The high prices of drugs can be directly traced to much other crime as addicts attempt to scrape up the money to purchase them. IF your kid ever does try drugs ( and believe me you are being naive if you think they will never have the chance) should your kid go to jail or should he get treatment?


----------



## Matt Jones (Mar 6, 2002)

Well if you have any parenting skills at all you should be able to teach your kid to not use drugs on their own. If you don't think your child will be exposed to drugs sometime during their adolescence you are extremely naive; so I don't see what difference having them be legal or illegal will make on whether they decide to try them. Eventually they're still going to have to make that choice for themselves. Just like they're going to have to learn to drink responsibly for themselves. The condonation that if something is legal it's totally safe to use is not true (alcohol is a perfect example).

Another benefit to legalizing drugs is that they will be safer, because the government can control the potency of a particular drug. As well as tax the hell out of them. For every big bust the feds make 99 other deals go through. It's impossible to stop drugs from coming into this country. We might as well quit wasting the money on trying to, and use that money for rehab clinics and prevention so there will be less of a demand. The main reason to legalize drugs is to reduce crime. How many crimes do you think occur in the U.S. are drug related? The only way you can take the power away from these criminals is to take away their product.


----------



## Brad Anderson (Apr 1, 2002)

Last time I checked, using drugs was a CHOICE. If people are going to do drugs, they will do them, legal or not.

Although, legalizing heroin might not be a good idea.

Ooops, now I'm on both sides of the fence. #!$%

Will violent crime increase as a result of legalizing drugs??? That is the only concern I'd have.

Who is their candidate???


----------



## Goldy's Pal (Jan 6, 2004)

My only point, was why make it anymore easier and available than it has to be.?? Sure, I agree totally in that kids can get drugs or alcohol anyway if they REALLY wanted to. I also agree that parents involved enough in there kids lives (which these days are more important than ever before) can have and should have enough influeance to keep drugs out of there lives. I don't think that I turned out all that terrible, and I drank a little before being of legal age. Who hasn't?? But my only question is why hand it to them on a silver tray with a mirror?? At least when I did do a little drinking before I was old enough, I felt a little guilty talking to Ma and Pa the next day. Did they have bad parenting skills??? NO. Big difference between a little beer and a little cocaine. Wouldn't you say?? If they wanna try the **** at least give them the opportunity to feel guilty as hell about it!!!


----------



## Dan Bueide (Jul 1, 2002)

I intentionally try to stay out of of these political debates. Bob, not because I don't follow or care about them, but because one only has so much energy and there's only so many hours in the day. But here goes anyway....

On the whole, I don't think legalization is a good thing. Pros and cons, certainly, but for me cons outweigh the pros.

Minor use would go up. Some don't use or use as much because of the stigma (read guilt) associated with the illegality. Legalize for adults, I think use by minors increases. How much, who knows.

Profits won't drop or evaporate either. Margin will be replaced by volume. Those on the early portions of the illicit supply line (most of the folks we worry about how they use their profits), will become part of the legal supply line and will "make it up in volume." Legality will lower the cost of doing business a whole bunch too, also increasing profitability. May displace some middle-men and/or dealers, but it's unlikely all illicit drugs would be legalized, so there'll always be a job for many/most of them anyhow.

Hard to rationalize at times why it's okay to buy a beer and not a joint, but I guess you have to draw the line somewhere.


----------



## win4win (Sep 8, 2003)

Matt Jones said:


> I want to see the U.S. no longer being the world's police force...


add to that the world's welfare system too! :evil:


----------



## Matt Jones (Mar 6, 2002)

I disagree Dan, I think use by minors would go down. Just talk to any highschooler; give them $50 and a half hour and you'd be suprised at what they can find in the halls of their school. There's kids that sell drugs out of their lockers. To get alcohol is a completely different story. When I was in highschool we'd start making plans for the weekend and on how we were going to get our booze no later than Wednesday...and there were a lot of times we still wouldn't get it. You'd have to find someone old enough to go legally buy it for you, not so with drugs. I bet there's a lot of 15-16 year olds who have an easier time buying pot than cigarettes. If you made it legal you could set age restrictions on it and keep it away from kids. Illegal sales would plummet on drugs and kids couldn't get their hands on them as easily, just look at booze and prohibition...you don't see many bootleggers these days! :lol:


----------



## Goldy's Pal (Jan 6, 2004)

Well at least they need the $50 and not $10. Make em work harder for it !!

Guilt is a strong tool that parents can use to keep kids straight. It worked for me. :justanangel:


----------



## Matt Jones (Mar 6, 2002)

Even if drugs were cheaper, and that might not necessarily be the case, they'd still have to find someone of age to go buy it for them. Look at all the liability cases that have resulted from kids getting into accidents and then having the family sue the adult that bought them the alcohol. Which is why I won't buy for minors, because if they do something stupid and get themselves hurt it's my *** on the line!

Let's just assume you're right and that kids still can get drugs just as easily if they're made legal (which I highly doubt), nothing's changed then in that regards...the status quo is still in place. What HAS changed however is you eliminated a high percentage of violent criminals and crime, saved billions of dollars in tax payer money, made billions (if not trillions) of dollars from taxing the drugs, thus giving you a ton of money for rehabilitation/prevention programs to help the people who would of still been using even if drugs were still illegal.

What's the worst than case scenario? More people start using drugs? Well if that happens then what would stop you from just making them illegal again? All I know is what's being done now is not working and is wasting a lot of money that could be used to more effectively treat the problem through other avenues. Maybe it's time to try something new...the possible positives far outweigh the possible risks. And if it fails, there's nothing stopping us from going back to the old system.


----------



## Goldy's Pal (Jan 6, 2004)

Sure Matt, but if they made alcohol illegal again would you stop drinking?? Hard to imagine that now isn't it. I don't think I can put a price on what it's worth for me to keep drugs out of my kids lives. I've just gotta go with what worked for me, and use it.


----------



## gaddyshooter (Oct 12, 2003)

Legalizing drugs is not the answer. I agree that there has to be more money used on treatment of addicts before they go to jail, which in the last five or so years is what is happening. The average Joe Public doesn't know it but it is happening. I work in law enforcement so I see it every day. There is hardly ever any one put in prison for just posessing drugs for personal use, whether it is crack, powder coke, meth, and there is almost never any one given jail time for marijuana. People arrested for just posession of a drug usually have to get arrested 4 or more times before a Judge even thinks about prison time any more.
The only ones that do get some prison time is the actual drug dealers and even they get 2-3 chances before they get any prison time and then it is usually a year or two, with an extra year or two of probation.
Legalizing is definately not the answer. If you think it would make less people use I think you are mistaken. If it were legal there would be a whole bunch more people that become dealers. Right now there are only some people willing to risk getting arrested to make some money, but if it were legal there would be nothing stopping them from becoming a dealer.
Your argument that it would be worth the extra people using because you could get more tax money is also ludicris (sp). There are some countries in the world where a big business (illegal) is selling children (boys and girls) as sex workers for pedofiles. They could make a whole lot of money if they legalize it. Doesn't make it right does it?
The idea of legalizing drugs because people are going to get it anyway if they really want it is also ridiculous. There are a whole lot of guys who love to have sex with little 12-13 year old girls and rape women. It also seems that these people will still rape and molest children if they really want to, so why not just make it legal and tax them for every girl they fondle. Maybe tax 500.00 bucks for grabbing a little kids breast, maybe 1000.00 bucks for an act of penetration?


----------



## Matt Jones (Mar 6, 2002)

You have to be kidding me...you're actually comparing drug use to pedophilia just because they're two illegal acts? Drug use is a persons individual choice, they decide for themselves. Molesting a child against their will obviously is not their choice, so you're comparing apples to oranges in that respect...it's harming yourself vs. harming another. Two totally different acts. That you'd compare them shows how shallow your thinking is. To you legalization equals morally acceptable. It's not the governments job to decide what's morally right for any individual. And for the record, I'm all for legalizing prostitution (obviously 18+ :roll: ). Now I better explain for all the inside-the-box thinkers out there that because I think it's in society's best interest to legalize it, it doesn't mean that my personal ethics are in agreement with it...or that it's not a heinous act. I'm just enough of a realist to put my morals aside and realize legalizing would solve a ton of problems. Just like legalizing drugs.

As for a bunch of people becoming dealers, let me ask you this...how many bootleggers do you know? Why would you buy a substance from some shady dealer when you can purchase it at a store legally? How are these dealers going to make money when they no longer have a demand for their product?

If they made alcohol illegal of course I wouldn't quit drinking...I'd probably drink more because I could get more, and better, booze at a cheaper price. :roll: Just like a lot of illegal drugs today. Plus I wouldn't have to worry about LAME 1:00am bar/liquor store closings...I'd be content chilling at a speak-easy! :beer: Hell, I bet you could even go over to MN and buy beer on a Sunday if they made it illegal! 

I'd like to hear some alternatives to what should be done regarding the drug problems in this country. The current policies and tactics in use have proven themselves to be a failure...and have been a failure for 20+ years. Instead of standing around continuing to piss down our own leg following the same approach that has already proven itself ineffective perhaps we should try something different for a change.


----------



## Goldy's Pal (Jan 6, 2004)

How do you figure if alcohol is illegal the price will go down??? Supply and demand??? Havin' a hard time at the local liquor store are ya?? Drug prices are high now because they are illegal and harder to get. So alcohol is just the opposite??? Make it illegal and it's cheap??? :eyeroll: Not buying that one Jones, legalize drugs ??? Great idea, take that trash back where it belongs. 3rd world.


----------



## gaddyshooter (Oct 12, 2003)

Ok Jonser, I'll give you that one. Maybe comparing drug use with child molestation is a bit of a stretch, but I still believe that it is morally wrong to be a drug user/addict. Maybe not quite on the same level as being a pedofile. I was just trying to make the point that just because some people enjoy and think that it is ok, still does not make it right and ok. There are a lot of illegal things that some people think are fun and fine for them to do, but you just don't go and make it legal because you are unable to stop people from doing it. You can't stop people from speeding, therefore no speed limits. You can't stop some people from stealing, so therefore property is free game, etc etc etc. Doesn't work that way with most things and it can't work that way with drugs either. And you can't just make it legal because there is tax money to be made off of it.
I agree with you the current "drug war" is not working. The drugs are going to find a way into the country and people are going to use them, legal or not. I don't have a solution to the problem, I just don't think that legalizing it and making a whole bunch more drug addicts is the answer. I know as you said above, that if it were legal, prices would go down and the people wouldn't be out stealing any more to buy drugs. BS. I see drug addicts every day in my job, and they're not the best at holding down a good job, so they still will be out there stealing from people. They just will be able to buy more drugs with their money they get from the pawn shop.
One last point and I know that nothing is going to change your mind, so I am done on this one after this post, but of course it is the government's job to make laws and decide what is and is not acceptable. That is what laws are about. Our whole society is based on laws that tell us what is morally acceptable.


----------



## Goldy's Pal (Jan 6, 2004)

Think I'll go to my annual NWTF "speak easy" tomorrow night and down me some legal cold ones, while they're still legal!! :beer:


----------



## dosch (May 20, 2003)

gaddy

"but of course it is the government's job to make laws and decide what is and is not acceptable. That is what laws are about. Our whole society is based on laws that tell us what is morally acceptable.

Thats sad.


----------



## Ron Gilmore (Jan 7, 2003)

Dosch most laws are made because of immoral people not moral people. A person that will stop in the middle of ND at a stop sign does so because he recognizes it is the right thing to do. Same with someone that stops shooting when they have a limit of ducks or geese. The laws had to be put in place because of those that have no morals.

On the drug issue as I age the more I think they should stay illegal. one would need to open all types of drugs up not just some to have a serious impact of reducing the illicit trade. It would not save any money as our shift from prison dollars would tranfer over to social programs for drug addiction and treatment and more welfare.

When I see what meth and pot have done to a number of people I grew up with or knew from high school and college and compare that to those affected by booze I see more damage from drugs.

PCP, Acid legal I do not think so. What about the date rape drug? Rational thought not generalizations are the reason drugs have stayed illegal.


----------



## headhunter (Oct 10, 2002)

Matt, I'm on the fence with you. I see your points and tend to agree to an extent that legalization would get rid of the whole "drug trade" What they SHOULD do, is at least legalize POT. Budweiser is every bit as harmful as POT is , BUD, may not be as harmful as ACID or COKE, so there needs to be a line drawn in the sand on which drugs should be "legalized"........By the way, Judgeing by your original post Matt? you are far and away more Republican than Liberal. Your a good man.


----------



## Goldy's Pal (Jan 6, 2004)

Let me guess Headhunter, you're in college too. Lets look at this picture. Legalize drugs aaaand prostitution. Hmmmm, anyone else just see the divorce rate triple? Yeah that's what this society needs alright, a few million more single parents, There just went welfare times three. Suicides? Not saying all single parents don't do well, some do a hell of a good job. Now that junior is 18 and has been without a father he can get drugs and a hooker by going to Kwik trip. Nice. Sure he could get it anyway, but why load the shotgun and hand it to your kid?? I don't see a problem with this at all. Jerry Springer won't need a show, You could just open the windows in the house. I'll stick with some good old "common sense" on this topic. I'd rather survive. Let it rip, I'm done chewin' on this ham bone. No meat on it.


----------



## zogman (Mar 20, 2002)

Here we go Sioux! Here we go! Oh bean's Wrong thread :beer: 
Goldy Buddy, 
Your wrong AGAIN. God I'd love to hold class for you metro boys oke: If you legalize prostution the divorce rate would go DOWN. ie less marriages :toofunny: No reason to fall in love and get married, be cheaper in the long run. Again to guote TK "I love this bar"


----------



## Field Hunter (Mar 4, 2002)

Boy you guys REALLY need to have the geese start showing up. Wondering if some of you will have the same opinions on the drugs when you have a 17 year old or two running around at night with their friends. Peer pressure is a very real thing and if the drugs were legal it would make it just that much easier for as good kid to just "try it once". Bad, Bad idea!


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

1)First off name one country thats legalized drugs and had drug use go up, you can't because its never happened. This is because the people that use drugs are going to find a way to get them, and the people that don't use drugs do not avoid them entirely because of the legal stigma they just make a choice thats its bad for them or whatever. Just like not everyone smokes cigarettes.
2)the number of drug dealers would decrease because the profit motive would be much lower pot is a weed and you could easily make the price .02 cents a joint and available for adults only with similar punishments as achohol has for buying it for children. The sales could be government licensed and prices set and run with the intention of putting illicit dealers out of business are you goin to go to the trouble of smuggling something in from another country when its dirt cheap here? It would make as much sense a smuggling tomatoes into the us.
3)the extremely low cost would eliminate the need for users to become dealers thus taking that criminal aspect out of it. If people were so poor the couldn't afford it there could be rehab places that give it to users for free along with counseling to get them off it. This would be a lot cheaper than housing a bunch of non-violent losers in prison at the publics expense.
4) because of the low cost of pot and I mean extremely low it would discourage the use of more expensive drugs. Holland has "coffee shops" where you can get a joint a donut and a cup of coffee cheaply and you can walk around without worrying about someone knocking you in the head to get some money to by expensive drugs. Addicts could be weaned of more dangerous drugs thru free distribution and gradually getting them on to mild drugs like pot.
5) pot could be allowed in your garden for personal use further lowering the cost and the incentive for the criminal elements to be involved
6) this country could pave the streets with gold with all the money we have ****** away on the drug war, extra police, incarceration and for what???? the drug war has been active since the 60's and drugs are more available, more potent and more expensive( meaning more attractive to criminals).
*ALbert Einstine(SP?) said "to keep doing the same thing with the expectation of getting a different result is the definition of insanity " Thus the drug war is insane!* 
7) the federal government(will lose power to use the drug war to break constitutional freedoms), law enforcement( will lose power and funding), and the powerful alchol lobby will have a very cheap competitor, none of these groups have a true incentitve to end the current wasteful ineffective approach to this issue...as with all things the money/power trail always should be examined-and this is not cynasism its logic.
8) good Job MATT, Dan this is good for the old brain :lol: and Goldy if prostitution was legal would you go to one??? again there is no evidence that it would be linked to additional divorces. People that want drugs are going to get them, people that want prostititutes will also, so legalize it, regulate it and use the savings I mentioned above to rehabilitate.


----------



## Fetch (Mar 1, 2002)

what would Libertarians do about ND Hunting ??? & farming ??? cause a happy Farmers is more likely to let you hunt ---But if all the farmers get bought out - I doubt the corporate boys would give a hoot about hunting (unless they can make a buck ) :eyeroll:


----------



## Ron Gilmore (Jan 7, 2003)

Bob I grew up during the late 70's and early 80's I say grew up because personal responsiblity became a clear choice to me. Many I went to school with and college still have not taken that step. Drug legalization will not decrease this but will increase the number who fail to take that step.

Enable a destructive activity and it continues to grow. Amsterdam tried it and it has been a failure, with unemployemt rates being in the double digits. Social programs have kept the tax rates high and this has stifled economic growth. THe socail programs have grown out of a high use of drugs even though they are legal.


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

Ron you're misinformed about Amsterdam my major pruduct line comes from Holland and I have talked to them about this issue at length.

Tobacco is legal. Tobacco kills. The deaths related to other drugs are minuscule in comparison. On present trends the global estimate is that, in the years 1990-1999, 21 million people will have been killed by tobacco. Smoking cigarettes is consuming tobacco in its deadliest form. Deaths from lung cancer, heart disease, bronchitis and emphysema are caused by cigarettes. But stressful or boring situations, such as being unemployed, can increase demand because smoking both soothes and stimulates.
Traditionally many drugs which are now illegal have been used as medicines. The medical use of cannabis goes back centuries. It has been used to relieve childbirth pain, as a general analgesic, and more recently as a treatment for glaucoma, multiple sclerosis, asthma and as an anti-nauseate drug in chemotherapy treatment. It may also be used to stimulate the appetite of those with AIDS
*Anti-drugs misinformation constructs an image of a slippery slope from cannabis to harder drugs. But long term drug addiction is not the pattern for most leisure users, as the experience of a more liberal approach to soft drugs in Holland shows. *
Since the revision of the so called Opium Act in 1976, possession of small quantities of cannabis has been tolerated in Holland. In practice, if not in law, cannabis has been decriminalised. The sale of up to an ounce of cannabis leaf became a misdemeanour like a parking offence and 400 coffee shops were opened in Amsterdam selling cannabis. 
The police have strong powers in relation to hard drugs, but in a harm reduction policy were encouraged by the Minister of Justice in 1985 not to use them as they would 'turn a health problem into a crime problem'. This policy did not result in a massive increase in the consumption of hard drugs. *In a recent survey a mere 1.7 percent of adults from Amsterdam said they had taken cocaine as compared with 6 percent in New York.* Heroin addiction in Holland has fallen by 30 percent since the early decriminalization. Heroin addicts get free needles and the proportion of injectors with AIDS is much lower than in the US. The Dutch statistics are interesting: 'Cigarettes are reckoned to have killed 18,000, alcohol 2,000 and the next most fatal drug was heroin which killed 64'. 
In the US the government threatened to withdraw aid to Colombia if the Colombian ambassador to Mexico, Gustavo de Grieff, even participated in a conference on the 'Reduction of Drug Related Harm'. They feared even a speech on drug legalisation, so politically important is the ideology of the war on drugs to the US goverment

*This is the horrible side of the War on drugs consider the following facts and tell me Ron how many people are we going to continue to lock up in this insanity. Is there no limit or do we change our approach the following facts are a National tradegy  *

According to the Justice Department, from 1971 to 1997, the US prison and jail population grew from fewer than 200,000 to a whopping 1.74 million. Since then, the incarcerated population has risen 4.6 percent, or 80,400 inmates to 1.82 million inmates on December 31, 1998. This means that one in 149 Americans is behind bars. This is roughly equivalent to the entire population of Houston, Texas, the country's fourth largest city, and twice as much as the population of San Francisco. The US prison population, which has doubled every 10 years, has increased ten-fold in a little over a quarter century. The US makes a big deal over human rights abuses in China and elsewhere, *yet there are half a million more Americans in prison than in China - which has a population nearly five times as large!*

*"Prisoners sentenced for drug offenses constituted the largest group of Federal inmates (55%) * 
On September 30, 2001, the date of the latest available data in the Federal Justice Statistics Program, Federal prisons held 78,501 sentenced drug offenders, compared to 52,782 in 1995."

Source: Harrison, Paige M. & Allen J. Beck, PhD, US Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Prisoners in 2002 (Washington, DC: US Department of Justice, July 2003), p. 11.

*In 2001, drug law violators comprised 20.4% of all adults serving time in State prisons - 246,100 out of 1,208,700 State prison inmates.*
Source: Harrison, Paige M. & Allen J. Beck, US Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Prisoners in 2002 (Washington, DC: US Department of Justice, July 2003), Table 17, p. 10.

*Over 80% of the increase in the federal prison population from 1985 to 1995 was due to drug convictions.*

Source: US Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Prisoners in 1996 (Washington DC: US Department of Justice, 1997).

*"Between 1984 and 1999, the number of defendants charged with a drug offense in U.S. district courts increased about 3% annually, on average, from 11,854 to 29,306." *

Source: Scalia, John, US Dept. of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Federal Drug Offenders, 1999 with Trends 1984-99 (Washington, DC: US Dept. of Justice, August 2001), p. 7.

*"As a result of increased prosecutions and longer time served in prison, the number of drug offenders in Federal prisons increased more than 12% annually, on average, from 14,976 during 1986 to 68,360 during 1999." *

Source: Scalia, John, US Dept. of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Federal Drug Offenders, 1999 with Trends 1984-99 (Washington, DC: US Dept. of Justice, August 2001), p. 7.

According to ONDCP, *federal spending to incarcerate drug offenders totals nearly $3 Billion a year *-- $2.525 Billion by the Bureau of Prisons, and $429.4 Million by Federal Prisoner Detention.

Source: Office of National Drug Control Policy, "National Drug Control Strategy: FY 2003 Budget Summary" (Washington, DC: Office of the President, February 2002), Table 3, pp. 7-9.

*"The United States has the highest prison population rate in the world, *some 701 per 100,000 of the national population, followed by Russia (606), Belarus (554), Kazakhstan and the Virgin Islands (both 522), the Cayman Islands (501), Turkmenistan (489), Belize (459), Bermuda (447), Suriname (437), Dominica (420) and Ukraine (415). "However, more than three fifths of countries (60.5%) have rates below 150 per 100,000. United Kingdom's rate of 141 per 100,000 of the national population places it above midpoint in the World List; it is the highest among countries of the European Union.)"

Source: Walmsley, Roy, "World Prison Population List (Fifth Edition)" (London, England, UK: Home Office Research, Development and Statistics Directorate, 2003), p. 1.

*The U.S. nonviolent prisoner population( primarily drug offenders) is larger than the combined populations of Wyoming and Alaska.*

Source: John Irwin, Ph. D., Vincent Schiraldi, and Jason Ziedenberg, America's One Million Nonviolent Prisoners (Washington, DC: Justice Policy Institute, 1999), pg. 4.

"Since 1995 the sentenced inmate population in State prisons has grown 27% (table 4). During this period 12 States increased their populations at least 50%, *led by North Dakota (up 88%*), Idaho (up 86%), and Oregon (up 85%). Between 1995 and 2002 the Federal system reported an additional 59,377 inmates sentenced to more than a year, an increase of 71%."

Source: Harrison, Paige M. & Allen J. Beck, PhD, US Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Prisoners in 2002 (Washington DC: US Department of Justice, July 2003), p. 4.

"In 2002 the growth in the number of inmates under State or Federal jurisdiction (2.6%) was more than twice the percentage increase recorded during 2001 (1.1%) (table 2). The population under the jurisdiction of State and Federal authorities increased by 36,623 inmates during 2002, higher than the increase in 2001 (up 15,521). The prison population has grown an average of 45,000 inmates per year (3.6%) since yearend 1995."

Source: Harrison, Paige M. & Allen J. Beck, PhD, US Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Prisoners in 2002 (Washington DC: US Department of Justice, July 2003), p. 2.

According to the US Justice Department, between 1990 and 2000 "Overall, the percentage of violent Federal inmates declined from 17% to 10%. While the number of offenders in each major offense category increased, *the number incarcerated for a drug offense accounted for the largest percentage of the total growth (59%), *followed by public-order offenders (32%)."

Source: Beck, Allen J., Ph.D., and Paige M. Harrison, US Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Prisoners in 2001 (Washington DC: US Department of Justice, July 2002), p. 14.

There were 5.9 million adults in the 'correctional population' by the end of 1998. *This means that 2.9% of the U.S. adult population -- 1 in every 34 -- was incarcerated, on probation or on parole.*

Source: Bonczar, Thomas & Glaze, Lauren, US Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Probation and Parole in the United States (Washington DC: US Department of Justice, August 1999), p. 1.

In 1990, of the 739,960 sentenced prisoners in Federal and State prisons, 370,400 were African-American. By 2001 the number of African-Americans had grown to 562,000 out of a total of 1,206,400 sentenced prisoners.

Source: Beck, Allen J., Ph.D., and Christopher Mumola, US Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Prisoners in 1998 (Washington, DC: US Department of Justice, August 1999), p. 9; Harrison, Paige M. & Allen J. Beck, PhD, US Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Prisoners in 2001 (Washington DC: US Department of Justice, July 2002), p. 12, Table 16.

*Assuming recent incarceration rates remain unchanged, an estimated 1 of every 20 Americans (5%) can be expected to serve time in prison during their lifetime most of them for drug crimes*. For African-American men, the number is greater than 1 in 4 (28.5%).

Source: Bonczar, T.P. & Beck, Allen J., US Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Lifetime Likelihood of Going to State or Federal Prison (Washington DC: US Department of Justice, March 1997), p. 1.

The Bureau of Justice Statistics reports that in 1999, the nation spent $146,556,000,000 on the Federal, State and Local justice systems. In that year, the United States had 1,875,199 adult jail and prison inmates. Based on this information the cost per inmate year was: 
-- Corrections spending alone: $26,134 per inmate 
-- Corrections, judicial and legal costs: $43,297 per inmate 
-- Corrections, judicial, legal and police costs: $78,154 per inmate

Source: Gifford, Sidra Lea, US Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Justice Expenditure and Employment in the United States, 1999 (Washington, DC: US Department of Justice, February 2002), p. 4, Table 6; Beck, Allen J., PhD, and Jennifer C. Karberg, US Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Prison and Jail Inmates at Midyear 2000 (Washington, DC: US Department of Justice, March 2001), p. 2, Table 1.

*In 1997, there were 216,254 drug offenders in state prisons (out of a total State prison population of 1,046,706 that year). Of these, 92,373 were in for possession, 117,926 were in for trafficking, and 5,955 were in for other drug crimes. Only 41.9 percent of State drug offenders were under the influence of drugs at the time of their offense*.

Source: Mumola, Christopher J., "Substance Abuse and Treatment, State and Federal Prisoners, 1997" (Washington, DC: US Dept. of Justice, January 1999), p. 3, Table 1.

*In 1997, there were 55,069 drug offenders in federal prisons (out of a total Federal prison population of 88,018 that year). Of these, 10,094 were in for possession, 40,053 were in for trafficking, and 4,922 were in for other drug crimes.* Only 25 percent of Federal drug offenders were under the influence of drugs at the time of their offense.

Source: Mumola, Christopher J., "Substance Abuse and Treatment, State and Federal Prisoners, 1997" (Washington, DC: US Dept. of Justice, January 1999), p. 3, Table 1.

*"Nineteen percent of State prisoners, and 16% of Federal inmates said that they committed their current offense to obtain money for drugs. These percentages represent a slight increase from 1991, when 17% of State and 10% of Federal prisoners identified drug money as a motive for their current offense." *

Source: Mumola, Christopher J., "Substance Abuse and Treatment, State and Federal Prisoners, 1997" (Washington, DC: US Dept. of Justice, January 1999), p. 5.

*"Department of corrections data show that about a fourth of those initially imprisoned for nonviolent crimes are sentenced for a second time for committing a violent offense. Whatever else it reflects, this pattern highlights the possibility that prison serves to transmit violent habits and values rather than to reduce them."*

Source: Craig Haney, Ph.D., and Philip Zimbardo, Ph.D., "The Past and Future of U.S. Prison Policy: Twenty-five Years After the Stanford Prison Experiment," American Psychologist, Vol. 53, No. 7 (July 1998), p. 720.

"Over the past twenty-five years, the United States has built the largest prison system in the world. But despite a recent downturn in the crime rate, we remain far and away the most violent advanced industrial society on earth."

Source: Currie, E., Crime and Punishment in America (New York, NY: Metropolitan Books, Henry Holt and Company, Inc., 1998), p. 3.

"We must have law enforcement authorities address the issue because if we do not, prevention, education, and treatment messages will not work very well. *But having said that, I also believe that we have created an American gulag."*

Source: Gen. Barry R. McCaffrey (USA, Ret.), Director, ONDCP, Keynote Address, Opening Plenary Session, National Conference on Drug Abuse Prevention Research, National Institute on Drug Abuse, September 19, 1996, Washington, DC, on the web at http://165.112.78.61/MeetSum/CODA/Keynote2.html

The table below shows the average sentence (mean and median) imposed on Federal prisoners for various offenses in 2000.

Average Federal Sentence 
Offense Mean Median 
All Offenses 56.8 months 33.0 months 
All Felonies 58.0 months 36.0 months 
*Violent Felonies 63.0 months *
Drug Felonies *75.6 months * 55.0 months 
Property Felony - Fraud 22.5 months 14.0 months 
Property Felony - Other 33.4 months 18.0 months 
Public Order Felony - Regulatory 28.0 months 15.0 months 
Public Order Felony - Other 46.5 months 30.0 months 
Misdemeanors 10.3 months 6.0 months

Source: US Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Federal Criminal Case Processing, 2000, With Trends 1982-2000 (Washington, DC: US Department of Justice, November 2001), p. 12, Table 6.

*States spent $32.5 billion on Corrections *in 1999 alone. To compare, *states only spent $22.2 billion on cash assistance to the poor*.

Source: National Association of State Budget Officers (NASBO), 1999 State Expenditure Report (Washington, DC: NASBO, June 2000), pp. 38, 68.

*Since the enactment of mandatory minimum sentencing for drug users, the Federal Bureau of Prisons budget has increased by 1,954%. Its budget has jumped from $220 million in 1986 to $4.3 billion in 2001. *

Sources: US Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Sourcebook of Criminal Justice Statistics 1996 (Washington DC: US Department of Justice, 1997), p. 20; Executive Office of the President, Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 2002 (Washington DC: US Government Printing Office, 2001), p. 134.

*"Despite the investment of more than $5 billion for prison construction over the past decade, the prison system is currently operating at 32 percent over rated capacity, up from 22 percent at the end of 1997. These conditions could potentially jeopardize public safety."*

Sources: Executive Office of the President, Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 2002 (Washington DC: US Government Printing Office, 2001), p. 134.

"At yearend 2002 the Federal prison system was operating at 33% over capacity. Overall, State prisons were operating at between 1% over their highest capacity and 16% above their lowest capacity (table 9)."

Source: Harrison, Paige M. & Allen J. Beck, PhD, US Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Prisoners in 2002 (Washington DC: US Department of Justice, July 2003), p. 7.

*From 1984 to 1996, California built 21 new prisons, and only one new university.*

Source: Ambrosio, T. & Schiraldi, V., "Trends in State Spending, 1987-1995", Executive Summary-February 1997 (Washington DC: The Justice Policy Institute, 1997).

California state government expenditures on prisons increased 30% from 1987 to 1995, while spending on higher education decreased by 18%.

Source: National Association of State Budget Officers, 1995 State Expenditures Report (Washington DC: National Association of State Budget Officers, 1996).

"In 1999 the United States spent a record $147 billion for police protection, corrections, and judicial and legal activities. The Nation's expenditure for operations and outlay of the justice system increased 309% from almost $36 billion in 1982. Discounting inflation, that represents a 145% increase in constant dollars."

Source: Gifford, Sidra Lea, US Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Justice Expenditure and Employment in the United States, 1999 (Washington, DC: US Dept. of Justice, February 2002), p. 1.

"The total number of State and Federal inmates grew from 400,000 in 1982 to nearly 1,300,000 in 1999. This was accompanied by the opening of over 600 State and at least 51 Federal correctional facilities. The number of local jail inmates also tripled, from approximately 200,000 in 1982 to 600,000 in 1999. Adults on probation increased from over 1.3 to nearly 3.8 million persons. Overall corrections employment more than doubled from nearly 300,000 to over 716,000 during this period."

Source: Gifford, Sidra Lea, US Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Justice Expenditure and Employment in the United States, 1999 (Washington, DC: US Dept. of Justice, February 2002), p. 7.

For a more complete perspective, read Drug War Facts sections on Alcohol, Crack, Drug Use Estimates, Gateway Theory, Race and Prison, and Women.

Addictive Properties of DrugsAdolescents / Education & Prevention of Substance AbuseAlcoholAnnual Causes of DeathCivil and Human RightsCocaine and CrackCorruptionCrimeDrug CourtsDrug TestingDrug Use EstimatesEconomicsEcstasyEnvironmentFamiliesForfeitureGateway TheoryHempHeroinInterdictionInternationalMandatory MinimumsMarijuanaMedical MarijuanaMethadoneMethamphetamineThe MilitaryPain ManagementPregnancy and Substance UsePrisonRace and HIVRace and PrisonSyringe ExchangeThe NetherlandsTreatmentWomen

Home Research Links and Materials for Journalists and Policy Makers Media Awareness Project News Archive Public Education and Advertising Campaign 
Effective National Drug Control Strategy Help promote Drug War Facts -- Put a Drug War Facts banner on YOUR site Links to Drug and Criminal Policy Organizations Real-Time Drug War Clock 
Copyright © 2000-2004, Common Sense for Drug Policy
Updated: Tuesday, 10-Feb-2004 12:57:36 PST ~ Accessed: 55052 times


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

If anyone read the above and doesn't think we have to change our drug policies in this country, they are simply unwilling to face the obvious. I too once thought the answer was to lock them up and teach them a lesson, but that strategy is obviously not working! I hope this provokes a little reconsideration. There are always going to be a few people in society Ron that don't grow up, don't quit using drugs or alcohol as a crutch but by far most recreational users of pot do not end up loser addicts. I would bet that between the ages of 20 and 50 nine out of 10 people have experimented with it. Most of them have grown out of doing stupid things, pot smoking was just one of those things. Being thrown in prison kicked out of school ect. does more harm to them than the pot ever would.


----------



## Fetch (Mar 1, 2002)

http://www.tonydean.com/issues2.html?sectionid=4725


----------



## Fetch (Mar 1, 2002)

Tony Dean Outdoors
Issues
Why Doesn't He Remember Us?

Editor's Note: A friend passed along the following, and I thought regular visitors would get a kick out of it.

"According to Professor Joseph Olson of Hamline University School of Law in St. Paul, Minnesota, these are the square miles of land won by the two major party presidential candidates during the 2002 general election:

Al Gore: 580,000 acres 
George W. Bush: 22,457,000 acres

Many of us are left wondering what the president who owes his election to people who live in wide open spaces is doing to keep faith with those people and the land on which they live and recreate."


----------



## headhunter (Oct 10, 2002)

GOLDY, NO I'm not in college. that was back in 93'.....(ouch!!) And I DID learn alot about Budweiser back in 93 too !!!! I'm actually a Scholar in the area of liquid education, so look out , I know my beer facts.

I just tend to agree with Matt and Bob on the drug issue. BECAUSE, as Bob said, If they make prostitution legal Goldy? does that mean you will scrap all your morals and spend that $50 on laptime instead of a new dollhouse for your little girl??? HELL NO. Of course not. I'm sure we agree on that one!!

So, let the space case tattooed idiot *** long haired losers that want to drown themselves in drugs and waste their life DO IT. Good for them!!! It will still be cheaper on us the taxpayers checkbooks.........Rather than spending it on Prison space, ( about 50% is related to drugs) ANY QUESTIONS??

BUD LIGHT/JACK DANIELS/POT/METH. SAME CRAP, DIFFERENT NAME.


----------



## gaddyshooter (Oct 12, 2003)

Wow. Simply amazing. Bud Light and Jack Daniels the same as meth? You must not see many meth heads or crack heads where ever you live. Unfortunately I see a lot of them. That stuff messes people up. I have seen people not eat for 4-5 days on their "binges". I have also seen people who leave their childen in the house with nothing to eat for those same 4-5 days while there were out on their crack or meth binges. Definately not the same as Bud Light. Yeah, real good idea, lets make if where they can go down to the Quiktrip and pick some up whenever they want to.
Now I'll give ya the marijuana argument. At least it does have some medicinal purposes and there are not many people out giving blow jobs or having sex (hence the name crack whore) with nasty drug dealers to get another joint like they do with crack or meth.


----------



## Robert A. Langager (Feb 22, 2002)

Bobm,

You and I are in 100% total agreement on this one! :beer:

But that goes without saying.

What's the shortest word in the english language?

RC


----------



## headhunter (Oct 10, 2002)

OK, you got me there, Meth and Bud Light are not in the same category, buy they all alter your mind, and all hurt you if taken to extremes. Let the burn outs burn out on there own.


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

Robert thanks, I'm sure there is a lot of things we agree on, next time we have one of our meetings I'll scrape up an extra sheet and hood for you :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:  The drug thing is just something most people haven't really considered from all the angles, whee they do they just have to admit what we are doing now needs to be changed. You'll find that people that are quick to call the user and a criminal change their minds rapidly when the criminal is their child, then treatment and counseling look like the more logical way.....funny isn't it


----------



## Matt Jones (Mar 6, 2002)

gaddyshooter said:


> Wow. Simply amazing. Bud Light and Jack Daniels the same as meth? You must not see many meth heads or crack heads where ever you live. Unfortunately I see a lot of them. That stuff messes people up.


I agree that Meth and alcohol are obviously two very different drugs that alter people in different ways. However, Alcohol is one of the worst drugs out there. I've seen people do things that are absolutely insane while being drunk, just look at how many problems in this country could be attributed to alcohol? Maybe we should ban alcohol so all the drunk low-lifes out there will stay at home and take care of their kids instead of going to the bar. :roll: Oh wait, been there done that...it didn't work. At the very least marijuana should be legalized in the U.S. All that crap about it being a gateway drug is bunk...alcohol is by far and away the BIGGEST gateway drug there is.

As for prostitution, this is the current way it works in this country...You have some lowlife Pimp beating women and selling them out to whoever he can (often times dealing drugs as well). The women, or whores, are constantly in danger and usually doing drugs themselves. They're not taking care of themselves and are spreading diseases to their 'clients.' Currently prostitution is a bane on society, and ONLY because it's illegal does it have to be this way.

Then look at parts of Nevada where it's legal. The girls are safe from pimps and are tested for diseases. They're not on drugs and are well taken care of. Everyone wins. The girls are safe, the clients are now safe and you eliminate the piece of **** pimp from the equation taking a means of making money away from a known criminal entity.

Goldy, I still don't see why you can't just teach your child right from wrong instead of having the government make that decision for them??? You'd rather see a bunch of other people suffer and have diseases spread under today's status quo than making prostitution legal and having everyone be safe because you think junior, and others, will become regulars at the local whore house. That's a pretty damn weak argument if you ask me. It sounds a lot like the argument the liberals use to ban guns...that people are too irresponsible to make choices for themselves so the government should make it for them. Simply because a couple idiots are irresponsible they think no one should have the freedom to make their own decisions. Sounds pretty similar to your reasoning, but guess what? There's ALWAYS going to be a couple of irresponsible idiots out there, that's a fact that will never, and can never be changed.

And just for arguments sake, what if I wanted to go and get a quickie every now and then...why the hell shouldn't I be able to? Because YOUR morals are against it??? Shouldn't that be MY decision and not yours?

...I guess I just think that I'm better at making decisions for myself than a bunch of bureaucrats are. :wink:


----------



## Militant_Tiger (Feb 23, 2004)

well there seems to be a few holes in your plan. How do you expect to get out of debt when you want taxes slashed? the money has to come from somewhere, and the majority of the money helping to keep the debt in check is tax money. also it pays for ALL of the services that you use. unless you dont like the idea of having roads or police, or a hospital. Also, legalizing drugs is the single worst idea I have ever heard. what you fail to realize is that drugs and alcohol do not equate, they are not the same. drugs have a lasting effect on the body, alcohol doesnt. Also with prohibition the mafia gained money through the trafficing of alcohol through canada, true. however nearly all of them branched off from just the alcohol trade into many other methods of producing money and flourished on even after prohibition was canceled. all of the crime that drugs cause would still go on, as they have many many other methods of producing funds, the war on that would still go on. you would not have changed the crime that they cause, just the name. if you feel better with a war on inner city crime than a war on drugs go ahead and think that, but a rose by any other name still smells just like a rose. Also, the worst thing that you could do to get the country out of debt is to have a generation of vegetables because they could all get their hands on narcotics. you want taxes slashed yet you dont mind paying the taxes for the welfare, which you dont want, which would pay for the druggies who couldnt work for themselves. your entire plan contradicts itself. please rethink what you've said.

Tiger


----------



## Goldy's Pal (Jan 6, 2004)

Matt Jones said:


> And just for arguments sake, what if I wanted to go and get a quickie every now and then...why the hell shouldn't I be able to? Because YOUR morals are against it??? Shouldn't that be MY decision and not yours?
> 
> ...I guess I just think that I'm better at making decisions for myself than a bunch of bureaucrats are. :wink:


When I have this exact conversation with my 17 year old, I would like to have a leg to stand on. Wouldn't you?? Do whatever you want, I don't give a sh*t, and I don't think you do either. I don't agree with you, so whatever.


----------



## zogman (Mar 20, 2002)

Tiger'
You can't tax this nation into prosperity, Some famous Democrate said that . Help me out Bob.
We need to cut spending on wasteful pork barrel, feel good, warm fuzzy waste.


----------



## adokken (Jan 28, 2003)

Please don't tell me that I have to quit drinking Jack Danials, here I have been giving good bourbon credit for me hunting and fishing at age 79, :beer:


----------



## Militant_Tiger (Feb 23, 2004)

as i said, taxes also account for all of the public services which we use. it also pays for the people who did the legalized drugs who are now on welfare. its redundant, henceforth we cant legalize drugs


----------



## Dano2 (Oct 8, 2002)

HHEY, I just got killed tonight at work becasue some moron didn't hook the chain up right on a chasis and it fell on my head while I was welding, I asked the idiot what the hell he was thinking, and he told me in his stuper, oh, sorry, I've been smoking too much weed at work tonight, or maybe it was the crack.
:eyeroll:

the only thing bad about BUD is it gives you raunchy farts

anyone have a hit of acid uke:


----------



## gaddyshooter (Oct 12, 2003)

79 and still hunting and fishing  Congrats and here's to hopefully many more. :beer:


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

Everytime there is a reduction in taxe rates there is an increase in business activity and then a increase tax revenues to the federal government. ( unfortunately the damn congress can't wait to squander the extra money on pork barrel projects but thats a different issue)
Legalizing pot and decriminalizing hard drugs will not increase drug usage. The people today that want to use drugs have no problem at all getting them and are using them while contirbuting to the crimanal elements profits, which if we get that out of the picture will eliminate much of the societal costs associated with drug use. 
The Savings could be WHICH WOULD BE REALIZEDcould then be used for treatment and education to keep people from using. Legalization DOES NOT MEAN ENCOURAGING drug use. Its just a much more efficient way to treat the problem. YOUR PREMIS THAT MORE PEOPLE WOULD USE IS NOT LOGICAL THEY CAN GET THEM NOW WITH NO REAL PROBLEM SO ALL THE CURRENT DRUGS LAWS DO IS INCREASE THE COSTS TO ALL OF SOCIETY, THEY HAVE NO AFFECT ON THE NUMBERS OF PEOPLE THAT ARE USING. 
1)MAKE THE PRICE SO LOW THERE IS NO PROFIT FOR THE CRIMINALS
USE THE SAVING FROM LAW ENFORCEMENT AND THE HUGE REDUCTION IN CRIME BECAUSE A LARGE PART OF VIOLENT CRIME IS PROFIT MOTIVATED IN THE DRUG BUSINESS AND USE THE MONEY FOR TREATMENT OPTIONS.
2) FREE ALL THE NON- VIOLENT PEOPLE THAT ARE SITTING IN JAILS AT OUR EXPENSE AND ARE A DANGER TO NOONE AND USE THE SAVINGS 
FOR TREATMENT OPTIONS.
3) USE POT AS A STEPPING STONE AND FREE ALTERNATIVE TO HARD DRUGS FOR ADDICTS IN THESE TREATMENT CENTERS.
4)STOP DOING THE SAME THING AND EXPECTING DIFFERENT RESULTS! DRUG USE IS A PART OF OUR SOCIETY AND THE METHOD (THE SO CALLED DRUG WAR) WE USE TO TREAT THE PROBLEM FOR 40 YEARS HAS NOT WORKED THAT WOULD BE OBVIOUS TO ANYONE WITH EVEN A OUNCE A SENSE. SO WHY NOT TRY A DIFFERENT APPROACH??????

I'LL TELL YOU WHY THEY DON'T
1) POLITICIANS ARE AFRAID TO TELL THE TRUTH ABOUT THIS ISSUE BECAUSE THERE IS SO MUCH MISINFORMATION ABOUT IT AND THEY WON'T DO ANYTHING THAT MIGHT JEOPARDIZE THEIR RE-ELECTION EVEN IF THEY KNOW ITS THE RIGHT THING TO DO.
2) POLITICIANS HAVE NO INCENTIVE TO ACTUALLY CURE THE PROBLEM BECAUSE A HUGE PART OF THE GOVERNMENT BEAURACRACY IS ESTABISHED BY THE "WAR ON DRUGS" AND IF IT WAS TRULY WON THEY WOULD NOT HAVE AS MUCH POWER. 
3)ALCHOL AND CIGARETTE LOBBYISTS DON'T WANT THE COMPETITION.
4) NORMAL CITIZENS LIKE US DON'T DEMAND CHANGE, LOOK AT THE IGNORANCE ABPOUT THIS ISSUE JUST ON THIS WEB SITE AND MULTIPLY IT BE THE WHOLE COUNTRY AND THERE YOU GO.
5) BY THE WAY ALCOHOL AND TOBACCO KILL THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE A YEAR IN THIS COUNTRY CRACK AND AND HEROIN KILL HUNDREDS, YET WE TREAT ACOHOL PROBLEMS AND CIGARETTE ADDICTION AS A 
MEDICAL PROBLEM AND OTHER DRUGS AS A CRIME ( TELL ME WHAT SENSE THE DISTINCTION MAKES????????????)


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

THE WAY I TYPE when I don't proofread you would think I smoke POT  
sorry for some of the errors!


----------



## Goldy's Pal (Jan 6, 2004)

Sure, why not legalize the sh*t. As an expectant parent I welcome even more of the challenge.  Sure when it boils right down to it the kid needs to make his or her own choice, no arguement there. But as I've stated a hundred times, why make it any more available and cheaper than it has to be?? Oh yeah, I'm gonna have parenting skills!! you can bet your *** on that. If my kid screws up and takes drugs at least I can say that I've saved some tax dollars on the war against drugs. That will be worth it. As for prostitution, if I have a son he will have lady skills like his old man anyway, no need to pay when he can get it tax free!! 8) :toofunny:


----------



## Matt Jones (Mar 6, 2002)

People that are addicted to alcohol are just as much of a problem as people addicted to drugs...if not more so. An addict is an addict, and alcohol destroys a persons body and life just as bad as any other drug when they're addicted (again, if not more so). Just like most drinkers only do so on occasion and drink responsibly when they do, there's a lot of people who've tried drugs who do the same. The notion that every drug user is an addict is simply ludicrous; look at the statistics...if all these users were addicts this country would be a mess and FULL of addicts. However most aren't, just like most people who drink aren't alcoholics.

I'm a realist and I realize that hard drugs will never be legalized in this country, and I'll admit that I would have my doubts on what would happen if they were. However I think marijuana should definitely be legalized. I also think the legal penalties for drug posession (on all drugs) should be lowered significantly. So now you know where I stand, I can now shut up. 

I would just like to make sure you guys realize that I was obviously going out on a limb with some of my examples to make my point. I condone neither drug use or prostitution, but I do see legalizing them as a possible means to a better way of controlling the two problems. You're not going to see me lighting up a joint cruising the town for a hooker anytime soon :lol: ...and I hope that no one got that impression while I was attempting to make my point. I realize that during these discussions I can sometimes push things too far.

So I hope that I didn't offend anyone, if I did I apologize as that was never my intent. I can see where/why everyone was coming from with their opinions and respect them, even if they were different than my own. I was merely trying to state my own opinion and back up why I stand where I do. You know what they say about opinions anyways  ...so with that I'm done with this topic. :beer:


----------



## Fetch (Mar 1, 2002)

I was just going to post the Bill of No Rights but I included the whole story

It is a good thought

http://www.snopes.com/language/document/norights.htm


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

Goldy, I'm a parent of 5 kids and I certainly don't want anyone to take any drugs. I don't smoke anything I don't drink alcohol , not one drop not ever, I don't speed or break any other laws. I work hard and I take care of and love my wife and kids (and dogs :lol: ). So what is "Saint BOBs' " point. Its the example *you*set as a parent and your attitudes about these issues that will determine what your childrens attitudes are towards drug use and other societal problems. Thats why I don't do any of these things *my example is without question the determining factor in how my kids will turn out *and as soon as I realized that I began to try my best to set a good one. 
Remember that the next time you open a beer in front of one of your kids, kids are like sponges and *its what you do *not what you tell them to do that will determine how they turn out. If your kid ever does experiment with drugs and there are no guarantees he won't ( because he will get exposed to them) answer me honestly do you want him to go to jail for it or do you want him to get treatment and couseling? Don't dodge the question those are your two choices and your only two so tell us which one you would select.


----------



## Militant_Tiger (Feb 23, 2004)

Bobm, i seriously suggest that you take the time to read and comprehend the posts above before arguing. case in point, as i said drugs account for only one part of the criminals income, they are spread among many many other activities which create revenue. please thouroughly read what has been said.


----------



## Goldy's Pal (Jan 6, 2004)

Bobm said:


> answer me honestly do you want him to go to jail for it or do you want him to get treatment and couseling? Don't dodge the question those are your two choices and your only two so tell us which one you would select.


Put me on the spot. I don't mind. "Tough love" Bob. Jail time to think about it and treatment to straighten out. That's my honest answer. Matt, no hard feelings here. Steelheads don't always have to swim in the same direction. :beer:


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

Militant Tiger I read your post thoroughly it doesn't hold water. I'll take your points one at a time
1)cutting taxes stimulates the economy resulting in an increase inactual dollars of revenue to the government every time its tried every time.
2) drugs and alchol are exactly the same they both drugs are bad and they both have a lasting effect one the body and alcohols is worse than pot. The only arbitrary difference is one is legal
3)Criminal have other activities so whats your point. Drugs are the MOST PROFITABLE portion of their activites and the Drug war (you love so much) is keeping those profits extremely high so you are financing their other activites, my suggestions would take that profit away! I'm not suggesting being soft on criminals. You take away their principal source of revenue and they will dry up just like any other enterprise!
4) you claim all the other crime "caused by drugs would still go on", YOUR WRONG all of the other crimes associated with drugs are because drug users need to commit crimes to get the money to pay exorbitantly high prices for drugs that are a result of them being illegal ( which I've stated repeatedly but because you don't read the posts you don't understand this)
5) taxes could be "slashed" as you say and there sould still be money for these treatment programs. And your premis that the country would be full of druggies is hogwash *every country that has legalized pot and decriminalized hard drugs has seen a drop in drug usage *because they started treating people instead of locking them up in a revolving door in and out of jail never ending waste of money.
6*) THE BIGGEST POINT IN MY FAVOR IS THAT 40 YEARS OF THE CURRENT POLICY HAS NOT GOT US ANYWHERE *DRUG USE AS A PERCENTAGE OF THE POPULATION IS ABOUT THE SAME
DRUGS ARE STILL READILY AVAILABLE AND MORE POTENT. 
DAMN THIS IS FRUSTRATING LETS KEEP DOING THE SAME DAMN THING EVEN THOUGH IT HAS GOT TO BE OBVIOUS TO THE DIMMEST WITS OUT THERE IT DOESN'T WORK....... WELL MAYBE NOT!


----------



## zack (Oct 17, 2003)

Legalize drugs? What are you on? If anyone can get that done, you may as well make suicide an accepted practice! Then I can live with myself for not seeing the drug abuse in my daughter early enough. Talk politics, but don't push this BS into the political limelight. 
Lets get back to the real issues.

zack


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

Goldy while hes thinking about it in prison what else will he be exposed to what beneficail thing do you learn in prison. I ask you the following three questions
1) who did he hurt other than himself?
2) whose rights did he violate?
3) whose property did he take?
the answer to all three questions is no ones! *IF the answer to these three questions is negative than no matter what the person should not go to jail!!!!!!!!!! *We shouldn't lock people up because they do something we don't approve of or know is self destructive we should help them.
And to be truthful while I do think you are honest now, if you were really facing the question I bet your heart and mind would go to the treatment....I hope


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

Zack try not to tell us what to discuss, if you want to talk hunting go to a hunting thread, this is the hot topic section and politics certainly is a hot topic and an important one. You're obviously unable to understand the link from drug policy to the crime rate, unless you think crime solution doesn't belong in the political disussion either.....otherwise make your case for your position instead of telling us what we can talk about 
thanks


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

One thing thats Zacks reaction clearly illustrates is the typical Knee jerk reaction to reasoned discussion of the drug policy issues.


----------



## Goldy's Pal (Jan 6, 2004)

Bob: If I don't answer the questions the way you would want me to, then why even ask them to begin with. :lol: Answer your own questions. You aren't going to change my mind anyway, so why bother. :lol:


----------



## zack (Oct 17, 2003)

Bob 
Although I agree with you stands on politics in general, we have to look at how law abiding are the drug users? They are not in jail for using one time. They are in jail,probably for a felony. 99% of drug addicts can't afford the drug they are addicted to. Just because it is legal they will all of a sudden decide, I'm gonna get a job and support my habbit. What we really need is some hard a$$ judges to throw more of these people in prison and try to keep them clean that way. Treatment is good if the audience is there on their own. Treatment, when they are locked up, will maybe give them a clearer view of the term, freedom of choice. Wrong choice, no freedom. I'm affraid I've become quite cold to the term leniency. Until you live it, don't tell the one's that have how it should be done.
zack


----------



## zack (Oct 17, 2003)

Bob 
Good quick answers. How about this for knee jerk reactions.
Build more damn prisons. Pi$$ money away on that instead of coddling every damn lawbreaker out there. As a matter of fact that would put more construction companies to work and then we would need to make sure we have enough employees. That idea would even make the liberals happy.
zack


----------



## Militant_Tiger (Feb 23, 2004)

zack, that is a oddly communist way to approach things, and yet i think it has more promise than anything said thus far.

Tiger


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

Goldy :lol: :lol: You know I'm right but good try. I can tell you're at least thinking about what I've said, you'll come around  
Zack I'll try one more time,they commit the felony to get the money because drugs are expensive, why are they expensive because the drug policies in this country make them expensive.
The enormous amount of money we spend on prisons and the drug war could be spent to help people like your daughter or do you think she should be thrown in prison and throw away the key? 
Go back a few posts and take a look at the # of people that we already lock up. More than any other country in the world
*I have a novel thought instead of building more prisons lets build more hospitals to help these people and more schools to get them pointed back to being useful citizens. Your construction workers could do fine with those jobs * and your daughter would be better off being rehabilitated instead of rotting in a jailcell. 
If you've been following my posts and politics you can bet I"m not soft on real criminals but I'm not going to throw some kid in prison for something a huge percentage of the people in this country does every weekend pot or alcohol they're both drugs and both widely used every weekend. I got you both you just don't want to admit it which is OK as long as I have you thinking outside the box I'm happy :lol: :lol:


----------



## Goldy's Pal (Jan 6, 2004)

BOB:

:eyeroll: :eyeroll: :eyeroll: :eyeroll: :eyeroll: :eyeroll:

I'm not givin' an inch on this one.

If the dealers are hanging around schools now,(I'm refering to the High school and middle schools) just imagine how many more would be!! How are you going to deal with that?? You have kids Bob, why would you want them to face even more pressure?? I think I'd just stamp the kids forehead with a big *NO!!!* before they left the house so they wouldn't get asked five times a day. uke:

Here's a little project for ya Bob. Break it down to how much per. household it costs for me to fight this drug war. Then I'll tell you if I change my mind.

I'll save you the time.

It Doesn't matter to me. :eyeroll:

I only agree that something else needs to be done. But this proposal is nothing short of pure scary.


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

Goldy I don't want to be offensive but are you able to understand that if there is no profit in dealing drugs there won't be any dealers. You just can't seem to get what I'm saying. Make drugs so cheap that they can't make a living selling them. *Does anybody else understand what I'm trying to say here?* Do your kids have people approach them 5 times a day at school to sell them beer?( a legal and regulated drug) no they don't and why might you ask, because the legally licensed "dealers" IE liquor stores have too much to risk (losing their license) for the small amount of profit selling to kids represents. In holland pot coffee shops don't sell to minors any more than bars here do and for the same reasons.
Goldy do you have any clue how much drug use is available to kids in school today all schools have dealers in their mist because of the money that can be made. 
*Would some of the young guys on this site tell him that his kids will get approached because the drug trade exists purely because its profitable. *No one would fool with it if pot was .02 per ounce and it easily could be, its no more expensive to grow than a bag of lawn clippings what would be the motive to be dealers.
You have to grasp the whole program I'm outlining not just bits and pieces. *I would also like some of the college guys on this site to tell some of the older and obviously naive people on this site how commonly available pot is in highschools and colleges. I would also like to here a guess from some of the college age guys what percentage of college age people are occasional users at parties on weekends (not daily potheads but recreational users)* and what percentage of people by their sophmore years of college have tried pot. 
I know when I was in college in the early 70s that # was in the very high 90%plus. And almost all of those people grew out of it and are productive individuals. In the company I work at every engineer we have and all the salesmen did it in college and they are successful highly motivated people that no longer do nonsense like this because they grew up. This is not to condone pot smoking it its just stating facts, and that the claimed dangers are exaggerated and slowing reforms in the way this problem is treated. In the 1100 plus people in my Army company I knew of only one person that didn't smoke pot including officers up to Captain. Maybe it was just the times but I believe that most of the productive people in this country have at least used it for an time in their 20's including Bill Clinton ( who in his usaul dishonesty claimed he didn't inhale ( yeah right)), Al Gore, The current resident of the white house and I'll bet most if not all of the congressman under 55 but none of them will address this problem with any honesty and we all pay the price. Some one has to do it and we need to demand they do.


----------



## Goldy's Pal (Jan 6, 2004)

Bob: We're in hot topics I don't care if you're offensive. It's not like I'm not hearing what you say, it's a lot different these days than in the 80's when I was in school. I don't want to deal with this stuff being legal. Plain and simple. It's hard to hear the college guys talk about the way it is today. This drug issue is not something I look forward to. But I'll do whatever it takes to keep it as far from my family as possible and I don't think making it legal will do that. I'm whipped on this Bob, leave me alone. :lol: :beer:


----------



## Militant_Tiger (Feb 23, 2004)

bob, i hate to sound like a broken record but your logic is so full of holes you could use it to strain pasta. Druggies steal so that they can feed their habit, because drugs are expensive. If drugs were legal, it would still cost money to buy. Drugs are well known to make people lazy, and in general not want to work. now if they want to buy a joint that was 5 dollars, and is now 2 because its legal, how do you figure that they will pay for it? they will just go rob someone to pay for it then too. sure they will have to rob fewer times for more joints, but the problem is that someone is still getting robbed. And, how do you figure that a buisness such as a drug store which would sell these drugs in your magical wonderland could undercut the drug dealers in the schools who pay no rent, taxes, or otherwise. Also, im not sure who said something about "name one country in which drugs are legal and there is more crime" or something to that effect, i say name one country that has legalized drugs that isint in a state of turmoil right now

Tiger's :2cents:


----------



## james s melson (Aug 19, 2003)

libertarian vote = wasted vote


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

Miltitant tiger my logic is rock solid and you apparently can't read. Do you steal to buy beer? My point is that pot use is widespread and already widely accepted in this country and has been for thirty years yet "officially" we are still treating users like lepers. Its a waste of time and money to lock up these people. There are a lot of people that you interact with on a daily basis that smoke pot recreationally and pay for it the same way that you pay for things they have jobs. You paint everybody that uses pot as a total drugged out addict which is as ridiculous as saying everybody that drinks is laying around drunk all day everyday. Pot use is just like alcohol use some people use commoon sense and a very few are in the same league as alcoholics. Talk about logic that has holes in it.
*The point is the way we treat the drug issue does not work! The problem has not improved in fact its got worse yet you insist in pouring money down a rathole doing the same damn thing " the drug war".*
Maybe thats the way you handle life if some method doesn't work you do it that way again next time, based on the stupidity of your responses it wouldn't suprise me. :******: *This attitude my friends is exactly why our country is in the mess it is we all see problems, we all realize whats currently happening to solve those problems doesn't work, and yet we do nothing to change our approach for fear of being branded radical, or soft on crime, or not politically correct. *Throughout history people that had new ideas or challenged the dogma of the times were abused and then honored later when it turned out they were correct!


----------



## Goldy's Pal (Jan 6, 2004)

Bob: Why is it that everything you say is rock solid, and guys like myself who disagree with you just write pointless dribble?? Read my posts again on this topic. You can't tell me that some of the points that I make don't have some form of logic behind them. Maybe you could understand someone elses point of view just a little.


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

Goldys Pal do your read what I write, that post was specifically responding to Miltant tigers crack about holes in my logic not to you. 
I do understand your views and as a young father I had similar ones but after spending a great deal of time reading and considering those viewpoints I've changed my mind. I like you(I think) was fearful that my kids would be exposed to the drug thing and wanted to prevent it at all cost. Its a complex and unfortunately emotional issue. 
It should be obvious to anyone that what we are currently doing is not working and I guess I get frustrated because its apparent to everyone that the problem is a growing one that isn't going away and after 40 years of failure of the lock em up and throw away the key approach all I here is more of the same (Tough love ect). Believe me I love kids yours and mine and if we don't change this failed policy what have we done for them? I've been taking a lot of heat but haven't got any new ideas just lock them up, lock them up, lock them up.........so whos point of view is no one hearing? I mean no one any harm or disrespect but after 40 years how much longer are you willing to continue on the same failed path?


----------



## zack (Oct 17, 2003)

Bob
My tendancy is to agree with you on the pot issue. It is a recreational drug in everyones eyes today. My real issues lie in the hard,addictive drugs on the market today. Meth is a home grown problem. Highly addictive and basically a poison. I watched my girl "graduate" from three treatment centers. Two which are quite well known in Minnesota, but to no avail, she was back on meth within 2 weeks each time. She was one of the first to enjoy New England, ND country club. This time she was a captive audience for 1 year, the longest year of my life. They have a very good treatment center, but it is still jail. After six months she realized what drugs had done to her and her life. And then six months to figure out a plan to fight the devil in its home, her body. 18 months clean and counting off each day. I feel more centers like this are a very good option to the coddling centers she visited before. I realize this is only my opinion and you probably won't agree, but I am pushed to the direction which seemed to work 1 person. 
zack


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

All drugs including alcohol and cigarettes are a poison the basic point of all my posts is that if we directed the money we now "invest " in failed law enforcement. We could afford treatment centers to really help these people. I sincerely hope your daughter is successful and I'm sure both you and her realize that depends on her desire to actaully get off drugs, Its entirely up to her. I just want to create a system that supports these peoples efforts to get off instead of throwing them in jail. I'm not meaning coddling them, and I think it would be reasonable to put hard drug users in a hospital like setting that they couldn't leave until they had been thru some sort of real program( not some touchy feely politically correct nonsense) but a real program to educate and treat both their mental and physical addiction illness.
Legalization would provide that funding, if someone who didn't commit any crime other then being an alcoholic(a drug) was sentenced to a long prison term in this country just because they were found drunk three times( good old three times your out logic, or lack of it) we would rightly recognize it as a terrible thing, why not give the same compassion to other drug users. I just don't understand it.


----------



## Militant_Tiger (Feb 23, 2004)

the sad thing is that you equate pot to beer, as if they are the same. about 1/3 of the people that i went to elementary school with are now in high school total drug addicts. I know what it does to people, and what they will do to pay for it. Most of them steal from their parents to pay for it. This is of course just one step down from robbery. you have obviously not seen what it does to people and therefore you really have no place speaking as if you do. I've said what i ment and i ment what I said, i think thats from horton. Finally, Drugs are bad, and bad things shouldnt be legal.

Tiger


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

Thats ok Militant Tiger when I was in highschool I was sure about everything also :lol: , and you're correct drugs are bad especially for young people, really everyone, so stick to your guns. 
I never said drugs were good by the way I said our approach to how we treat the problem needs to be changed. And I never would legalize them for kids. But you made my point lots of kids already are exposed to them so the current system is obviously not accomplishing what we want it to do because 30 years ago kids were not using drugs in grade school.


----------

