XPost: mi.misc, rec.drugs.cannabis, alt.drugs.pot   
   XPost: alt.politics   
   From: estasiak@att.net   
      
   > J.D. Baldwin wrote   
   >> Ed Stasiak wrote   
   >>   
   >> IMO the reason pot (and other drugs) won't be legalized/   
   >> decriminalized in the U.S. is because of the pro-drug crowds   
   >> insistence on labeling drug addiction as a disease and not a choice.   
   >   
   > But we already have a pretty good model for decriminalization of an   
   > undisputably harmful substance:  ethyl alcohol.  Addiction to ETOH is   
   > still a "disease" and yet I can go right down the street and purchase   
   > an effectively unlimited amount of the stuff.   
      
   Not that I disagree with you but for the average American, booze is   
   booze while pot is DRUGS.   
      
   The vast majority of people grow up watching family members having   
   a beer or a drink and think nothing of it, pot (and especially other drugs)   
   are part of a whole different "culture".   
      
   >> As long as pro-drug groups tie legalization to Euro-style welfare   
   >> for addicts,   
   >   
   > I haven't really seen that.   
      
   You can see a variation of it in this very thread, with this comment   
   from Phil Stovell;   
      
   "Tax them [drug users] and invest the income in health services."   
      
   Why does the tax generated from the legal sale of various drugs have   
   to go to health services?  Why can't those dollars go into the general   
   fund just like the sales tax from lawn mowers, candy bars, etc, with   
   tax payers getting a tax cut?   
      
   Both the pro and anti-drug people are missing the point; I don't want   
   my tax dollars pissed away on _either_ of these programs!   
      
   > You know we had that "Euro-style welfare" in this country, right?  But   
   > drug addiction was dropped as a "disability" according to the federal   
   > rules back during the second Clinton Administration, and we haven't   
   > been subsidizing that (directly) for nearly ten years.   
      
   The U.S. has/had tax funded rehab programs, (which I also kinda   
   oppose) what I'm talking about is the line of reasoning frequently   
   heard from pro-drug groups;   
      
   "The Drug War costs bazillions of dollars and is a waste of money,   
   we should legalize/decriminalize drugs and instead _use that money_   
   to support addicts."   
      
   I fully agree with the first half of that statement but if we're going   
   to stop funding the Drug War, why the hell would I want my hard   
   earned tax dollars going to provide drug addicts with free drugs,   
   a place to live, etc, etc, etc?   
      
   Many on the pro-drug side are no better then those on the anti-drug   
   side; their only interest is in getting their hands on my tax dollars.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)