XPost: talk.politics.misc, alt.politics   
   From: yodasbud@mnsi.net   
      
   On Tue, 31 Mar 2009 20:31:12 GMT, bw@barrk.net (B1ackwater) wrote:   
      
   >By Jack Cafferty   
   >Special to CNN   
   >   
   >Editor's note: Jack Cafferty is the author of a new book, "Now or   
   >Never: Getting Down to the Business of Saving Our American Dream." He   
   >provides commentary on CNN's "The Situation Room" daily from 4 to 7   
   >p.m. ET. You can also visit Jack's Cafferty File blog.   
   >   
   >Jack Cafferty says America's effort to prohibit illegal drugs doesn't   
   >work and should be rethought.   
   >   
   >. . .   
   >   
   >NEW YORK (CNN) -- Here's something to think about:   
   >   
   >How many police officers and sheriff's deputies are involved in   
   >investigating and solving crimes involving illegal drugs?   
      
   	So certain crimes should be legalized if there are a lot of   
   that type going on?   
      
   >And   
   >arresting and transporting and interrogating and jailing the suspects?   
   >   
   >How many prosecutors and their staffs spend time prosecuting drug   
   >cases? How many defense lawyers spend their time defending drug   
   >suspects?   
   >   
   >How many hours of courtroom time are devoted to drug trials? How many   
   >judges, bailiffs, courtroom security officers, stenographers, etc.,   
   >spend their time on drug trials?   
   >   
   >How many prison cells are filled with drug offenders? And how many   
   >corrections officers does it take to guard them? How much food do   
   >these convicts consume?   
      
   	Put 'em to work on road gangs then.   
      
   >   
   >And when they get out, how many parole and probation officers does it   
   >take to supervise their release? And how many ex-offenders turn right   
   >around and do it again?   
   >   
   >So how's this war on drugs going?   
      
   	It was never a sincere effort anyway. They put "mules" away   
   for life and leave big dealers alone. Changing that sort of thing is   
   the solution.   
      
   >   
   >Someone described insanity as doing the same thing over and over and   
   >expecting a different result each time. That's a perfect description   
   >of the war on drugs.   
   >   
   >The United States is the largest illegal drug market in the world.   
   >Americans want their weed, crack, cocaine, heroin, whatever. And   
   >they're willing to pay big money to get it.   
   >   
   >The drug suppliers are only too happy to oblige. The Mexican drug   
   >cartels now have operations in 230 American cities. That's 230   
   >American cities!   
   >   
   >And we're not just talking about border towns, but places such as   
   >Anchorage, Alaska; Boston, Massachusetts; Atlanta, Georgia; and   
   >Billings, Montana.   
      
   	It ought to be pretty easy then to weed out the Mexican gang   
   members from the rest of the population...   
      
   >They're everywhere. And they don't just bring   
   >drugs, but violence and crime as well -- lots of it at no extra   
   >charge.   
   >   
   >They have been able to infiltrate those 230 cities because we have not   
   >bothered to secure our borders.   
      
   	That's right, and not because drugs are not "legal".   
      
   >In addition to illegal aliens who come   
   >here to work and avail themselves of our social programs, we have   
   >criminals from Mexico bringing drugs in, taking money and guns back,   
   >and recruiting American kids into their criminal enterprises while   
   >they're here.   
   >   
   >What do you suppose the total price tag is for this failed war on   
   >drugs? One senior Harvard economist estimates we spend $44 billion a   
   >year fighting the war on drugs. He says if they were legal,   
   >governments would realize about $33 billion a year in tax revenue.   
      
   	...and how much more would they lose from some people's   
   increased consumption of said drugs?   
      
   >Net   
   >swing of $77 billion. Could we use that money today for something   
   >else? You bet your ass we could. Plus the cartels would be out of   
   >business. Instantly. Goodbye crime and violence.   
      
   	Nice try, no buy. If you think drug legalization would do   
   ANYTHING to reduce violence, then you're a bit crazy.   
      
   >   
   >If drugs were legalized, we could empty out a lot of our prison cells.   
   >People will use this stuff whether it's legal or not. Just like they   
   >do booze. And you could make the argument that in some cases alcohol   
   >is just as dangerous as some drugs. I know.   
   >   
   >Like I said ... something to think about. It's time.   
   >   
   >- - - - - - - -   
   >   
   >   
   >   Gee ... I guess he's the FIRST ONE who has thought about   
   >   this stuff ......   
   >   
   >   The 'drug war' continues because it's a MONEY MAKER ... and   
   >   I don't mean for the drug cartels.   
   >   
   >   That 44 gigabucks makes a lot of American special-interests   
   >   rich. How much goes to some politicians rother-in-law in the   
   >   prison-construction biz ? To the owner of for-profit prisons ?   
   >   To the companies that make all that 'cop stuff' needed to   
   >   continue the 'war' ? To the owners of drug-testing companies ?   
   >   To the excess cops and prosecutors and judges, staff, rehab   
   >   shrinks, parole officers, prison guards and whomever sells the   
   >   damned toilet paper to the prisons ?   
   >   
   >   How much gets kicked-back to those politicians via one route   
   >   or another ?   
   >   
   >   Oh yea, then there's the campaign donations from idiot soccer   
   >   moms and talibanistic puritan types who think they're doing   
   >   little Billy a big favor by making him a drug felon in a   
   >   cage rather than have him smoke a joint. There's always big   
   >   political profit in loosing the Righteous on the Sinners -   
   >   they're SO happy to do Gawds Work ... and persecuting Jews   
   >   is, well, so last century dontchaknow .....   
   >   
   >   Oh, and don't forget that SPECIAL puritanical branch, the   
   >   "so-last-century" boys. The 'war' expends most of its ammo   
   >   keeping the "poor" (you know who I mean) under the boot-heel   
   >   of the State - persecuted, downtrodden, dejected and safely   
   >   disenfranchised ... ie out of the voting booth. Oh, and   
   >   you get to SHOOT a lot of 'em for 'Driving While Black' too.   
   >   Gotta keep the underclass down - otherwise ...   
      
   	If you think drug legalization would mean more social justice,   
   then you've lost it, at least in this respect. This is just something   
   I'll have to agree to disagree with you about. You're still about the   
   smartest poster on this group.   
      
   >   
   >   The 'war' also has an interesting special use ... because   
   >   it justifies our govt meddling in the affairs of OTHER   
   >   governments. And then there's all that yummy 'interdiction'   
   >   money - Reagans genius - originally designed as an   
   >   alternative way to fund the 'Contras' after Iran/Contra   
   >   was exposed. What DOES happen to all that money once it   
   >   goes south of the border ? Nobody knows for sure. I wonder   
   >   how much of it gets kicked-back up this way ?   
   >   
   >   "Fighting drugs" has become a real INDUSTRY - one which   
   >   channels your 44 gigabuck into relatively few bulging   
   >   pockets. They profit, you and yours and the whole 'Free   
   >   Country' thing suffer.   
   >   
   >   The suffering doesn't end with the money either ... it's   
   >   in crime, violence, corruption and hundreds of thousands   
   >   of 'OK' people, who could have lived perfectly good lives,   
   >   processed into hardened criminals in our prisons - so we'll   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)