XPost: uk.legal, uk.politics.drugs   
   From: jygffv568@jogrtyhf456v.com   
      
   "johannes"  wrote in message   
   news:49DF30B5.EE5BB2AF@sizefi8376536735tter.com...   
    > Pete nospam Zakel wrote:   
   > > Remove prohibition and standard market forces will result in competition   
   and   
   > > lower prices, and regulation will ensure that people aren't selling talcum   
   > > powder or rat poison when the package says "cocaine".  Cost of enforcing   
   > > non-enforceable laws will go down, and tax revenue will go up.   
   >   
   > So lower prices will result in more drug users; more drug addicts who expects   
   > to be cared for by everybody else.   
      
   It will result in lower use, through separating the hard and soft drug   
   markets; by making drugs available to anyone who wants to use   
   them - basically people who are using them already; it will reduce   
   procurement crime, if addicts can get their drugs on the NHS; and   
   it will reduce or eliminate the issue of overdoses by standardizing   
   the content.   
      
   > Or will drugs be taxed to prevent overuse,   
   > in which case drug users will continue to steal and burgle to fund their   
   > addictive habit. Which is it?   
      
   Neither, that is a disingenuous argument.   
      
   Cigarettes and alcohol are taxed, but neither generate prostitution   
   or burglaries specifically as procurement crimes.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)