8d2d1d59   
   XPost: soc.veterans, talk.politics.misc   
      
   On Fri, 30 Jan 2009 13:17:21 -0800 (PST), M_P    
   wrote:   
      
   >On Jan 30, 2:59 pm, BE-VA  wrote:   
   >> On Thu, 29 Jan 2009 21:07:07 GMT, "Sid9"  wrote:   
   >> > wrote in message   
   >> >news:pnt3o45drlhjdlvv5ep82c6ie238pgarpf@4ax.com...   
   >> >> On Thu, 29 Jan 2009 10:16:49 -0800 (PST), M_P    
   >> >> wrote:   
   >> >>>On Jan 29, 11:44 am, "Sanders Kaufman"  wrote:   
   >> >>>> "M_P"  wrote in message   
   >> >>>>news:b395d8f0-2e48-41bc-9879-153c674f8c55@q30g2000prq.goo   
   legroups.com...   
   >> >>>> > On Jan 26, 5:04 pm, "Sanders Kaufman"  wrote:   
   >   
   >> >>>> >> > It certainly would put the drug lords out of business.   
   >>   
   >> >>>> >> No - it would just change who the drug lords are.   
   >> >>>> >> As long as Americans continue to shoot up and snort, there will be a   
   >> >>>> >> drug   
   >> >>>> >> lord marketing product to them.   
   >>   
   >> >>>> > "Drug lords" like Seagrams and Coors are much preferable to the kind   
   >> >>>> > of drug lords that prohibitions give us.   
   >>   
   >> >>>> Y'all start by saying that it would put the drug lords out of business.   
   >>   
   >> >>>That wasn't me, it was "no_...@void.nul".   
   >>   
   >> >>>> But you end up saying that it would just shift the business to your   
   >> >>>> *preferred* drug lords.   
   >>   
   >> >>>Preferred because on the evidence less likely to engage in shootouts   
   >> >>>with competitors and otherwise commit crimes that endanger the   
   >> >>>innocent.   
   >>   
   >> >>>> You guys waffle   
   >>   
   >> >>>We're not the same guy, so we're allowed to disagree.   
   >>   
   >> >>>> more than IHOP.   
   >>   
   >> >> Criminals adapt to what opportunities are in front of them. Removing   
   >> >> the prohibition of drugs for drug users will result only in criminals   
   >> >> finding another prohibited substance, activity, or thing, etc.   
   >>   
   >> >> Can anyone suggest what the next major currently prohibited area will   
   >> >> attract them to apply their entrepreneurial activities?   
   >>   
   >> >The "next" illegal enterprise is not the issue here.   
   >>   
   >> >The drug "war" is a failure in many ways.   
   >>   
   >> >Like alcohol prohibition it breeds lawlessness and contempt for the law.   
   >>   
   >> >It should be dealt with the same way alcohol is dealt with...regulate it   
   and   
   >> >tax it.   
   >>   
   >> Stupid liberal thinking. That's akin to promoting Russian Roulette for   
   >> cure of cancer.   
   >   
   >Ending alcohol Prohibition was stupid liberal thinking akin to   
   >promoting Russian Roulette for cure of cancer?   
      
   Relaxing drugs law would have to be preceded by hard core instructions   
   on haw to use addictive drugs responsibly. I suspect that there are   
   not many people in the US who have experimented with drugs who would   
   be qualified to instruct in such a program. The best we could expect   
   from them would be a fundamental class on "How to LACE UP SHOES", and   
   MAYBE with the shorter termed addicted adding another education level:   
   "How to TIE SHOES."   
      
   Naaaaaaaaaaaaaah...that's asking too much from the crack-heads. I like   
   the bumper sticker that says; "CACKHEADS - LET 'EM BOW TILL THEY GO."   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)