Are prostitution and drug use victimless crimes?

[FTL_Ian]

Government does not "have to" do any of that. They do it because government grows bigger and more intrusive over time and there is not enough opposition.

Plus, you're wrong. Some of us ARE calling for blanket decriminalization of ALL drugs. Including prescriptions. That truly would eliminate the black market drug trade.

For example, Dextromethorphan Hydrobromide (DXM) is fully legal and available on the shelf. This is a drug that will induce a trip at a high enough dose. Where is the black market? Nowhere, because it is a product that is available without govt. control.

Gangs can't make money without government providing rules for them to break.

[FTL_Ian]

How about Salvia Divinorum? This is a plant containing the highly psychoactive Salvinorin-A. When smoked, it produces visual hallucinations, and a very intense trip. It is in fact illegal in some countries and a few states in the US. However in the vast majority of states it is completely unregulated. Government is not involved.

Where is the black market? Nowhere near Salvia.

The free market provides all the iterations demanded of Salvia. There are dry leaf as well as 5x, 10x, and 20x extracts for extra potency.

As soon as Salvia becomes illegal, THEN the black market takes hold.

[StanSwitek]

How about Salvia Divinorum?
As soon as Salvia becomes illegal, THEN the black market takes hold.

If now-illegal drugs were decriminalized, the government would have to determine the allowable potency for commercial drugs. But no government can okay toxic substances, so a black market would be created for higher potency drugs and those that remained banned, like the new "designer drugs.

[Virginian]

Why should we foot the bill for massive changes to law, government structure, and law enforcement so that the minority of our country can indulge in a recreational drug?

[FTL_Ian]

If now-illegal drugs were decriminalized, the government would have to determine the allowable potency for commercial drugs. But no government can okay toxic substances, so a black market would be created for higher potency drugs and those that remained banned, like the new "designer drugs.

You repeat yourself. Government doesn't have to "okay" the substances, they can just ignore them. Just like they ignore Salvia. Does that make sense?

[FTL_Ian]

Why should we foot the bill for massive changes to law, government structure, and law enforcement so that the minority of our country can indulge in a recreational drug?

Who is "we"? Are they going to dock your pay?

The changes are simple. Eliminate the laws and shift your vice squad to something else.

The structure stays in place. You get more jail space, less packed courts, and less bad law to enforce.

The "bill" will be less to taxpayers as the feds will not be spending 18 billion dollars per year on drugs.

Only DEA agents will lose their jobs.

[Coloradocop]

How about Salvia Divinorum? This is a plant containing the highly psychoactive Salvinorin-A. When smoked, it produces visual hallucinations, and a very intense trip. It is in fact illegal in some countries and a few states in the US. However in the vast majority of states it is completely unregulated. Government is not involved.

Where is the black market? Nowhere near Salvia.

The free market provides all the iterations demanded of Salvia. There are dry leaf as well as 5x, 10x, and 20x extracts for extra potency.

As soon as Salvia becomes illegal, THEN the black market takes hold.

So, then, where is the "black market" in the few states where it is banned? You've stated previously that the problems with drugs are created when they are regulated... yet you state that there is no problem with this drug, and at the same time indicate that it is already regulated in some of the areas where it isn't a problem

[Virginian]

Who is "we"? Are they going to dock your pay?

The changes are simple. Eliminate the laws and shift your vice squad to something else.

The structure stays in place. You get more jail space, less packed courts, and less bad law to enforce.

The "bill" will be less to taxpayers as the feds will not be spending 18 billion dollars per year on drugs.

Only DEA agents will lose their jobs.

Some of us pay taxes. And the savings you would have in the fight against drugs would just be shifted to the enforcement of drug laws that are relaxed, and the increase in crime to finance habits as a result of decriminalization of drugs.

[TheOldRhino]

So we should just respond to the result of "victimless crimes" rather than get to the root of the problem? That's moronic

I agree. Kiddie pools kill thousands of children every year- let's get rid of those. People commit thefts to eat: so let's get rid of food. People steal gas so they get drive their car- so let's ban cars.

Moronic, indeed.

Do you want an industry on par with the oil trade regulated by criminals? Yes or no. (And yes, I'm going to keep asking until I get an answer)

[FTL_Ian]

So, then, where is the "black market" in the few states where it is banned? You've stated previously that the problems with drugs are created when they are regulated... yet you state that there is no problem with this drug, and at the same time indicate that it is already regulated in some of the areas where it isn't a problem

The market for Salvia operates in banned states the way dry counties work: People go to neighboring states to get it, or set up mail forwards. Ban it in all states, and you'll see more black marketeers getting in the game.

[StanSwitek]

You repeat yourself. Government doesn't have to "okay" the substances, they can just ignore them. Just like they ignore Salvia. Does that make sense?

Even if drugs were legalized some restrictions still would be necessary. For example, restricting the sale of legalized drugs to minors, pregnant women, police, military, pilots and prisoners would be necessary but would still provide a black market niche. Pro-legalizers contend that government could tax drugs, thus off-setting the social costs of abuse.

But history proves that efforts to tax imported drugs like opium created a black market. Earlier this century Chinese syndicates smuggled legal opium into this country to avoid tariffs. Even today, there is ample crime based on the legal drugs, alcohol, and tobacco. For example, organized crime smuggles cigarettes from states with low tobacco taxes into those with high taxes, and such activities are accompanied by violence against legal suppliers.

Modern-day Netherlands is often cited as a country which has successfully legalized drugs. Marijuana is sold over the counter and police seldom arrest cocaine and heroin users. But official tolerance has led to significant increases in addiction. Amsterdam's officials blame the significant rise in crime on the liberal drug policy. The city's 7,000 addicts are blamed for 80 percent of all property crime and Amsterdam's rate of burglary is now twice that of Newark, New Jersey. Drug problems have forced the city to increase the size of the police force and the city fathers are now rethinking the drug policy.

Sweden legalized doctor prescriptions of amphetamines in 1965. During the first year of legalization, the number of intravenous"speed" addicts rose 88.5 percent. A study of men arrested during the legalization period showed a high correlation between intravenous use and a variety of crimes.

Great Britain experimented with controlled distribution of heroin between 1959 and 1968. According to the British Medical Journal, the number of heroin addicts doubled every sixteen months and the increase in addicts was accompanied by an increase in criminal activity as well. And British authorities found that heroin addicts have a very good chance of dying prematurely. On the crime front, Scotland Yard had to increase its narcotics squad 100 percent to combat the crime caused by the "legal" addicts.

The Swiss opened a "legalized drug" area in Zurich in the late 80's. Local addicts were given drugs, clean needles, and emergency medical care. Unfortunately, the liberal policy backfired and the number of addicts surged to 3,500; violence surged, too. "Needle Park," as it came to be known, was a place of open warfare among rival gangs, and even police faced gunfire. Their cars were attacked and overturned. In February 1995, officials ended the experiment, conceding that it had evolved into a grotesque spectacle

[sgtpelon]

FTL Ian
You are ignoring one important fact and that is what do you do with the resulting population of addicted people who can no longer function in society? I will go back to my post about Skid Row in LA. There are literally hundreds of people who are unable to work and provide for themselves. StanSwiteck's statistics clearly show that the addict population surges when drugs are legalized. How does your plan deal with this group?

Another question is the mechanism to distribute the legalized drugs. Who is going to provide that service? The government? Local drug dealers? Who is going to produce the drugs? Are you going to make them immune from lawsuits when the lawyers get involved because their clients became addicted and their lives were ruined just like cigarettes?

That is the problem with quick fixes like the blanket legalization of all drugs. Unfortunately, life doesn't occur in a vacuum.

[TheOldRhino]

Sgt-
While you talk about this, consider my statements earlier.

How many people do you know that would rush out and try crack or meth or heroin the second it becomes legal? How many people have you heard say "Man, I wish that meth was legal so I can get addicted to it?"

Again, for those people that want to do drugs, what is there now that is stopping them?

[StanSwitek]

Sgt-
While you talk about this, consider my statements earlier.

How many people do you know that would rush out and try crack or meth or heroin the second it becomes legal? How many people have you heard say "Man, I wish that meth was legal so I can get addicted to it?"

Again, for those people that want to do drugs, what is there now that is stopping them?

The Swiss opened a "legalized drug" area in Zurich in the late 80's and local addicts were given drugs, clean needles, and emergency medical care. Unfortunately, the liberal policy backfired and the number of addicts surged to 3,500; violence surged, too. "Needle Park," as it came to be known, was a place of open warfare among rival gangs, and even police faced gunfire. Their cars were attacked and overturned. In February 1995, officials ended the experiment, conceding that it had evolved into a grotesque spectacle.

Great Britain experimented with controlled distribution of heroin between 1959 and 1968. According to the British Medical Journal, the number of heroin addicts doubled every sixteen months and the increase in addicts was accompanied by an increase in criminal activity as well. And British authorities found that heroin addicts have a very good chance of dying prematurely. On the crime front, Scotland Yard had to increase its narcotics squad 100 percent to combat the crime caused by the "legal" addicts

[sgtpelon]

Rhino,
Well, unless the stats that StanSwiteck posted are made up, it looks like a lot of people do in fact take up drug abuse on an exponential basis. And for two decades, I tried to talk to most of my arrestees to find out what made them tick. During these talks, the majority of them told me that it was their use of drugs that made them commit crimes or had their lives totally ruined by them. I think that many of the pro-legaliazation people fail to take into account the incredible addictive powers that many of the drugs have. It would be cool if people would be able to sit in their own homes and get high, but that is pure fantasy. Life doesn't work like that. If you want a snapshot of what misery drugs cause, then go volunteer to help at the Mission downtown LA this Christmas to serve meals to the homeless.

http://www.losangelesmission.org/vol...volunteer.html

Take a chance and see.

[TheOldRhino]

You can't make that kind of claim. You don't know if the drug use explosion in that experiment was because people became addicted or because many addicts all over the country heard about the experiment and flooded to one place.

I suspect it's the latter, unless you or Stan can find proof otherwise.

Again, do you or do you not know anyone that would do illegal drugs if they were made illegal?

Do you or do you not know of anything that is keeping people from doing drugs right this very second?

And again, Do you want an industry comparable to the oil industry controlled and regulated by criminals?

[Doc_Holliday]

Rhino....
I will attempt to answer your question refering to the oil industry...I assume you are comparing the 2 based solely on dollar amounts of revenue, and not on the way the are operated? My response would be this...the drug industry isnt regulated by criminals, its regulated by hardworking LEO's like yourself who put it all on the line to try to stop the sale and manufacturing of the product. The criminals attempt to circumvent this regulation by breaking the law.

On a sidebar...I can agree with some of the base principals of Libertarianism...as have been refered to before, Second Ammendmant, smaller government, lower taxes...HOWEVER, for the most part the people who have posted here, not including you, recently in favor of "libertarian views" are more like anarchists than libertarians. They speak of individual freedoms, but deny the freedom of those who have voted in the laws to choose a direction for the country. They compare their causes to those of the founding fathers, but fail to realize that the colonists didnt try to change the existing country, England, they left and started over. The founding fathers would have had NO chance at enacting the policies and freedoms they enjoyed in America had they tried to do the same in England. Why? Because they were in the minority. Much as these "individualist anarchists" or "anarcho capatalists" ,as wiki refers to libertarians, are currently in the minority. Just because you, I or they wish for a change to happen, it doesnt mean it will happen. Frankly, I find their constant belittling of LEO's and Government offensive, but I believe totally in their right to SAY it. However, freedom of speech does not gaurantee that they get a forum to be heard, nor that they make any sense. Thanks for your input Rhino, always a pleasure....

[StanSwitek]

You can't make that kind of claim. You don't know if the drug use explosion in that experiment was because people became addicted or because many addicts all over the country heard about the experiment and flooded to one place.

I suspect it's the latter, unless you or Stan can find proof otherwise.

Again, do you or do you not know anyone that would do illegal drugs if they were made illegal?

Do you or do you not know of anything that is keeping people from doing drugs right this very second?

And again, Do you want an industry comparable to the oil industry controlled and regulated by criminals?

Experiment? Those were real life examples of what happened. In the one example I cited, the number of herion addicts doubled every 18 months.

Swtitzerland, failure. Ansterdam, failure. Even in the USA it failed. How many examples do you need?

[TheOldRhino]

Stan, I've given up arguing with you. For some reason you are unwilling or unable to address the meat of what I post, so you decide to argue simantics.

[StanSwitek]

Stan, I've given up arguing with you. For some reason you are unwilling or unable to address the meat of what I post, so you decide to argue simantics.

Now thats funny. I give you examples from actual case studies. You are the one that is in denial & I dont mean the river in Egypt.