America is a nation of lawbreakers-

I like that, I thought it was only me

He was already on painkillers, but heroin was cheaper and easier to find.

Yeah, because painkillers are so strictly regulated that doctors live in fear of the DEA, and are afraid to prescribe. So, when a pain patient wants more but his doctor refuses to write any more prescriptions (lest he be busted for overprescribing), the guy turns to illegal sources.

Not surprising. It's easier for rich people, of course, just as it was under Prohibition. They could go to the doctor, get a scrip, then buy their liquor at pharmacy. Even though it was easier to get prescription alcohol then than prescription narcotics now, it was still a hassle and cost more money than buying the bootleg liquor.

However, store bought alcohol and store bought drugs are much safer, in addition to being legal. That's why the folks with money and connections prefer them.

The impure, toxic stuff is for the poor.

So are the prisons.

Well, prohibition does not stop addicts from getting anything. It's much more effective at limiting casual or social use. And it probably prevents some people from becoming addicts. Less people drank during alcohol prohibition. So, by that measure, it worked.

I probably would have been a casual social user of pot were it legal, in the same way that I was a casual social user of alcohol. Now I drink moderate amounts of alcohol for my health. Even if moderate amounts of pot were proven to be healthy I wouldn't use it, because it is illegal.

I'm sorry to burst your bubble, Simon. But laws work. That's why we are a nation of the rule of law.

I believe that we have too many laws. I am sympathetic to the idea that the drug war doesn't work. But drug addiction is such a scourge that I am not prepared for such a drastic step. Personally I want to hear a the public debate this notion before I will buy in. Right now the idea is politically marginal enough that we aren't getting the kind of spirited public debate that we need.

Yours,
Tom DeGisi

Well sure. Laws Work. And you can get people to obey them. All you need is a police state. And even that doesn't work forever. See the USSR.

You also might like the view of police:

Herding Junkies

Interview With A Police Officer

Law Enforcement Against Prohibition

I know this may come as a shock but law enforcement (at least once they are off the drug bust overtime gravy train) does not think the drug war is producing results commensurate with the effort.

And it creates other pathologies:

Demographics

====

And given the tremendous success of alcohol prohibition in curing the social ills of the nation it is a wonder we gave it up.

====

And yes you can cut down on casual use. But casual users are not a problem.

You might like to read about this survey of heroin users:

Heroin

and here is a nice one about the US Military:

Treatment Denied.

Some more educational material for you:

Addiction Is A Genetic Disease

PTSD and the Endocannabinoid System

I have lots more and you can ask me questions once you have studied the material.

I have lots more and you can ask me questions once you have studied the material.

I'm not that interested in the drug war, Simon, just as you are not that interested in abortion.

But I am interested in the nature of law. Do you think that it should be against the law to torture and even kill animals for fun? Should dog fighting and cock fighting and bear baiting be illegal?

Now apply all your arguments against those laws. I think you will agree they should be repealed, according to your logic.

But if you don't want them repealed, I think you must be in favor of strong enforced laws against late term abortion.

Which is it, Simon? How radical a libertarian do you want to be?

Yours,
Tom DeGisi

I gave up The Total Rationality of Libertarianism a long time ago.

The study of war convinced me that rationality was not as valuable as proclaimed.

====

Short version of the drug war - a war on traumatized people.

In any case my current concern is politics.

Making the largest coalition possible in order to throw out the bums and keep them out.

To do that the program should be limited. What can the largest number agree on that serves the goal.

To do that the program should be limited. What can the largest number agree on that serves the goal.

Well, then I guess ending the drug war is out. And pro-life is probably in so you can keep the socons - and because pro-life stands are politically cheap. If the Court had left it in the politcal arena pro-life stances would be more costly, but they didn't.

Yours,
Tom DeGisi