"Another good reason for staying in the good old USofA... "

"In this case I am glad I live in USA/ California."

Do you mean our government has revoked the illegal search and seizure rights given to the law without a trial? How did this happen and I missed it?

Representative Henry Hyde of Illinois noted in June 1993 that 80 percent of the people whose property is seized by the federal government under drug laws are never formally charged with any crime.

The war on drugs has been a farce since some bozo dreamed it up.

Sue

All I know is that in Ca the cops have better things to do than search people for drugs. Plus there is Proposition 215.
Don't get me started about the unconstitutional crap the US govt pulls.
Bill

Actually, we put them in jail for breaking the law. You may not like the current drug laws, you might not agree with them or believe they are necessary or effective and that is certainly within your rights. Working to change such laws, should you choose to do so, would equally be within your rights but ignoring the laws concerning illegal drugs is no more justifiable than ignoring any other law you don't agree with.

Some may rationalize it by thinking that "everybody" does it but the reality is that the vast majority of people don't use illegal drugs and the self-serving rationalizations of drug users doesn't change that fact or justify breaking the law. If someone chooses to use illegal drugs, they should have "the sack" to accept the consequences if they are caught (damaged and destroyed relationships, loss of jobs, possible denial of future employment and educational opportunities, fines and jail time), not whine about it being unfair.

IMO

One of my favorite quotes used to be "it's not illegal until you get caught". Kinda one of those tree falling in the woods philosophical thingies.

I recall an old axiom comparing a democracy to tyranny, goes something like this:

In a democracy, anything is allowed that is not specifically prohibited.

In a tyranny, everything is prohibited that is not specifically allowed.

Given the propogation of the laws and regulations in this country, it seems we are creeping ever closer to the latter. It might now be a shorter list in this country to identify all that we can freely do anymore.

I haven't posted for a while, because I was and am busy settling into a new job as a municipal prosecutor. Now, I've also been a criminal defense lawyer, so I think I see this issue pretty much in balance. That being said, I consider drug dealers to be on a level with murderers. The only difference is, they kill spirits and souls, not just bodies.

And most long-term addicts are indeed lost souls. I read about 6 new police reports a day on average, and at least 4 of them involve drugs. Not just possession for personal use, but stealing to buy drugs, mugging people to buy drugs, and, recently, bashing in your father's head with a hammer because he wouldn't give you money for drugs, then taking his cell phone and making three or four calls to drug dealers while he died in front of you. It's not a matter of personal choice and it's not a victimless crime. It is an exploitation of a genetic flaw in our species - a form of cannibalism, if you will. I respect and embrace the Constitution, but when a guy with no visible means of support gets busted in a brand new Explorer with 4 kg of marijuana and a couple of hundred Percocets rolling around in the back, you can believe we seize the vehicle and seek forfeiture. Interesting thing is, the druggies usually don't even try to oppose the forefeiture, because to do that you have to testify, and you don't necessarily want to answer questions under oath about how you were able to pay cash for a new vehicle when you haven't worked or filed a tax return in 5 years.

Sorry about the rant, but these people contribute nothing, they build nothing, and they add nothing to our community. Yes, they represent job security for me. I'd trade the job in a second for a drug-free town.

To a certain extent, the same could be said of certain weapons manufacturers, arms dealers (we're #1 btw), large tobacco companies, special interest lobbyists, pharmaceutical companies, etc. Its all a matter of perspective and whether or not the activity is sanctioned by the state. They're all in the business of making money and supplying a demand. I have no doubt that if 'illegal' drugs were to become socially acceptable the government would have no problem spending the tax revenue rolling in from those drug sales. So, while I agree drug dealing is a fairly despicable, its no more reprehensible to me than many legal enterprises.

"Actually, we put them in jail for breaking the law."

Our laws change on a daily basis, depending simply on who has the power to make them. Isn't a judge's decision in one case used as a weapon in similar cases?

And why are some laws enforced and others aren't? The same cops who (apparently) decided that Illinois police officer Drew Peterson's previous wife's death was accidental don't hesitate to arrest some guy with two joints in his pocket. The same cops who pull over middle-aged guys for speeding often let the pretty young women who were doing the same speed under the same conditions go with a warning. How many times have cops given an abusive husband or boyfriend the benefit of the doubt because he came up with some story and the woman was obviously too scared to argue? Is there still a law in NYC where no guy will be charged with rape unless the woman had a witness?

Do some officers make certain kinds of arrests because they look good on their record?

DUI is against the law, isn't it? So why are some people arrested for it 35 times or more, and still out there doing it again? If they're being arrested, why aren't they being convicted to the point where it will do them some good?

* * *
I overhead a conversation many years ago, where a man was saying, "Ninety percent of the price of drugs is the fact that they're illegal". That's the only part I heard, and I don't know what the context was.

So, what WOULD happen if all of them were legalized?

Is there anything to my theory (based on almost nothing) that:
1) Users want to use them -- no one is standing on their throat with a knife posed over their heart.
2) Users will always be users, legal or not. If you legalize drugs and make them cheaper, will the users be able to afford enough to become fatalities, and thus "reduce the surplus population" (it's that time of year, you know)?
3) If you legalize them, and that does take most of the profit out of them, will the pushers still be pushing? What would be the point?

There is a tremendous amount of "stuff" that I don't know and don't understand. But some "legal" things that go on in this country defy any rationalization, although many people work hard at it.

We have a really good set of basic laws, and have had them for over 200 years. And some people have been doing their utmost to get around those for about 150 of those 200 years, and (esp the last 50 yrs or so) succeeding quite well. So, why are some laws so much more important than others?

Sue

"...new job as a municipal prosecutor..."

Welcome to the bright side! I like the way you think!!!

"...its no more reprehensible to me than many legal enterprises..."

Legal is legal, illegal is illegal...

Bingo!