Silk Road forums

Discussion => Philosophy, Economics and Justice => Topic started by: kavakava on July 13, 2013, 05:57 am

Title: Do politicians believe their own bullshit about drug prohibition?
Post by: kavakava on July 13, 2013, 05:57 am
A person only needs a schoolboy understanding of economics to see why prohibition doesn’t work, and never can.

Everyone knows the story of what happened in the years of alcohol prohibition, and the conclusion that was drawn from it.

It’s not believable that educated people like Obama or Cameron *really* believe that prohibition is ever going to work, if they just try a bit harder.

So they know it can’t work, but they don’t have the balls to say it? Is that what’s happening?
Title: Re: Do politicians believe their own bullshit about drug prohibition?
Post by: Rastaman Vibration on July 13, 2013, 06:57 am
Most politicians are hypocrites. They legislate one way, and act the complete opposite. There was a some congressman that voted against gay rights, and it turned out he was secretly gay. (cant remember the name...). And there was this Senator that ended up on the DC Madam's list that was a super conservative and family values voting Republican (Sen. David Vitter?)

So, no, I don't they they believe the bullshit, but they sure vote for it.  ::) It helps them stay in office/power
Title: Re: Do politicians believe their own bullshit about drug prohibition?
Post by: aredhel on July 13, 2013, 01:59 pm
Most Politicians are either brainwashed like journalists and stupid, or intelligent and whores, or worse- having an evil agenda on their own.

Politicians in positions of power, who are not whores, and cherish the truth, usually get nicely asked to leave, will run into a clinton-esque media scandal, or go JFK, depending on how important they are.
Title: Re: Do politicians believe their own bullshit about drug prohibition?
Post by: jackofspades on July 14, 2013, 08:00 am
i think they actually do... I think most LEO's do as well...

that will aurely change in the next decade or 2 at least in North America.
Title: Re: Do politicians believe their own bullshit about drug prohibition?
Post by: turdburglarSandwich on July 14, 2013, 08:39 am
IMnotsoHO, politicians are mealy mouth talking out the sides of their necks worthless scumbags. I wouldn't even feed David Vitter to my dogs, much less a poor starveling Ethiopian family. He is so bloated with shite he could fertilize most of the corn crops in the Midwest.

Politicians couldn't possible believe the fetid pile of rank and rotting misinformation they spew. Most of them have graduated from accredited colleges, with BA's or BS degrees...and quite a few of them hold Master's or Ph.D.s...

Hard to hold on to an ignorant belief in the face of hard sciences. But it is easy to pander to the lowest common human denominator to maintain one's place at the trough of public funds.

Find me an honest politician, and its not a politician.
Title: Re: Do politicians believe their own bullshit about drug prohibition?
Post by: Isobetadine on July 14, 2013, 10:21 pm
TS,to understand why politicians continue to stand behind  this prohibition and don't do shit to change it ,you must understand the nature of the politician.
 
Even though they may have first-hand experience that drugs aren't what they are made out to be by those that truelly believe in the war on drugs they will not change shit due to the nature of what their profession has become.

Listen to Omar Ahmad's talk about "Making political change with pen and paper"

He simply explains the nature of these "creatures" we call politicians:).
His explenation and the money to be made of the war on drugs are all we need to know about why this is still enforced.

But i feel that we will once overcome this.
Title: Re: Do politicians believe their own bullshit about drug prohibition?
Post by: zxydwx3 on July 15, 2013, 04:16 am
While I don't know if various politicians believe the anti-drug propaganda, it's not hard to figure out why they promote it. It wins votes. I realize it's not a popular position to hold here, of all places, but the fact is that a substantial portion of society believes the BS about drugs. It's not like the politicians are forcing their own views on an unsuspecting public that can't do anything about it, the politicians are spouting off popular views that will help them get elected. The problem lies more with an uninformed electorate than with individual powerful people IMO.
Title: Re: Do politicians believe their own bullshit about drug prohibition?
Post by: aredhel on July 15, 2013, 11:41 am
... the politicians are spouting off popular views that will help them get elected...

By sporting popular views to get popular, they are holding up these very views, it's a feedback effect, and a circular justification.

However, the propaganda institutions COULD alter the public view on any drug, if they planned to. For example, cigarettes, a few decades ago, they were considered chic, only recently they have become detestable, the hidden agenda behind the propaganda isn't always obvious.
Title: Re: Do politicians believe their own bullshit about drug prohibition?
Post by: PerPETualMOtion on July 17, 2013, 04:46 pm
... the politicians are spouting off popular views that will help them get elected...

By sporting popular views to get popular, they are holding up these very views, it's a feedback effect, and a circular justification.

However, the propaganda institutions COULD alter the public view on any drug, if they planned to. For example, cigarettes, a few decades ago, they were considered chic, only recently they have become detestable, the hidden agenda behind the propaganda isn't always obvious.

Politicians don't believe in anything. They are black slates for short sells to make a name for themselves... to get/stay rich... and keep their peers on top.
Title: Re: Do politicians believe their own bullshit about drug prohibition?
Post by: flashlight5 on July 17, 2013, 06:46 pm
drug prohibition, internet piracy, terrorism... problems that dont exists more or less... just excuses to take away personal liberties
Title: Re: Do politicians believe their own bullshit about drug prohibition?
Post by: kmfkewm on July 17, 2013, 08:46 pm
While I don't know if various politicians believe the anti-drug propaganda, it's not hard to figure out why they promote it. It wins votes. I realize it's not a popular position to hold here, of all places, but the fact is that a substantial portion of society believes the BS about drugs. It's not like the politicians are forcing their own views on an unsuspecting public that can't do anything about it, the politicians are spouting off popular views that will help them get elected. The problem lies more with an uninformed electorate than with individual powerful people IMO.

Bullllllshit. The only reason these are popular views is because of government mandated propaganda programs and misinformation campaigns. Don't give the politicians such a huge massive benefit of the doubt, "Oh they are just doing what the people want!", that is exactly what they fucking want you to believe. When they made marijuana illegal it was most commonly known as cannabis and the average people knew about it by that name and didn't think it was a big deal, so out comes the government calling it marijuana but never cannabis and propaganda is released making it out to be some devil drug from Mexico poisoning their children, and suddenly the people who know that cannabis is not a bad drug are freaking out over this marijuana shit. That is the perfect illustration of how the government makes popular opinion, and then they make laws regarding popular opinion but they act like oh we are just doing what the people want, BULLSHIT they are making the people want what they want them to want! The politicians ARE forcing their own views on an unsuspecting population. Hold the people accountable who need to be held accountable, don't push the responsibility off onto the people who they brainwashed.
Title: Re: Do politicians believe their own bullshit about drug prohibition?
Post by: kmfkewm on July 17, 2013, 08:55 pm
drug prohibition, internet piracy, terrorism... problems that dont exists more or less... just excuses to take away personal liberties

First of all I agree with you about drug prohibition, it addresses a problem that doesn't really exist , but actually it causes a ton of problems to exist in doing so. Drug prohibition is evil and those who support it are no better than Nazis, and the most powerful supporters should be tried as war criminals and executed. Internet piracy is definitely a problem depending on your perspective. It probably costs companies billions of dollars a year, all together. Now I am not really anti piracy because I pirate shit all the time, and there are some good arguments both for and against intellectual property, and the people making digital content can fight piracy by changing their models but they are just ultra slow to adapt to change.....but internet piracy definitely has a massive economic impact. I have never once paid for music, movies, porn or games in my entire life. I have also pirated a large number of books as well as very expensive software that sometimes costs in the thousands of dollars for a single license. I imagine there are a lot of people like me, and I also imagine that we would all pay for at least music, movies, porn and games if we were not able to download them for free. I also disagree with you about terrorism. Now, terrorism doesn't seem to pose a very huge threat to us, but indeed many thousands of people are killed on a yearly basis by terrorists. The threat posed by terrorists is generally greatly exaggerated, but certainly there are terrorists (although I would prefer to call them violent non-state actors) and they do kill many people a year, although then again so do automobiles.
Title: Re: Do politicians believe their own bullshit about drug prohibition?
Post by: flashlight5 on July 18, 2013, 07:15 am
yes you are right if you look at it that way... bush, rumsfeld and chaney killed about 100 000 civilians in iraq... to secure oil fields and make sure their buddies in the defense industries can make some money. so yes, terrorists kill many people.

if you mean "Muslim terrorist", Id like to see a source... except 9/11, eg, there die only a couple of people, if that much, in the US from that kind of terrorism. And about 9/11, im not saying they blew up those houses themselves, but there is a lot of weird stuff to that if you dig into it. and it wouldn't have been the first "false flag" operation in history 

piracy... well, from the standpoint of the old business model you are right. but its ... an old business model. didn't adapt to the internet and new forms of consumption. and... almost everybody that is pirated a lot still makes a lot of money.
Title: Re: Do politicians believe their own bullshit about drug prohibition?
Post by: kmfkewm on July 19, 2013, 05:01 am
yes you are right if you look at it that way... bush, rumsfeld and chaney killed about 100 000 civilians in iraq... to secure oil fields and make sure their buddies in the defense industries can make some money. so yes, terrorists kill many people.

if you mean "Muslim terrorist", Id like to see a source... except 9/11, eg, there die only a couple of people, if that much, in the US from that kind of terrorism. And about 9/11, im not saying they blew up those houses themselves, but there is a lot of weird stuff to that if you dig into it. and it wouldn't have been the first "false flag" operation in history 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Islamic_terrorist_attacks

I agree that the Islamic violent non-state actor threat is largely overblown, but it is still very real, and if we have no defense measures in place to try to detect and prevent such attacks they will only become more common. Wikipedia shows 8,969 deaths linked to Islamic terrorist attacks since 1970, so really a drop in the bucket compared to death by other means, and certainly not warranting the amount of money spent to combat it.

Quote
piracy... well, from the standpoint of the old business model you are right. but its ... an old business model. didn't adapt to the internet and new forms of consumption. and... almost everybody that is pirated a lot still makes a lot of money.

Sure I agree, but piracy still costs billions of dollars in lost profits, so it really does hurt the finances of content producers and especially distributors.
Title: Re: Do politicians believe their own bullshit about drug prohibition?
Post by: fordingtheharrison on July 19, 2013, 07:47 am
Quite a lot of them definitely do honestly favor drug prohibition, but others are just saving face to preserve their careers. Especially on the matter of cannabis, where about half the population of the country is in favor of legalization, yet there is barely anyone in power who is willing to admit to favoring legalization themselves. Remember that many voters are old and overrepresent the anti-legalization group. A mainstream politician can be really kicked around by the media if they ever say they want legalization.
Title: Re: Do politicians believe their own bullshit about drug prohibition?
Post by: CannabisConsumer on July 20, 2013, 02:53 am
It's called doublethink. It's when you accept two contradictory facts to be the truth simultaneously.

They are masters at this skill.
Title: Re: Do politicians believe their own bullshit about drug prohibition?
Post by: upthera on July 20, 2013, 11:55 am
god I Hope not.  That would mean they are even dumber than I already think.  But, and a few people touched on it I think, their attitudes about prohibition come from a few things, 

1)  putting people in prison is HUGE business in the US and lets face it most drug users are not the violent type and that makes it easier to have behind bars paying for the salaries of guards, judges, pigs, contractors of every type from building, maintaining, oversight :-/ , it just goes on and on and on and it's SICKENING. I won't even get started on how the Private methadone clinics operate but will say they have taken what is a fantastic drug for people with real pain and destroyed any positive thoughts or ideas associated with it while not really helping many. 1 out of 500 maybe get real help.  It is great to know you can lead a semi-normal life but it does not take long to see through it.  Add in all the private drug testing companies and lets just say DO NOT GET YOUR HOPES UP.  :-(

2)  for many of a certain age, region, religious, type, we are evil! Thats it.  I have been told over and over again by nice religious people from all over the south and Midwest that I should be put to death for my cannabis use(I've never made it a secret) use.  It is this complete irrational fear. Most of these comments come from people born between 1945-55 depending on where they were brought up and what circles they were part of.  This group of religious nuts, kinda sound almost like a good ole' American al-Qaeda type attitude, really.  Many, of this group are/were military.  Very prevalent among officers.  Look into the Air Force Academy and where it's located and what huge nut-job religious fundamentalist group is right there. Hint, It ain't the Mormons. I'm not sure how many of that group(military) really believe it or just know that as an officer, especially in the USAF, it is a good career move to join that hateful crowd.
Not getting along or being at least seen to support the military is usually not a great idea for our politicians, if that title even applies anymore.

3)  Like terrorism, it is a great form of control and excuse to fund and militarize our police, snoop on us, etc.  It all makes me sad.

Probably should have finished my coffee before writing this as it a bit of a mess but the topic is something I think about all the time and have for decades.  Either way I think it's safe to say they have disgraced and embarrassed this country and ruined the lives of people, good caring people. People who where worth a lot more to this world than said political scum. 
Title: Re: Do politicians believe their own bullshit about drug prohibition?
Post by: AirshipAdmiral on July 23, 2013, 09:06 am
It's called professional thugs, brigands, thieves, con men, frauds, hucksters, carpetbaggers, bandits, pirates, rapists, murderers.

They want to call us the criminals, but we all know who the real Buy Guys are.
Title: Re: Do politicians believe their own bullshit about drug prohibition?
Post by: goblin on July 23, 2013, 08:57 pm
I'm sure Schumer does.
Title: Re: Do politicians believe their own bullshit about drug prohibition?
Post by: joolz on July 25, 2013, 08:16 am
one word ..... yes but do we  ...........no  8)
Title: Re: Do politicians believe their own bullshit about drug prohibition?
Post by: foxen624 on July 25, 2013, 12:07 pm
This in general is a subject that I've thought and wondered about for a very long time and have never really come up with any reason or set of reasons that seem to warrant the amount of damage done over all by this persistent so called Drug War.  The topic of this thread poses a great question.. especially if what you mean by their bullshit is what they spout about it being a public health hazard.  To that, I don't think they give a shit even a little bit about our health or personal well being, only their hidden agendas.   As far as if they actually believe that constantly having congress vote for more and more laws and harsher punishments/sentences regarding drugs is what is popular with the public at large...  I don't know.  But they all seem to think that they would ruin their chances of getting re-elected if they voted any other way.  Which is ridiculous.  Especially if any of them remember that they are supposed to be each representing a segment of the people - which they obviously don't as I've never seen or heard of any  congressperson sending out polls or trying in any other way to ask the people the are supposed to be representing how we want them to vote.  And if so many people really are against drugs, then the private prison business wouldn't be so booming. 

But what I really think about the most in this regard, is why does drug prohibition still exist at all anyway?  Especially after they tried alcohol prohibition, it failed miserably and was overturned in a relatively short period of time [compared to the current ongoing prohibition of all other drugs].  They must notice that there are no cartels killing each other and anyone else in their way over alcohol since it can be purchased legally in the store as well as they must enjoy the excess taxes they collect on it.

So, I just have a really hard time figuring out why this is still going on and it constantly makes me mad.   And when I turn on the TV and hear about what a terrible problem the cartels are...   how (depending on the decade) this drug or that one has swept the country in an epidemic and must be stopped...  how "crime" is on the rise... and all that shit, I just want to (and sometimes do) just scream at the TV that the answer is so simple... legalize drugs and the cartels will go away naturally... or at least the violence would be reduced dramatically, not to mention that the "crime" rate would also be drastically reduced if they quit making the use of drugs a "crime".  Makes me especially frustrated when I know that even when politicians can and do often appear really dumb...  even they are not that stupid that they don't realize this.  So, I can only conclude that they don't want to legalize drugs for .. well, many of the things already pointed out by many of the people who have replied in this thread..  all of which pretty much are money driven...  and as I also believe that it is money driven, they must want to keep drugs available only on the black market for a reason that benefits them.  And if that is the case, then it only makes sense that the government IS the black market, or makes up a good part of it.  I suspect that they make huge profits by keeping drugs illegal.  Even though I'm not sure how exactly they make it since many of the reasons given by others - and I don't doubt them at all.. have to do with money made by private companies ...  Private Prisons, makers of drug tests...  just to name a couple - although I'm sure that private companies that profit from this prohibition are huge "contributors" give the politicians generous "donations", etc...  still, I don't get how that could compensate even for the payroll of the evergrowing, over-empowered police force.  And while I see how the cops must love it because they can make many "safe" arrests (because the majority of people arrested on "drug charges" are non-violent ordinary citizens and most of the people overall arrested are not in cartels) without worrying about getting hurt while racking up their arrest count and overtime pay with all the "probable cause" reports they get to write, etc...  the cops are not the ones who make the laws and I doubt the politicians are doing it for their benefit any more than they are doing it for our health and well being.

Then, there's the fact that afaik, the only so-called "crime" that exists that allows for automatic forfeiture of a person's cash, car, home(?) not sure if they can take the house or not... but anyway, while I'm not positive on this either, I think that the forfeiture money goes to the individual police stations... not the politicians..   The States make money on all the bullshit "programs" like drug court and all the other ones that people get court ordered to attend but I'm pretty sure that they are for the most part federally funded...  so I don't see how that is of much financial gain to the politicians either...

So....  seems it just has to be money and lots of it going straight to the politicians that is keeping drugs on the black market. I don't have any proof of this, but I believe that since when they publish the budget, they never include the amount spent on WAR(S).. which has to be an astronomical number, I think it must come from the government's involvement in or possible running of the black market.  How do they manage that though?  Are they the suppliers for the cartels and other major distributors around the world?  I really don't know for sure, but that is the most plausible reason that I've been able to come up with after thinking about it for many, many years...   

Sorry this got so long, but it's probably THE thing that I hate the very most about the government....  and I really can't think of much of anything I do like about it...  just will save the rest of the list for the appropriate forums.  Just one other thing...  How in the fuck has Diane Feinstien stayed in office for many decades when she wants to ban everything except for spying on the world, which she would probably fight to ensure that is kept up with her life if it came down to it!

Oh, and because this is such a depressing and more than annoying problem to be talking about...  and I managed to come across something written in this thread that made me laugh...  I saved it for last:

for many of a certain age, region, religious, type, we are evil! Thats it.  I have been told over and over again by nice religious people from all over the south and Midwest that I should be put to death for my cannabis use(I've never made it a secret) use.  It is this complete irrational fear. Most of these comments come from people born between 1945-55 depending on where they were brought up and what circles they were part of.   

Makes me think of people who watched Reefer Madness, totally believed it... then just sorta stayed locked in time ever since....  still believing that to be the truth... :P

Actually, I thought your whole post was good  +1 for you upthera ;)
Title: Re: Do politicians believe their own bullshit about drug prohibition?
Post by: AirshipAdmiral on July 26, 2013, 02:26 am
god I Hope not.  That would mean they are even dumber than I already think.  But, and a few people touched on it I think, their attitudes about prohibition come from a few things, 

1)  Putting people in prison is HUGE business.

So is "prescription drugs" and the synthesis of patented drugs. Big Pharma, Big Prison, and Big Medicine are not going to let some freedom-lovers take their power away from them by curing people, making medicine nearly free, or (god forbid!) make people HAPPY! Oh no!

2)  We are evil! That's it!

I do not think the Mormons are completely free of this mindset, either, although the Baptists, Presbyterians, Methodists and Lutherans tend to be the worst examples of this. However, there are many wet-blanket types who are overly concerned with meddling with other people's loves, prone to fear of their own animal desires, are crushingly afraid of themselves and the people around them, and cling to a specific type of insanity because they are really that pathetic. This type of person is the real enemy.

However, they fear freedom, they fear the wilderness, they fear the natural state of humanity, and they fear "godlessness." They want to control what they do not understand. Good thing they are not generally that good at it.

3)  It is a great form of control.

Anything having to do with "transportation license" "border control" "contraband control" "anti-counterfeiting" "anti-moneylaundering" "licensing and registration" "watchlisting" and similar deliberate limitations of freedom are ALL forms of control, and all of them are for the same reason.

They are to "fight the Enemy," and the enemy is YOU. It is ME. WE are the Enemy.

Probably should have finished my coffee before writing this as it a bit of a mess but the topic is something I think about all the time and have for decades.  Either way I think it's safe to say they have disgraced and embarrassed this country and ruined the lives of people, good caring people. People who where worth a lot more to this world than said political scum.
Title: Re: Do politicians believe their own bullshit about drug prohibition?
Post by: goblin on July 26, 2013, 03:16 am
On a side note, the pope says, Just say no!
Title: Re: Do politicians believe their own bullshit about drug prohibition?
Post by: foxen624 on July 26, 2013, 05:53 am
On a side note, the pope says, Just say no!

and a note on the other side...  did the expression :"Just say no" originate with the Pope or with Nancy Reagan?  ;)
Title: Re: Do politicians believe their own bullshit about drug prohibition?
Post by: redalloverthelandguyhere on July 26, 2013, 10:38 am
In the USA alcohol prohibition, there were a few politicians who did not drink - but its easy for someone who does not like drink to oppose it. Trouble is that act inhibits others freedoms. It also prevents a billion dollar trade from donating to the public coffers.

So whilst a minority of politicians don't use drugs, they are wrong to put a ban on drugs for those who enjoy a variety of substances.

Its like a heterosexual politican banning homosexuality. (this happened for real)

We should live and let live.

I know that when I go out tonight, I will see a few drugs being used aside from alcohol.

Some drugs I would be wary about legalising.

But I think that cannabis ouight to be legal, cocaine and heroin avaliable via some strict procedure to verify age and mental state of being.

Heroin would be more of a medical issue I guess. Selling it openly would be insane. Giving current addicts their own clean supply of diamorphine, NHS standard, would work wonders.

I see cannabis, cocaine, heroin, mushrooms and those four drugs are maybe something in which everyone would find something to chill them out at the end of a working week.
Title: Re: Do politicians believe their own bullshit about drug prohibition?
Post by: goblin on July 26, 2013, 12:03 pm
In the USA ...

Its like a heterosexual politican banning homosexuality. (this happened for real)
Even worse, a closet homosexual ranting against homosexuality. Now that has really happened. Fucking hypocrisy.
Title: Re: Do politicians believe their own bullshit about drug prohibition?
Post by: ralph123 on July 27, 2013, 04:00 am
I think Ron Paul does
Title: Re: Do politicians believe their own bullshit about drug prohibition?
Post by: foxen624 on July 27, 2013, 05:25 am
2)  We are evil! That's it!

However, there are many wet-blanket types who are overly concerned with meddling with other people's loves, prone to fear of their own animal desires, are crushingly afraid of themselves and the people around them, and cling to a specific type of insanity because they are really that pathetic. This type of person is the real enemy.

However, they fear freedom, they fear the wilderness, they fear the natural state of humanity, and they fear "godlessness." They want to control what they do not understand.

Well put!  Very well put...  I have thought along those lines too, as far as people in general when a bunch of them jump on this bandwagon or other, usually about something that doesn't even effect them ie: anti-abortion people, anti-gay marriage people and anti-anything people (they act as if something is legal, that means it's mandatory... when in reality, just because it's available as a choice for those who choose, nobody who is against it need participate) - although I've not before thought of that concept as pertaining to drugs being illegal. But put in this context, I see how it certainly does. Very insightful...


In the USA ...

Its like a heterosexual politican banning homosexuality. (this happened for real)
Even worse, a closet homosexual ranting against homosexuality. Now that has really happened. Fucking hypocrisy.

uh yeah...  more often that I can even remember.  Seems that you can usually tell though who will be next by who is shouting the loudest about how immoral or whatever it is...  then they turn up gay.  Not that I have anything against those who are gay, it's the hypocrisy that I just can't stand....
Title: Re: Do politicians believe their own bullshit about drug prohibition?
Post by: kmfkewm on July 27, 2013, 06:27 am
But what I really think about the most in this regard, is why does drug prohibition still exist at all anyway?  Especially after they tried alcohol prohibition, it failed miserably and was overturned in a relatively short period of time [compared to the current ongoing prohibition of all other drugs].  They must notice that there are no cartels killing each other and anyone else in their way over alcohol since it can be purchased legally in the store as well as they must enjoy the excess taxes they collect on it.

But the official position of the DEA is that alcohol prohibition was a tremendous success!

http://www.republicreport.org/2012/dea-prohibition-worked/

They used to have a full page on their website talking about how great alcohol prohibition was but I cannot find it right now. Surprisingly I did find them admit that Alcohol is more harmful than Marijuana

http://www.justthinktwice.com/drug_facts/chat_day_topics.html?ncd=3&exp=803&page=2 (justthinktwice is a propaganda site I think it is owned by the DEA, is definitely sponsored heavily by them).

Quote
is the effects of marijuana less harmful then alcohol Close

That's a great question. The answer is yes for now, and maybe in the future. Right now alcohol is responsible for a much greater proportion of health problems and car accidents than marijuana. Some of that is due to the differing effects of the drugs, but some of it is because many more people use alcohol and do so for their entire lives, so we know about a lot more about its long term effects than we do for marijuana. If marijuana were to become legal, we risk seeing more of its adverse health effects in more of the population--e.g., addiction, lung infections.
Title: Re: Do politicians believe their own bullshit about drug prohibition?
Post by: kmfkewm on July 27, 2013, 06:32 am
Ah finally found the link I was looking for, but they took it down. Thankfully some other people commented on it!

http://reason.com/blog/2005/09/07/prohibition-was-not-an-awful-f

Quote


Over at Grits for Breakfast, Scott Henson notes that the DEA defends alcohol prohibition on its new Web site aimed at teenagers:

    A word about prohibition: lots of you hear the argument that alcohol prohibition failed--so why are drugs still illegal? Prohibition did work. Alcohol consumption was reduced by almost 60% and incidents of liver cirrhosis and deaths from this disease dropped dramatically...Today, alcohol consumption is over three times greater than during the Prohibition years. Alcohol use is legal, except for kids under 21, and it causes major problems, especially in drunk driving accidents.

It's true that alcohol consumption fell during Prohibition, at least initially. In a 1991 paper, economists Jeffrey Miron and Jeffrey Zwiebel estimated, based on four measures (cirrhosis, alcoholism deaths, arrests for drunkenness, and alcoholic psychoses), that consumption dropped 60 to 80 percent immediately after Prohibition was enacted, then rebounded sharply beginning in 1921. By the end of the decade, consumption was 50 to 70 percent of the pre-Prohibition level according to three measures and slightly higher according to one. Drinking did not rise precipitously after repeal. Alcohol consumption in the late 1930s was about the same as in the final years of Prohibition; it returned to the pre-Prohibition level during the next decade.

There remains the question of how important a role Prohibition itself played in these trends. In a subsequent analysis that took additional factors into account, including World War I, changes in the age structure of the population, and the lag between drinking and the development of cirrhosis, Miron concluded that "Prohibition exerted a modest and possibly even a positive effect on the consumption of alcohol."

But to decide whether banning booze was a good policy, which is what the DEA seems to be arguing, it's not enough to know whether it reduced drinking. Assuming, for the sake of argument, that paternalism can be justified on a utilitarian basis, you need to know whether the benefit from fewer alcohol-related problems outweighed the costs associated with prohibition, including the loss of privacy and freedom, black-market violence, official corruption, disrespect for the law, injuries and deaths from illicit alcohol, and the strengthening of organized crime. A consensus developed during Prohibition that, whatever its benefits might be, they were not worth these costs. By that measure, alcohol prohibition in the 1920s and early '30s, like drug prohibition today, was a failure, even if it "worked" in the sense that it discouraged drinking.

It's hard to take prohibitionists seriously when they act as if the policy they favor carries no costs. But by pining for the days of Al Capone and methanol-tainted rotgut, at least the DEA is being consistent.

Title: Re: Do politicians believe their own bullshit about drug prohibition?
Post by: kmfkewm on July 27, 2013, 06:37 am
You see this is the position of the democrat party DEA agents. Drugs cause health problems, and they are going to save us from the health problems of drugs, even if it means a massive surge in violent crime, the rise of mini-state violent drug cartels, an epidemic of HIV due to lack of needle exchanges, tens of thousands of preventable overdose deaths, total lack of regulation, drugs that were cooked up in crack head toilets being sold at schools and an entire generation of people raised in prisons and perpetually involved with the justice system. If they save even one person from getting a lung infection after smoking marijuana, it is a huge success.

It could be compared to dropping an atom bomb on a bank in a major city in order to stop a bank robbery. They will say "It was a success!" as long as the bank robbery was terminated due to the evaporation of the bank robbers. To a casual observer this makes them look like they must be clinically insane, but once you realize they are really in the business of making Atom bombs (republicans) and disaster clean up (democrats), it starts to make a lot more sense what is going on.
Title: Re: Do politicians believe their own bullshit about drug prohibition?
Post by: foxen624 on July 27, 2013, 07:03 am
You see this is the position of the democrat party DEA agents. Drugs cause health problems, and they are going to save us from the health problems of drugs, even if it means a massive surge in violent crime, the rise of mini-state violent drug cartels, an epidemic of HIV due to lack of needle exchanges, tens of thousands of preventable overdose deaths, total lack of regulation, drugs that were cooked up in crack head toilets being sold at schools and an entire generation of people raised in prisons and perpetually involved with the justice system. If they save even one person from getting a lung infection after smoking marijuana, it is a huge success.

wow.. you're awfully prolific right now... lol..   I've been trying to comment on your comment (now 3 down).. since you posted it...  hehehe..  aw well..

O.K. really was mainly gonna say.. I read the part of the article (or comment on it) that you posted - was fairly interesting, though haven't checked out any of the links you put in your OP.. probably will when I get a chance...   but the way I see it, the DEA is always going to have an official story that any and all of their projects were huge successes because they probably get paid a good paycheck and want to keep their boss(s) believing that what they do is actually important and necessary - not to mention that they get to go get high and hang out with those they are planning on busting...  get paid for it... and do it legally with the blessing of the Federal Government... 

and hey, if it means a bunch of people's lives being ruined by violence caused not by the drug but by the law against it, be it by violence, arrest, or otherwise, oh well..  just collateral damage...   long as the DEA can keep doing what they're doing...  their gonna continue to insist what a wonderful job they are doing so very successfully...  ugh!