Rudy Van Horne wrote: Some stuff.
Several points.
First of all, with decriminalization, you absolutely will see a reduction in street crime, This is the first universal effect. Will it stop the cycle of "addiction" completely? Will it FIX addicts...? Of course not...but that's not that's not the question. The question is would it be better or worse? The argument at play is what we are currently doing is so catastrophically bad on by every possible metric that at the very least it's worth experimentation over time with decriminalization and then legalization as we have done with Cannabis.
I will give you my first hand observations based on years of experience both as a rec drug user and the fact I work and train at within 3 meters of the worst drug corner north of Sacramento. When post was decriminalized, there was an almost immediate effect of more "community oriented policing" suddenly, you take the cops off of having to keep up appearances, (people smoking weed on the bus type shiut) and they turn there attention to longer term interactions with addicts and normals who are frequenting the area. Whatever else I think about both Cops and Drugs, the police have a near impossible task when it comes to petty drug shit, take the lower tier of this distraction off the table and the street get safer..not by a little. BY A LOT..and this as just weed. When Weed was Legalized, there was a near 90% drop off in street dealing. There are still people slinging coke and H but they cant do it on the street. Why? Because the attention span of the SPD is now expanded at least by double. Anecdotes are not data. Those are my observations. But I've read and seen enough of the way other drugs are treated in a harm reduction model and the first thing you get? More effective Policing and better police interactions with the populace.
If there's one demonstrably true thing that you have completely fucked up backwards its that anyone prefers to live outside the law. Even massive criminal organizations are businesses....businesses that lose massive potential profits because they have a stranded asset. Now there's a massive difference in decriminalization and legalization. That's an area that warrants a lot of experimentation to get correct...but your fundamental understanding of the drug trade is flawed as fuck...esp. as it relates to the motor of teh drug sales, the user/dealer. Until you understand both the pharmacology and the nature of who is doing the transactions and why, your opinions are as useful to the discussion as a fart in the wind.
Secondly, here's where I knew you were a fucking moron.
When people say 'the war on drugs isn't working' what they really mean is it's too hard to win. It pisses me off that Western countries namby pamby their poor little addicts when the trade they support causes untold misery around the world. We don't treat consumers of child pornography as victims, we rightly recognize that the demand is half the problem and causes the supply.
Consensual use of rec drugs do not victimize ANYONE on the level your describing.(namby pamby?..fuck you son, you dont know shit about addiction, and you know far less about drug policing worldwide, that';s for sure) This statement belies that you are delusional on two fronts..One who uses and why, secondly how prevalent and unstoppable child porn is. Prohibition is an abject failure wherever is has been tried. When you say it's TOO HARD, it's because too hard mean scorching your own earth to win. With C. Pron, maybe that's worth it. You bring up the deman side? So..let's get this straight, you want to treat the demand side the way we treat the supply side? What are youa prison gaurd? Holy fucking shit we're losing and you want to double the fuck down?
I don't know you from Adam...but unless I grossly misread your logic, you might be pathologically stupid, incredibly sheltered (the "drug dealer down the street" rings hollow as fuck, pick better lies) or just an idiot. Crosssfit I'm guessing?
