Sunday, May 09, 2010

Dude..... where's my life?

Sure as shit, along with all the suggestions regarding what to do about the border between the USA and Mexico, there's someone talking about legalizing drugs.  This time it's DJ Allyn from the Rott.  Halfway down his post:


Legalize marijuana, and decriminalize cocaine and most other Schedule II narcotics. Okay, I know that this one is probably going to be a bit tough to swallow, but listen it out and think about it before jumping out against it.
Our “War on Drugs” has been a costly and complete failure. It has done nothing to curb our appetite for drugs. Because of this, we’ve created Capone-like groups that prey on American society — a lot of them being illegal aliens and drug cartels that only exist because illegal drugs means big money to those that provide them.

Now, I used to jump up and down about the failure of the War on (some) Drugs, about how it wasn't worth it, etc., etc., etc.  But I wonder just how many of the people who are advocating for the legalization of drugs have spent much time around the end result of the drug culture.  Anybody willing to admit that?  Because let me tell you what I've been around, both from my employment and from my personal life - the people who use illegal drugs on a regular basis are NOT the kinds of folks who you want to have living next to you, or working with you.

Ladies and gentlemen, if you were to legalize every drug tomorrow you would have a crime wave.  Because people who are addicted to drugs by and large do not hold down jobs adequate enough to pay for their drug habits.

Now, me being who I am, I don't like to dwell in theory all that much.  Oh sure, theories might be fine to sit around and discuss and debate, but if you're going to talk about real-world actions, I want real world data.  Like, say, Mexico, as discussed in a rebuttal post at the Rott by Subotal Bahadur:


It is not widely known [and I suspect because it would upset a lot of political applecarts] but MEXICO legalized personal possession and use of ‘harmless drugs’ as marijuana, LSD, cocaine, heroin, ecstasy and crystal meth almost a year ago.
In the last few years, 23,000 people have died in drug related killings in Mexico.

The only place I know of where legalization of (some) drugs has worked is Amsterdam, under tightly controlled conditions.  Conditions that I know wouldn't be accepted by the people currently screaming for the legalization of drugs in America.

Let me ask you this - let's say I open a business.  America legalizes drugs.  Am I allowed to discriminate against a pothead?  Or would I face a lawsuit for violating someone's "civil rights"?  Because after my past dealings with potheads, I wouldn't want one working for me, period.  I wouldn't trust one with a bankroll.  I wouldn't trust one with the keys to my business.  But if we legalize drugs in America, I'll bet my business (and I bet that I would!) that I won't be allowed to show a pothead the door.

Now look at Mexico, where they've legalized quite a bit, and far from drugs being a tax-revenue bonanza, the drug cartels have taken over.  Would anyone like to show me some hard evidence that this wouldn't happen in America if we legalize drugs here?  Hell, is there any evidence that would show ANY kind of different reaction?

Anyone?

2 comments:

genedunn said...

You make some good points. As a "fascist libertarian" (figure that one out), I have reluctantly embraced the idea of legalizing drugs. After all, the ultimate freedom is the freedom to regulate what goes in and out of my body. Plus, if they were legal, at least we would be able to tax the ever-loving shit out of them and use that money on rehab clinics or something. So, I guess I support the "legal but heavily regulated as in Amsterdam" approach.
On the question of hiring "dopers", my wife works in HR for a company that drug tests. Some applicants who have failed the screening claim "medical" marijuana usage and her company declines to hire. There have never been any issues of discrimination, wrongful termination, or claims of "civil rights violations". As an employer, I would think you could fire drunks, dopers, criminals, or anyone else that has a behavior that doesn't support your business.

JMHO

Sergeant Mac said...

I believe that an employer should be able to "discriminate" against anyone, for any reason, or for no reason at all.

....and that their customers should be equally free to do the same to them.

You're raising a non-issue here.