Re: Admiral Inman

Subject: Re: Admiral Inman
From: "Connie Sadler"@MR.STANFORD.EDU
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 1994 07:58:00 PDT
A1-type: DOCUMENT
Posting-date: Tue, 22 Nov 1994 00:00:00 PDT



In list.cypherpunks, jgrubs@voxbox.norden1.com writes:

> jamiel@sybase.com (Jamie Lawrence) writes:
> 
>> It does amaze me that what can be a victimless activity is such
>> a hotbutton.
> 
> Drugs are victimless? What about crack babies, which cost a million
> dollars EACH in medical care, btw.

Exactly! And this is just one example of the victims. What about the extremely
high rate of crime motivated by the need for drugs? I have personally been a
victim twice (theft of my car and *nice stereo system* and a breakin to my
house where much was taken) in crimes which appeared to be motivated by the
the need for drugs. I don't see where legalizing drugs would motivate addicts
to start working to legitimately pay for their habits.

CJS

"Connie Sadler (415)725-7703" says:
> What about the extremely high rate of crime motivated by the need
> for drugs? I have personally been a victim twice (theft of my car
> and *nice stereo system* and a breakin to my house where much was
> taken) in crimes which appeared to be motivated by the the need for
> drugs. I don't see where legalizing drugs would motivate addicts to
> start working to legitimately pay for their habits.

No, but perhaps you could note that the price of drugs is hundreds of
times higher than it would be without illegalization. Cocaine and
heroin are amazingly cheap per dose before seven layers of smugglers
and dealers get into the act.

I used to pass by the rummy's in lower manhattan on Bowery and
Lafayette Street all the time. I have yet to see a wino on the Bowery
rob anyone to support his habit -- he's got plenty of options to get
fucked up out of his mind for a few dollars a day. If anything, the
currently illegal "white powder" drugs would be far cheaper per dose
than thunderbird.

We might also note that the bulk of the deadly crime associated with
the drug trade is not junkies stealing to pay for their habits but
dealers involved in turf wars. No more gang drive-bys if you legalize
drugs, folks. When was the last time you saw a pair of liquor store
owners having a gun battle over turf?

Beyond this, however, is the inherent foolishness in thinking that
keeping the drugs illegal will do any good. We have already seen that
an order of magnitude increase in the money spent on drug enforcement
over the last decade has produced NO noticeable change in the size of
the drug trade, and has, if anything, made the problem worse. Drugs
are even available in maxium security prisons, where, supposedly,
there is absolute control over what enters and what leaves. Given
that, there is no quantity of money we could possibly spend that would
stop the drug trade -- even unto the point of eliminating all human
freedom in our society.

I am unwilling to sell my birthright for a mess of pottage. We are
sacrificing billions of dollars and all our civil rights for NOTHING
VISIBLE AT ALL. Even were you correct that drugs were an intolerable
menace to society it has long been obvious that drug law enforcement
does no good whatsoever in lowering the rate of drug "crime" and if
anything causes harm by driving the price up and creating a huge
profit opportunity for the unscrupulous.

Perry

...
> I am unwilling to sell my birthright for a mess of pottage. We are
> sacrificing billions of dollars and all our civil rights for NOTHING
> VISIBLE AT ALL. Even were you correct that drugs were an intolerable
> menace to society it has long been obvious that drug law enforcement
> does no good whatsoever in lowering the rate of drug "crime" and if
> anything causes harm by driving the price up and creating a huge
> profit opportunity for the unscrupulous.
> 
> Perry

You forgot: QED

Between the rediculous amount of money and things like the RICO laws
that practically wipe out rights through loopholes we'd better
wake up and remember prohibition and other lessons of history.


sdw
-- 
Stephen D. Williams  Local Internet Gateway Co.; SDW Systems 510 503-9227APager
LIG dev./sales       Internet: sdw@lig.net  In Bay Area Aug94-Dec95
OO R&D Source Dist.  By Horse: 2464 Rosina Dr., Miamisburg, OH 45342-6430
Internet Consulting  ICBM: 39 38 34N 84 17 12W home, 37 58 41N 122 01 48W work
Newbie Notice:       
     I speak for LIGCo., CCI, myself, and no one else, regardless of
     where it is convenient to post from or thru.

Connie Sadler writes
> What about the extremely
> high rate of crime motivated by the need for drugs? 
> I have personally been a victim twice (theft of my 
> car and *nice stereo system* and a breakin to my
> house where much was taken)

These crimes were not caused by drugs, but by the war on
drugs.

Now even if heroin was legal, a junkie would be more inclined
to lie and steal than a sober person, just as a drunk is more
inclined to get into fights than a sober person, but heroin is not
in itself a major cause of theft, just as alcohol is not
in itself a major cause of violence.  Certainly the violence
caused by alcohol is vastly less than the violence caused
by prohibition.


The intrinsic cost of heroin is considerably less than the
the intrinsic cost of alcohol.   If we abolished the FDA,
a junkie could stay stoned for less than it costs a
drunk to stay drunk.

He would still be a no good human being, but he would be a
quite and unobtrusive no good human being.  Junkies are
quieter than drunks and less likely to assault you.


-- 
 ---------------------------------------------------------------------
We have the right to defend ourselves and our
property, because of the kind of animals that we        James A. Donald
are.  True law derives from this right, not from
the arbitrary power of the omnipotent state.            jamesd@acm.org

>   In list.cypherpunks, jgrubs@voxbox.norden1.com writes:

>   > jamiel@sybase.com (Jamie Lawrence) writes:

>   >> It does amaze me that what can be a victimless activity is such
>   >> a hotbutton.

>   > Drugs are victimless? What about crack babies, which cost a million
>   > dollars EACH in medical care, btw.

>   Exactly! And this is just one example of the victims. What about the extremely
>   high rate of crime motivated by the need for drugs? I have personally been a
>   victim twice (theft of my car and *nice stereo system* and a breakin to my
>   house where much was taken) in crimes which appeared to be motivated by the
>   the need for drugs. I don't see where legalizing drugs would motivate addicts
>   to start working to legitimately pay for their habits.

if drugs were legal, they would be cheap, thus addicts could afford them
more readily.

this is easily seen in countries which do tolerate drugs.

josh