NYPD Gangbusting at the Marcy PJs?

Guvna wrote:
Seriously, most of us know about prohibition. That doesnt make having liquor freely available to idiots righ though, does it? There has to be a better way than simply reacting to people getting mowed down by drunkards.

As for treatment, why is it assumed that treatment and keeping drugs illegal are mutually exclusive? Call me crazy, but I cannot stand being harassed by smelly drunks/crackheads. That does not mean that I am against them getting treatment. Far from it. HOWEVER, it was suggested earlier that those who choose to get high are adults and can do what the hell they want, so long as it doesnt affect others. Well, harassing other people DOES affect others. Then comes the whole issue of what to do with them once we so proudly allow them to exercise their right to get high and become addicts. Legalization under that approach will create more problems than solutions, in my view.

IF, for arguments sake, we legalize hard drugs, how does that benefit addicts? Sure it lowers the price, stops the arrests, but it also makes it ridiculously easy to get more of the very stuff that messed them up in the first place! Treatment? You have to be kidding. For that treatment to work, you'd need a "boot camp" environment, and even then, what the hell chance do they have once they get out and walk down the street to their local crack-selling pharmacy/bodega/liquor store, government office? No, the only justification for legalization of hard drugs under that model would be to take the profit from the gangs and give it to the government, who will then piss it away on ineffective treatment? deny treatment to addicts? Then you are back to square one, because then the illegal market will return.

Dont get me started on tobacco, or our treatment of vets!

BedStuyDoOrDie wrote: We tried making alcohol illegal. What we got was the birth of organized crime, hundreds of people dying from poorly manufactured bathtub gin, and millions wasted on law enforcement to combat the sale of booze. This is essentially what's happening with the War on Drugs. And it's been going on for decades, without improvement.

Guvna wrote:

Lets be clear. Are you saying legalize ALL drugs? I think you said so earlier.

I would consider legalization of so-called soft drugs, but under no circumstances can I envision sanctioning the legalization of hard drugs, including crack and heroin.

Is crack legal in the Netherlands? I dont think so. They seem to make a distinction between soft and hard drugs, legalizing the former and prohibiting the latter.

The Dutch lesson
Two countries took the drugs test. Who passed?


In Holland, there is no war on drugs. They believe this is a social problem, not a criminal one. And all the evidence suggests that their policy works

David Rose reports from Utrecht
Sunday February 24, 2002
The Observer

On the busy road which skirts Hoog Catherijne, a vast indoor shopping mall, the Stationsplein centre in downtown Utrecht looks like some kind of clinic. The walls are tiled, the floor is bright linoleum. There's a neat reception area and, four days a week, a nurse. Stationsplein's main business happens in a row of glass-fronted rooms, equipped with benches and sinks. In one of them crack addicts suck vapours from makeshift pipes; in another, heroin smokers chase the dragon. A final space is reserved for injectors. It goes without saying that their state-provided needles are clean.

'There is no war on drugs in the Netherlands,' says Machel Vewer, a senior police detective who has spent the past decade working with addicts. 'What's the point of making war on part of your own country? Drugs are here and they're always going to be. This is a social problem, not a criminal one, and the whole of society has to tackle it - not leave it to the police on their own.

'This means accepting that addicts are people too: that they have their backgrounds, their stories, and you have to respect them. They can still lead useful lives, and they're not a lost group. If you look at England, France, Spain, they all have drug problems. But Holland started thinking about how to deal with this much earlier. We're not deluded we can solve the problem entirely, but we can contain it, make it controllable. You are 20 years behind.'

This is no utopia. Around the stairwells and walkways of Hoog Catherijne, Utrecht's addicts, many of them homeless, are highly visible: hunched, gaunt, unshaven. The mall and its customers, brimming with prosperity, present an inevitable target for thefts to fund pur chases from dealers, which still remain illegal. But measured against the near-catastrophe of drugs policy in Britain, the evidence suggests the Dutch are right.

BedStuyDoOrDie wrote:
When I get the time I will reply at length. Hard drugs are STILL illegal there, and them cracking down on dealers/importers happens here too. Also, as I noted above, their alcohol and tobacco usage among teens is higher than ours. There's a lot wrong with the dutch model, though they may offer something worth looking at as far as legalizing soft drugs.

But to answer your question about tobacco and cigarettes, you should ask me first if I think we should allow cigarettes in the first place.