chris, Hence, address and resolve the causes of addiction.
arthur .....which are??? how long might this take? what do we do in the meantime? -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2004 6:41 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Futurework] Possible U.S. cutbacks? Pete Vincent wrote: > Everything quoted here (below) would apply pretty much equally to > alcohol, yet alcohol is universally legal, and most people are able > to manage it quite well. With the endemic proliferation of "alco-pops" among youth, that last statement becomes increasingly untrue. > More importantly, experience has shown > that prohibition results in worse problems. The bottom line here > is that there is a population which is vulnerable to psychological > dependencies, and if they don't acquire dependency on one thing, > they will just focus on something else. True, that's why I wrote (in my first posting of this thread) that the solution is to address the causes of addiction as such. But that's not what the drug legalizers want -- on the contrary. > If they've been socialized > to resist strongly psychoactive chemicals, they will just turn to > something acceptable within their worldview, such as sex or > chocolate. Yup, but at least these may have less destructive effects. > All psychoactive substances should be legalized, regulated, and > vigourously taxed. Too much damage and too little deterrence. The variety and potency (in addictiveness & harm) of synthetic drugs is practically infinite. If you "vigorously tax" them, you get a black market, i.e. the mafia comes in thru the backdoor again (-> present tobacco suggling high 5). > Social and legal sanction should deny access to these > substances for minors ^^^^^^ Practice shows that this doesn't work. If the substance is legal, then minors have access in large numbers too. > and dependencies should be regarded as a > medical problem of a psychosocial nature, requiring treatment > funded out of the tax money collected. Tinkering with symptoms is not enough. Doesn't work with tobacco and alcohol either. > If someone is > going to spin these data so hard that they intend to use it to justify > cannabis prohibition, they must accept that this argument requires > alcohol be prohibited as well. Otherwise, the perception of hypocrisy > will undermine respect for their position. And as prohibition of > alcohol is thoroughly discredited, it is clear that their position > is untenable. Bottom line: Prohibition won't work and legalization won't work either. Hence, address and resolve the causes of addiction. Duh! Chris ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SpamWall: Mail to this addy is deleted unread unless it contains the keyword "igve". _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
