Drug usage is unquestionably lower as a result of the laws in place, which is their purpose. They are working. Turf wars take place regardless of drugs as do shootings and other crimes. You have no evidence to suggest that making marijuana legal would remedy any of these issues.
-Gary Eli Allen said the following on 8/25/2005 4:12 PM: > I'd define working as a decrease in the usage, decrease in ability to > get the drugs, decrease in crimes related to the drugs (stealing to > get money to pay for them, shootings over who has rights to a certain > turf for selling drugs, etc) And this decrease should be significant, > especially for the area of related crimes as I'd argue those effect > others besides just the user to a much larger degree so are more > important. > > Using that definition I'd say they aren't working > > Eli > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gary Udstrand" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "The Hardware List" <[email protected]> > Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2005 3:56 PM > Subject: Re: [H] Gas prices > > >> Your problem is you have failed to define working. If by working you >> mean are they acting as a deterrent, then they are working. If you are >> defining working as the complete eradication of drugs from society then >> you are creating nothing more than a canard. >> >> -Gary >> >> >> >> Thane Sherrington said the following on 8/25/2005 2:58 PM: >> >>> At 04:44 PM 25/08/2005, Hayes Elkins wrote: >>> >>>>> And that's one, not several. Please give me some concrete examples >>>>> of harsh drug laws having the desired effect over the long term. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Saudi Arabia - caught with drugs? Bye bye head. >>>> >>>> It's also a GREAT place to live. >>> >>> >>> >>> I think that proves my point. Harsh drug laws just don't work. >>> Unless you feel that leaving in an oppressive regime with no drugs or >>> alcohol is working. >>> >>> T >> >> >> >
