Inhale
Faulty arguments against drug legalization
November 26, 2004
iranian.com
I am bringing you this article, not as a heavyweight libertarian
who opposes government involvement in people's affairs, but rather
as a conservative who strongly believes in the freedom of the individual
from harmful laws.
I think most of us are in general agreement that the excessive
use of illegal drugs is detrimental to one's health. I am in no
way advocating the use of drugs. I am in no way attempting to provoke
anyone to break the laws of our great nation. I am merely questioning
the logic in continuing a governmental war on drugs that is not
working.
The whole uproar about drugs in the first place is rather odd.
Statistics show that drugs like cocaine kill far less people than
the legal alternatives in the United States. In fact, cocaine kills
less people than swimming pool accidents. To quote statistics from
Dr. Walter Wink, a specialist in the field, "alcohol is associated
with 40 percent of all suicide attempts, 40 percent of all traffic
deaths, 54 percent of all violent crimes, and 10 percent of all
work-related injuries."
Nicotine, the most addictive drug
of all, has transformed lung cancer from a medical curiosity to
a common disease that now accounts for three million deaths a year
worldwide and 60 million since the 1950s. Smoking will kill one
in three smokers eventually. Where is the call for a ban on nicotine?
The same individuals who sit and preach about the "dangers" of
marijuana are the ones pumping their lungs with nicotine from tobacco
use.
Not a single person can document a death related to the use of
marijuana, yet the slow acting and miserable Drug Enforcement Agency
is not even wiling to allow the legalization of it for medical
use. Statistics have also shown that cocaine is not as addictive
as nicotine is, only three percent of those that try it actually
become addicted to it; yet another blow to the traditionalists
on capital hill who sit with their thumbs you know where.
 The statement is frequently made of how "bad, dangerous
and utterly destructive" drugs are and how we as a society
have an obligation to keep them from children. But it's a downright
shame how we as a society can preach so loudly about how damaging
drugs such as ecstasy and marijuana are, but at the same time allow
the consumption of alcohol and cigarettes.
Where is the reliable evidence that
points out the difference between the drugs that are kept illegal
and those that are kept legal? Where is the reliable scientific
evidence?
According to Dr. Benson B. Roe, legalization will lead to purity
assurance under Food and Drug Administration regulation, labeled
concentration of the produce to avoid overdose, obliteration of
vigorous marketing pushers, obliteration of drug crime and reduction
of theft , and finally savings in expensive enforcement and significant
tax revenues. Effort and funds can then be directed to educating
the public about the hazards of all the drugs. Education can work
if it's used properly.
I challenge any of you traditionalists to write me with the "logical" benefits
of keeping drugs illegal.
*
*
|
