[martinizing2]

Hello Doc:

I could make a stab at it. Obama hopes the move to the right will insure his re-election. That's more important than righting a long standing wrong.

Here in Washington, we were on the verge of passing historic legislation that would finally make the distribution of Medical Cannabis orderly. The governor, upon being WARNED by the US Attorney that state employees would be in danger of ARREST IF the law was signed, of course, VETOED it.

That was OBAMA'S DHHS, and it's OBAMA'S US attorney.

Does the blatant hypocrisy you point out make a difference? Nahhhh. Can't be soft on drugs, you know.

excon

I think the outcome would be the same no matter who the US Attorney or President happens to be.

The lies and hypocrisy have been a part of US government policy since the early 1900's when the lies , laws ,and legislation got under way in regards to drugs.

Originally the laws were designed and implemented to make it easier to arrest , convict, and "keep the blacks and mexicans under the governments thumb" since they thought the blacks and mexicans were responsible for bringing it into the US and distributing it.

Those laws that are still being enforced and "enhanced" were never designed to control or abate drugs or their use. They are designed to control people and have worked as well as outlawing alcohol did but on a scale that has put so much money and power into the hands of the criminals , cartels, and gangs they are better funded, organized and armed than any of the agencies trying to stop them.

It is probably the smugglers and cartels working to keep drugs illegal .

What would they have to sell if it were legalized that could even come close to the revenue they are bringing in now?

Nothing.

[geesuzz]

Comparing UK drug laws with the US laws.

Basically The UK is very small but with high population, were as in the US there is plenty of room for prisons. UK prisons are over filled so drug crime makes it less likely to be a prison sentence.

But were ever you live there will always be a percentage that take drugs, I think it is wrong to criminalise a group of people who take different drugs to the ones that are legal.

LSD and MDMA for example is less addictive and less toxic then alcohol

[paraclete]

Alcohol was iliogal in the 1930's in the US, proabition was deemed a bad idear as the trade of alcohol went to the black market and was run by gangsters.

Is drugs being illigal like proabition. Some people decide to take drugs but if they were legal there could be controle over quality.

Or do you think it would be worse for sociatey?

Let's put it this way, making things illegal doesn't seem to stop the problem, in fact it makes it worse, so we haven't tried making drugs legal or at least decriminalising personal use. The government could find an immediate solution to it's cash flow problems by nationalising distribution of drugs

[smoothy]

Let's put it this way, making things illegal doesn't seem to stop the problem, in fact it makes it worse, so we haven't tried making drugs legal or at least decriminalising personal use. The government could find an immediate solution to it's cash flow problems by nationalising distribution of drugs

China had a VERY effective solution to ramant Opium use... of course it was rather draconian and extreme... but damned effective.