--- Jim Devine <jdevine03 at gmail.com> wrote:
> In general, US anti-drug policy raises drug prices,
> which encourages
> smuggling, turf wars, etc.
Did not I acknowledged that in my posting? I disagree with you, however, that drugs - or alcohol - are violence and social cost free. Cocaine often produces violent outbursts. Opium derivatives (morphine, heroine) are addictive, and addiction can have quite adverse effect on the addict and his/her family, including violent outbursts (esp. during withdrawal).
Even pot, which indeed is quite benign and soporific, in some individuals it can produce paranoid reactions, extreme agitation and irritability, which may trigger violence.
Or take alcohol, which is legal. True, you do not have gangsterism associated with it (at least since the Prohibition,) but there is a lot of violence and victimization, not to mention social cost, linked to alcohol consumption itself: domestic violence, assaults, accidents, people becoming dysfunctional, homeless and dying prematurely.
The bottom line is that there is a considerable social cost associated with substance abuse, period. That social cost may be exacerbated by idiotic drug policies (such as one in the US) or may be ameliorated by a different set of policies - such as decriminalizing the use of narcotic substances coupled with suffcient means to institutionalize, in a humane way, people who become dysfunctional or dangerous due to substance abuse. I personally favor the latter on the grounds that it is not government's business what people do to their bodies (including offing themselves if they wish), but it is government's business when dysfucntional people pose a threat to others.
Wojtek
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com