Posts like this remind me of one of my central objections to the War on Drugs' supporters' arguments. They claim that if drugs are legalized that there will be a plague of violence and mayhem, but that has not happened in the Czech Republic which serves as a good model for how we might begin a process of legalization. What this belief says about those who subscribe to it is that they do not believe that their neighbors have the good sense to not get addicted to hard drugs. It's really quite arrogant as it is a not so subtle way of saying that pretty much everyone but you is an idiot.
Alcohol is not as potent as many hard drugs, but it is a very easy way of achieving the same effect. If most people were that stupid, there would be an uncontrollable wave of alcohol-induced violence and mayhem long before there would be one brought on by heroin, cocaine or methamphetamines. I am far more cynical than most drug war supporters, but even I am willing to give the average person the benefit of the doubt that they are not that stupid.
If there was a "plague of violence and mayhem", how would these people manage to discern the difference - and why did they miss it before?
And just how in the hell did I miss being the first to sieze on this post? :p
Having been nestled in the sweet bosom of Mother Britainia now for nearly 3 years, and having befriended or acquinted with nearly 2 dozen Dutch kids between school and social circles in that time, I was shocked to find out that a whopping 0% smoked pot or did hard drugs. What get's lost on those outside looking in on the Dutch experiment is that the Dutch are savvy enough to realize the "forbidden fruit" element removed reduces the most interest in something.
I catched a cab ride off a driver from either Ghana or Nigeria back when I was in beantown. He told me that some long-gone bannana dictator made pot possesion punishable by like 18 years in prision or something, and that the place looked like a Cheech and Chong movie. Now that it's legalized, he said you could get a QP for five bucks.
My personal beliefs on drug legalization, are like that of dry cities and counties. If individual communities chose to forbid a substance being sold there, I'm all for it. Don't like it? You have the right of association and two feet to take you to more like minded places.
Doesn't surprise me in the least! Alcohol was, from what I understand, the same way during prohibition. The only reason that alcohol is still widely consumed is that it is easier and more enjoyable to consume it in a social setting. A mixed drink is a lot more sociable than smoking crack...
Still, the effects of hard drugs are widely known. It's a rather incredible display of arrogance and cynicism, even by my (non-)standards to think that most people want to put themselves at that sort of risk for a cheap high.