cannabisnews.com: 'Just Say No' To Drug Legalization of Any Variety





'Just Say No' To Drug Legalization of Any Variety
Posted by CN Staff on September 29, 2004 at 11:31:36 PT
By U.S. Sen. Jon Kyl, Special to the Examiner
Source: Coolidge Examiner 
For sure, as Office of National Drug Control Policy Director John P. Walters recently pointed out in the National Review, "legalization has enticed intelligent commentators for years, no doubt because it offers, on the surface, a simple solution to a complex problem." But Walters adds that "reasoned debate on the consequences usually dampens enthusiasm, leaving many erstwhile proponents feeling mugged by reality." 
Just for starters, drug use would increase if it were legalized. The bedrock economic law of supply and demand guarantees that narcotics would become cheaper and easier to get once unencumbered by legal risk and promoted by the great American marketing machine. The effect would be ruinous, even in the case of "soft" drugs like marijuana, which is already responsible for nearly two-thirds of individuals who meet psychiatric criteria for substance-abuse treatment. And marijuana is a widely-acknowledged "gateway" drug; In Holland, where it was legalized in 1976, heroin addiction levels subsequently tripled. Fortunately, while few would argue that victory is within sight, pessimism over the future of the war on drugs has been vastly overstated. Consider:* The claim is often made that hundreds of thousands of purportedly harmless, "recreational" marijuana users are behind bars, straining judicial resources and diverting the attention of law enforcement from more serious crimes. But Walters points out that fewer than 1 percent of those imprisoned for drug offenses are low-level marijuana users, and many of them have "pled down" to a marijuana charge to avoid other, weightier convictions. "The vast majority of those in prison on drug convictions," he says, "are true criminals involved in drug trafficking, repeat offenses, or violent crime."* Proponents of legalization also argue that because about half of all referrals for substance-abuse treatment come from the criminal justice system, the law is more of a problem than marijuana itself. But the same is true of referrals for alcohol treatment, and no one argues that alcoholism is a fiction created by the courts. Marijuana's role in emergency-room visits has tripled over the past decade, not because judges are sending patients to the hospital, but because of the well-documented increasing potency of the drug.* In surveys, eight times as many Americans report regular use of alcohol than of marijuana. The law is a big part of the reason why. Far from a hopeless battle, the war on drugs has made significant progress. According to the Drug Enforcement Administration, overall drug abuse is down by more than a third in the last twenty years. Cocaine use in particular has dropped by an astounding 70 percent.* Like the battle against cancer and other diseases, this war will and must continue. The alternative is too dreadful to contemplate. As Walters puts it, "Drug legalizers will not be satisfied with a limited distribution of medical marijuana, nor will they stop at legal marijuana for sale in convenience stores ... Using the discourse of rights without responsibilities, the effort strives to establish an entitlement to addictive substances. The impact will be devastating." If you've ever known someone hooked on drugs, you know what he means. Source: Coolidge Examiner (AZ)Author: U.S. Sen. Jon Kyl, Special to the ExaminerPublished: September 29, 2004 Copyright: 2004 Casa Grande Valley Newspapers Inc. Related Articles:No Surrender The Drug War Saves Liveshttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread19490.shtmlIt's Time To Rethink and Reform Drug Laws http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread19445.shtmlHigh Time To Eliminate Drug Laws?http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread19118.shtmlAn End To Marijuana Prohibition http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread19112.shtml
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #32 posted by dididadadidit on September 30, 2004 at 11:00:43 PT
It's Only ONE % Jailed for Low Level Marijuana
The drug war liars like to trot out this old lie as it diminishes the argument that we are filling our jails with low level drug offenders (which indeed we are). But, even if their 1% lie were even true, with a 2 million prison population, that's still an astounding 20,000 incarcerated over nothing at all and subject to post release harrassment, namely, like trying to compete on a level playing field with rapists, hold-up artists, and low level murderers for a college loan.Here I am, down the rabbit hole with Alice, without even benefit of drugs. Crazy. Absolutely insane.Cheers?
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #31 posted by Scandum on September 30, 2004 at 02:11:53 PT
Heroin addiction levels in Holland
Heroin addiction levels lowered in Holland after the legalization, they did not triple. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #30 posted by Robbie on September 29, 2004 at 22:03:37 PT
Don't pay special attention to Kyl
He's a right-wing Repuke of the brownest stripe. He's a liar in a cadre of liars who want to impose their "morals" on people while chirping about "big government". 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #29 posted by John Tyler on September 29, 2004 at 20:36:52 PT
Off Topic: Ecstasy & Therapy II
Back in the spring Peter Jennings had a show on about Ecstacy. He essentially said that it was actually OK, and everyting the gov. said against it was a lie. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #28 posted by John Tyler on September 29, 2004 at 20:28:38 PT
U.S. Sen. Jon Kyl,
I have to ask, is the Senator that ignorant of the facts of which he writes, or is he lying? A thoughtful, reasoned, researched effort on this subject would reveal some truthful insights, yet he spouts old cliches that have been proven false long ago. If this is an example of how he performs his Senatorial duties, perhapse he should seek another line of work. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #27 posted by Hope on September 29, 2004 at 18:39:26 PT
Oh, rchandar...
I'm so relieved to hear from you.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #26 posted by Hope on September 29, 2004 at 18:38:24 PT
"send a telegram"
It's attributed to several different people. I think I may have heard it first from Kaptinemo.Some people attribute it to Samuel Goldwyn. He apparently...as well as other artists...said it when asked about the "message" in his work. He replied that if he wanted to send a message he'd send a telegram.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #25 posted by rchandar on September 29, 2004 at 18:06:10 PT:
the article sucks
This is just a stupid, unresearched, and biased article. It commandeers people to obey, without any real questioning, the current drug policy.Where is the concern for those whose lives were ruined, by overzealous arrest policies?Why do we have to innocently believe in this destructive and pointless war?Why do we, in peacetime, have to respect the rights of war-hawks who decide for us?Millions will find this article objectionable. It is a stupid article, and America has more drug addicts per capita than any other nation in the world. Stupid. Period.--rchandar
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #24 posted by FoM on September 29, 2004 at 17:30:43 PT
Hope
Send a telegram! I never heard that before! That's really good. Sometimes I think our english language allows for to many ways out for politicians and lawyers. What happened to yes meaning yes and no meaning no? Now no might mean maybe. A yes could mean maybe not. No wonder the young people are confused. Heck I'm confused! LOL!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #23 posted by Hope on September 29, 2004 at 17:23:54 PT
Absolutely beautiful, global warming
You wrote, "Just remember this Jon old boy, it is currently easier for children to obtain illegal drugs that it is for common beer, and while you stand up in your grandeur and preach about such forbearance, realize that your beliefs and judgments not only continue this madness of prohibition but jeopardize what this America is about, what this America is made from, the history of civilization and the emancipation from the shackles of tyranny and currently corporate greed.For all the corporations, you may win in the courts, but you will lose in the fields, for the common man will survive long past your failed efforts to control, long past your short life span, long past your ignorance of the understanding of the bounty of nature and God."
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #22 posted by Hope on September 29, 2004 at 17:19:12 PT
FoM, You are so right in "Words"
I laughed out loud when I read, "I want to say when I see that attitude who died and made you boss."I feel the same way. I guess one of the things "they" say that annoys me the most and jumps right to my nausea center is, "What message are we sending our children?""Send a telegram"!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #21 posted by global_warming on September 29, 2004 at 16:01:30 PT
My Sympathies
To the folks in Arizona,How they could have elected such a dipshit as this balding little schmuck makes we wonder about Arizonians..http://www.vote-smart.org/bio.php?can_id=H0121103http://kyl.senate.gov/"Just for starters, drug use would increase if it were legalized. The bedrock economic law of supply and demand guarantees that narcotics would become cheaper and easier to get once unencumbered by legal risk and promoted by the great American marketing machine."Just remember this Jon old boy, it is currently easier for children to obtain illegal drugs that it is for common beer, and while you stand up in your grandeur and preach about such forbearance, realize that your beliefs and judgments not only continue this madness of prohibition but jeopardize what this America is about, what this America is made from, the history of civilization and the emancipation from the shackles of tyranny and currently corporate greed.For all the corporations, you may win in the courts, but you will lose in the fields, for the common man will survive long past your failed efforts to control, long past your short life span, long past your ignorance of the understanding of the bounty of nature and God.We will light candle to celebrate your demise..good riddance , for not even your children will miss you..
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #20 posted by FoM on September 29, 2004 at 15:38:00 PT
Words
Let me see if I can say what annoys me most often.I don't mind constructive advice. I will listen for hours on end but when someone uses words that are condescending while they are trying to teach me something I tune out. I see this condescending manner in many people who are our "leaders" I want to say when I see that attitude who died and made you boss.It is a real turn off to me. I literally tune out and it is almost becomes impossible to get me to tune back in.People that control laws that govern us have no concept of politeness it seems. This country is supposed to be a democracy not a dictatorship.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #19 posted by Hope on September 29, 2004 at 15:33:41 PT
E Johnson, Lenin
Lenin, an old "zero tolerance" guy. He and Walters and the rest of them could have some fine old baffling "Zero Tolerance" conversations with each other. "Liberalism is a childhood disease of Marxism-Leninism and must be eradicated by any means necessary."When will reality "mug" them and let them realize that they are the worst danger...worse than what they propose to be fighting.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #18 posted by Hope on September 29, 2004 at 15:26:12 PT
The reality is
He's got the power to make many people miserable if they don't do exactly as he says, right or wrong, and he won't relinquish it easily. That's what reality means to him and the rest of us, who disagree with him and his ways, just might as well accept the "reality" of it.He's trying to "baffle" us. Us being We, the People. He,being the State (or it's mouthpiece).
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #17 posted by Hope on September 29, 2004 at 15:19:55 PT
Right, FoM
He's been "mugged" by reality before? His provacative and condescending sentence is political double speak at it's finest."If you can't dazzle them with brilliance...baffle them with bullshit."
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #16 posted by E_Johnson on September 29, 2004 at 15:19:29 PT
Lenin used the same analogy
Lenin wrote, "Liberalism is a childhood disease of Marxism-Leninism and must be eradicated by any means necessary."
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #15 posted by Hope on September 29, 2004 at 15:17:08 PT
"reasoned debate"
He can't be talking about real reasoned debate. He has to only be talking about prohibitionist reasoning...which isn't reasonable.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #14 posted by FoM on September 29, 2004 at 15:12:01 PT
Mugged By Reality
I don't think I've ever been mugged by reality. I've been enlightened when reality is shown clearly to me.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #13 posted by Hope on September 29, 2004 at 15:04:03 PT
b4daylight 
"reasoned debate on the consequences usually dampens enthusiasm, leaving many erstwhile proponents feeling mugged by reality." That sentence has bugged me for days. Would you or someone translate it down to my level. It makes me feel like I have dyslexia.Maybe it's these bi-focals.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #12 posted by Hope on September 29, 2004 at 15:00:57 PT
Warhater, you're right! I didn't even catch that!
You wrote, "How dare you compare your fascist drug war to the noble struggle against cancer."
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #11 posted by Hope on September 29, 2004 at 14:54:39 PT
He's like a man
who is afraid of his own shadow. He's like someone who believes he has a lot more power over other people than he actually does. Oh he has the power to punish, but he doesn't control the will of any man like he might think he does. He thinks he's holding back an ocean with a little piece of paper. I think he's a little out of touch with reality and doesn't know it."* Like the battle against cancer and other diseases, this war will and must continue. The alternative is too dreadful to contemplate"
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #10 posted by Hope on September 29, 2004 at 14:47:21 PT
Sam...about the redneck liar
"* Like the battle against cancer and other diseases, this war will and must continue. The alternative is too dreadful to contemplate"He may actually, albeit foolishly, be that afraid. Problem is he should be aware of how dreadful things ARE, now, and he's apparently not.I once had a fierce argument with one of my little brothers, who was a truck driver. On legalization, etc., he said, "You mean to tell me that you want people out there on the highway in cars and trucks using drugs?" This punctuated by arm waving and looking at me like I was surely the moron of morons.I just looked at him and asked, "And they are not now?"He was stunned for a moment...then he realized the truth. Regulation and control are a better way of dealing with what might or might not be a problem.Prohibition of a substance that many people like and want or enjoy has always failed in it’s objective and it gives birth to hideous things that shouldn’t be.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #9 posted by E_Johnson on September 29, 2004 at 14:41:48 PT
Heer are Kyl's PACs
http://capwiz.com/norml2/bio/fec/?id=203&cycle=2003-2004
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #8 posted by b4daylight on September 29, 2004 at 14:38:52 PT
We are already there
"reasoned debate on the consequences usually dampens enthusiasm, leaving many erstwhile proponents feeling mugged by reality." He will not debate though.
Anyone else catch that.
How many times has he been asked to debate?Secondly I want this question asked. 
How can a controlled substance be Illegal and still protect america fairly?
The very nature of this sentence repersents Communism. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #7 posted by warhater on September 29, 2004 at 14:36:08 PT:
Letter to Jon Kyl
"In Holland, where it was legalized in 1976, heroin addiction levels subsequently tripled."Leave it to you anti's to find a statistical rock in a pile of diamonds. He forgot to mention that fewer kids use pot in Holland then in the United States. Legalization in Holland has been a success. Trying to convince ignorant soccer Moms that pot leads to heroin is pathetic and manipulative."...The vast majority of those in prison on drug convictions," he says, "are true criminals involved in drug trafficking, repeat offenses, or violent crime."Yes, but even though recreational users rarely go to prison they get their drivers licences suspended and are burdened with a criminal record. This can ruin a person financially. It also wastes law enforcement and court resources on non-violent non-criminals. Cities like Chicago recognize this and have taken steps to turn MJ possession into a summary offense."...Proponents of legalization also argue that because about half of all referrals for substance-abuse treatment come from the criminal justice system, the law is more of a problem than marijuana itself. But the same is true of referrals for alcohol treatment, and no one argues that alcoholism is a fiction created by the courts."This is a meaningless argument. Nobody is arrested for drinking or possessing alcohol. If you drink and come into contact with law enforcement it is because you committed another crime. Commiting a crime while drunk is a sign of a problem drinker. Many drunks get into bar fights or drive home completely loaded. These people often need rehab. Marijuana possession itself is a crime and many people who are convicted are required to attend rehab even though they lead otherwise crime free lives. I would love to see what percent of people who go into rehab voluntarily say they are "marijuana addicts". I've known many people who have smoked potent bud regularly and quit without any withdrawal symptoms. Marijuana is not physically addictive. Stop lying."Marijuana's role in emergency-room visits has tripled over the past decade, not because judges are sending patients to the hospital, but because of the well-documented increasing potency of the drug."People smoke less high potency MJ then low potency MJ. You don't get extra high from kind bud, You just smoke less. This is a good thing. The increased hospital visits due to MJ is fiction. People don't go to the hospital because of high potency pot overdoses. It is impossible to to overdose on pot. When a person goes to the hospital for an injury the medical staff asks them what drugs they take. If they say they smoke pot then this is called "a Marijuana related hospital visit"."Far from a hopeless battle, the war on drugs has made significant progress. According to the Drug Enforcement Administration, overall drug abuse is down by more than a third in the last twenty years. Cocaine use in particular has dropped by an astounding 70 percent."There are a lot fewer kids then there were twenty years ago. We are an aging population. a 40 year old is far less likely to take hard drugs than a 20 year old. I suspect that many more people take psychoactive prescription drugs than 20 years ago. Illegal drugs are as available as they have ever been."Like the battle against cancer and other diseases, this war will and must continue."How dare you compare your fascist drug war to the noble struggle against cancer. If you clowns ran the war on cancer we would arrest everyone with a mole or a swollen prostate and force them to attend a cancer treatment camp. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #6 posted by mayan on September 29, 2004 at 14:01:03 PT
Bought & Sold
All of Senator Kyl's lies have been debunked here many times so I feel no need to address them . I do,however, wonder just what industries are paying the Senator to spew such cripe. Petrochemical? Pharmaceutical? Alcohol? Tobacco? Cotton? Timber? Law enforcement or prison? All of the above??? What a lying scumbag.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #5 posted by Dan B on September 29, 2004 at 13:46:25 PT
Just One of Many Points.
I just want to focus on one point raised by the Senator. I could address all of these points if I had the time, but I don't have the time, and this one stands out to me for some reason."In surveys, eight times as many Americans report regular use of alcohol than of marijuana. The law is a big part of the reason why. Far from a hopeless battle, the war on drugs has made significant progress. According to the Drug Enforcement Administration, overall drug abuse is down by more than a third in the last twenty years. Cocaine use in particular has dropped by an astounding 70 percent."Actually, I have talked to many people who have said that they have tried cannabis and simply "didn't like it." The same can be said for alcohol, of course, but in our society such is usually not the case. Some of the difference, then, can be attributed to the fact that perhaps fewer people overall enjoy it. Many also associate the dangers of tobacco smoke with cannabis smoke, and as a result they prefer to get their highs another way.That being said, one main factor in illegal drug use being "down by more than a third in the last twenty years" is the fact that some high-profile people (Kurt Cobain, John Belushi, Chris Farley, Layne Staley, Shannon Hoon, etc.) have died from cocaine and heroin overdoses in or around that time period, and that has awakened a renewed understanding that these (hard) drugs actually do kill. Cocaine use scaled way back when high profile people started to die from it, just as tobacco use began to scale back after Yul Brynner did his famous commercial against smoking. My point is that to say that the law is the cause of a decrease in overall drug usage is to ignore myriad other factors that are at least as likely to be the cause. Cocaine was illegal back in 1972; why did it escalate for another twelve or so years and then begin to decrease? Further, if drug use is down, why are deaths due to drug overdoses up? According to government statistics, such deaths have increased more than 15 fold since the early 1980s. Why do hospital emergency room visits continue to increase? According to the article, that's the fault of the mythical "well-documented increasing potency" of marijuana, but the increase in emergency room visits is more likely the result of (1) increased reporting of such incidents at hospitals overall, and (2) an increase of new cannabis users who are not yet accustomed to its effects. The latter reason is consistent with an increasing--not decreasing--use of illegal drugs overall.Finally, it is interesting that the author chose the statistics of 20 years ago for comparisons of drug use. The latest year for which statistics are available is 2002, and 20 years before that would be 1982. The closest numbers that I could find were for 1979 and 1985, so let's compare. In 1979, for all age groups, 31.3% of respondents to the survey said that they had used an illegal substance some time in their lives. That figure for 1985 is 34.4%. The figure for 2002 is 41.7%. Rather than decreasing, then, overall lifetime use has actually increased and is currently at an all time high (no pun intended).Let us, then, look at the figures for admitted drug use in the past year. For 1979 that figure was 17.5%, and for 1985 it was 16.3%. For 2002 the percentage had in fact decreased to 12.6%. But wait a minute; look at what that percentage did in the intervening years while the drug war continued to escalate: by 1988 it decreased to 12.4%, and by 1993 it was at an all time low of 10.3%. Since that time self-reports of drug use have steadily climbed to their current rate of 12.6%--higher than the rate for 1986. If anything, then, the "war on drugs" has no relationship with actual reported drug use.No, the "war on drugs" has not decreased drug use. In fact, it seems to have had no effect whatsoever, other than providing price controls for drug dealers. Just in case anyone thinks I have "cooked the books," I found my statistics on the ONDCP website:
http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/publications/factsht/druguse/Dan B
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #4 posted by Sam Adams on September 29, 2004 at 12:41:48 PT
redneck liar
* Like the battle against cancer and other diseases, this war will and must continue. The alternative is too dreadful to contemplateWhat? In the battle against cancer, failed treatment protocols are quickly discarded, not ramped up. If we treated the war on cancer like we do cannabis, the government would be spending $80 billion a year on leaches & bleeding centers."The alternative is too dreadful to contemplate." That is a terrifying statement! He's basically saying, oh, it's too scary for you simple-minded folk to even think about!  Don't even speak the word! (legalization). Don't even think it! Lest your puny minds explode from the strain.Kyl is a modern-day High Priest of the Inquisition. Really, weren't those times better than today? At least the Catholic Church had some cool clothes, ritualistic chanting, etc.  They had many different and imaginative means of torture. Today we get rich men in suits that throw you in prison to be raped. Cruel and boring at the same time. No class or style in this corporate 1984 world, that's for damn sure.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #3 posted by E_Johnson on September 29, 2004 at 12:17:28 PT
Here is Senator Kyl's page at NORML
http://capwiz.com/norml2/bio/?id=203&lvl=C&chamber=SWe can send him a message via NORML.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by FoM on September 29, 2004 at 11:43:59 PT
Off Topic: Ecstasy & Therapy
It may be illegal but the popular “club drug” MDMA is coming back to its psychotherapeutic roots. Complete Article: http://www.slweekly.com/editorial/2004/feat_2004-09-30.cfm
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by FoM on September 29, 2004 at 11:39:25 PT
About This Article
I looked and looked to find a email that would be for a LTE but really to no avail. They don't even have a good web site link. I thought you all would want to read it anyway. 
[ Post Comment ]


Post Comment