DEALERS EXPOSE LOVED ONES TO ADDICTION

Re: Public demand drives drug industry.

Russell Barth says the dealer's main objective is to provide the needs
of the industry, which the public has created. The public is to blame
for the growing numbers of dealers who are only responding to the
demands of the public. Barth also blames how our society deals with
the altering of senses that result in drug and gun violation.

Although the public demands could be to blame for the "drug-hungry
public," where did they obtain this type of behaviour?

The public is not the only one to blame. The dealers are the people
who open up this addiction to our loved ones. They benefit from the
misery of others and continue to provide their service to make money.

It could be argued the dealers did not force individuals to
participate in these activities.

However, they provided the substance and an environment that accepted
this type of behaviour. Dealers target certain individuals, such as
weak and impressionable people who are easily manipulated to purchase
their substances. Putting the blame on an individual who is not able
to resist the pressure of a dealer is unreasonable.

Barth is also blaming the drug trade for "our society's psychotic
desire to stop certain people from choosing how they would prefer to
alter their senses?"

That this type of behaviour will result in other violations like
gun-related charges.

Society's pressure can be a factor to the growing consumption of
drugs.

In addition, Barth blames the law for the growing drug industry, but
mainly the "media-addled public who keep voting for prohibitionist
hacks who insist only more prohibition will save us from the problem
caused by prohibition."

He is putting the blame on the government and their efforts to help
the public and the public for supporting the government efforts.

In a sense, he wants the government and public to give up and accept
the drug industry because in a way they cannot win.

They allowed the industry to expand so much that the law has no effect
in the way they operate.

Although dismissing the prohibition against the drug industry would
allow an effective way for substances to be given and consumed, the
result could be an increased number of drug-related deaths. The laws
allow the drug industry a longer period for them to distribute their
stuff, which may give the police officer the time to stop them.

Eliminating the laws against the drug industry would only increase the
public's demand and provide more opportunities for dealers.

Barth dismisses the role of the dealers in the increasing consumption
of drugs. Dealers open up opportunities for individuals to participate
in drug activities in a non-judgmental environment. The large number
of demands from the public may be due to the increasing pressure of
the public, which may cause an alteration of senses.

Finally, Barth commented drug prohibition was wrong because in a way
it would not affect the drug business. But it does provide protection
for the public because it limits the drug activities in
neighbourhoods.

Zarah Jamoralin