News (Media Awareness Project) - CN BC: LTE: Decriminalizing Marijuana Is Not The Answer |
Title: | CN BC: LTE: Decriminalizing Marijuana Is Not The Answer |
Published On: | 2003-06-26 |
Source: | Prince George Citizen (CN BC) |
Fetched On: | 2008-01-20 03:10:29 |
DECRIMINALIZING MARIJUANA IS NOT THE ANSWER
Dear sir:
Re: Banning drugs is causing more harm than good (letter, June 23).
I request Mr. Randell and his family to accept my sincerest condolences at
the loss of their child; I cannot even begin to understand their pain.
Neither am I suggesting that my views, expressed here, relate to him or his
family.
Unfortunately, though, his letter misses the basic argument in trying to
help others caught in the hell of addiction. Suffice it to say that I am a
child of the '50s. I have travelled worldwide and worked with communities
caught up in the drugs wars on four continents for 30 years.
De-criminalizing drugs, which is the first step to legalizing them, is not
the answer. The argument that marijuana is not an entry-level drug has been
proved time and again to be a no-brainer, put out by trendy, drug-using
dilettantes who are looking for money-making careers and who are
sufficiently clever to sell the idea to booze-addled nincompoops in the
various senates and politically-motivated judiciaries. These people who
make these stupid decisions are basically driven by ego and self-service,
rather than concern for society. (Read Mezz Mezzrow-Really the Blues for a
less academic but realistic understanding of drug sub-cultural processes.)
The drug cartels of South America and the warlords of the Golden Triangle
and Afghanistan have, after subjugating the local populaces, declared war
on western society. The drugs business is about money and those who support
these people understand clearly the dreadful outcomes of their actions, but
they don't care.
Don't be mistaken that it is about anything else. Use of charter arguments
about rights and freedoms are trickery of the worst kind. If somebody
poured gasoline over a child and set that child on fire, would anyone
suggest that this was not illegal and immoral, never mind psychotic or
sociopathic? Once a pusher has the victim in his or her clutches, their
selling of drugs has no less an impact, be the drug "soft" or "hard." If
the victim has $20, the pusher, or using the business parlance that is now
politically acceptable, the supplier, wants that money.
This fight is not about freedom of choice, it is about worldwide death and
destruction.
- -- Mike Shepherd
Prince George
Dear sir:
Re: Banning drugs is causing more harm than good (letter, June 23).
I request Mr. Randell and his family to accept my sincerest condolences at
the loss of their child; I cannot even begin to understand their pain.
Neither am I suggesting that my views, expressed here, relate to him or his
family.
Unfortunately, though, his letter misses the basic argument in trying to
help others caught in the hell of addiction. Suffice it to say that I am a
child of the '50s. I have travelled worldwide and worked with communities
caught up in the drugs wars on four continents for 30 years.
De-criminalizing drugs, which is the first step to legalizing them, is not
the answer. The argument that marijuana is not an entry-level drug has been
proved time and again to be a no-brainer, put out by trendy, drug-using
dilettantes who are looking for money-making careers and who are
sufficiently clever to sell the idea to booze-addled nincompoops in the
various senates and politically-motivated judiciaries. These people who
make these stupid decisions are basically driven by ego and self-service,
rather than concern for society. (Read Mezz Mezzrow-Really the Blues for a
less academic but realistic understanding of drug sub-cultural processes.)
The drug cartels of South America and the warlords of the Golden Triangle
and Afghanistan have, after subjugating the local populaces, declared war
on western society. The drugs business is about money and those who support
these people understand clearly the dreadful outcomes of their actions, but
they don't care.
Don't be mistaken that it is about anything else. Use of charter arguments
about rights and freedoms are trickery of the worst kind. If somebody
poured gasoline over a child and set that child on fire, would anyone
suggest that this was not illegal and immoral, never mind psychotic or
sociopathic? Once a pusher has the victim in his or her clutches, their
selling of drugs has no less an impact, be the drug "soft" or "hard." If
the victim has $20, the pusher, or using the business parlance that is now
politically acceptable, the supplier, wants that money.
This fight is not about freedom of choice, it is about worldwide death and
destruction.
- -- Mike Shepherd
Prince George
Member Comments |
No member comments available...