Re: drug abuse among the homeless

Brother Nate <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> proffsl wrote:
> > 
> > Legalizing drugs would put an 'effectively-unlimited supply' of completely 
> > legal adult customers, virtually eliminating any predisposition to sell 
> > drugs to children.
> 
> And that's why legal alcohol is our #1 under-aged drug abuse problem?

Fact is, something has to be "our #1 under-aged drug abuse problem". 
Even if only one child abused drugs, and that drug was alcohol,
alcohol would still be "our #1 under-aged drug abuse problem".  Fact
is, alcohol always has been "our #1 under-aged drug abuse problem",
even before other drugs were outlawed.  As alcohol has always been
"our #1 under-aged drug abuse problem", I fail to see how you believe
outlawing drugs other than alcohol proves alcohol is "our #1
under-aged drug abuse problem" because it's legal.


> The actual facts of legal substances don't bear out your claims about 
> what would happen to illegal ones after legalization.

Nathan, try to consider this:  Let's say biking is the #1 child
accident problem.  Now, let's say rollerskating is outlawed.  Biking
will STILL BE the #1 child accident problem!!!  Do you really presume
to believe that just because rollerskating was outlawed, biking is the
#1 child accident problem because it's legal?


> > > Actually any drug abuse opponent in his or her right mind would point 
> > > out that most children do NOT try drugs, and of those who do try them 
> > > most don't go on to become chronic abusers.
> > 
> > So, you're saying that child drug use is insignificant,,,
> 
> No, I am pointing out the fallacy in your assumption that "They're going to 
> do it anyway".

Fact is, dispite all the best intentions, some children ARE "going to
do it anyway".  Failure to recognize this fact is itself criminal. 
Just as criminal as it would be to leave young children with dangerous
equipment and having no child guards, regardless if you warned them of
the dangers.


> The fact of the matter is that most are NOT going to do it, 

Fact is, child guards aren't for those children who are "NOT going to
do it".  Fact is, some ARE going to do it, and that is why we have
child guards.  Which makes me wonder why you do not ask yourself: "If
some children ARE going to use drugs, which drugs would be least
harmfull, drugs produced by criminal black markets, or drugs produced
by licensed producers?"


> and less use illegal drugs than either of the 2 legal ones.

Because, less used those currently illegal drugs even BEFORE they were
illegal!  NOT because their currently illegal!


> > > And the answer to question 1) is still that the legal drugs are the 
> > > ones that are our biggest problems among minors.
> > 
> > Yet, in that school raid, they were looking for children selling 
> > Illegal Drugs, NOT alcohol or tobacco!
> 
> I am no more accountable for that bad decision than you are for the 
> homeless people who shoot up with dirty needles.

I disagree.  You DO promote prohibition, which leads to just such
school raids.  I DO NOT promote drug abuse, much less using dirty
needles.

I have told you numerous times, and now once again:  I DO NOT promote
drug abuse.  I denounce prohibition, the War on Drugs, as being
COUNTER PRODUCTIVE to Reducing Drug Abuse.