On 27 May 2008, at 05:07, Ronn! Blankenship wrote: > While those conservatives not > only admit that the so-called "War on Drugs" does not seem to have > worked or indeed done much good at all in reducing demand for and use > of drugs, but also many of them believe that some of the powers given > to law enforcement and the courts in the name of said "War on Drugs" > go too far and have been shown in practice to have been used to > harass, imprison and even kill under color of law the innocent*, they > don't see how blanket legalization will reduce the number of people > who will drive while impaired and then cause accidents or keep drugs > out of the schools and away from their minor children any better than > the current laws [fail to] do.
The perception I get from US popular culture is that drugs are *far more* accessible to minors in the US because they are illegal and unregulated. An alcohol seller can lose their essential license for selling to minors; a drug dealer has no license. It is difficult to campaign against driving under the influence of drugs when taking them is already completely illegal anyway. The success of anti drink-drive campaigns is because drink is legal and driving under the influence is not. "Don't take drugs under any circumstances and also don't take them and drive" Maru -- William T Goodall Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/ "I embraced OS X as soon as it was available and have never looked back." - Neal Stephenson _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
