Tuesday, November 14, 2006

Silver Age Party - Second Plank

Okay remember the name of the party is because of the comic book era and not what color my hair is becoming!

So the second plank is a greater liberalization of laws and this also would reduce the overall cost of government.

I believe we should legalize almost all the drugs and legalize prostitution.

The War on Drugs has been lost. You cannot legislate morality and the illegal drug trade creates a lot of the crime in our country. I'm not saying to make it available in a vending machine, but marijuana could be sold like alcohol and other drugs could be purchased with a prescription. If you are a heroin addict then a doctor gives you a prescription which the government pays for and you get your fix. Look back at prohibition and see how it failed. Alcohol is a drug plain and simple, it is just a socially accepted drug. Making this huge war on drugs has cost taxpayers an inordinate amount of money and has only made the problem worse. It's time to try something new. If a heroin addict has no incentive to steal to buy his fix, then he won't be stealing of trying to sell drugs to others to support his habit.

Prostitution should also be legalized. Why when a star gets a pre-nuptial that guarantees the spouse millions of dollars if they break-up any different then prostitution. It is essentially someone paying for sex and perhaps is more honest then dinner and a movie for sex.

We have to work to increase personal freedom. As a nation we cannot pretend to be able to legally tell people how to act.

Obviously personal freedom has to have limits also, but these are two things where I feel the current solutions have not worked and a different approach should be tried.

So that is the second plank for my newly formed party of one.


  1. I'm with you on the legalization of prostitution and drugs. Not so much on the government paying for the drugs. Taxpayers don't subsidize alcoholics. Why would we subsidize narco addicts?

    There's no wave of crime stemming from alcoholics being on their own in acquiring alcohol, so I don't think there would be one with drugs either. I would advocate for treatment programs and general dissuasion of kids from using, same as with alcohol. And of course, driving under the influence would still be a crime.

    By the way, stay away from the "legislating morality" term. All criminal codes are legislating morality. There's nothing inherintly wrong with murder, after all. It's just our society's moral stance to make it illegal. In some countries it's perfectly legal, especially if it's your sister who had a relationship with someone you did not approve. Of course, women are property and not people in those countries, also a moral choice.

  2. Valid point on "legistating morality", I will drop that phrasing.

    The idea of the government paying for the herion fixes is to try and reduce the number of addicits to a manageable level in one generation. I worry that if it legal, the cost would still be too high for the addicts themselves. Perhaps a test on ability to pay would be better as I sure the Rolling Stones memebers vould afford to pay for their heroin.

  3. Well, the cost is likely to go down if it's legal. A lot of what keeps the cost high is the overhead expense of the traffickers in avoiding interdiction. If the governmetn were really smart it would run drug stores the way it does liquor stores in some states (like PA). Then they would garner more than enough revenue to pay for rehab programs. That doesn't even account for the savings to government in not pursuing traffickers anymore. Lower violent crime rate, too.

    Of course, you realize this is all a pipe dream on our part. Sure, the Democrats took back Congress, but about half of the electorate is still in favor of the Taliban wing of the GOP when it comes to narcotics. (Admittedly, there's a certain irony in the similarity with the Taliban, given that the actual Taliban gets much of its revenue from opium production.) It's highly unlikely that drug use will be legalized any time soon, some Western states notwithstanding. Look at how much the feds interfere with just those limited efforts at using medical marijuana.

    The problem for narcotics is that they were never as socially acceptable as alcohol was before Prohibition. There never were large numbers of middle class users like there were with alcohol. They're also harder to use on a strictly recreational basis, so there is some legitimate medical concern. But, that should be a medical problem, not a legal one.

  4. I agree with legalizing drugs - especially marijuana. I mean, talk about an insanely useful plant (apparently terrorists are now using it to mask themselves from infrared detection). Our gov't could make a lot of money off of drug legalization and marijuana especially is on the same level as tobacco and alcohol.

  5. I strongly disagree with the government paying for an addict's fix. On the surface, the idea sounds like a nice one, but look at welfare. What was meant to offer a leg-up to people in need has become a lifestyle. There are too many lazy, selfish people out there for government-provided drugs to be a good idea!

  6. Arielle - I concede your point about the government paying for fixes and would eliminate that to an extent.

    What my idea was is that the drug addicts of today would be allowed if a doctor certifies them as addict to be giving a subsudized fix. The idea is to elminate their need to steal to get the drug. I understand your point and it is valid, but I still think we need to address the problem of the addicts that exist today.