>I disagree. My personal observation has been that we don't need an additional bad substance.

See I don't understand why you keep saying that. It's not an 'additional' bad substance - is a substance that's already here. As I"ve pointed out before, other countries that have gone the route of legalization have seen their usage and addict rates DROP - so if you were really against it because you think it's harmful then you should be for legalization because that has been proven (every time) to drop the rates. Furthermore keeping it illegal does more harm than good for a vast number of other reasons - and if you'd take the time to read the report by this panel you'd see some of those.

>Even so, the bottom line, at least in Tennessee, is this - it is illegal. If it were legal, I still wouldn't partake. I do like a good Coheba after a steak on occassion, but other than that, I don't smoke.
>
>We will have to agree to disagree on this one.
>
>>>As you pointed out government would collect lot of tax revenue, drugs would be more safe, general appeal on drugs in teenagers would fall (forbidden fruit effect) as it is falling now towards tobacco. If it is no longer 'cool' to do drugs and it is in the same time known unhealthy (freakin' deadly!) then much less of them will be inclined to even try it. (Thinking of some teens, slight criminalization of meat and veggies, could actually do some good! {g})
>>>
>>>And many other good things as outlined in this 24 page report.
>>>
>>>'Only' problem is that profit margins in illegal drugs industry ($800b / year ?) would fall drastically, so no much money will be left for laundering by big banks, no bribes for police forces around the world, politicians, government officials, and who ever else is in those chains, no extra funding for undercover activities (vital for national security! eg. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran-Contra_affair ), and foremost much less profits for share holders.
>>>
>>>If world leaders actually wanted to combat drug production, it could be done very efficiently and relatively easy. Drugs mostly come from very easily detectable fields/crops like poppy flowers, coca fields etc). All they need is to instruct NATO/US forces (already in Afganistan) to simply destroy poppies whenever they see them and/or (for political stability reasons) pay farmers equivalent they get from drug-lords, (which is peanuts) and then simply destroy poppy. The similar could be arranged with governments in Latin America. But this is somehow NOT happening...
>>>For instance Taliban did it back 2001, and world heroin production plummeted that year. See graph inside this article;
>>>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/6239734.stm Uhm.. we all know what was their 'prize' for that supposedly good deed...
>>>
>>>Legalisation of drugs would have pretty much similar effect, but on the long run. It would shrink all volumes (production qty / money) by minimum 60-70% . Therefore it will NEVER happen.
>>>
>>>It is an industry that flourished for centuries, entire wars were fought over it ;
>>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_East_India_Company
>>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opium_wars
>>>and it is very much integrated into free market world economy, so it is highly unlikely it will be all changed by one 24 page pdf document, no matter who wrote it and what is in it.
>>>
>>>Still love your thoughts on this issue / have great day Good ol' Grady :))
>>
>>You'll probably then be pleasantly surprised to know that my thoughts on this are very much in line with Grady, you, the pdf etc. ( and that is taking into account that in the 70s I did overseas consulting work for the Cabinet Committee on International Narcotics Control and have some citations from DEA, other agencies and a couple of foreign governments in this area <g> ) I have also had, over the years, personal experience with drugs on both sides of the law and lots of friends on both sides of that fence.,
>>
>>The really silly part is the thought that keeping drugs from crossing borders is the key to the problem. Anyone who knows anything about the abuse of prescription drugs or the very homegrown problems of things like crystal meth knows drug abuse is not a problem solved by closing borders.
>>
>>And as to cocaine and crack - as our Japanese friends will tell you, ice ( the crack of methamphetamine ) is potentially every bit at least the problem crack is. It is all a matter of marketing.
>>
>>I certainly don't think legalization of importation, manufacturing or marketing of most currently illegal drugs helps anything, but decriminalization of use is just sensible.
>>
>>Marijuana should never have been illegal to begin with, but Joseph Kennedy gave a lot of money to FDRs 1932 campaign ...
>>
>>There is no "solution" to human folly and not messing with one's dopamine 5 production is a personal lesson that has to be learned, but social policy is another matter and when even a well-meaning policy is causing more harm than good it has to be rethought.