>Re deterrence: even if I thought there was a deterrent effect it would not justify taking a person's life in my mind.

Now we can agree, somewhat. First, until US society improves it's violent moral climate, CP may have its place, and I also think it's a States' Rights issue to enforce if they wish, but still: I think there are several perfectly valid arguments against CP (my personal preference is the one that's sort of like "violence begets violence"). I've only been saying that "non-deterrence" is a flimsy argument against CP.

>Re drug war: if we talked together we could probably find quite a bit of common ground. I would suggest these ideas:

Agree on most of your ideas on fixing drug abuse.

>4) Increase penalties for DUI.

Except this one, a little bit. My feeling is that there should be a fairly stiff penalty on the *first* DUI offense, about as now exists most of the US. But almost anyone can make a mistake once, even George W. However, then there should be an enormous increase in punishment severity for a second or further DUI offense.

>5) I would support a constitutional amendment authorizing the creation of a class of products and services which are legal (for adults) but cannot be advertised. Alcohol, tobacco, marijauna, gambling and prostitution for instance.

A CA will never happen, only slight federal policy adjustments can be made. IMO, control of the actual laws belongs primarily in the domain of States' Rights, though I agree many should "loosen up" on these relatively "victimless" so-called "crimes," I have a similar Libertarian-style view as you.