Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 43

Thread: CNN Commentary: Legalize drugs to stop violence

  1. #1

    Default CNN Commentary: Legalize drugs to stop violence

    Jeffrey A. Miron is senior lecturer in economics at Harvard University.

    He says legalizing drugs would greatly reduce violence.

    http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/03/...ugs/index.html

    GREAT article.




  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2

    Default

    His TV appearance on CNN to promote his article was even more impressive:
    http://rawstory.com/rawreplay/?p=3168

  4. #3

    Default

    Oh, come on, you can totally tell this guy is a dirty drug addict..



    He just wants to get his fix.
    "He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
    "dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc


    "Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul

    "Paul said "the wave of the future" is a coalition of anti-authoritarian progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans in Congress opposed to domestic surveillance, opposed to starting new wars and in favor of ending the so-called War on Drugs."

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

  5. #4

    Default

    He also has a blog...

    "Musings of a libertarian economist"

    http://jeffreyalanmiron.typepad.com/

  6. #5

    Default

    He reminds me of Gary Johnson.
    "He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
    "dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc


    "Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul

    "Paul said "the wave of the future" is a coalition of anti-authoritarian progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans in Congress opposed to domestic surveillance, opposed to starting new wars and in favor of ending the so-called War on Drugs."

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

  7. #6

    Default

    Let's just repeal all laws, everything goes! Then we have no "crime" at all.

  8. #7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zuras View Post
    Let's just repeal all laws, everything goes! Then we have no "crime" at all.
    Do you have a valid point that you would like to make?

    Being sarcastic because you don't agree with something doesn't get you anywhere.

    How can you refute anything in that article?

  9. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JoshLowry View Post
    Jeffrey A. Miron is senior lecturer in economics at Harvard University.

    He says legalizing drugs would greatly reduce violence.

    http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/03/...ugs/index.html

    GREAT article.

    Of course the people in power know this, but the drug war is growth industry with many vested interests. The trick is getting the people to recognize this. The drug war is a cash cow for great numbers of people and it will never change until the American people see it for what it is. Our mistake is thinking that the owners of this country have any interest in its welfare. There are a thousand things we shouldn't be doing and that the country would be better off doing, but for all of this stuff there is a vested interest or many who will stop at nothing to protect their interests.

  10. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeffery A. Miron; 2-5-09
    Increase Carbon Taxes While Lowering Marginal Tax Rates: Reasonable people disagree about how much the U.S. should reduce its use of fossil fuels, but crowded highways, air pollution, and global warming all suggest that some reduction is desirable.

    The effective way to accomplish this is higher gasoline or other carbon taxes, not the messy, complicated green spending in the Obama plan that will morph into pork in many cases. If higher carbon taxes are combined with lower marginal tax rates, the private sector faces better incentives on both counts. This approach avoids the higher deficits implied by Obama's green initiatives.
    http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/...lus/index.html

    Uhh...what? How is it that raising taxes can be part of a "stimulus package that libertarians can endorse?"
    Quote Originally Posted by Mitt Romneys Sideburns
    Open up your windows. The change is already starting. I just saw a unicorn dancing on a rainbow!

  11. #10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Maverick View Post
    http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/...lus/index.html

    Uhh...what? How is it that raising taxes can be part of a "stimulus package that libertarians can endorse?"
    Email him and ask: miron@fas.harvard.edu

  12. #11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JoshLowry View Post
    Do you have a valid point that you would like to make?

    Being sarcastic because you don't agree with something doesn't get you anywhere.

    How can you refute anything in that article?
    I don't disagree with much at all in the article, not counting the logic, although if I read it more carefully I might find some things I do. I just don't think it's a very profound proposition that decriminalizing things leads to less crime. It's, like, you really need a Harvard scholar to come up with something that genius. Uh-huh. But beware this "end justify the means" logic, as, like I said, the logical conclusions from such ideology can be quite dangerous or absurd. Two of the ugly step sisters of logic in this are: do away with all laws, hence no crime ever happens, and: put people in prison for life for the most trivial crimes, and such draconian measures will make criminality incredibly rare.

  13. #12

    Default

    That's a better explanation of how you feel. Thanks.

    The article is not calling for an end to all laws. Not even close.

    It's an end to the prohibition of substances by our government. I own my body, no one else does. The violence comes from buyers and sellers getting screwed over and having no one to turn to but themselves for justice.

    Why is using marijuana or cocaine a "crime" in your eyes? It is not criminal. You are not harming anyone.

  14. #13

    Default

    I'm glad this point of view is getting mainstream press.


    We've wasted so much money and so many lives fighting an unwinnable war against people choosing to put in their bodies what they want. I love victimless-crime

  15. #14

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JoshLowry View Post

    Why is using marijuana or cocaine a "crime" in your eyes? It is not criminal. You are not harming anyone.
    The only thing that makes it a crime is that the republic in which I reside has deemed it so. I firmly believe that people should be able to use drugs as they please, with the caveats that it not be done in public places, restricts the usage for minors, and that it may never be used as a defense in a trial. But that's neither here nor there. My issue, again, is simply with the logic being employed to argue for decriminalization.

  16. #15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zuras View Post
    My issue, again, is simply with the logic being employed to argue for decriminalization.
    How would you argue for the legalization of banned substances?

    I really don't see any flaws in the argument that this guy used.

    Just trying to understand what you are saying...

  17. #16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JoshLowry View Post
    How would you argue for the legalization of banned substances?

    I really don't see any flaws in the argument that this guy used.

    Just trying to understand what you are saying...
    The flaw is his logic. If we are taking an exam and are asked the question "What is 2 + 2" and the multiple choice gives a. 1, b. 2, c. 3, d. 4 and we both pick d. 4, yet you selected d. because dog starts with a "d" and you like dogs, then we both may be right when it's graded, but what are the chances you are going to get anything else right on the exam?

  18. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zuras View Post
    The flaw is his logic. If we are taking an exam and are asked the question "What is 2 + 2" and the multiple choice gives a. 1, b. 2, c. 3, d. 4 and we both pick d. 4, yet you selected d. because dog starts with a "d" and you like dogs, then we both may be right when it's graded, but what are the chances you are going to get anything else right on the exam?

    Are you saying that he is not using logic in wanting legalization?

    He is just a strung out druggie that likes to get lit?

    Legalization makes sense because of all the well reasoned arguments he made.

    Again, how would you argue for the legalization of banned substances?

  19. #18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zuras View Post
    Let's just repeal all laws, everything goes! Then we have no "crime" at all.
    Your logic fails because:

    A) He wasn't saying "legalize drugs to stop crime" he was saying "legalize drugs to stop violence

    B) Not all crime has an economic component. People don't generally commit rape to make money for example. In the specific case of drugs the violence exists largely because of the black market profit motive. It was the same for the prohibition of alcohol.
    9/11 Thermate experiments

    Eze 22:25 There's a conspiracy of prophets within her....

    "I am so %^&*^ sick of this cult of Ron Paul. The Paulites. What is with these %^&*^ people? Why are there so many of them?" YouTube rant by "TheAmazingAtheist"

    "We as a country have lost faith and confidence in freedom." -- Ron Paul

    Quote Originally Posted by Brian4Liberty View Post
    The road to hell is paved with good intentions. No need to make it a superhighway.

  20. #19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JoshLowry View Post
    Are you saying that he is not using logic in wanting legalization?

    He is just a strung out druggie that likes to get lit?

    Legalization makes sense because of all the well reasoned arguments he made.

    Again, how would you argue for the legalization of banned substances?
    Me? I'd personally go back to the documents and words of our founding fathers, particularly the declaration of independence(persuit of happiness) and the constitution(IX) in this case.

  21. #20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jmdrake View Post
    Your logic fails because:
    Wrong. Semantics aside, he uses the same "end justifies the means" throughout the entirety of the piece.

  22. #21

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zuras View Post
    Wrong. Semantics aside, he uses the same "end justifies the means" throughout the entirety of the piece.
    If I go into walmart and buy a $500 dollar item, and later find out it is not what I bought... I take it back to walmart.
    Walmart either takes it back... or I sue them for fraud.
    I can actually take them to court because our financial transactions were legal.

    If I buy drugs for street dealer and its not what I thought I bought... I can't sue him in court, I can't ask for a refund, I can't go to the cops.
    The only thing I can do is shoot the fuck.

    This type of crime disappears with legalization.

    Drug Cartels running central and south america. We are one of the biggest consumers.
    If we legalize drugs here, those cartel's cash cops will dry up.
    No more drug cartels.


    The laws as they are do not deter or prevent people from doing drugs it just turns them into hard-core criminals for doing it.


    There is no victim, no accuser for which you could question in a court of law. Which is guaranteed by the constitution. If there is no victim, there is no crime.
    Otherwise, you are being accused by a non-individual entity for a 'collective' crime against morality.

    Smoking pot and damaging your own body on your own dime, on your own time, Is not the same as stealing someone else's property or damaging their bodies.
    Last edited by torchbearer; 03-24-2009 at 10:03 PM.

    You're a backer of
    Lavabit's Dark Mail Initiative


    by Ladar Levison

  23. #22

    Default

    The would probably be a lot of patent infringemnet of GE Hemp... People not paying sales tax... People not adhering to zoning laws...

    So still lots of crime. But dang the stuff would be cheaper.
    Stop the Looting and Start Prosecuting! Gold plated Tungsten IS Money!
    We Must Dissent A colher não existe.
    A government is just a body of people, notably, usually, ungoverned.

    "You mean this entire war started because The Empire dressed as the enemy? That's exactly what happened in the last major war! Our government is so stupid!"

  24. #23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by idiom View Post
    The would probably be a lot of patent infringemnet of GE Hemp... People not paying sales tax... People not adhering to zoning laws...

    So still lots of crime. But dang the stuff would be cheaper.
    those wouldn't be violent crimes. not something that would get your child killed in a drive by shooting.

    You're a backer of
    Lavabit's Dark Mail Initiative


    by Ladar Levison

  25. #24

    Default

    But, But,, but how would the CIA finance their Black Opps?
    Liberty is lost through complacency and a subservient mindset. When we accept or even welcome automobile checkpoints, random searches, mandatory identification cards, and paramilitary police in our streets, we have lost a vital part of our American heritage. America was born of protest, revolution, and mistrust of government. Subservient societies neither maintain nor deserve freedom for long.
    Ron Paul 2004

    Registered Ron Paul supporter # 2202
    It's all about Freedom

  26. #25

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zuras View Post
    Let's just repeal all laws, everything goes! Then we have no "crime" at all.
    Zuras, Prohibition didn't work after World War One and it ain't working now. And the reason is pretty simple, too. When a person asks, 'Who are you to tell me what I can and can't put inside my own body?' that person has a point.

    Deny it. I dare you.

    Now, tell the truth. Are you really convinced that it's better to give the profits to the drug cartels such as the mafias, the Mexican mafias and the CIA on a silver platter than to tax those profits?
    Last edited by acptulsa; 03-25-2009 at 09:15 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Maury Klein View Post
    Since the pace of change wrought by new technology continues to gain speed, the gap between policy and reality widens daily... In the modern world policy cannot possibly keep pace with change of all kinds.
    Quote Originally Posted by Calvin Coolidge View Post
    There is danger of disappointment and disaster unless there be a wider comprehension of the limitations of the law. The attempt to regulate, control, and prescribe all manner of conduct and social relations is very old. It was always the practice of primitive peoples.

  27. #26

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pcosmar View Post
    But, But,, but how would the CIA finance their Black Opps?
    I was telling someone the same thing yesterday... half- joking, half- serious as shit.

    You're a backer of
    Lavabit's Dark Mail Initiative


    by Ladar Levison

  28. #27

    Default

    Im split on the issue, obviously crime would be reduced. The prices of drugs would fall immensely, which would eliminate the drug dealer profession.

    But if you legalize hard drugs like meth, you might have a few crazies that get strung out and stay up for 2 weeks then go on a killing spree. You would definately see that on the news.

    I think pot is a good starting point. And i would love to see the experiment of legalizing all drugs. But i'm afraid with the harder stuff, you might have some people that are not just harming theirselves, but others as a result of their addiction.

    "Do whatever you want so long as it does not harm another."

    Economically speaking, i think it is a great idea. Socially i am split.

    I understand that it is not goverments proper role to protect you from any substance, and goverment is not responsible for what you might do while on that substance, but for the reasons above i am split on the issue.

    convince me otherwise.

  29. #28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by werdd View Post
    But if you legalize hard drugs like meth, you might have a few crazies that get strung out and stay up for 2 weeks then go on a killing spree. You would definately see that on the news..
    That happens now, by many people, on a daily basis... regardless of the law.
    I think it is the epitome of stupidity to think that because you make a law forbidding its use, that people will stop using it.
    That is the most retarded idea and is pervasive in people.

    Making it illegal just turns those same people into hardcore criminals. That is it.

    You're a backer of
    Lavabit's Dark Mail Initiative


    by Ladar Levison

  30. #29

    Default

    Werdd, I doubt any company would sell meth. Honestly. It would have to be their whole business, because the stuff is so demonized (not completely without justification at all) that any company that did that and something else would get the something else boycotted. That said, if it did happen at least the stuff would be clean, and probably would be a less obnoxious form of amphetamine to boot.

    Then comes the second question. If it's that addictive, who would be brave enough to sell it?

    Have your faith in the market restored yet? Really, the biggest practical reason I see behind not bothering to legalize the crap is not much would change--it would probably remain black market. The only people that would see much change at all are the doctors who pay for their Porsches by writing amphetamine scrips for wealthy afficionadoes of it.
    Quote Originally Posted by Maury Klein View Post
    Since the pace of change wrought by new technology continues to gain speed, the gap between policy and reality widens daily... In the modern world policy cannot possibly keep pace with change of all kinds.
    Quote Originally Posted by Calvin Coolidge View Post
    There is danger of disappointment and disaster unless there be a wider comprehension of the limitations of the law. The attempt to regulate, control, and prescribe all manner of conduct and social relations is very old. It was always the practice of primitive peoples.

  31. #30

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by acptulsa View Post
    Werdd, I doubt any company would sell meth. .
    Amphetamines are already sold by prescription.
    Adipex comes to mind.
    It is useful for weight loss.

    The drug companies just don't want anymore competition.

    You're a backer of
    Lavabit's Dark Mail Initiative


    by Ladar Levison

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast




« Previous Thread | Next Thread »


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •