Reply
Fri 28 Apr, 2006 01:09 pm
April 28, 2006, 1:23PM
Mexico set to decriminalize pot, cocaine
Reuters News Service
MEXICO CITY - Possessing marijuana, cocaine and even heroin will no longer be a crime in Mexico if the drugs are carried in small amounts for personal use, under legislation passed by the Mexican Congress.
The measure given final passage by senators late Thursday allows police to focus on their battle against major drug dealers, the government says, and President Vicente Fox is expected to sign it into law.
"This law provides more judicial tools for authorities to fight crime," presidential spokesman Ruben Aguilar said Friday. The measure was approved earlier by the lower house.
Under the legislation, police will not penalize people for possessing up to 5 grams of marijuana, 5 grams of opium, 25 milligrams of heroin or 500 milligrams of cocaine.
People caught with larger quantities of drugs will be treated as narcotics dealers and face increased jail terms under the plan
That's a fair trade. They send us their desperate poor and we send them our druggies.
See what I mean? In exchange we'll get forty guys who'll fight to mow my lawn for a dollar.
I've found this commentary by Stanley Crouch in today's Chicago Sun-Times (page 43), here posted as origianally published in the
New York Daily News. Quite related, I think.
Quote:Break addiction to senseless war on drugs
Monday, April 24th, 2006
In the ongoing battle over the legalization of marijuana for medicinal purposes, the Food and Drug Administration has now shown that ideology can bend almost anything to its will. Last week, the FDA claimed that "no sound scientific studies" supported the medical use of the drug - flatly contradicting a 1999 review by the Institute of Medicine. That seems strange, given that the Institute is part of the National Academy of Sciences, the nation's most prestigious scientific advisory agency.
Could one group of scientists be so far off as to come up with a completely incorrect reading of the medicinal value of the drug? I doubt it - and so do many others who feel that right-wing politics have trumped science yet again.
But that, it seems to me, is the least important issue connected to the legalization of drugs. The three most important reasons to call a ceasefire in the insane "war" we've been fighting for decades are the reduction of crime, the expansion of the tax base and the contribution to the economy.
Whether or not anyone likes it, recreational drug use has become part of American social life - and it is that use, not addiction, that fuels the trade. If addicts alone were spending money on drugs, the problem could have been licked or dramatically reduced long ago.
As for the reduction of crime, we are constantly getting benumbing reports that tell us how many inner city young men drop out of school to sell drugs, naively looking for a fast way to make big money. Such young men are the drones of the business. If we ended the illicit nature of the trade, the drones would either stay in school or surprise us and find a legal line of work.
The real economic winners in the drug business these days are the high-level dealers and traders. When it comes to them, America is being played for a chump in exactly the way we were during Prohibition. That's when the Mafia gathered all the capital it needed to become a formidable national criminal organization because public demand for drinking was greater than fear of the consequences of drinking.
If we ended today's version of Prohibition and legalized drugs, we could stop the murderous drug wars and pull billions of dollars out of the shadow world. Taxes could be levied and public rehabilitation centers supported.
In that way, victory could be pulled from the jaws of a very obvious defeat. Some call this position defeatist - but it's far more realistic than craven. It's simply a matter of facing the facts of our time rather than pushing our heads under the sand - no matter how many young men are in our penal system for either the sale or the possession of drugs, no matter how many are killed in drug wars and no matter how obvious it has become that recreational drug use is here to stay.
We are still a long way from waking up to these facts. But we can wake up, and we will. After all, once upon a time, many thought slavery would go on forever and women would never get the vote.
Most pertinent, Walter. A good article.
While I do not personally approve of a drug culture or lifestyle, I have always believed the war on drugs to be totally counterproductive. The Mexican law change may be a start in the right direction.
God bless Stanley Crouch. Well said, indeed.
Walter Hinteler praises the NSA. He calls it the"nation's most prestigious scientific advisory agency.
I do agree. It is the nation's most prestigious scientific advisory agency, however, when it produced a report five years ago on "global warming" indicating that there was great doubt about the effects of man-made warming, the speed at which it would occur and its interaction with natural warming, the agency was condemned by many of the environmentalists.
Either the scientific agency is reliable or it is not. Which is it?
And we all know it's a black-or-white world with nary a shade of gray, right?
BernardR wrote:Walter Hinteler praises the NSA. He calls it the"nation's most prestigious scientific advisory agency.
Just for the record:
Walter Hinteler wrote:I've found this commentary by Stanley Crouch in today's Chicago Sun-Times (page 43), here posted as origianally published in the
New York Daily News. Quite related, I think.
There's one of my typos in my response but nothing what is said by BernardR.
To be honest: I don't like it at all, when I'm misquoted, but I get a bit more angry when someone alleges that I have written/done something which easily can be proven as being a lie (even on small moinitors).
It is possible to be right about one thing, but wrong about another, don't you agree, bernarder.
Well, now I know that Walter Hintler does not agree with Stanley Crouch that the NSA is the most prestigious Scientific Agency in the USA. No matter. I agree with Stanley Crouch. The NSA is the most prestigious Scientific Agency in the USA. If one uses the argument from authority, then the NSA's findings on both global warming and drugs are to be taken seriously.
But some people are so politicized that they reject "a prestigious scientific agency's findings when they conflict with their political rigidities!
BernardR wrote:Well, now I know ...
Thanks for apologizing, BernardR. It was very cryptic, but nevertheless ...
You're a more generous man than I, Walter.
There are two monitors between me and him - otherwise .... who knows? :wink:
Man if I ever find myself in a spelling bee with Bernard I hope the word prestigious doesn't come ... he'll advance for sure... :wink: