Send comments, tips,
and suggestions to:
DrugWarRant
Join us on Pete's couch.
couch

DrugWarRant.com, the longest running single-issue blog devoted to drug policy, is published by the Prohibition Isn't Free Foundation
facebooktwitterrss
February 2012
M T W T F S S
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
272829  

Archives

Authors

Ron Paul keeps the discussion going

In Vancouver:

“If we are allowed to deal with our eternity and all that we believe in spiritually, and if we’re allowed to read any book that we want under freedom of speech, why is it we can’t put into our body whatever we want?” Paul proclaimed from Vancouver.

Post to Twitter Post to Facebook Post to Reddit Post to StumbleUpon

8 comments to Ron Paul keeps the discussion going

  • mr. right

    because it’s a sin dumb fucks

  • darkcycle

    The bible only enjoins against drunkenness.

  • Sinners Terrify Me!

    The sinners are coming! Evil doper hippie scum hunger for our munchies and t-shirts! Lock up every one of those maggot infested dope smokers.

  • Brandon E.

    If Ron Paul isn’t our next president, I’m terrified for the future of our country. These other fools are going to start WWIII.

    • darkcycle

      Brandon, we have troops in combat all over the world, the president has declared the UnitedStates a battlefield….not that much more required, really.

  • If the drugs can’t make anyone rich, they cannot be condoned.

    And heaven forbid that they actually provide a benefit; something no pharmaceutical can ever perform.

  • PimPomPoon

    Here’s a really fine comment that Francis posted (at least I’m nearly sure it’s his)

    “The war on drugs fuels violence because the “WAR” on drugs IS violence. It’s the policy of sending men with guns to confiscate sellers’ profits, destroy their inventories, and lock them in cages. All of the other violence that surrounds the (non-alcohol, non-tobacco) drug trade is fundamentally a REACTION to that initial state-sponsored violence. Prohibition renders contracts unenforceable and makes it impossible for competitors to use the courts or the police to challenge intimidation or settle disputes. Those conditions promote violence. There are plenty of legal businesses that might love to “kill the competition,” but that only becomes a viable strategy under the black market conditions that prohibition creates. (Note that nobody from Coke or Pepsi actually gets killed as a result of the much-hyped “Cola Wars.”) Prohibition also raises the prices of illicit drugs and hence their profitability. (Econ 101: risk demands compensation.) This only increases sellers’ incentives to do “whatever it takes” to capture market share. Today you don’t see rival beer distributors engaging in deadly shoot-outs over turf, but you USED TO — during alcohol prohibition. Run a Google image search for “U.S. homicide rate graph” (not all together in quotes). Take a look at the murder rate before, after, and during alcohol prohibition (1919-1933). Tell me when you spot a pattern.”

    • nhop

      Drugs should be cheaper than toothpaste, and in some producer countries are only slightly more expensive. In “first” world “consumer” nations many classes of drugs outvalue silver, gold, etc. Im curious whether the treasure (taxes) we spend on the machinery of the drug war, ie, police, coastguard, prisons, pisstesting, etc.,, etc.., is worth it in terms of the cash value of the drugs that we consume. ( and the cash that we transfer overseas to such kindly and charitable organizations as the Zetas and the Taliban) Can anyone with a good economic understanding of this situation shed some light here. Thanks.