From: ren@Turing.ORG (Karen Prestemon)
Subject: Re: Question: drug non-control
Keywords: drug control
Organization: The Turing Project, Charlottesville Virginia.
Distribution: us
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 11:22:42 GMT

In article <1992Nov6.003150.18081@genie.slhs.udel.edu> nancy@genie.slhs.udel.edu (Nancy Lebovitz) writes:
>In article <3bj1zqd@rpi.edu> ash@acm.rpi.edu (Arthur Hyun) writes:
>>I have a question about the Libertarian position on drug laws.
>>
>>I understand the rationalle behind abolition of most control laws, and
>>by my understanding, it would seem that the abolition of drug laws would
>>make drugs cheaper and of higher quality.  Wouldn't this encourage more
>>people to experiment with narcotics and therefore become addicted?
>>
Wait a minute!  Who says trying something leads to addiction? I tried
pot in college.  It was fun while the moment lasted, but that doesn't
mean I want or need to do it again.  A good friend of mine was telling
me about trying cocaine.  He thought his heart was going to explode,
it started beating so fast, and he didn't need to do it again.

There are plenty of people out there who try smoking or alcohol,
but this doesn't lead to addiction.  Of course, if tobacco products
and alcohol didn't exist, no one would ever become an alcoholic
or smokaholic.  However, these products do exist, and the legality
or illegality does not stop from buying and trying.  In high school,
the "cool" kids had parties with alcohol.  They were under 18.  They
got it from somewhere, and I'm sure it was pretty easy.

In college, the people I hung out with drank a lot less once they
turned 21.  Suddenly, we didn't have to keep imbibing as if the
alcohol supply were about to dry up tomorrow.  Some things aren't
nearly so exciting when you know you can have them anytime you
want.  Any married people out there want to comment on whether or
not they have sex as often as when they were engaged or dating?
(assuming of course, you had sex while you were engaged or dating)

There are people in this world with all kinds of addictions that
undoubtably do as much damage to themselves.  Food addictions
are real and not only lead to weight gain, but all kinds of medical
problems, including heart disease.  And yet, there is no federal
law against eating fatty foods.  Has anyone ever seen a person
shoot someone over a twinkie?  Are people dying in the streets
of Los Angeles because of cigarettes?

>I'm not sure what the "party line" is, but I believe that if all drugs
>were legal, there'd be more research into safer drugs, and, if there's
>a market for it, into the biological basis of addiction, so that it 
>will be easier to get off drugs if one wants to.

That's an interesting idea.  We already do know that some of the
illegal drugs help people with certain medical needs.

>(I'm willing to be corrected on this, but I suspect that people generally
>bece addicted to drugs to feel better, not in order to kill themselves
>or to ruin their lives.)
>
People become addicted to drugs because drugs are addictive substances.
Its a chemical thing, and anyone who knows an alcoholic or drug
addict knows that drugs and alcohol do not make the addict feel better.
The experimenting user may get a good buzz or a nice high, but an
addict does drugs, even though they make him miserable, because he
got himself to the point where he can't do much about it, besides
seek professional care.  A lot of the people I've met who smoke
acknowledge that it is a crappy thing to do, but can't get away from
it.

However, so much information is available that people cannot say
that they got involved in drugs, alcohol, and tobacco-smoking
because they were not well informed.  People cannot say they didn't
know they were going to gain weight when they ate snickers bars
all the time.  I don't know what the party line is, but the policies
are inconsistent.  Either the governemnt thinks our welfare is so
crtitical so as to superceed our right to choose what is best for
our bodies,which means not allowing us to eat "bad" foods, or by
prohibiting pregnant women from smoking, drinking, or enaging
in otherwise unhealthy activities; or it should allow us total
control over how we use and maintain our bodies.  However, our givernment
looks at issue du jour and picks and chooses its policies,
regardless of any use of logic.  If I began lobbying my Senator
to introduce a bill prohibiting thegrowth, manufacture, or sale
of fat in foods in any form, he would probably dismiss me as
being insane!  Substitute the word "narcotics" and people
go crazy!

I don't get it!

Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian