From: larry@b8.b8.ingr.com (Larry Billings)
Subject: Re: BUSH IS A NEO_NAZI! AND A LIAR
Organization: Intergraph
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1992 19:46:24 GMT

In article <1992Sep23.003619.26825@b30.ingr.com>, pat@fitz.b30.ingr.com (Patrick Fitzgerald) writes:
> >>> = larry@b8.b8.ingr.com (Larry Billings)
> >>  = pat@fitz.b30.ingr.com (Patrick Fitzgerald)
> >   = larry
> 
> >I meant that we should get them any way it takes,
> >Tax evasions, Unrelated charges -- Speeding, failure to use proper turn
> >signals,
> >or if all else fails blow them off the face of the earth...
> 
> Now you are ranting, and probably foaming at the mouth as well.
> 

Not to say that I don't foam at the mouth accasionally, but I deliberately
overstated this to make a point.  People on the net, have been saying
over and over that if you legalize drugs that the people selling them now
will not be criminals, but honest citizens selling the products from the
"corner store".  This is something that I do not believe, if you legalize
one thing, they will move on to something else which is still profitable.
I cannot see the people who are now used to making 1 million a month/week
whatever the profits are from illegal drugs (for major dealers), sitting
in a small store, making 30 to 40 thousand a year.
Time for a mental picture:
    The Godfather of one of the mafia's and his henchmen siting in a store.
The henchman behind the cash register (while scratching his chin with the
back of his fingers) says in a deep voice "The Godfather says you owe him
three dollars for that pack of Columbian Gold.  (He scratches again) 
"Youall come back now, ya hear."  "Well, Godfather We have made 50 dollars
today. Good day, huh?"
     Now tell me these people are going to go into legitimate bussiness,
Rabbit Dropings, if they wanted to go into legal business, they would
already do so, they have the money to start any kind of business they want.


> 	What happened to "innocent until proven guilty"?  You're advocating
> 	legalized harassment.
> 
> "would not be able to hire the best lawyer in the country to get them off"
> 	They're not allowed to hire a competent legal counsel?

how many times are they proven guilty (caught with their hands in the
cookie jar -er dope bag) and go free because of some technicallity, "the
police officer spit on the ground while arresting them, and some of it hit
on their shoes, your honor, therefore I request dismissal of all charges
since it is clearly a case of physical abuse.

This isthe legal counsel that I don't want them having.

> 
> I guess since they're scumbag drug dealers, 

Yes.

> >> Percentage of prisoners incarcerated solely for possession or sale
> >> of illegal drugs (no other attendant crimes):
> >>   Federal prisons:  50%
> >>   State prisons:    25%
> >>   Local jails:      25%
> >> 	- From National Public Radio's "All Things Considered" Feb. 10, '92
> >
> >True, but how many more alcoholics do we have today than we had then?
> 
> I don't know.  Does the legality or illegality have much to do with it?

I think so, more availability to more people.  A lot of people did not
drink during probitition because they didn't know where to get it or were
afraid to, the law, you know.

> 
> Your own experience with drugs shows that laws against drugs didn't stop
> you.  In fact, the laws actually hurt you (by encouraging tainted drugs),
> and nearly killed you (because you feared reprisals if you saw a doctor).
> 

I was in the military and anyone who was in the military can tell you, you
NEVER let it be known in the military.  If it is the last time you ever do
it, your record is still tainted for the rest of your enlistment, and
thoughts of a career in the military is nonexistant.

> Since you want some numbers:
> 
> Deaths by substance, 1990. (U.S. Surgeon General's Actuarial Information)
> 
>         Tobacco                 360,000
>         Alcohol                 130,000
>         Prescribed drugs         18,675
>         Caffeine                  5,800
>         Cocaine                   2,390
>         Heroin                    2,147
>         Marijuana                     0
> 
> Deaths by substance, per user, 1989 (James Ostrowski, "Thinking About Drug
> Legalization", Cato Institute Paper #121)
> 
>         Tobacco                 650 / 100,000 users
>         Alcohol                 150 / 100,000 users
>         Heroin                   80 / 100,000 users
>         Cocaine                   4 / 100,000 users
> 
> 

since legal ones cause the most deaths legalizing news ones should help them
catch up with the leaders.

> "Cigarettes are among the most addictive substances of abuse and by far the
> most deadly."  Nonetheless, a massive decrease in use of this drug has
> occurred over 3 decades with "virtually no regulation of smoking by any
> level of government."

No, due to government insistance of warning labels and funding of education
programs against smoking. (in the schools and TV advertisements, Public
Service Announcements).

> 
> Observation:  people who argue for prohibition are obliged to say "yes, I
> have taken drugs in the past", in order to sound qualified to speak on the
> subject.  People who argue against prohibition are obliged to say "no, I
> don't take drugs now", in order to be taken seriously.  ;-)
> --

I didn't say that so people would think me an expert, I was far from an
expert, I smoked when I was young-a friend wised me up, I drank for several
years-I found that I didn't need to after I got rid of my fiancee, and I
took some drugs-I couldn't trust the friends who got the stuff for me.  I
guess now that I've said that I'm qualified to speak on all those subjects.

I was never  a heavy user of any of the above, and I no longer partake of
any of them.

Larry Billings