... it's an addiction (a disease), some argue decrimilazing the drug will help the victims, and that they need medical attention, not prison time.
What do you say?
2006-06-26 11:46:49 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law Enforcement & Police
No!
2006-06-26 11:57:34 · answer #1 · answered by gunsandammoatwork 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There is no allowance for drug enforcement in the constitution, at least on the federal level. When the first drug laws were passed - Harrison Narcotics Tax Act of 1914 in particular - they were done as tax acts, not as prohibition act. The constitution grants the feds the ability to regulate commerce, but not morality.
If you want to ruin your life with drugs, you are supposed to be able to do that, in America. You have the legal right to do so.
Instead, we have The War On Drugs which has ruined many more lives, and flitted away more tax dollars than could ever hope to be saved by "saving lives". Instead of someone just being a dope-head, we make them a criminal, too.
The Harrison act was the first step towards the Nanny State. The Nanny State has morphed from a tax on "hard" drugs, to not being able to smoke a ciggarette on a public beach, or in your own car.
True freedom has costs.
2006-06-26 12:02:18 · answer #2 · answered by theothermikes 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't think there is a very good success rate on the rehabilitation of crack heads. Once someone gets addicted to that drug, their whole personality changes, they become liars, thieves,murderers and do not care what it takes to get their buzz. If it was decriminalized and made out to be disease then they would all just be getting it for free and any other freebie they would scam off the government, We the tax payers would then be supporting their habit. You know they can't work ( and who would want a crack head working for them anyway ) So they can get SSI or Disabilty and live a happy little life. Yeah.....Decriminalize....Yeah... That would be really smart.......ha....I don't think so..........
2006-06-27 14:44:19 · answer #3 · answered by ameri_skigirl 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, I wouldn't decriminalize crack, but I would get rid of the federal mandatory minimum sentences for crack.
"In 1988, Congress went on to create the first -- and still only -- mandatory minimum federal sentence for simple possession of a drug: Conviction for holding five grams of crack (three grams, if it's a second offense) draws a required five-year term. Simple possession of any amount of cocaine, by contrast, is a misdemeanor punishable by a year in jail."
Yes, crack addicts need drug treatment and community support. If they had been using meth instead, they probably would have gotten this help. Right now it seems we're punishing them for having picked the wrong drug.
"The average sentence for someone convicted of a crack crime in fiscal 2004 was 118 months, 38 months longer than for a cocaine crime and 26 months longer than for a meth crime."
2006-06-26 13:41:54 · answer #4 · answered by away team 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Are you kidding me? It's still a crime. You don't want it decriminalized, but perhaps better sentencing options is what you are looking for.
Most states have a diversion program for addicts. Crack addicts would certainly qualify. Ultimately, however, it's up to the addict to change, not the system.
Addictions are NOT victimless crimes. They victimize their family and friends. Too often the addiction leads them to commit crimes to pay for the addiction. Victimless it is not, so it must be a crime.
2006-06-26 12:55:41 · answer #5 · answered by NoJail4You 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Hell no. If it weren't illegal more people would try it, and then get hooked. I know so many people who have ruined their lives already at the ripe age of 21-22 because of cocaine. The girl I would probably be married to right now got hooked and isn't even the same person anymore. It is not like weed and you can use it and go on with your everyday life, it literally changes who you are. It changes your beliefs, morals, everything. We have to have harsh penalties on this stuff to get people to not even try it in the first place. IT IS THE DEVIL.
2006-06-26 11:58:48 · answer #6 · answered by allknowing 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No because the pharmaceutical companies have gone out of their way to set up a system for you. If you are going to be addicted to drugs in this country then the pharmaceutical companies want to get their share. If you have a real desire to get high just go visit your local doctor/"dealer" and he will be happy to help you.
2006-06-26 11:50:53 · answer #7 · answered by 3rd parties for REAL CHANGE 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
... People who addicted to ANYTHING dont need prison OR medical attention they need counseling and support to get over their problems with drugs. the dealers though they should be jailed.
2006-06-26 13:13:48 · answer #8 · answered by deftlychillin 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
#1 - Go rent this movie, "Requiem For A Dream"
#2 - Wait a couple hours for your heart to stop pounding
#3 - Post this question again
2006-06-26 12:13:31 · answer #9 · answered by pachl@sbcglobal.net 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I say anybody caught with the stuff should go to Jail. That stuff messes you up, BAD, and I can't believe you're actually asking that.
2006-06-26 11:50:37 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
If it were legalized, usage would shoot sky high probably. Our ER rooms are being closed as it is, we don't need them to be closing any faster
2006-07-01 20:49:51 · answer #11 · answered by High On Life 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋