hahahhaha. I just visited www. DEA. gov! A billion dollar 'company' fighting drugs has the worst arguments and sources I've ever seen on the internet:
What happens when drugs are legalized?
While many speculate about how drug legalization would affect our nation, the best way to predict possible effects is to examine what happened in places that have tried drug legalization. The realities of relaxed drug policies in practice make a strong argument against legalization:
Here are the DEA's STRONG ARGUMENTS (this is all.... strong arguments??? ):
Never Mind: Alaska's Failed Legalization Experiment
In 1975, Alaska's Supreme Court held that under their State Constitution an adult could possess marijuana for personal consumption in the home.
The court's ruling became a green light for marijuana use. A 1988 University of Alaska survey showed that the state's teenagers used marijuana at more than twice the national average for their age group. The report also showed a frequency of marijuana use that suggested it wasn't experimental, but a well incorporated practice for teens.
Fed up with this dangerous experiment, Alaska's residents voted in 1990 to recriminalize possession of marijuana. But 15 years of legalization left its mark-increased drug use by a generation of our youth.
The Netherlands: A Return to Law Enforcement Solutions
For many years, the Dutch have led the way in establishing permissive policies to address issues of drug use. The infamous "coffeeshops" that sell marijuana emerged throughout the Netherlands as a symbol of Dutch drug policy and led to a booming drug tourism market in areas such as Amsterdam. The focus on the health aspect of addiction resulted in a flurry of harm reduction measures introduced throughout the Netherlands. The growing ecstasy problem in Europe and the Netherlands' pivotal role in ecstasy production has led the Dutch government to look once again to law enforcement solutions.
Based upon the concept of the separation of markets, "coffeeshops" began to emerge throughout the Netherlands in 1976, offering cannabis products for sale. While possession and sale of cannabis are not legal, coffeeshops are permitted to exist under certain restrictions. Restrictions for coffeeshops include: a limit of no more than 5 grams sold to a person at any one time, no alcohol or hard drugs, no minors, no advertising, and the shop must not cause a nuisance.
Coffeeshops have thrived throughout the Netherlands, but in recent years, there has been a decline in the number of shops. Falling under the jurisdiction of local authorities, many coffeeshops have been forced to close. According to the 2001 International Narcotics Control Strategy Report, in 2000 81% of the municipalities in the Netherlands did not tolerate coffeeshops.
Portugal: Decriminalization of all Illicit Drugs
Portugal is a nation plagued by many of the drug problems that persist in Europe. Unlike many of its neighbors who have witnessed a reduction or stabilization in the opiate addict population, Portugal's addict population and the problems that go along with addiction continue to increase. In an effort to reduce the number of addicts in the prison system, the Portuguese government has an enacted some radical policies in the last few years with the eventual decriminalization of all illicit drugs in July of 2001.
Until July 1, 2001, drug use, possession, and acquisition in Portugal were punishable by penalties up to 3 months in prison or a fine for small quantities. For amounts that exceeded a three-day supply, the penalty was up to a year in prison or a fine. Then in April 2001 a Regulation Decree was adopted and led to the implementation of the November 2000 law, Law 30/2000. On July 1, 2001, Law 30/2000 took effect in Portugal, decriminalizing drug use, possession and acquisition for the "casual" user as well as the addict.
While drug use, possession, and acquisition are still illicit activities in Portugal, these acts have been decriminalized. Acts that could once bring a prison sentence of three months to a year will now result in the confiscation of the illicit substance and a referral, not to a trial, but to a three-person commission to evaluate the offender. Under this new law, non-addicts may receive monetary fines or other penalties, while addicts will only receive non-monetary penalties. The three-person commission will most likely consist of a lawyer, a doctor, and a social assistant to evaluate the individual's level of addiction and recommend treatment options with the goal of rehabilitating the offender. Administrative sanctions may be used, but are not the primary objective of this new law. This new law did not legalize drug use, but removed criminal penalties for use, possession, and acquisition for all illicit drugs in quantities up to a 10-day supply.
Zurich, Switzerland: Needle Park
Switzerland's drug policies are among the most liberal in Europe. With only one federal drug law, most drug policy issues are handled at the regional or level. Within the regions, a wide range of harm reduction and treatment options have emerged with some funding and guidance from the national government. The Swiss' drug policies are supported by the public, while criticized by many international organizations, including the United Nations International Narcotics Control Board.
In the 1990s, Zurich experimented with what became known as Needle Park where addicts could openly purchase drugs and inject heroin without police intervention. Zurich became the mecca for drug addicts across Europe, who would travel to Needle Park. In 1992, when authorities decided to close Needle Park, the addicts moved to Letten railroad station until its closure in 1995. Based on the failure of Needle Park and the Letten railroad station experiments, the Swiss government, like other governments in Europe, developed consumption rooms to provide a "clean and safe" environment for addicts to inject heroin under medical supervision.
http: //www.dea.gov/ongoing/britons.html
|