Every revolutionary idea seems to evoke three stages of reaction. They may be summed up by the phrases: (1) It's completely impossible. (2) It's possible, but it's not worth doing. (3) I said it was a good idea all along.
The relevance is to the gradual change in various country's response to drugs. A conference has just been held at El Paso, Texas;
More than two dozen drug experts, academics, border journalists and law enforcement officials gathered to compare notes for three days about drug policy, coming from Mexico, the United States and even Colombia.
Two seemingly unlikely advocates of radical change at the conference were Terry Nelson, a retired federal agent, and James Gray, a California state judge, both of whom once sent drug offenders to prison.
“The global war on drugs is probably the greatest public policy failure of all time,” said Nelson, who stalked traffickers in the Caribbean and Latin America during three decades with the U.S. Border Patrol, Customs and Department of Homeland Security.
“The drug war has brought us the militarization of our police force,” Nelson said. “And it's killing our families when you put a mother or father in jail for smoking small amounts of marijuana.”
Nelson said the answer is legalization, education and regulation, the treatment given two other dangerous but popular legal drugs, alcohol and tobacco.
6 comments:
The "war on drugs" has also brought greater police powers and powers for the state to intervene deeper into peoples personal lives. Drug dependency and the related crime strongly maintains a separation in the population between those in to semi-criminal environment and those not, i.e. a cultural difference between similar parts of the population. It also creates a "moral separation" based on nothing but state determination. Furthermore, it legitimizes the extraction of funds to be used by the state for increased surveillance and control. Additionally, the entire drug trade is (albeit indirectly) taxed at every step of the way, so it actually generates state revenue.
Conclusion: for governments that are intent on ever increasing state intervention there is no benefit whatsoever to resolve the problem in the simplest fashion possible, i.e. let people make their own decisions and live with the consequences.
Lindsay, there is a parallel concept with the quote for which you were searching. It's something we've experienced ourselves as private suppliers to an industry that is govt-controlled.
The bureaucrats' response to any new idea/product/service/technology is initially:
1. ridiculed
2. ignored
3. adopted
But not before they've done their best to drive you stark raving mad. :/
Sus, are you by chance in the gaming industry? :-)
Lindsay- Hone's inane proposition could end up the living proof of your excellent quote.
Some clever person once said "If man was meant to fly, God would have given him wings" The rest as they say is history.
Dirk
Quite. Sometimes the most dangerous ideas are promoted with the greatest fervour (and consequent success). There are ample fearful examples.
Yes, especially when taking drugs is a victimless "crime" anyway.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/p-epidemic/news/article.cfm?c_id=605&objectid=10599741
Post a Comment