"New Zealand ranking second only to the United States for cannabis use provides further evidence that our country is descending into the world's gutters," Mr Sabin said.
I wonder if National has a seat they can offer to Doug Sellman?
Tuesday, May 03, 2011
National bolsters war on drugs
Nothing much captures my imagination today. Perhaps worth a mention is National's replacement for John Carter's safe seat. Mike Sabin, the ex-policeman who wages war against P. His anti-drug advocacy doesn't stop at P.
I wonder if National has a seat they can offer to Doug Sellman?
I wonder if National has a seat they can offer to Doug Sellman?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
The Nats are well and truly on their own path to being run by special interest groups. In their case not the unions or the LBGT fraction, but special interests nevertheless.
If the nats were serious about saving money they'd legalise or decriminalize. Helping people instead of prosecuting them would save millions each year.
Anon, you must certainly mean billions?
Would it be billions Bez? What is the entire law and order budget? $3.5 billion? But I can see where other expenditure would be soaked up too, like benefits for those criminalised and unable to work because of it. However if serious money went into rehab that would alos reduce the savings. Just interested in your analysis.
my experience of new Zaland police tells me they have no interest in winning any war against drugs because drugs give the police a high profile and they dont want to kill the goose that lays the golden egg.
Dirk
If the nats were serious about saving money they'd reintroduce arbitrary capital punishment.
Cost - say $10,000 bounty paid to law enforcement officer.
benefits for those criminalised and unable to work because of it.
and this removes all those benefits for the criminals, and I'd confiscate all their assets (if they have any) and ban dependents from all benefits too.
serious money went into rehab
Hell yeah, it's really really expensive - much much more so that prison, which is far more expensive than most other options. If you want to save, just send them to a poly on a student loan...
Yes Lindsay, I'm convinced that that's the case. I haven't done a very detailed analysis and, doubt that would be possible on the available information. I would only want to put a more definite number on it if I can provide more detail, especially of "hidden" costs (for example the costs of people languishing on the welfare rolls because their constant involvement with the periphery of the law prohibits holding a regular job, healthcare costs associated with unhealthy and criminal fringe lifestyles, DPP, housing and other costs as a result of same etc). Also don't forget non-police enforcement costs, from customs to coastguard to IRD. Then there are more remote costs, such as the costs of criminalizing large parts of the population early in life and the consequences of that on education, career prospects and economic contribution, and the costs of maintaining the policy frameworks around drugs, or the regulatory costs on all parts of the economy that result from drug-oriented interventions.
Also realize that there is a significant benefit side to legalization (tax), as well as the potential for related industries, from agriculture to tourism to scientific research and everything in between.
Also, I'm not convinced that decriminalization would in fact lead to the necessity of serious money going into rehab.
In my view the entire criminalization of drug use is premised on the idea that government wishes to take responsibility and decision making away from individuals, whatever the deeper background behind that desire. Most of the problems we see associated with drugs have nothing to do with the actual decision to use drugs but with the lifestyle consequences of placing that decision in the criminal sphere.
That means that capturing the financial parameters of the phenomenon must include all areas of impact.
I for one would strongly support rational debate on the issue, and have some problems with the rather one sided approach to the issue.
I suggest we should discuss this in much more detail at some point.
Also realize that there is a significant benefit side to legalization (tax)
Right. Because people currently getting their dope and crack and P tax-free will start paying taxes? Please.
most of the problems we see associated with drugs have nothing to do with the actual decision to use drugs
Almost all drug problems in NZ related to Alcohol and Tobacco. Both legal. Gambling is legal but we still have to pick up the tab.
Legalizing yet more drugs is only sensible in an environment where
- "welfare" (including Super) has been terminated, so I don't end up pay benefits to many more drug-wasted bludgers
- cops are not only armed but have the legal, regulatory, and operational framework to use firearms (ideally all citizens) so that when some wasted pot-head or P-addled blagger gets in my way, we can blow them away.
Fix the big things, and the small things will take care of themselves.
Post a Comment