Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!prls!pyramid!voder!kontron!cramer
From: cramer@kontron.UUCP (Clayton Cramer)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,net.med
Subject: Re: Drug Abuse - True Problem or Media Hype?
Message-ID: <1080@kontron.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 23-Sep-86 16:12:59 EDT
Article-I.D.: kontron.1080
Posted: Tue Sep 23 16:12:59 1986
Date-Received: Thu, 25-Sep-86 00:24:08 EDT
References: <720@scc.UUCP> <20756@rochester.ARPA> <463@epimass.UUCP> <374@necntc.UUCP> <20976@rochester.ARPA>
Organization: Kontron Electronics, Mt. View, CA
Lines: 49
Xref: linus talk.politics.misc:302 net.med:4662

> In article <374@necntc.UUCP>, gkb@necntc.UUCP (Greg Busby) writes:
> > [As an aside, some of my siblings' high-school-age friends have said
> > that with the higher drinking age, they can't get alcohol, so they have
> > turned to drugs.  But that is another pet peeve.] The point is that
> > regulating a legal drug has made it harder for "children" to get it, so
> > why wouldn't legalizing and regulating illegal drugs have the same
> > effect?
> 
>   The entire paragraph above is just about the most bullshit ridden group of
> words assembled that I've seen in quite awhile.
> You are saying that because the drinking ages for alcoholic consumption were
> raised that kids can't get alcohol, but CAN get drugs.  Does some moral code
> of ethics exist out there that would prevent someone from selling alcohol to
> minors but would alow the selling of illegal drugs to minors?  I think you've

Not a moral code.  Liquor stores are afraid of losing their license.  Drug
dealers are completely unconcerned because they already operate illegally.

> been led astray by some of your siblings' high-school-age friends.  Even if
> this were true, what is your point, that we should alow kids to have alcohol
> so that they will use less drugs?  
>   Now my point.  If drugs are made legal, kids will have even easier access to
> them, just as they currently have easy access to alcohol.  Just as they have
> always had easy access to alcohol.  But a more frightening point is that
> these legal drugs will now be cheap.  A kid could spend his lunch money on 
> some drugs and be wacked out for days.  Can you imagine a 'pack of coke' 
> costing the equivelent of a pack of cigarettes with enough 'blast' to last
> the day?  The next time you are driving by a school play ground, please
> observe all the kids in the area smoking.  Also realize that it is against
> the law for minors to purchase tobacco products, but there they are, smoking
> away, with no one admonishing them for it.  So here we have a regulated legal
> substance with kids having absolutely no problem obtaining it.  So much for
> your theories on regulation and legalization.
> 
> ray

Fine.  A bunch of scum wack themselves out from cheap drugs.  The REST of
the population (which is the overwhelming majority) can get back to studying.

You also seem to overlook that the illegality of drugs results in not
only higher prices and profits for drug dealers, but the illegality of
advertising price and availability makes it likely that a doper will
go back to the same drug dealer that introduced them to the drug in
question.  This creates incentives for a drug dealer to give away
free samples.  If the profit is measured in the 1% range, and you have
assurance that your customers will come back to you in particular,
why give away drugs to get people hooked?

Clayton E. Cramer