Right Pain During Ovulation

legalize drugs!

Today I have again found an article that reflects the more common arguments against legalization of drugs.

core message:

. Legalizes the state drug dealer he sets out for the legalization of drugs is therefore immoral. "

we verify this argument. According to the

drug addiction and report of the Federal Government we have the following situation in Germany:

• 9 million consume alcohol in dangerous degree. We have 1.3 million serious addicts with about 75,000 deaths per year
  
• 16 Million smokers and 140,000 deaths per year
  
• 1.4 to 1.9 million drug addicts
  

sum up, consume about 30% of the population regularly dangerous drugs.

contrast, 1% or 800,000 are regular users of illicit drugs with about 1,500 deaths a year.

fact is thus:

• is that the consumption of illegal drugs to alcohol, nicotine and drugs virtually meaningless.
• that the consumption of dangerous drugs in Germany is legal and widely disseminated, and the state so strongly deserves

The first result is thus: Who

to ban drugs, it must also necessarily advocate a ban on alcohol and nicotine. Anything else would be an untenable double standard.

As the state controlled the use of drugs?

In the case of legal drugs take the state on taxes and education have a significant impact on consumption (eg taxes on alcohol in Scandinavia, warnings on cigarette packs, ban on advertising, banning the consumption of the public etc).

What happens when the state declared as illegal drugs?

We saw very beautiful in the American prohibition. The state is on the active control of the market, leaving that instead organized crime. Consumption (the market) but it is not a limit order. The same can be experienced now with the cocaine trade in Mexico or Colombia. Rather than raise taxes on the consumption of drugs, the state must spend now, however, significant resources to curb organized crime again, he has created with the prohibition in the first place.

declare the state a drug illegal

• he is the active control over the use of the drug on
• leaving the state in control of the market to organized crime
• avoid the state taxes to a good extent
• the consumption the Drug is not contained
• wasted instead of the State funds for significant tax permanently ineffective enforcement of bans
  

result

• The consumption of drugs is largely independent of the laws. There is a constant demand, a market, and therefore always trade.
• The consumption of drugs can only be controlled through taxation and education
• The question whether a drug is legal or not decide solely on who controlled the market
  

In other words, declares

of State for illegal drug , subsidizes and promotes it organized crime, thus creating a legal vacuum dispense with tax revenue during the same time he wasted considerable tax revenue.

What is organized crime?

I think that can best be seen in Mexico or Colombia. So alone in Mexico last year came in the war on drugs more than 7700 people died. are produced in the countries in the drug cartels control whole regions, keep people in part in slave-like conditions and are a state within a state.

In other words,

Explains the Company with an illegal drug for the company to the highest degree is immoral and economically stupid.


The bottom line is simple.
All drugs should be legalized. Everything else can be justified neither logical nor moral.

Or vice versa: the prohibition of drugs only be justified by using double standards ;-).

However, it must also be a clearly stated. Non-dangerous drugs are not.