You've seen it at DK's, you might even have wandered over to Unity's. It's 15 000 words, which dwarfs anything I've written. In these "eight line bite posts" days which the short-attention spanners seem to demand, Unity's piece still deserves to be read in its entirety.
UPDATE: Sackerson begs to differ and his view is over here.
UPDATE UPDATE: Having read the article fully again, what Unity is basically arguing is:
1. The government has made a mess of legislation regarding the "drug war";
2. The scientific articles on risk and harm are inconclusive on newer drugs;
3. Prohibition has not significantly altered the level of drug usage.
All of these I'd agree with but there are two things Unity did which were disappointing:
1. He presented counter-argument as strawmen, inserting emotive phrases instead of examining the arguments against and presenting them impartially, something he does not do with those who wish to legalize hard drugs;
2. He fails to address the overall societal cost, not monetarily or on registered addicts but in terms of the culture of drugs and that is far less able to be pinned down, far less able to be quantified. He also doesn't address the political value of this culture becoming all-pervasive.
I stop short of saying he's wrong but it is going to require the level of research I just can't put in at this moment but should be able to two weeks from now.
UPDATE: Sackerson begs to differ and his view is over here.
UPDATE UPDATE: Having read the article fully again, what Unity is basically arguing is:
1. The government has made a mess of legislation regarding the "drug war";
2. The scientific articles on risk and harm are inconclusive on newer drugs;
3. Prohibition has not significantly altered the level of drug usage.
All of these I'd agree with but there are two things Unity did which were disappointing:
1. He presented counter-argument as strawmen, inserting emotive phrases instead of examining the arguments against and presenting them impartially, something he does not do with those who wish to legalize hard drugs;
2. He fails to address the overall societal cost, not monetarily or on registered addicts but in terms of the culture of drugs and that is far less able to be pinned down, far less able to be quantified. He also doesn't address the political value of this culture becoming all-pervasive.
I stop short of saying he's wrong but it is going to require the level of research I just can't put in at this moment but should be able to two weeks from now.
Incidentally love the picture at the top of the page very Great Expectations.
ReplyDeleteGiven your name, I would expect you to write this way. However, this is a distortion of what is happening.
ReplyDeleteHamas is not even being supported by the Arab world - that's what is the bottom line here.
Let me ask you two questions:
1. Does Israel have a right to exist without being exterminated?
2. Where should they be allowed to exist?
Please don't shuffle off onto other rhetoric - just answer those two simple questions.