Legalize It?

Dirty, nasty hippies: are they correct for once?In today’s Washington Post, Peter Moskos and Neill Franklin lay out a law enforcement based argument for legalization of drugs. Both authors are former Baltimore City police officers. Mr. Moskos is also currently a professor of criminology at John Jay College of Criminal Justice.

‘Puter tends to agree with Messrs. Moskos and Franklin. Marijuana should be legalized (and taxed) immediately. Marijuana could be treated similarly to alcohol, with government licensed facilities selling the drug to people over 21. Criminal offenses such as public intoxication and DUI could be updated to include marijuana.

Harder drugs such as heroin, cocaine, crack, crystal meth, etc., would require tighter controls. Perhaps a “use on premises” situation would be appropriate, wherein licensed retailers could distribute the drugs (along with clean needles) to be used on premises. Counselors and medical personnel could also be on premises.

For too long the United States has fought a losing battle against drugs and the associated violence. American drug policy has also had a detrimental effect on our foreign policy (see, e.g., Afghanistan poppy growers). Legalizing the possession, sale and consumption of currently illegal drugs would remove the criminal element and likely reduce violence. Tangentially, legalization would also raise government revenue (taxes) and decrease costs (lowered prison and enforcement costs). Further, legalization recognizes citizen’s abilities to make choices for themselves, without government interference.

Politically, the issue is a difficult one. Many conservatives would not countenance repeal of prohibition on illegal drugs. It is an area where conservatives fail to recognize in themselves what they criticize in liberals: a willingness to use law to force social policy choices on those with whom they disagree.

‘Puter awaits his fellow Gormogons’ explanation of the myriad ways in which ‘Puter is wrong.

About 'Puter

Always right, unless he isn’t, the infallible Ghettoputer F. X. Gormogons claims to be an in-law of the Volgi, although no one really believes this.’Puter carefully follows economic and financial trends, legal affairs, and serves as the Gormogons’ financial and legal advisor. He successfully defended us against a lawsuit from a liquor distributor worth hundreds of thousands of dollars in unpaid deliveries of bootleg shandies.The Geep has an IQ so high it is untestable and attempts to measure it have resulted in dangerously unstable results as well as injuries to researchers. Coincidentally, he publishes intelligence tests as a side gig.His sarcasm is so highly developed it borders on the psychic, and he is often able to insult a person even before meeting them. ’Puter enjoys hunting small game with 000 slugs and punt guns, correcting homilies in real time at Mass, and undermining unions. ’Puter likes to wear a hockey mask and carry an axe into public campgrounds, where he bursts into people’s tents and screams. As you might expect, he has been shot several times but remains completely undeterred.He assures us that his obsessive fawning over news stories involving women teachers sleeping with young students is not Freudian in any way, although he admits something similar once happened to him. Uniquely, ’Puter is unable to speak, read, or write Russian, but he is able to sing it fluently.Geep joined the order in the mid-1980s. He arrived at the Castle door with dozens of steamer trunks and an inarticulate hissing creature of astonishingly low intelligence he calls “Sleestak.” Ghettoputer appears to make his wishes known to Sleestak, although no one is sure whether this is the result of complex sign language, expert body posture reading, or simply beating Sleestak with a rubber mallet.'Puter suggests the Czar suck it.

Comments are closed.