Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:you're wrong (Score 1) 20

You're slightly incorrect about tobacco. It does have some medicinal value, in the right dosage, for the right symptoms of course. But I would say alcohol's value is much higher :-)

The rest of your post does not address the massive, off the books profits derived from prohibition. And the race/class issue plays a big part also amongst an emotional, fickle public to get it to go along. Who wants their daughter smokin' reefer in the alley with jazz musicians?!

Comment Re:you're wrong (Score 1) 20

Your analogy is horrible and doesn't hold up in any way.. Inconsistency is something you are totally unqualified to discuss. Though you are the perfect example. Like she said. If you want to prohibit intoxicants, then you have to prohibit all of them. I mean, if you want to be 'consistent' and all that. So, yes your point was addressed Your hoity-toity rich people like illegal drugs as much as anybody. But you need the pretext to harass those who aren't so rich. Prohibition targets specific groups of of people for specific reasons. And it only makes your defense of it look even worse. It's real purpose though is to drive the price up. It actually is an exercise in free marketing. With the right amount of money I can still acquire all the bazookas and tanks, and drugs I want. Poor people need not apply if they want to stay out of jail. Contraband is always a growth market. Hell, Ms. Hillary scored 60 bil in a single deal, legally for a change. There's no telling how much is being made by the government in illegal arms, and drug sales. Of course, that's just 'lefty' speculation to you.

Slashdot Top Deals

You can tune a piano, but you can't tuna fish. You can tune a filesystem, but you can't tuna fish. -- from the tunefs(8) man page

Working...