Not at all, Grim, you are just focusing on one of the less immediate aspects of a pretty nutty idea. This idea gibbers and sticks bananas in its ears. This is a bad idea.
Lets bring back Prohibition. Thats a better idea. The amount of human carnage and wasted resources as a result of alcohol in our society is staggering (snicker…chortle.) By what interpretation are any of these drugs, or for that matter, all of them combined, any worse for our society than plain ol’ popskull.
Of course, thats a dumb idea. Its still better.
And what about those of us, like myself, who are in an ongoing glaucoma prevention regimen? Gonna shove all the potheads on an island? Which one? Australia’s pretty much full, and they might resent it. You’ll put those nice folks over at Ben and Jerry’s right out of business.
You know, this idea is so dumb its hard to make fun of.
You’re missing the fact that we’re not talking about red light districts here: we’re talking about specially created drug ghettos, where anyone who wants free drugs can go and burn themselves up.
I suppose there would be pregnancies, but I suspect the infant mortality rate would be exceptionally high.
Hmm, Cracktown. I could go for XTCLand. I would surely reside in LSDville.
For the record, it would take pharmaceutical companies about two seconds to produce all illegal drugs which can be synthesized. This would include, but no be limited to, LSD, DMT, Ecstacy, MDA, Meth, Mescaline, and PCP. All the precursors necessary, and ALL of the equipment, is already lying around in labs. I have little doubt that “broken” equipment and missing materials are funneled into basement operations.
Companies like Sigma already manufacture such drugs, and thus the turnover time would be zero.
Let it be resolved, then, that the machinery for such a plan already exists. As well, it is pretty apparent that many a city block exists in the state we are hypothesizing. They also happen to be high-crime areas because of two reasons. One, the drugs and their manufacture and sale are already illegal. Two, the addict stealing to support his/her habit.
I believe in the market and the government behind it enough that given appropriate regulations the economics of selling drugs would make it viable, and would remove much of the crime associated with murders between “territorial disputes” and selling bad shit.
The only real problem that faces us, IMO, are the following: ODing, and debilitating addiction. Are we saying that these aren’t surmountable?
I suppose we should add the following problem in as well: getting the land in the first place.
Well, while drug ghettos may be the way to go in the intermediary until society can adjust to the fact that this ignored, despised coalition of “druggies and harlots” are in fact their sons, daughters, cousins, sisters, brothers, mothers, fathers, aunts, uncles, friends, nephews, nieces, neighbors and coworkers, I still believe that while tobacco and alcohol are (relatively) successfully regulated and sold, so should marijuana be. I, for one, would smoke probably about a half a pack on Friday and Saturday, and maybe a single stick every other day during the week. That’s, what, $40-$60 a week that can be remaindered on my paycheck in income taxes, only to be reharvested in marijuana taxes. Less income taxes to bitch about, people who don’t like it don’t have to do it, and don’t have to pay it, and the Government still gets their monies. That’s a plan I could agree with.
Alternatively, we could tax marijuana use like I said, but leave income taxes, and apply the full amount of the marijuana taxes to maintaining and supplying the “drug ghettos”. Make marijuana pay-for-play, as it would definately be the most popular, and let the received taxes pay for the rest of the “playground”. That way marijuana users help support their “brothers in crime” while remaining free and clear… am I making sense?
I searched for info on the harmfulness of marijuana and tobacco and found the following page:
However, this hardly answers the question. It seems to contain small portions of about 30 different studies, and they all produce different results (but they aren’t all measuring the exact same thing). Here are some highlights:
there’s a lot more where that came from. So at least from that it would seem that marijuana is not MORE harmful than tobacco. And of course this doesn’t answer the “cancer question.” I did also find this: http://www.ukcia.org/lib/lungs.htm
which is entitled “Marijuana Less Harmful to Lungs than Cigarettes” though I didn’t read this one as it made it quite clear what its conclusion was.
Jesus, what are you John Carpenter?
It sounds like ‘Escape From New York’. Cracktown-ha!
Seriously, what would the difference be between the OP’s proposal and what we have now? There are already plenty of drug ghettos in this country. All we’d have to do is legalize it, and we’d have some more sin tax revenues. What could possibly go wrong?
Also, the whole proposal kind of smacks of concentration camps. What’s next - Gayville? Catholic City? Jewtown?