Legalize Methamphetamine

Methamphetamine is bad stuff. Really, really bad stuff. If the devil were to invent a drug to destroy mankind, it would be meth. That’s why I used to say that methamphetamine, out of all of the drugs in the world, should be illegal.

Phoenix criminal defense attorney Marc Victor makes a compelling argument that methamphetamine should be legalized. I think that he is right, and that I was wrong: methamphetamine, along with all of the other now-illegal drugs (most of which are benign compared to meth) should be legalized.

Technorati Tags: , ,

About Mark Bennett

Mark Bennett got his letter of marque from the Supreme Court of Texas in May 1995. He is famous for having no sense of humor when it comes to totalitarianism.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Legalize Methamphetamine

  1. Michael Stuart says:

    Glad you sent me this link Mark.

    Absolutely, without exception, everything must be “legal”. In fact what is un-LAWful is making substances illegal.

    The principle at stake is simple; who owns your body?

    Methamphetamine. PCP. Ketamine. LSD. Peyote. Pot. MDMA–“ecstasy”. Heroin.
    Vicodin. Oxycontin. Propofol.
    Cyanide. Strychnine.
    Paint thinner. Freon.

    My body, not yours.

    The inevitable shrill shriek of the collectivist is “but what about sociiiiiiietyyyy?”

    There’s no such thing. There are only individuals. If one harms another, THAT is the crime–NOT the substances he was ingesting prior to the harm.

    There must be no leniency in punishment for a given harm based on the miscreant’s state of intoxication, nor any extra punishment; their state of intoxication is immaterial, because they CHOSE that state, and CHOSE to do the harm–whether or not the intoxicant disinhibited them sufficiently to allow them to commit it, the chain of choices was THEIRS, not the drug’s.

    “But they’re addicts!” No such thing. Read the late great Thomas Szasz on the illegitimacy of psychiatric labels; the disempowering nature of words like “addict” and “disease”. And, even if you subscribe to these artificial constructs–and choose to ignore the “addicts” dereliction of moral duty–they still chose the path they’re on, culminating in whatever violence they commit.

    That’s the moral argument. The much less powerful utilitarian argument applies as well, for those so inclined–the War on (some) Drugs doesn’t work. Well, it DOES work for those who designed it; what appears to be an utter clusterfuck superficially has masterfully:

    * vastly increased drugs’ customer base
    * increased drug purity and availability; product has never been this good
    * created unheard-of profits for the participants–most of them directly sponsored by, or carefully nurtured, by the government supposedly fighting drugs. The banks launder $500 Billion annually in drug money–so much, they’d be insolvent without this source of hard cash*.
    * enormous and highly profitable prison populations who are now a ready source of slave labor at 25 cents/hour.

    * don’t believe it? Google Wells Fargo’s recent settlement for laundering drug money; roughly 0.03 percent of the amount laundered.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>