Domestic Terrorism

Is the dea Encouraging Drug Use?

This entry was posted in Capitalism Domestic Terrorism Drug Laws Economics Law Enforcement Libertarianism on by

The US drug enforcement agency has published the 2005 edition of their classic magazine Drugs of Abuse:

This DEA magazine delivers clear, scientific information about drugs in a factual, straightforward way, combined with scores of precise photographs shot to scale.

There are lots of photos and there may be some facts but what is the message? Mr. Sun says:

I must say that, for me, the primary impact of the magazine was to make me want to do drugs. I’m as straight as an arrow, but after looking at this DEA publication I simply can’t wait to start cramming psychoactive substances down my pill hole. Let’s look at a few screenshots, shall we?

Well, click on over and look at them with Mr. Sun!
Via Hit & Run where some of the commentors have noticed items that may not be quite factual. Can you find others?

Fighting the Wrong War?

This entry was posted in Capitalism Culture Domestic Terrorism Drug Laws Economics Law Libertarianism War on Terrorism World Affairs on by

Gary Becker argues that the war on drugs has failed and that alternate approaches involving legalization, regulation and high taxes might achieve current results along with other benefits without the large social and individual costs associated with the current prohibition.
Richard Posner generally agrees with Becker arguments:

If the resources used to wage the war were reallocated to other social projects, such as reducing violent crime, there would probably be a net social gain. For one thing, it is particularly costly to enforce the law against a �victimless� crime, more precisely a crime that consists of a transaction between a willing seller and a willing buyer.

In addition, he points out that:

The political source of the war on drugs is mysterious if, as I am inclined to believe, there is a legal substitute for every one of the illegal drugs:…
…it is apparent that our society has no general policy against the consumption of mind-altering substances, and there seems to be a certain arbitrariness in the choice of the subset to prohibit.

To get a sense of just how large the failure has been on a global scale check out the maps that Michael Stastny has posted from the World Drug Report 20041. Note what country is either number 1 or 2 in usage for each category. Stastny has an interesting supposition about his government:

Maybe Austrian authorities know that watching TV does more harm to your brain and health than taking drugs once in a while and that stigmatizing long-term users doesn’t help either.

So, a war on TV instead of drugs? Well, no. We do not need any increased government intervention in media. But I would accept regulation and taxation of now illegal drugs as a first step out of the current quagmire. The proper long term goal is, though, to completely remove the government from any involvement in “transactions between a willing buyer and a willing seller.”
Via Marginal Revolution where you can find more here.
1The report and the above referenced maps appear to overlook certain other popular drugs, e.g., alcohol!?

Security Freeze? Not enough!

This entry was posted in Capitalism Domestic Terrorism Economics Information Libertarianism Regulation on by

The Washington legislature is considering legislation that will give consumers the authority:

….to put a security freeze on their credit-reporting file. A security freeze lets the consumer prevent anyone from looking at his or her own credit reporting file for purposes of granting credit unless the consumer chooses to let that particular business look at the information.

This is a partial step in the right direction. It is not enough and will not as article suggests give consumers the ability to prevent identity thieves from getting credit in their names.
As I commented last month individuals must own their personal information and:

No institution, government or private, can be allowed to collect or distribute, for free or for fee, any information about an individual without that individuals specific consent on a per incident basis and if the distribution is for a fee then that individual must be compensated at a rate agreeable to the individual.

Anything less is a recipe for theft underwritten by the very governmental institutions alleged to be our protectors.