Tuesday, June 22, 2010

Alcohol Intoxicant Market Protectionism

U.S. drug prohibition statutes consitute a RICO racketeering for market protection for alcohol

excerpted from The Anti-drugwar czar

But my intent here is not to focus on "medical" marijuana -- I want to focus on the real reason the vast majority of people smoke pot: for recreational intoxication. It is a subtle but essential point to state that the CSA has nothing to do with recreational intoxicants. Indeed, the specification in the Scheduling criteria that a substance has to be evaluated in terms of its medical efficacy is its Achilles' Heel. Why should a substance intended for recreational intoxication be assessed for medical utility? If I want to get high, I honestly don't care whether or not my intoxicant can double as a "medicine" of some sort.

Worse yet, given the absolute inadequacy of the CSA to address recreational intoxication, if we need to buy allergy pills or cold medicine we now have to show photo ID, and have our purchases of such items recorded and restricted. Never mind that the drug in question (pseudoephedrine) was already approved through the various "Schedules" and was proven a "safe and effective" non threatening medicine" that made it all the way to over-the-counter sales (in 1976!).

Never mind that 99.4 percent of Americans are not past year meth users. The intentions behind the CSA were to ensure that intoxicants other than alcohol would never be "legal" to manufacture, use or sell in the United States. Period

Its all about criminal mercantilism: market protection for alcohol as an intoxicant, and for pharamecuticles and Virginia Bright Leaf Tobacco.

No comments: