The world would be better if …
By Adam Markwood
I wanted to get a few things off my chest so I can give my wife a break from what feels like involuntary political rants. Following is the painfully abridged list.
– Double (at least) K-12 teachers’ salaries and make it easier to fire them. This will attract more talent and sustain excellence in one of the most important professions in the land. We can’t rely on altruism to attract talented teachers, and we can’t let the next generation’s economy be failed by untalented teachers. To the same goal, make school year-round (now that I’m out), increase teacher-parent-student engagement and reduce teacher-student ratio.
Markwood is a real estate consultant in Roanoke.
July 3, 2012 - 7:57 AM
Dear Adam, my only question to you is, WHY aren’t you running for Congress? You would have my support.
“Decriminalize all other drugs and use a portion of the billions made available from both taxes on marijuana and saved from reduced prisoner load to establish treatment centers for addicts”
Maybe you could also set aside a few billion to pay the medical bills incurred from people who suffer health maladies from exposure to the toxic waste dump of old meth labs your neighbor creates now that no one could tell him he can’t cook meth in his home. Yeah that decriminalizing all drugs seems like a well thought out plan.
“Decriminalize all other drugs and use a portion of the billions made available from both taxes on marijuana and saved from reduced prisoner load to establish treatment centers for addicts”.
I tripped over a junkie in Frankfurt, Germany. He was passed out on the floor of a tunnel leading from the train station. Still had the needle sticking out of his arm.
No, thanks. I’d rather not see that here.
Decriminalize drugs. Tax them heavily like cigarettes. Then sue the manufacturers and distributors for selling a product they knew to be harmful/deadly. Drive the cost of legal drugs through the roof so that people have to resort to obtaining them illegally to satisfy their addiction. Then throw them in prison.
Michael and Chuck – I hope you guys don’t bring the same ignorance to the voting booth; it ends up in things like the Iraq war. Decriminalization wouldn’t cause either of the problems you cite, as dealing and trafficking is still illegal and subject to the same laws that exist now. The only thing decriminalization changes is the punishment levied on those with small amounts of drugs for personal use. These folks would receive an infraction (not years of jail time) and then be forced into a rehabilitation center, instead of stuck in jail where they would come out a convict that can’t get a job and thus would resort back to drugs. And at the same time cost us a bunch of unecessary taxpayer money that doesn’t fix the underlying issue.
Chuck – under decriminalization, your meth dealer would be committing a crime and could be arrested just the same.
Michael – under my decriminalization the intent is to prevent that junkie from ending up back on the street so you don’t have to be so terribly inconvenienced. As I said, instead of sending him to jail to come out unable to be a productive member of society, I would send him to a rehabilitation clinic whose sole task is to rehabilitate and give him the tools to be a useful part of society.
Very well said and please, tell your wife that my husband shares her problem. He has heard my rants so often he can probably recite them from memory.
You make some very valid points in a very succinct way. That is a true gift and not an easy feat! I salute that as well. 750 words seems like a lot, but it isn’t.
I knew some would deliberately misinterpret your “decriminalize” point. That is par for the course here.
Would that more of the pols in office had your clarity.
We absolutely need more rehabilitation clinics and less prisons for addicts of all stripes. When the “answer” is prison, you have ruined a life. To pretend otherwise flies in the face of reality.
#6 – “When the “answer” is prison, you have ruined a life.”
Actually, Sandi, the person using illegal drugs has already ruined their life.
Not necessarily Michael #7. Drug rehabilitation can and does work for a lot of people. Adding a prison record makes recovery, rehabilitation and rebuilding a life much more difficult. People do not want to hire “criminals”. It follows you forever, even if you get clean and stay that way. There IS a better way for the majority of drug and alcohol users.
No worries Adam. I will be at the voting both every year. Someone has to counter the ignorance people like you and Sandi will bring.
There are a couple of major flaws with your little theory. First, “my” meth dealer isn’t cooking to sell, he’s cooking for personal use. Your plan was to make ALL drugs legal. So it will no longer be a crime to possess meth. Unless CVS is going to start selling meth, the only way people will get is to make it themselves, which will still produce the same toxic wastes that are produced now. Or would you still have laws against manufacturing drugs, just not posessing them.
Second, your ideas (and Sandi’s position stated in #6 and #8) are built on flawed premise. First, rehab can work, but it only works when the person wants to stop using drug. The ideas posited seem to be based on the fallacy that the majority of drug users are pitiable characters who only use drugs because they are addicted and that they would quit if only they could get some help. In reality, nothing could be further from the truth. The majority of people who use drugs don’t want to stop. They use drugs because they like being high. Forced rehab for people who don’t already want to cahnge their behavior is very seldom effective. That is a proven psychological fact.
Second, do a little research. The idea that jails and prisons are full o first time offenders who who got caught with a small, personal use amount of drugs is simply not true. Some people believe this because they don’t know any better and the decriminalization lobby has sold them this bill of goods. Others believe it because they want to because it helps their political agenda. Either way, it is simply false. First offenders in Virginia already get diversion into drug education programs and the charge is dismissed if the program is completed. The idea that you get caught with a dime bag of weed and a pipe and you get a year in jail is simply a lie. It just doesn’t happen. If you want to argue that drugs should be legal because you want to be able to get high without worrying about getting in trouble, at least in the case of marijuana, I could support that. It would be an honest argument. If you want to say legalize it to save money on enforcement and use it like to tobacco as a revenue tool, I can respect that because that too would at least acknowledge the honest motivation behind it – the money. But to argue that it should be legal because the money would be better used for rehab is disingenuous. If there were no threat of prosecution behind it, the vast majority of people would never voluntarily go into treatment.
Sandi, it’s no surprise, but your position perfectly exemplifies the the enabling, entitlement mindset that decries any sense of personal resposibility in America today. “When the answer is prison, YOU have ruined a life.” Right. The person who chose to break the law has no responsibility for their own actions, but somehow the ubiquitous ‘you’ has ruined their life. Sorry, but if their life is ruined and they want someone to blame, take a look in the mirror.
Chuck, before you turn red and pass out from indignation, you might want to notice that Adam did mention the 750 word limit and that nothing in his commentary said that his plan would not need elaboration, collaboration and fabrication into a concrete plan. He was expressing ideas and possibilities and why he supports them, not writing legislation.
I don’t think anyone can or should be forced into rehab when prison is happy to take them and again, he did not say anything about a revolving door for the incorrigible addicts. In prison they cost us money, in a coffin, they don’t if we need to be graphic.
I will also add that it is YOU and your projection onto my point that decided my saying “When the “answer” is prison, you have ruined a life.” into, “The person who chose to break the law has no responsibility for their own actions, but somehow the ubiquitous ‘you’ has ruined their life. Of course the person who “broke the law” bears the brunt of the responsibility, whether they end up in prison or in a gutter. No one is trying to mitigate that truth.
Is your world truly that black and white?