The RPs Debate Legalizing Marijuana: Jeff Smith Responds

Jeff Smith‘s First Response

[The RP’s Provocation; Jason Atkinson’s Rebuttal #1; The RP’s First Defense: Jason Atkinson’s First Response; Artur Davis’ Rebuttal #2; The RP’s Second Defense; Artur Davis’ First Response; Ron Granieri’s Rebuttal #3; Jeff Smith’s Rebuttal #4; The RP’s Third Defense; Artur Davis’ Second Response]

Some interesting points from Jonathan and Artur, and some fancy philosophy as well.

And I grant Artur’s point – having represented some of the nation’s poorest and violent census tracts I agree that people just want the dealers off the streets.

And when our nation has the political will to make that happen instead of spending a trillion dollars in the Middle East this past decade, then I’m prepared to entertain arguments about reforming the criminal justice system.

But I think we’d all agree that this was not a priority under Bush and does not appear to be much of one under Obama.

No one addressed my central point: The nation has spent billions with almost no impact on the availability of drugs. Indeed, in the most controlled environment possible – federal possible – drugs remain easily available.

Given that lamentable fact, I’m not sure why spending more billions to try to stem the flow of drugs here continues to make sense, as opposed to spending that money on in-patient treatment centers for which, to reiterate, there are waiting lists in every major city. (Indeed, new innovations in pharmacological treatment of drug addiction are beginning to gain traction at the state and local level in across the nation.)

We have learned throughout history with prohibition that supply will meet demand. Markets for prostitution, gambling, and assorted intoxicants have existed for millenia and will continue to exist long after we are gone.