Opinions - Prohibition will go away, way faster then it came. Educate & they will follow.

[BLTC]

Good time of day, respectable members and lurkers. I've been reading this for quite some time now, and finally decided to throw in a bit.

Here is what it took me a few years to realize :

A large portion of the population who gave it substantial thought would support total decriminzalization of posession and use and heavy regulation and taxation of production and sale.

With a few dollars spent on a thorough explanation campaign, that number could be increased drastically.

I kid you not. Almost any sensible human being, presented with clear facts and a plan of action that addresses everyones' concerns (kids, crime, health etc.) , will agree that legalization of personal posession and use makes a whole lot of sense from any standpoint - basic human rights, economy and healthcare amongst them.

But anyone attempting anything resembling such a campain will be an instant target for the natural proponents of the prohibition whose livings depend on it wholly : the gangs (organized crime here and abroad) and the "law enforcement" circles and their friends and supporters.

But even amongst the latter, I am sure that there are some honest and
sensible cops out there who would agree to the simple facts on the ground.

Heck, with a few bucks and a few dedicated souls I could pull off legalization of all personal use and posession along with regulation of sales and manufacturing. And it would save tens of billions of dollars in wasted money, would bring in additional tens of billions in legitimate tax revenue and most importantly it would save countless, countless lives. Save them from murder, prison, careers of crime, overdosing or poisoning themselves on some rat poison and all the other perils brought upon us by nothing other then prohibition. One could pull off all that in a 12 month timeframe.

It'll take time, effort and money. But it'll happen one day. No doubt about that. It's the real Change, worth waiting for ...

Reputation Comments on this post:

	Very well-written, interesting post.
	I believe that peoples perceptions on a lot of so called stigmas are changing daily
	I liked your post
	Optimistic, but thought out.

[Heretic.Ape.]

Almost any sensible human being, presented with clear facts and a plan of action that addresses everyones' concerns (kids, crime, health etc.) , will agree that legalization of personal posession and use makes a whole lot of sense from any standpoint - basic human rights, economy and healthcare amongst them.

Nice first post, welcome to the forums
While I agree with the above, and it's always nice to see some optimism, I admit my own cynicism by saying I believe you overestimate the number of sensible human beings comprising society.

[cannabis-sam]

While I agree with the above, and it's always nice to see some optimism, I admit my own cynicism by saying I believe you overestimate the number of sensible human beings comprising society.

Look at how many people buy the daily mail.

[BLTC]

Originally Posted by Heretic.Ape.

Nice first post, welcome to the forums
While I agree with the above, and it's always nice to see some optimism, I admit my own cynicism by saying I believe you overestimate the number of sensible human beings comprising society.

I'm actually rather pessimistic about it. Most people are very inert and will listen to whatever will be fed to them. It's all about mobilizing those who are willing to act, and do so with high impact; build a cliff and the lemmings will follow ...

[psyche]

Many people are closeminded, have already made up their mind about drugs, and simply wont take a look at facts. But I still think that prohibition is going to end some day, just not very soon.

But even amongst the latter, I am sure that there are some honest and
sensible cops out there who would agree to the simple facts on the ground.

http://www.leap.cc/cms/index.php

[crackcityrocker]

^^^yep. there has been so much propaganda put out that 1 campaign probably isnt going to do too much. just look at NORML, they have been around since 1970 and marijuana is still generally illegal. yes, its been decriminalized some places, but we're far from being able to buy weed at a gas station. this isnt to say NORML hasnt done any good, its just that the fight for legalization is a long hard road. and thats just marijuana. good luck trying to convince the people that legalizing heroin and coke will end up being better for everyone. its going to take a while before that happens.

[BLTC]

Originally Posted by crackcityrocker

^^^yep. there has been so much propaganda put out that 1 campaign probably isnt going to do too much. just look at NORML, they have been around since 1970 and marijuana is still generally illegal. yes, its been decriminalized some places, but we're far from being able to buy weed at a gas station. this isnt to say NORML hasnt done any good, its just that the fight for legalization is a long hard road. and thats just marijuana. good luck trying to convince the people that legalizing heroin and coke will end up being better for everyone. its going to take a while before that happens.

Firstly, I believe that NORML and other "medical MJ" crowd aren't really doing any good. They're just trying to squeeze their agenda at the expense of pretty much everyone else and without much regard to the real issue at hand.

The very basic notion is that state has no business imposing on a sane adult what he is allowed to eat, snort or put in the veins of their body, as long as nobody's rights are infringed upon. This is way more straightforward than the rights of gays, abortion or even "adultery". A proper campaign would concentrate on driving that message home; the notion of criminal punishment of people who sole sin has been their choice of personal intoxicants should be made so super-uncool, not hip, anti 21-st century and whatnot that even Nancy Reagan herself, may she rot, would agree. Keep your "just say no" campaigns, keep restricting (taxing and licensing) the trade and keep the drugs out of kids hands. But lay off doctors and lay of grown up peoples' choices in regard to their own bodies.

Believe it or not, with a few bucks this message can be drilled into average Joe's head over a pretty short amount of time. Even if that Joe is a lawyer, or even a law enforcement agent. Especially so in our days, when people who grew up in the 40's-60's are slowly getting out of sight and the younger generation is taking over.

[Frond]

I doubt you'll get the Bible Belt to do away with prohibition, at least in the USA. I also doubt that everyone that has invested money into prohibition - absolutely HUGE amounts of money at that - and makes money off it is going to give up without a fight. Lastly, it will take a generation change in order for this to happen, so don't expect it soon.

Counter-argument: is our society really ready to be able to put whatever the hell it wants into its collective bodies? Having a right to do whatever you want with your body is fine and dandy in theory, but if a substance changes the way you think and act, then it's possible to reason that when said substance is introduced to your body you're no longer fully under your own control, and could pose a danger to society. If people cannot exercise basic responsibility with alcohol, how can you expect them to do the same with harder drugs? Also, this isn't the 60s, and "peace and love, man" has been replaced with gangsta' rap. Popular music and popular culture is much more inclined to preach violence than tolerance. Rekindling the fire that was put out in the 60's might not necessarily be a good idea in light of today's cultural environment.

Of course, I'm being devil's advocate, since anyone that wants to get drugs is going to get them. Prohibition is failing from a drug control standpoint, completely and utterly, so that any argument against legalization that emphasizes societal change is null and void.

We have to do two things. First, we have to point out the real effects and causes of prohibition. When the self-righteous veneer is stripped off, more and more people will begin to realize the sham that is the drug war, and will want it to end. The only way to do this is to get big business on your side. Decriminalization and personal growth of small quantities will never get approved because there's no money in it. Drugs have to be made commercial.

Second, we have to get through to people's heads that the reality of the modern drug user is not some cracked-out junkie lying under a bridge waiting to ambush old ladies for drug money, but a normal, responsible, productive member of society who simply chooses to disregard drug laws since he/she believes them to be immoral. Or since he simply wants to get high. Getting high isn't something to be culturally alienated. It has been a part of the human experience for as long as humans were around, and no government no matter how deluded will be able to strip that away.

Psychedelics have been a part of the religious experience until the major modern religions showed up and replaced the physical component of the religious experience with a metaphysical sham.

As long as we argue from the "addiction is a disease not a crime" standpoint, nothing will ever happen. Addiction isn't the reality of responsible drug use.

The party line has to change. And generations have to change, at least the ones in power. Only then will something happen.

Reputation Comments on this post:

	great informed post methinks
	well said
	My optimism meets with your logic. Thank you for another perspective.

[Richi]

It is just a few dollars, but the government spends millions of dollars each year on anti-drug propaganda. Organizations working against this have much, much less resources, probably because the vast majority of drug users do not help out.

NORML is trying to reform marijuana laws. Should that one day actually happen, I would like to think of it as a step in the right direction. Then those efforts can be put elsewhere, to reform other drugs laws.

[shivakiva2112]

Guys, NORML is a joke, it basically stands in the way of legalization efforts, I know those guys and behind the curtains it's all about getting high. Don't get me wrong I love NORML, but it's an ineffective political organization (now, they did a lot of good in the '70s, Ann Arbor, MI comes to mind).

The problem is that politicians and the general public can't take NORML seriously because of what I've said above. There are better, less well known organizations that haven't been consistently associated with the burnout stoner stereotype for the past 30 years: the Drug Policy Alliance, Law Enforcement Against Prohibition, Students for Sensible Drug Policy, the Multi-disciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies, these organizations are far more effective than NORML is.

But even then, the turnover rate for drug money is over 700 billion dollars a year (Booth's Opium: A History). Drug sales, licit and illicit, are a major driving force for the global economy. The prohibition machine is so integrated into our social system it's hard to see it going away for any reason, good or bad. We all know that everyone would be better off if drugs were legal (given certain changes), but this would require a social and governmental overhaul the likes of which have never been seen.

The status quo is just making too much money for everyone involved; obviously, the best way to get rid of the DTOs is to legalize and regulate the sale of all illicit drugs, but the DEA/DOJ/FBI/et cetera ad nauseam need the DTOs to keep their jobs just as much as the DTOs need drugs to generate revenue. The prisons would be more-or-less emptied and then the prisoners, guards, and cops would all be out of a job. The potential effects of such a change are truly mind-boggling. My mind is actually boggled right now, just thinking about it.

Thus, I am convinced that the MAJOR reason drugs aren't being legalized in a full-blown, all-encompassing fashion is a sort of collective social/economic/political fear of the consequences of such an action. Nobody knows what would happen. We fear the unfamiliar. We fear change.

May God help us all (metaphorically), thank you, and good night.

Reputation Comments on this post:

great post

[Jasim]

Originally Posted by Heretic.Ape.

I believe you overestimate the number of sensible human beings comprising society.

Lol! Unfortunately I share those views. Read some recent DEA pubs, they are all brainwashed, it's kinda scary. And they spread it any chance they get.
usdoj.gov/dea/pubs/news_releases.htm

All we can hope to do is educate, educate, educate and hope that maybe someday society will change and the laws will follow.

[runitsthepolice]

Swim is getting ready to graduate college next semester with a degree in finance. He is very passionate about this subject. Swim would like to work to change things, but he isn't sure how he can do anything by himself. Does anyone have any suggestions as to how swim can help? Lobbying, writing a book, anything? Swim would forgo a normal job in his field and be willing to work for pittance in order to help stop this barbaric war. To him it is an atrocity, on par with events in history such as the holocaust and slavery. People's lives are damaged, in some cases beyond repair. What is it going to take for this to end?

[edges]

A large portion of the population who gave it substantial thought would support total decriminzalization of posession and use and heavy regulation and taxation of production and sale.

With a few dollars spent on a thorough explanation campaign, that number could be increased drastically.

I kid you not. Almost any sensible human being, presented with clear facts and a plan of action that addresses everyones' concerns (kids, crime, health etc.) , will agree that legalization of personal posession and use makes a whole lot of sense from any standpoint - basic human rights, economy and healthcare amongst them.

But anyone attempting anything resembling such a campain will be an instant target for the natural proponents of the prohibition whose livings depend on it wholly : the gangs (organized crime here and abroad) and the "law enforcement" circles and their friends and supporters.

But even amongst the latter, I am sure that there are some honest and
sensible cops out there who would agree to the simple facts on the ground.

Heck, with a few bucks and a few dedicated souls I could pull off legalization of all personal use and posession along with regulation of sales and manufacturing. And it would save tens of billions of dollars in wasted money, would bring in additional tens of billions in legitimate tax revenue and most importantly it would save countless, countless lives. Save them from murder, prison, careers of crime, overdosing or poisoning themselves on some rat poison and all the other perils brought upon us by nothing other then prohibition. One could pull off all that in a 12 month timeframe.

It'll take time, effort and money. But it'll happen one day. No doubt about that. It's the real Change, worth waiting for ...

I don't think people really understand what the problem is.

It's not cops or lawmakers or public opinion in Western countries (well, maybe the US ... I don't know). When it comes down to it, it's the international treaties - they are binding and prevent any substantial moves towards decriminilization. They literally can't change the drug laws without breaking treaties. These are part of UN conventions like the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs. You need to get this through the UN and although you might possibly be able to generate enough political pressure to get countries like the UK, Germany, Canada etc to present and back a new convention, there's just no chance in hell that countries like China, Indonesia, Russia, Thailand, Iran etc are going to go for it.

So ... put yourself in a politician's shoes - are you going to provide your opponents with cheap shots for their campaign (imagine the attack ads!) and violate international treaties just to get the weed vote? There are much bigger voting blocs that a politician can appeal to at far less risk.

Prohibition and the drug regime are not alike. Prohibition was just in the US; the rest of the world formed a ring of booze around US borders and laughed all the way to the bank. When ships were boarded, they made an international crisis about piracy. The drugs regime is different - it is international in scope, the situation is completely the opposite.

Narcotics laws are going to be on the books for a long, long time to come. That's the reality. The only good news is that they might only be on the books someday - there are plenty of laws nobody enforces any more. The level to target is police procedure and practice, not law. In other words, recreational drug users have to appeal to the police to stop enforcing the law, rather than trying to appeal to politicians. Unfortunately, most people who use drugs recreationally have an "us vs them" mentality and are quite eager to express this, either when they interact with police or even on forums like this.

Reputation Comments on this post:

Well thought out and reasoned argument. Cheers!

[Richi]

Originally Posted by shivakiva2112

Nobody knows what would happen. We fear the unfamiliar. We fear change.

No doubt the latter two statements you made were true, but the first one is not. Luckily, we have a real life example of a [more] successful drug policy: The Netherlands.

[Jasim]

Originally Posted by Richi

Luckily, we have a real life example of a [more] successful drug policy: The Netherlands.

Unfortunately, 'successful' isn't the best adjective. The Netherlands has been moving towards a more restrictive stance in recent years. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_po...t_developments


It is swims opinion that this issue will not be easily solved. It's a multifaceted problem that will persist for quite some time. The issue is two-fold. On the right hand we have policy makers that don't attempt to understand the issue, they just want to eliminate or completely control it. On the left hand we have drug users that abuse and use irresponsibly.

To further complicate the issue, the fundamental truth is that 'We Don't Know'. We don't know the truth about the long term use of many of these substances. We don't know what really occurs at the biochemical level in the brain. We don't know how to effectively treat addiction and substance abuse without relapse. We don't know if society can really use responsibly on a mass scale even if properly educated.

But swim will never stop believing in education. That is why swim is here on this site and contributes to other organizations devoted to disseminating knowledge.

Though it may feel like we are trying to water a desert with our tears, we can help by trying to get those around us to never stop questioning, to always seek the truth, and to not listen to consensus without seeking their own answers. We can help by doing these things ourselves and leading by example.

[pipolito]

I believe it will go away pretty fast.
To do it, we will need a strong political ideological party in one of the most influential countries (part of the G8). I believe Switzerland is one of the countries which is the most probable of legalizing drugs for personal use, along with maybe the UK and Canada.

I also do believe that the United States will, after the situation will be gone to the worst (which is not quite yet), elect a President which will base its campaign on drug legalization. It will be from one extreme to another.

Sorry if the message is unclear, my cat is kinda disturbed as he is in an altered-mindset.

[doggy_hat]

Originally Posted by Jasim

Unfortunately, 'successful' isn't the best adjective. The Netherlands has been moving towards a more restrictive stance in recent years. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_po...t_developments


It is swims opinion that this issue will not be easily solved. It's a multifaceted problem that will persist for quite some time. The issue is two-fold. On the right hand we have policy makers that don't attempt to understand the issue, they just want to eliminate or completely control it. On the left hand we have drug users that abuse and use irresponsibly.

To further complicate the issue, the fundamental truth is that 'We Don't Know'. We don't know the truth about the long term use of many of these substances. We don't know what really occurs at the biochemical level in the brain. We don't know how to effectively treat addiction and substance abuse without relapse. We don't know if society can really use responsibly on a mass scale even if properly educated.

But swim will never stop believing in education. That is why swim is here on this site and contributes to other organizations devoted to disseminating knowledge.

Though it may feel like we are trying to water a desert with our tears, we can help by trying to get those around us to never stop questioning, to always seek the truth, and to not listen to consensus without seeking their own answers. We can help by doing these things ourselves and leading by example.

Well the main reason why we don't know about long term effects, or even have very many studies on short term is because of prohibition. Prohibition repealment wouldn't happen overnight, and a logical step would be to start allowing researchers to study drugs in a scientific manner. Instead of the Goverment's drug "research" of spending millions of dollars doing shit experiments that piss all over basic logic, and then paying some scientist to back it up so people won't look into it any further.

Also I'm sure if people were told the truth about drugs and could approach them with that knowledge, instead of being told that turn into a junkie, and then die and burn in hell, that irresponsible use would be lower. I'm sure that the swimmers that use the information from websites like this one, or erowid, are much more responsible users than people that know nothing. In an environment were drugs were legal, irresponsible use would most likely be reduced. But look at alcohol, people still abuse it even though it is legal. Do people say we need to ban alcohol when some kid drinks a bottle of whiskey and drowns in a pool of his vomit? No, we say he was a dumbass and that the problem was him, not the alcohol.

I don't even know why I said the above, I'm preaching to the choir. I guess I'm just in a mood to rant.

But I can't really think of any unknown to be scared of. After legalization, I wouldn't be surprised if there's a sudden burst of use. Kind of like how kids smoke salvia just because it's legal. But afterwards, use would probably die down and as it becomes more socially acceptable, become less of problem. In some cases increases in drug use might even be good. I mean, imagine if there was a sudden surge in the use of OTC, pharmacutical grade MDMA pills? There'd probably be a correpsonding sudden drop violent crime, amongst other benifits. I think It's sick that anyone would defend prohibition because they want to keep their job of inflicting suffering upon others.

But all problems in the world, not just prohibiton, stem from one source, that is ignorance. I think it'd be a much more affective approach to try and teach people to think for themselves, and develop an ability to analyze info. When people believe whatever they're being spoon fed more, they're always going to pawns for the larger powers, and be used for such atrocities as a war business, or a business in imprisoning innocent people. People need to ask why. The only reason these things happen is because people passively live their lives, allowing them to happen.

And for this very reason, I'd say it's more than likely that we'll never see prohibition become repealed.

[Jasim]

Originally Posted by doggy_hat

Well the main reason why we don't know about long term effects, or even have very many studies on short term is because of prohibition. Prohibition repealment wouldn't happen overnight, and a logical step would be to start allowing researchers to study drugs in a scientific manner. Instead of the Goverment's drug "research" of spending millions of dollars doing shit experiments that piss all over basic logic, and then paying some scientist to back it up so people won't look into it any further.

Actually a lot of good research is currently taking place.
Check out: http://www.maps.org/
MAPS has also been successfully fighting some lawsuits against governing agencies seeking to halt such research.

And MAPS is just one institution of many where psychoactives are being studied. Many major (particularly medical) universities throughout the world have psychiatric and pharmacology departments actively engaged in uncovering biochemical mechanisms to psychoactive drugs.

[crackcityrocker]

Originally Posted by BLTC

The very basic notion is that state has no business imposing on a sane adult what he is allowed to eat, snort or put in the veins of their body, as long as nobody's rights are infringed upon. This is way more straightforward than the rights of gays, abortion or even "adultery". A proper campaign would concentrate on driving that message home; the notion of criminal punishment of people who sole sin has been their choice of personal intoxicants should be made so super-uncool, not hip, anti 21-st century and whatnot that even Nancy Reagan herself, may she rot, would agree. Keep your "just say no" campaigns, keep restricting (taxing and licensing) the trade and keep the drugs out of kids hands. But lay off doctors and lay of grown up peoples' choices in regard to their own bodies.

Believe it or not, with a few bucks this message can be drilled into average Joe's head over a pretty short amount of time. Even if that Joe is a lawyer, or even a law enforcement agent. Especially so in our days, when people who grew up in the 40's-60's are slowly getting out of sight and the younger generation is taking over.

we're agreed on the first paragraph. i understand all of this, and im not trying to refute it. the second paragraph is where we differ. you have to realize that quite a few bucks already have been spent on this message. probably the biggest problem here is money. there will always be enough money in the hands of the prohibitionists to send out their message, because in a way theyre making money off of their message (if that makes any sense).

im not saying give up, im saying be realistic. and yes, a younger generation will probably help.

i dont understand the title of this thread, btw. prohibition will go away faster than it came? prohibition has been around since loooong before the war on drugs was thought up in 1972.

[shivakiva2112]

Originally Posted by Richi

No doubt the latter two statements you made were true, but the first one is not. Luckily, we have a real life example of a [more] successful drug policy: The Netherlands.

I agree that we have the Dutch model as a pretty good example of a successful (more or less) drug policy, but I think you misunderstood my statement. When I said that, "Nobody knows what would happen.", I meant it in regard to the social, political, and economic consequences of letting half a million (baseless example number) people out of prison, re-instating their status as potential voters, dismantling the prison-industrial complex, and closing down multiple large government organizations like the DEA.

The Dutch never had the problem that we have now in the States. The whole drug machine is thoroughly entrenched in our society, and while many of us can dream of a better world and there are a lot of great (theoretical) ideas about how we can really deal with drug issues instead of ceaselessly exacerbating them, it's difficult (read: impossible) to think of a relatively immediate, effective solution to the eco-political drug problem as a whole.

[BLTC]

There are the tactical, localized issues and then there is the strategy.

An example brought above - the Bible Belt and their being least likely to repeal this prohibition in any form or fashion. Now, these are the same people who believe, for the most part, that almost every individual is entitled to carry a fully automatic assault weapon and its the illegal government assault on constitution rights is the obstacle preventing them from doing so. And you can custom tailor the message these people want to hear to make this shift :
1. It's a very private, very personal and individualistic matter for every grownup man to decide which substance to use to relax after a day of hard work.
2. We keep the ban on trading, marketing, selling to kids, public intoxication or DUI; we may even increase punishment when it comes to selling to kids
3. We can use the existing highly successful venue to restrict the flow to its boundaries : the prescription medicine / pharmacy facilities
3a. Case in point : methamphetamine. All of US Proper can relate to the "scourge", if because of these freaking cop shows. Few know that methamphetamine and similar substances are readily available by prescription to those who have one; they go by the names of Desoxyn, Dexedrine, Adderall, Ritalin et cetera. Yet virtually all of the "problem" traffic comes from the illegal, clandestinely manufactured meth and not from diversion.
4. There is a substantial class of people who use drugs, who have few problems related to their use, who are functioning and well adjusted human beings, and who are almost never heard of because they are hiding deeply underground and they aren't a subject of interest to the media. These people were declared the worst enemies by the likes of Reagan and Rockfeller, precisely because they are a living proof that drugs per sem are not the problem in most cases.
4a. The non problematic substance users are the majority of the substance user community. The criminals and their crimes are already well proscribed by the criminal justice system. The only thing the legitimate users would like is to get rid of the necessity to associate with the violent felon crowd, necessity to break the law to get their basic needs, and necessity to thus inadvertently supply funds to the gangs, the terrorists and general corrupt and mostly foreign and hostile infrastructure of the trade.

After all, these people (the Bible Belters and similar large groups of seemingly conservative stance) are thinking humans and like a mental challenge just like everyone else. So if you put up all the said points and more, and do some more explanatory work relating to the object, you will get a result. It will not be an instant adoption of the abolitionist ideology, mind you. But you will plant a seed of doubt, and if it's repeated often enough, and all the concerns and questions are addressed, eventually many (not everyone of course, but many) will see that this unknown is way better, way less scary and way less different then they were told by the Big Socialist Governmemt. A bonus point to carry is that all the communist and red-socialist countries do treat their people like cattle that needs a prod and are harshly persecuting those unfortunates whose personal tastes doesn't align with said red regime's Ministry of Health.

To be continued ...

BLTC added 18 Minutes and 5 Seconds later...

Yes, the prohibitionists have all the money in the world to send their message. And yet, of all the people that I know very few support the prohibition in its current incarnation. Most would agree that the "european model" (of which they know few details, but they've heard that in some countries users can just walk into a pharmacy and get their fix) would work much better. And this without almost any public effort by the abolitionist establishment !

A properly tuned abolitionist message would initially sit well with the staunchest prohibitionist. It is only until he heard the whole thing, made the right conjectures, heard it again and scratched his head - only then will they scream bloody hell. We would talk about the harm the illicit production does to the local communities, the 'hoods ravaged by the gangs and their trade, children getting hooked because of the unrestricted trade and the rest of the entire sleeve of tricks that the prohibitionists have cooked up in their waste of public funds. After all, we agree that we'd like to get rid of all the symptoms, don't we ?

At least up until the Harrison Act times, addiction to opiates was a minor social vice comparable to mild drinking and way more acceptable then homosexualism or masturbation. We won't bring back those times, but the society managed to get by for a good few thousand years with opium being around, and quite a few years with injectable and pure stuff being around as well, and the world didn't look all that terrible all those years.

Now the biggest problem of all. The Huge Machine that Harrison Built - the symbiotic cancer of gangs, terrorists, cops, prisons, lawyers; many hundreds of billions of dollars fuel these relationships and these organizations. If a whiff of an organized challenge will be in the air, I am sure that the DEA will cooperate with FARC and no sane person would take on these behemoths of violence for a sake of an idea - even such a noble one. SWIM spent countless hours contemplating how this could work. And SWIM has a solution. A solution that SWIM has to keep to himself for now, unfortunately, but mind you people - when you read it eventually, your minds will be boggled. It's a thorough, all encompassing, incredibly smart, witty, pragmatic solution that will leave no doubt in your mind that it will work - if and when executed properly.

For now, SWIM is just fishing around for dedicated people to get glued together to form a core of this future revolution. It will take time and work; SWAUs will need connections, money and brains to make this work. But SWIM is pretty sure that SWIM will go to grave knowing that he helped every adult human in the free world to get the title to his body back from the evil guys with AK-47s.

Reputation Comments on this post:

I can't wait to hear your proposed solution.