Direct predecessor to DEA agents proudly displaying their prohibition victory. After another decade of trying to make alcohol go away, Americans would wise up and regulate alcohol. Guys like these would then continue the prohibition fight against other drugs. It’s 92 years later and more than two million Americans are behind bars. Keep on keeping on!
[Enlarged version here. Taken from Shorpy.com]
When the people of a democracy prohibit, or place a substantial tax on, a substance that is not necessary to life and can be harmful to health why does it become the fault of that society when people choose to violate the law and suffer the consequences for it?
I am not trying to be a troll. I really have been struggling with that question.
Many of those who are in prison for drug offenses, actually had more serious offenses that they could have been charged with, in fact the offenses that they were convicted of, are often a break given to them, so as to expedite cases. Lots of these drugs offense miscreants are bad mothers, and our society is much safer that they are indeed, not roaming the streets.
When your kid dies of an overdose, you may feel differently about tolerance for drugs.
You seem to mis-equate kids dying of an overdose, my position, and tolerance for drugs. People die because of overdoses because of prohibition. Regualtion would lower drug use and overdoses. Right now there is no regulation. That is the problem.
As to plea bargains, I agree with you. But that doesn't explain why the prison population went from a few hundred thousand in 1970 to 2.3 million today. Neither does crime (which is no higher now than then). It's the choice we make to lock more people up for longer and for the war on drugs.
Nor do I think we are safer because we lock up lots of mothers, good or bad. I suspect you too know that is true. Besides, you know what is worse for children than a bad mother? A bad mother in prison. Think about it.