It is so evident that one can only think that the reason government officials do not try to implement it (at least partially) is because they are colluded with the drug gangs.

The way you are talking about legalization of drugs, it sounds you have already determined that we have lost this battle against them.
Although the taxes will go to the govt., but at what cost?
A lot more citizens will be left drug dependent and useless to the society.Taylormade R11 Driver Review

"The way you are talking about legalization of drugs, it sounds you have already determined that we have lost this battle against them."

I consider that comment to be insane, in the clinical sense (i.e psychotically detached from reality.)

I find it difficult to believe that anyone of even average intelligence, could fail to see the crushingly inhuman consequences of a drug war that has made America the most incarcerated nation on earth, while bringing para-military horror down upon the world.

This pathetically delusional nonsense is repeated as if anyone with an ounce of humanity should have the patience to listen politely, to such vicious ignorance. I'd just as soon listen to the respectful reading of "Mein Kampf."

Now you American idiots are gearing up to inflict your cruelty on a new continent. As the economic opportunity of supplying the addictions of Western Europe and North America reaches Africa, you creeps are preparing to crush those who are sufficiently desperate to pick up the crumbs from your addictions. The nauseating self-righteous ignorance of those words: " it sounds you have already determined that we have lost this battle against them..." The battle is not against drugs; it's against greed and stupidity and America has lost that war.

This is how America warns the world what they might yet become...

The legalization of cannabis would end the drug war boondoggle, because — even though cannabis is the most benign of all of the illegal drugs, both physically and socially — cannabis is used by the greatest number of people and its metabolites are most readily detectable for the longest time in drug tests... Therefore, to legalize cannabis would cripple the bloated apparatus of drug enforcement.

Those who seek their own job security, even at the cost of continued social devastation, will fight to prevent the legalization of cannabis, because it represents a threat to the parasitic prison/industrial complex.

The crime of Cannabis is the enforcement of laws against it. Those who allow these unjustifiable laws to go on pay a terrible price for their cowardice. Sadly, the perpetrators of this fraud are in America, while thousands of its victims are in Mexico. Do not imagine that that injustice will not come north to haunt the guilty.

This is a fair statement, but at some point in time you have to accept that this is the unfortunate reality of having bordering countries with vastly different incomes per capita, especially when the poorer country is perfectly placed to deliver South American narcotics to a thriving US market. As easy as it is to criticize Calderón, credit has to be given to him for the brave stance he has made. Surely, upon election it would have been far easier and less dangerous to attempt to distract the Mexican people towards other areas. Did Calderón receive premature (pre-election) US backing to commence this "war on drug lords" or was it entirely his own initiative?

First, SERIOUSBLAC, there's very little reason to believe terrorism is spreading in the world. Always been around, always will be. To a former British government, the American revolutionaries of the 1770s were terrorists. There seems to be more these days because a multitude of news sources tell us about the current lot. Pre-internet, there was much less of this kind of news reporting.

Next, could somebody explain to me why the author, Malcolm Bleith, is so contemptuous of the Mexican president's saying "Today, more than ever, is the moment to look to the future, the moment to persevere in the fight to overcome adversity and to build this country [into] a more just, prosperous, and safe country that our countrymen dream of and that millions of Mexicans seek each day?"

That reads like an excellent speech to me, and one delivered at an appropriate time and place.

I think I can explain what the author feels and means. Almost all Mexicans are certain that those Calderon's words (as many others) are empty or plain lip service.

The contempt is probably due to the fact that there have been no results in the Mexican president's "war" against drugs, other than 40,000 civilians death, a figure that increases every day. The contempt is probably due to the fact that he is not doing much to "build this country into a more just, prosperous and safe one" (surprising that he did not mention democracy). Calderon's deeds and actions are no better and, as a matter of fact are much worse, than those of the party who ruled Mexico for over 70 years.

He talks about ending impunity, while he protects relatives and friends who should be tried for a negligent fire in a day care facility which killed close to 40 babies. He talks about ending with corruption while his own police chief is suspected of covering up for certain drug cartels, and blatantly violated Mexican law by accepting a medal form a foreign government without previously seeking authorization from Congress. And these are but two examples of hundreds of actions that prove contrary to what he says. Maybe that is the source of the contempt you perceive.

I was just going to say this. I mean, legalization would really help in a lot of different ways. It would cut down on enforcement costs significantly amongst other things. I agree that by legalizing most drugs the cost of enforcement would go way down, and even better, tax revenue can be generated by the drugs which would now be sold by corporations. I would rather play a flight sim than do drugs. So I guess I'm not really a part of the problem.

1. Because its the law of the land. Psychotropic substances are banned because, as all mind altering substances are, they create dangers to *others* regardless of the effect or lack thereof to the user.

2. Why not arbitrarily throw out every other law thats incovenient to your lifestyle, like rape or murder? Enforcement of those laws costs money as well. Investigations cost money. Social distruptions are more costly than enforcement so they need to be banned.

3. Legalization will not eliminate the social costs, but increase them. The fact that alcohol and tobacco is legal clearly shows that problems do not go away - it simply shifts them to other people instead of the user bearing the responsibility. As long as the user fails to act responsibly, then such activities should be illegal. I do think alcohol and tobacco should be banned until such a time.

1) Laws can be counterproductive, and laws that are ought to be substantially reformed. Many dangerous substances (alcohol, paint, fertilizer) are legal and regulated because it is recognized that total prohibition would be impractical and result in greater harms than those that are alleviated. Regulatory regimes allow for a minimization of harm, whereas prohibition often fails to reduce consumption to an extent that would offset the gigantic legal and social costs of multi-billion dollar lawlessness.

2) This is a straw man, cost-benefit analysis is an essential component of policy-making. If we genuinely collectively believed that intoxication of any kind was so morally despicable as rape then we would extend that legislative impetus to alcohol as well. But we don't, and recognize that we should instead regulate the sale of alcohol and legislate against the choices intoxicated individuals make. Drinking is legal, raping someone while drunk is not.

3) Another straw man, no one expects that legalization would end social costs. Again, alcohol remains a scourge in our society. But we recognize, as we did with prohibition, that our policies are compounding the problems caused by substance abuse. We create a highly lucrative and totally unregulated market where violence is a means of business. The substances don't go away, and rates of usage are barely affected, so we end up with a situation that combines the worst of both worlds. Teenagers in any city in the country have more access to illegal drugs than regulated alcohol, and alcohol manufacturers compete with advertising rather than bullets.

Quatra wrote: "Has ANYBODY ever explained why it's not convenient to legalize drugs?
As long as the US is the largest consumer the problem will never go away."

It is not convenient because self-righteous, culturally incompetent fools do not know enough to see how wrong they are or to face the terrible consequences of their ignorant actions.

The believe in drug war because they fear liberty, and assume that given a world free of their superior morality, everyone would become a hopeless drug addict. the stupid part is, of course that they provide the economic incentive to broadcast addiction and the diseases associated with addiction around the world. Can't explain that to those who get their marching orders from a higher authority.

I lived in Mexico in the 1960s. I know what Mexican culture was like, before this American infection. It is not convenient for those who are responsible for such crimes against humanity to take responsibility for the evil consequences of the beatific visions...

Then, of course, there is the business aspect of the problem... As John Stewart Mill wrote: The opium trade is trade and trade is good." there is simply too much money (when it is aggregated) for some people at the top to pass up. If that were not so, the business would have gone out of business long ago.

Here's the long lesson on social responsibility
1. Drug use does not necessarily harm the individual or the society, as compulsive drug use certainly does. This person makes the same false assumption as the alcohol prohibitionists did (with much more compelling evidence I might add...) that those who drink cause harem to themselves and others, when it is, in fact, a small percentage of those who drink or use drugs who do. Fact is, most people who start to use drugs quit on their own. the harshness of the punishment exceeds the harm of the crime; the expense of the punishment exceeds the cost of the crime. That is, US society is punishing itself by the way it mishandles the challenge of drugs.

====
"2. Why not arbitrarily throw out every other law thats inconvenient to your lifestyle..."
====

That's a canard. this writer wants everything legal that is convenient to his "lifestyle" but he would deny others the same opportunity. What is your position of gay sex? How about abortion? There were laws against both those things, I personally know people who went to jail for both of those "crimes." Would you prefer that we bring those laws back? Laws are changed when society sees that they fail. Drug war was a failure — now, as an inter-generational failure, drug war is a fraud perpetrated upon the taxpayers of America and the poor people of the world. As Dr. King said: "The war is a war upon the poor."

====
"3. Legalization will not eliminate the social costs, but increase them. The fact that alcohol and tobacco is legal clearly shows that problems do not go away - it simply shifts them to other people instead of the user bearing the responsibility. As long as the user fails to act responsibly, then such activities should be illegal. I do think alcohol and tobacco should be banned."
===
This last paragraph falls on its own lack of merit. This abstemious writer also thinks that alcohol and tobacco should be banned. That demonstrates a very loose grasp on reality, but when you talk about "social costs" in that way it shows that you are bad at arithmetic.

Calculate the cost of imprisoning non-violent drug users against the cost of putting that money back into communities to do after-school programs in sports art and music; midnight basketball; tutoring for college preparation and the potential to earn scholarships that would give poor kids genuine hope of changing their lives, etc., then see if you could make an impact on the social costs of drug use. All those things for every poor school district in the country, would cost a fraction of what the US now spends on prisons.

That is America's choice. Build a future or continue to build prisons.
America is failing because of an addiction to political cowardice not drugs.

With thinking like that expressed in the above post, Americans are killing America's future.