> In the USA before 1900 approximately 1/3rd the adult population used what
> are now considererd Illegal Drugs. And they did quite alright. But that
> was also before Federal income taxes.
>
> Cop A: "Hey, that guy walking over there looks like he's whacked out on
> drugs! Bust him!"
> Cop B: "Nah, that's Socrates. He's drunk."
> Cop A: "Oh, never mind. That's cool."
>
> --
> Socrates - "I just drank WHAT?"
>
>

> Legal or Illegal
>
> There would seem to be only two possible statuses for a substance to have in
> a society. It is either banned or it is allowed. However there is one other
> option and it is the worst of all. That is where a substance is officially
> banned, but unofficially tolerated to a large extent. This is the situation
> in the western world that cannabis, cocaine and heroine benefit from.
>
> Let's face it if the US and Europe really chose to clamp down on these drugs
> they could. If there was a true war on drugs, and I do mean armies and
> aeroplanes, then the supply of drugs would dry up. If life imprisonment were
> mandatory for dealing even small amounts, as it is for other forms of
> voluntary manslaughter, then suppliers would dry up. If even a 10th of the
> money that was spent on the cold war were directed at tackling drugs within
> a few years the drug problem as we have it now would be a distant memory.
>
> These measures would be severely draconian. It would require the invasion of
> quite a few countries and a field by field eradication of crops. In past
> such campaigns, especially in heavily forested or mountainous areas, have ...

> Legal or Illegal
>
> There would seem to be only two possible statuses for a substance to have in
> a society. It is either banned or it is allowed. However there is one other
> option and it is the worst of all. That is where a substance is officially
> banned, but unofficially tolerated to a large extent. This is the situation
> in the western world that cannabis, cocaine and heroine benefit from.
>
> Let's face it if the US and Europe really chose to clamp down on these drugs
> they could. If there was a true war on drugs, and I do mean armies and
> aeroplanes, then the supply of drugs would dry up. If life imprisonment were
> mandatory for dealing even small amounts, as it is for other forms of
> voluntary manslaughter, then suppliers would dry up. If even a 10th of the
> money that was spent on the cold war were directed at tackling drugs within
> a few years the drug problem as we have it now would be a distant memory.
>
> These measures would be severely draconian. It would require the invasion of
> quite a few countries and a field by field eradication of crops. In past
> such campaigns, especially in heavily forested or mountainous areas, have ...

> In the USA before 1900 approximately 1/3rd the adult population used what
> are now considererd Illegal Drugs. And they did quite alright. But that
> was also before Federal income taxes.
>
> Cop A: "Hey, that guy walking over there looks like he's whacked out on
> drugs! Bust him!"
> Cop B: "Nah, that's Socrates. He's drunk."
> Cop A: "Oh, never mind. That's cool."
>
> --
> Socrates - "I just drank WHAT?"
>

>
> "jjs" stop.right.there.net> wrote in message
> news:13bhgusgtvq1te2@news.supernews.com...

>> Socrates - "I just drank WHAT?"
>>

> He knew exactly what he was drinking. It was his 'sentence' of course.

>
> "brian fletcher" bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
> news:Xygui.17119$4A1.4078@news-server.bigpond.net.au...

>>
>> "jjs" stop.right.there.net> wrote in message
>> news:13bhgusgtvq1te2@news.supernews.com...

>

>>> Socrates - "I just drank WHAT?"
>>>

>> He knew exactly what he was drinking. It was his 'sentence' of course.

>
> I don't believe Socrates chose to die. He first suggested that he be
> rewarded for his work, then countered with the suggestion of a small fine.
> Athens decided his sentence was to be death.
>
> However, in the end Socrates accepted the fate of Hemlock as the ultimate
> affirmation of his principles vs The State.
> ...