Having the police not enforce stupid laws and policing real crimes has the same effect has hiring more police officers without actually hiring more police officers. What aren't you getting about this?
Like I said, the logic is sound, but, I need proof.
JohnAskew pointed you to an example that might satisfy what you consider "proof". If you don't define what your idea of proof is, nobody's going to spend the time on a wild goose chase to satisfy you.
Also I didn't clarify before. I always think marijuana should be legalized due to its impact isn't as addictive as cigarettes and less brain damaging as alcohol. But, that's all i am willing to allow due to that reason. I would not stop War on Drug because drug like cocaine is just too dangerous and additive that even doctor think twice before using it.
There are prescription drugs that are just as addictive and dangerous as cocaine. The interesting thing is that decriminalization works in the same way on drug abuse as it does rates of crime.
Many of these innovative treatment procedures would not have emerged if addicts had continued to be arrested and locked up rather than treated by medical experts and psychologists. Currently 40,000 people in Portugal are being treated for drug abuse. This is a far cheaper, far more humane way to tackle the problem. Rather than locking up 100,000 criminals, the Portuguese are working to cure 40,000 patients and fine-tuning a whole new canon of drug treatment knowledge at the same time.
And my support to legalize marijuana is just based on its chemical, not because some other unrelated things such as equality. Equality can be fixed without legalizing marijuana.
Who gets to decide which drugs are legalized and which are not? What should be the "chemical" basis for the decision to legalize or not?
They are mutually exclusive to me.
I think you mean "independent" or "orthogonal".