Social and Legal Limits of Drug Law Reform (USP): Unterschied zwischen den Versionen

Social and Legal Limits of Drug Law Reform (USP) (Quelltext anzeigen)

775 Bytes hinzugefügt , 15:33, 9. Apr. 2018

31.738

Bearbeitungen

@@ Zeile 9: / Zeile 9: @@
 Is there a responsibility for her death beyond the immediate perpetrator's?
-Suspect 1: Drug Users (see Tropa de Elite, 28'-34')
+Suspect 1: Drug Users (see Tropa de Elite, 28'-34'). Is their use causal? Is it against the law? Should it be punished? What if they have a right to use drugs? (Douglas Husak). In that case, the law would have to allow drug use and drug commerce. How would that affect violence?
+Suspect 2: Prohibition of goods and services creates a black market, which in turn creates structures and profits for organized crime. Lack of access to legal conflict regulation leads to violent ionternal sanctions as well as turf wars for domination and demarcation of markets.
+Suspect 3: Legislators responsible for law-making. Legal reform could re-create more peaceful conditions. It is their responsibility to do something. But why don't they?
+Suspect 4: The public does not demand legalisation. So is it the people's own fault?
+Suspect 5: Political parties and governments are responsible for informing the public, organising inquiries, initiate discusssions about various policy alternatives. The government keeps silent, though. Why? It's a vicious circle.
-Suspect 2: Organized crime. Internal sanctions, turf wars. Lacking access to law.
-Suspect 3: Should there be access to law? If so, why did legislators not do anything?
-Suspect 4: The public's apathy
-Suspect 5: The government