Here are some free ASINs: 052179997X (Drug War Heresies: Learning from Other Vices, Times, and Places) and 0945999909 (Drug War Crimes: The Consequences of Prohibition). Or maybe you'd rather: 1577662172 (Drugs, Crime, & Justice: Contemporary Perspectives) or 1583605428 (Drugs in Society: Causes, Concepts and Control).

Excellent points, Margaret. To say that I support the regulation of the sale of, say, marijuana, would leave people with an impression of control. There is no doubt that what I have seen in using a term like legalization is the accusation of anarchism, which I do not support. May seem like semantics to some, but there is certainly a different appeal to be struck by using particular words.

Thanks. Excellent post.

Words are more powerful than most people think. Consider how the people who are promoting the President's plan to reform Social Security have been instructed not to use the expression "private accounts" but rather, "personal acounts," in order to deflect attention away from the unpopular idea of "privatization," a term which the opponents of SS reform use frequently in their rhetoric.

Likewise, the words legalization and its cousin decriminalization have been adopted by prohibitionists and transformed into scare words to suggest a loss of control, a mere repealing of punitive laws that would leave the currrnt system of marketing and distribution in place.

It is in our nature for us to want to feel in control of our world and speaking and writing about prohibition in terms of how it has created a loss of control and how regulation will let us regain that control while at the same time reducing violent prohibition-related crime is far more convincing than any of the numerous "human rights" arguments.

The idea is to chip away at the myth that prohibition is the solution to, rather than the cause of so-called "drug-related" crime. A good working knowledge of the history of Prohibition (1919-1933) and the gangsterism and subsequent crime that fostered provides a rich library of very effective analogies and comparisons.

Always remember that the real "drug problem" is prohibition masquerading as a solution to itself.

excellent post Margaret and I agree entirely: regulate and tax is the proper approach and wording.

Pat's right: please put in one or more ASIN with every post. Thanks!

Great post! It would make a decent speech.

I have added two books after finding the right numbers to use when there is no apparent ASIN available.

Dan Russell's Drug War is a real eye-opener. Those who read it might never look at the US government in the same way again.

ASIN=ISBN

While I agree wholeheartedly with your argument, I don't think rewording the political stance of the "legalizers" would really accomplish much. The American public isn't interested in long-winded explanations or complicated terminology. The average soundbite is only seven seconds long. In order to get across a statement or message in today's society, you need a short powerful slogan. "Legalize it" is far catchier and memorable and provocative than "regulate and tax it." It's a sad truth, but the American public these days is much happier being misinformed.

While I fully understand that the national attention span is barely long enough to comprehend a 30-second television commercial, what must also be considered is how soundbites are related to the longer term evolution of political and cultural memes.

The expression, "legalize it" might sound catchy, but its meaning has been twisted by prohibitionist rhetoric to the point where it is most often perceived as the "stoners'" cry for their right to get high (and be irresponsible and spread STDs and corrupt the moral fiber of the nation and kill our children and bring on the apocalypse and...).

So, we need to let the prohibitionists have the "L" word and adopt new short and powerful slogans that convey the ideas which I outlined in my rather long-winded essay above (which was mostly intended to instruct reformers in debating methodology rather than to convince the unquestioning advocates of prohibitionist policies that interdiction is ineffective).

The idea is to inspire new political and cultural memes, like forwarding the idea that the interdiction-fueled black market causes prohitbition-related crime, not "drug-related" crime. And to focus on the loss of market control that results with prohibtionist policies (the ultimate deregulation).

Now, I am not much of a sloganeer, but I do hope to give those who are good at thinking of effective soundbites some ideas about what they must convey in seven seconds or less.