Posted by PatJ. on January 28, 2001, at 18:02:53
In reply to Personal Note on Harmful Chemical Use, posted by PatJ. on January 28, 2001, at 17:54:36
To Those Who Seek To Be A Part of the Solution
KNOW WHAT YOU ARE GETTING INTO BEFORE SPEAKING AGAINST LEGALIZATION
Legalization can be a very complicated subject to discuss and it would be almost impossible for any individual to be completely prepared, current and credible on all the aspects of the legalization issue. Also, it's one thing to make your presentation effectively when you're the only speaker of the evening, quite another when equal time goes to someone speaking in favor of legalization, especially if that person is adept at public debate.No matter what the setting, we recommend couching your message in affirmative terms because legalization is about drugs and drugs are as controversial a topic as any facing the American people. Many times, even those listeners who have no sympathy for the idea of legalization might say, for instance, "Can't we do better somehow than we're doing now about our drug problems?" The answer is clearly yes. This question, by the way, provides an opportunity for you to remind the audience that they must help deal with the problem. It is your chance to ask them: Do you know about the demand reduction and prevention solutions at work in your community, in your neighborhood, in the schools, in job training and workplace settings, in jails and in treatment and prevention centers? What do you do now, and what are you willing to do? How much are you prepared to spend to make it better?
The discussion can and usually will touch on several areas of scholarship: medical science, the behavioral and social sciences, law and criminal justice, economics, international matters, and historical and cross-cultural analysis. While it is not necessary to be a specialist in all the disciplines, it is wise to be knowledgeable and comfortable with some essential questions and answers.
Arguments in favor of legalization, as mentioned earlier, often draw overly broad conclusions from limited data or research, rely on hypothetical arguments and lean heavily on research that is outdated, discredited, or "uncredited," meaning that it hasn't been subjected to rigorous review by the researcher's colleagues prior to publication.
Not all discussions of legalization issues take place in formal or structured settings. Frequently, questions are raised in the course of presentations on other subjects, often in the context of discussions such as "Can we really stop the flow of drugs in the United States?" The answers you provide to these inquiries may be even more important and persuasive than your views offered in a debate setting because they are specific and direct, and may occur in one-on-one situations
poster:PatJ.
thread:52766
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20010122/msgs/52784.html