Some thoughts. The first issue would seem to be personal freedom. Why does the government claim the right to tell me what I may and may not ingest. It smacks of feudalism and the idea that individuals, the low-born anyway, are less than free, that someone or some body has dominion over me/us. I don't agree that that is so. I doubt if anybody feels that way about himself and I pity anyone that does. Nevertheless, we have a government that, at least on this subject, feels that it can impose its will upon the individual.

If this was all there was to it I think that we, the people, would take back our right to liberty, and choose not to be dictated to. So there must be more to it. Could it be that I am supposed to feel a responsibility to society/my country, and that part of this responsibility is that I will not impair myself with drugs? Or beyond impairing, I will not ruin my life with drugs and become a burden on society or worse? Supposing this to be "true", how does alcohol fit into this scenario?

Next, I will say that in my opinion we do have a national drug problem. It's not our only national problem either but for now its the one we're talking about. "Drugs" means all of it, alcohol, speed, pot, pills of various function, cocaine, heroin, nicotine whatever. It seems that anything that can be used can be abused and this is especially true of drugs because in addition to having potential for creating dependency, many if not all of them can be physically addictive. And yet, some are allowed, some are not. Some are sort of in between, prescription drugs for example. The rule for prescription drugs seems to be you can have that which you have a legitimate medical need for but nothing just because it feels good, although abuse goes on here too, naturally. You are allowed to indulge in some so-called adult recreational drugs, chiefly alcohol and tobacco. Neither of these is good for an individual and neither is in any way good for our society/country. Nevertheless, it's a free country, they say, so be responsible, act like an adult, use good judgment (that's kind of ironic when talking about alcohol because the first thing that starts to "go" when you drink is your power to reason) and we'll let you have this.

But, evidently, not that, whether that is marijuana or something harder. Why? Now there's a question. For the moment let's leave the harder ones out and focus (a little more irony?) on marijuana. This will be continued soon, I gotta go.

If anybody ever tells you that football players are not dumb, don't believe it. I realize that there are exceptions but let's take a look at a few cases in point. Today, in the Colts/Steelers game, Troy Polamalu makes a diving interception to come pretty close to sealing the victory for the Steelers with about five minutes to go. Except... Polamalu isn't content with a boring old game-winning interception. Oh no! He wants to score a touchdown! Do the Steelers need another touchdown? No. What they need is the ball. But Polamalu wants a touchdown, probably so he can do some moronic celebratory dance or something. And be on SportsCenter! Dude! You just made the game-winning play! You're already on SportsCenter! Except... he was so eager to get up and start running for his precious touchdown that he kicked the ball out of his own arms and lost the interception on review. I haven't heard him address this play yet but I bet if somebody would ask him what he was thinking about on that play he would say "I was just trying to make a play". Doh! (Smacks forehead) You had the play moron, all you did was screw it up.

And how about in Saturdays Broncos/Patriots game. The big play, the play that really swung everything into Denver's favor, happened with the score 10-6 Denver, but New England knocking on the endzone door and maybe about to take the lead. Except Tom Brady makes a rare poor throw and Champ Bailey pounces on it, intercepting the ball in full stride and heading for the other endzone. Bailey is very fast and once he eludes a (would be) tackler around midfield he looks like he's sure to score; there's nobody else on the screen except teammates. So he sails down the sidelines and, like others before him, decides to start the celebration a little early and slow way down at the five. Unfortunately for him (but to my great enjoyment) Patriots tight end Ben Watson had decided to run out the whole play, even though it must have looked pretty hopeless, and because of this, Watson is able to slam into Bailey just before he crosses the goal line, even knocking the ball out. Yes!!! It even appeared to me that the Patriots would be awarded the ball and Bailey could live forever in infamy along with Leon Lett but alas, the replays were inconclusive and the questionable ruling of out of bounds at the one that had been made by the field officials was allowed to stand. Damn! And not one talking head would even ask him what the problem was even though he was interviewed more than once after the game, and asked about that very play even. They all pretended like it was one of the biggest plays of the game (well OK, it was) and that nothing unusual had happened. I tell you, I have less and less respect for those boneheads every week.

I suppose I could write more but I feel better now. Thanks, you've been great!

In the comments section of my Prison Reform post, part 2 I think, the question is asked, how to pay for it all. A good enough question. The answer, of course, is we pay for it the same way that we pay for things, including prison administration, now. With your tax dollars, and mine. My proposed reformation should not necessarily cost more, and in the long run, if it works like I think it should, it should cost us less. But whatever, even if it cost more there is more than enough wealth in this country for us to have whatever we, as a citizenry, decide that we need. The key is to spread it (the wealth of this country) around a little bit more. You can call me a socialist if you want but there is no justification, in my opinion, for ten percent of the people controlling ninety percent of the wealth. I'm not really a socialist, at least not completely, and I'm not against capitalism (at least, not completely) but there's nothing wrong with some checks and balances as it were. (Always wanted to use that one "as it were". There, that's twice, I'm good.) I welcome any opinions here but for starters, I propose a complete overhaul of our federal revenue raising system. Currently we have an income tax that is responsible for most of the federal government's revenue. I could live with an income tax but I would like to see it modified in such a way that it produced at least as much revenue while costing me less. Ha ha. Actually, everyone tends to favor any proposed change that would cost him/her less, what I really mean is come up with a system that is as close as possible to being equally "fair" to everyone. Everybody would have to pay something, even if it's a dollar, and the people with the most would have to pay the most. I know the people with the most will say that a progressive tax is not fair to them but you know what? They are allowed to trade places with poor or working class people, all they have to do is ask. It would be one thing if people were rich because they just work so much harder than everybody else but we know that there are many factors that go into being rich, like being born that way, or at least having the means to higher education and maybe a little seed money. If it was all about merit, George W. would have less money than most kindergarten teachers. And so would Lebron James for that matter. In my next post I will begin to talk about how we should spend all this federal money.

I don't have all the details worked out, possibly I never will but: Prisons should become more like schools; and you don't get out until you graduate. No more throwing everybody in and locking the door and turning our backs. The way it works in there now just reinforces how they've been living all along; don't co-operate with the authorities, rats die, if somebody disrespects you, kill him! Or at least f--k him up big time! Avoid any self-improvement, just hang out with your boys and talk trash. Get wasted if you can. No more I say! First of all, break them up into small units (smaller class sizes are better in school too, right?) Destroy the pack mentality. Make the groups racially diverse, try to keep it so everybody is a little different from everybody else. Structure their days. Education, work, recreation. Make them earn their privileges: recreation, TV, whatever you got. Ones that don't want to play by the rules/are disruptive get pulled out. They can sit in their cell all day, approved reading material allowed but no TV, rec, whatever. The sentence is a little bit open-ended, for instance, a petty thief is in until he earns 40 points. He can earn one point for just sitting there for six months. He can earn multiple points for getting his HS diploma or even a college degree. You don't get points for degrees that you already hold. Some non-violent offenders might be allowed out on a sort of work release program to build playgrounds or parks, stuff like that. That could earn points too. The idea is to get them positively involved in society. Some may never assimilate. They'll be back with more and more points to earn. You would also lose points for serious transgressions committed inside, like fighting, raping, stealing etc. I'll add to this as I think of more maybe, for now that's it. Make it so!