You've heard the news by now that Mexico and Argentina are not supposed to jail people for possession of small quantities of drugs any more. There's even an article at the NarcoNews main page about it (ie: the Mexico story). That may be so, but what are they saying at the same time... that the new policy is only so they can battle the big drug lords even more vehemently than they previously have... That's like Obama saying he wants to pull out of Iraq, but only to move the war over to Afghanistan, nothing more. See what they're doing? The policy is the same as it always has been... It's just a lot of dog and pony show for the news media, that steps are being taken to minimize collateral damage, yada yada yada.... Mexico knows what side its bread is buttered on... They're not acknowledging that a person has a basic human right to mind alteration... They're simply saying that the person is sick and needs medical help. But what if someone isn't sick and just wants to get high. Is every person that drinks an alcoholic? Same principle here. Yeah, it's a step in the right direction and what not but they need to go further in legalizing all aspects of the trade. If a person is committing no crime by smoking a joint, then how in the world is the person that supplies that joint guilty of violating some law? That does not make sense. That would be like making drinking legal, but not bars... Am I missing something or what... Argentina at least made some mention of personal liberty, for what it's worth. But there remains to be seen how they actually implement the Supreme Court's decision. I just don't see how you reconcile that taking the drug is not criminal, but supplying that drug somehow is... or that the Afghanistan war is somehow more noble than the Iraq one... Maybe I'm like a cop and just stupid... oh well I guess...