
You drive a hybrid car, you use energy-efficient light bulbs and, of course, you recycle. But if you enjoy a little NOSE CANDY now and then, you're still not doing enough to save the planet. Here's why . . .
--This month, lawmakers on Britain's Home Affairs Select Committee blamed cocaine users for contributing to global warming.
--Their logic is that users create a demand for cocaine . . . a demand that Colombian drug lords fill by tearing down the country's rainforests to make more room to grow coca plants. Which, in turn, causes global warming to get worse.
--A guy named Keith Vaz led the committee. He says, quote, "We were horrified to learn that for every few lines of cocaine snorted in a London club, [43 square feet] of rainforest is destroyed." (Mirror)
(--This is an interesting argument, but it's just one side of an extremely complicated issue. Stay with me here . . .)
(--If you agree that some people will always use drugs no matter what stance the government takes, you can argue that "unrealistic" drug prohibition policies . . . NOT users . . . are responsible for the drug's impact on the planet.)
(--Because if cocaine was manufactured, regulated and distributed by the British or American governments, Colombian drug lords wouldn't have a monopoly on the trade, and they wouldn't destroy rainforests to grow more coca.)
(--In other words, you could argue it's up to our governments to decide which is more important to them: Fighting a losing war on drugs, or saving the planet. Not that I'm for legalizing the "yayo" . . . I'm not . . . but you get my point, right?)
--Brady
No comments:
Post a Comment