#1 rape drug

Alcohol, of course. If we’re worried about substance abuse, let’s keep our eye on the ball.

Ethyl alcohol. Of course. Always.

But let’s forget about all the things we could do to shrink the alcohol problem and keep insisting that legalizing pot would be too dangerous “for the kids.”

Footnote No, I’m not a fan of virtually unregulated commercial legalization for pot, any more than I am for beer. And of course the liquor situation demonstrates the fatuity of the legalizers’ claim that they can reduce access for minors by expadig it for adults because “Dope dealers don’t card.” But swallowing camels while straining at gnats is bad logic and makes for bad policy.

Second footnote Of course the thug culture surrounding football at every level is also part of the picture. (I grew up worshiping the Baltimore Colts, so I take no joy in saying that, but it’s true, even aside from the brain-injury problem.) The high school head coach who spat curses at an inquiring reporter and added, “You’re going to get yours. And if you don’t get yours, somebody close to you will” is still coaching.

Author: Mark Kleiman

Professor of Public Policy at the NYU Marron Institute for Urban Management and editor of the Journal of Drug Policy Analysis. Teaches about the methods of policy analysis about drug abuse control and crime control policy, working out the implications of two principles: that swift and certain sanctions don't have to be severe to be effective, and that well-designed threats usually don't have to be carried out. Books: Drugs and Drug Policy: What Everyone Needs to Know (with Jonathan Caulkins and Angela Hawken) When Brute Force Fails: How to Have Less Crime and Less Punishment (Princeton, 2009; named one of the "books of the year" by The Economist Against Excess: Drug Policy for Results (Basic, 1993) Marijuana: Costs of Abuse, Costs of Control (Greenwood, 1989) UCLA Homepage Curriculum Vitae Contact: Markarkleiman-at-gmail.com

13 thoughts on “#1 rape drug”

  1. I grew up worshiping the Baltimore Colts,..

    But did you give your fiancee a quiz on their history before committing to marry her?

    1. Every single one of them. But remember the that the present King of France is bald. “For all X such that …”

      1. But, as dedicated RBS readers know, the present Duke of Normandy has well-styled hair. Surely all of Mark’s fiancees would see the logic of that.

          1. Boy, some folks just never do get past the idea of revolutions, do they?

            Are there any Jacobists remaining in the U.K.?

  2. The routine imposition of significant brain trauma on minor-age males throughout the country in football from Pee-Wee through at least High School football is an ongoing scandal that is unmatched. It deserves an ongoing crie de coeur of outrage at a level at least as voluble as the one that followed the Jerry Sandusky revelations.

    1. Yes, exactly. I think in the not-too-distant future we will see significant changes in th’ fuh-bawl. A couple big lawsuits will do it.

      1. Take off the body armor. Most people have a reasonably healthy sense of self-preservation.

        1. I’ve heard the argument but I’m agnostic. Aren’t NFL-level players outliers by definition?

        2. I’m not entirely sure about the body armor, maybe. Different armor is surely needed for other common injuries, including the one to the too-reckless RGIII yesterday.

          The Denver Post had a story recently about a boy out on the plains who has ‘galvanized’ a small town. Buried way down in the story was the fact he had a head injury from fuh-bawl. We have a long way to go, but I think I see the tide turning. Hope.

    2. Not just any minor-age males; typically those who might be expected (from their physical condition and willingness to work hard) to be in the top decile of their communities. Maybe this is some kind of social homeostatic mechanism now that atmospheric lead levels have gone down.

      I was pondering the other day the possibly-interesting comparison between the football industry and the auto-racing industry, which both sometime in the 70s/80s ran into the problems of technology outstripping human capability. For racing, it became fairly straightforward to build cars that went much faster than humans could safely control. For football, to bulk players up to levels where brain injury and other disabilities went from likely to near-certain.

      The racing industry responded with (relatively) strict limits on engine displacements, aerodynamic techniques, tires etc (plus enhanced energy-absorbing structural features) that kept speeds closer to 300 kph than 400, and rendered more crashes survivable. The football industry, it appears, has responded with a sort of perverse democratization of risk where 9th and 10th-graders are now exposed to the same kinds of damage as well-paid pros. (One of the local high schools just canceled next year’s varsity football season because there weren’t enough 11th and 12th grade prospects, and the risk of injury to younger players was considered too high.)

  3. Anonymous alleges that the girl in the Steubenville case was given some rape drug other than alcohol. Not that this, even if true, disproves Mark’s claim that the #1 rape drug is alcohol.

Comments are closed.