What a waste of resources, on both sides. Just let people do what they want to do, educate, regulate and tax it. Mind altering drugs has been always been used by humans and they will always be part of humanity. You can't change millions of years of evolution by simply banning some substance people crave. If sugar became illegal today, tomorrow it would be smuggled in.

I find Bill Murray with a few sticks of dynamite to be a much cheaper solution.
On the more serious side of things, he's crazy if he thinks they'll ever be able to make a billion dollar drug industry unappealing enough to stop people from trying it.

Geez, what horrible narration.

"You are finding all of them... right?"

why dont they place the sensors down the wall that monitors vibrations in the ground. They could easily locate any tunnels as they are being built. Kind of like what fort knox has around its grounds to keep people from tunneling into it.

Considered and rejected. Besides, Bill prefers plastic explosive (you can't make Mr Squirrel out of TNT)!
Because some are under my house, even the gophenator and similar explosive methods are excluded. I even have to be careful trying gas, or I might gas myself. It's a problem.
On the serious side...there is a way to make it unappealing enough to stop the criminal aspect....legalize and regulate...that removes the insane profit margins and makes dangerous illegal smuggling no longer worth it....but maybe that's not what you meant.

Get to know someone with pet minks.

How do you regulate highly addictive substances? You can't. If people can't get it legally, they'll just get it illegally. Our current situation has already proven that. Making drugs legal and easy to obtain will only exacerbate the issues already caused by substances with similar effects (like alcohol). In 2010, over 10,000 people in the U.S. were killed in drunk driving incidents. Throw in PCP, cocaine, heroin, meth, etc, and those numbers will only rise.

It's easy to say "oh, just legalize and regulate it" but it's pretty obvious that regulation doesn't work when it comes to drugs or alcohol. People still get addicted, people still do whatever it takes to get more and lives are still destroyed as a result.

Shit, plastic explosives; having failed 80's comedy trivia I will now go sit in the corner. Ferrets might do the job but afterwards you'll have an entirely new problem in extracting them from their new underground lair, they take to those like Bond villains.
As for drug solutions, yes, legalization is unthinkable to most of these people and so is not an option in their minds.

@Jerykk

i am trying to understand your position.
you state you cant regulate addictive substances.
yet we regulate:cigarettes,alcohol.both of these are addictive and both are regulated.

you also infer that if illegal drugs were decriminalized the situation would become far worse.

in relation to what,exactly?
are you positing that if illegal drugs were made legal,illicit drug use would rise? can you provide some evidence to back that up? because i cannot find any...at all.

you appear to actually agree with @SquidCap in regards to the fact that people are going to do what they are going to do but disagree with the idea of regulating the illicit drug trade.

non-regulation=black market=criminality=violence=waste of resources directed towards non-violent citizens doing something they enjoy in the privacy of their own home,with their own body.

so i agree with @SquidCap,i am just unclear where your disagreement lies.
please clarify.

My point is that even with regulation, alcohol and cigarettes are causing plenty of harm to society. Check the statistics for drunk driving incidents and health issues caused by smoking. If alcohol and cigarettes were banned, they would be harder to obtain and therefore the harm they cause would be decreased.

Conversely, if you legalize hard drugs like cocaine and heroin (which are scientifically proven to be detrimental to your health and livelihood in general), the usage of said drugs and their destructive effects will only increase. Marijuana is irrelevant to this argument, as it isn't addictive and its effects aren't harmful. If you only want to legalize marijuana and not heroin, cocaine, PCP, meth, LSD, etc, I'm in full agreement.

Regulation will never be completely effective, as people will often ignore laws if they really want something (see the current drug situation). But by banning something, you at least make it slightly harder to obtain. It's a tricky situation with no perfect solution. By banning something, you are empowering the criminals who can supply it. But by making something legal and easily obtained, you are also promoting its use. Sure, the government makes a lot of money from liquor and cigarette taxes but those two products have ruined many lives in the process.

@Jerykk
thank you for clarifying.

i can agree with many of your points i.e:addictions are destructive,health issues etc.

but there is zero evidence that decriminalizing (not the same as legalizing) is somehow promoting addictive drug usage OR that the user population will increase in response to decriminalization.

in fact,it is quite the opposite.
see:portugal
see:netherlands

users are not criminals.
addicts are not criminals,they are addicted.addiction is an illness not a legal status.

when you create a black market due to policy,violence will ensue,because those involved in that black market have no legal recourse.they are exempt from the legal system to settle disputes since they are engaging in "criminal" enterprise.

take away the criminality and you take away the black market and conversely...the violence.
see:prohibition.

addicts are not criminals....they are addicts.
and as squid alluded to:education is the best prevention.

thank you for your thoughtful reply.

I'm not really concerned if someone is an addict or a criminal. I'm simply concerned with the repercussions of hard drugs being made readily available for anyone to use. The prohibition did increase crime, sure, but the availability of liquor since then has caused far more deaths and ruined many more lives. Hell, in 2010, alcohol killed almost as many people in the U.S. as guns did. Tobacco causes more than 5 million deaths worldwide each year. Just because something is legal doesn't mean it isn't harmful. The widespread availability of liquor and tobacco has caused more damage than the entire war on drugs.

As for education, I don't think that's the root of the problem. Everyone knows that smoking is unhealthy and that alcohol is addictive and that driving while drunk is incredibly dangerous. The problem isn't lack of awareness. The problem is apathy. People know these things yet do them anyway because they just don't care. The momentary relief/pleasure derived from liquor and cigarettes is more important to them. If all drugs were legalized, I have no doubt that more people would use them because they'd be easier to get and people don't really care about the downsides.