The War on Drugs is Useless

[MattusMaximus]

Ouch...

AP IMPACT: US drug war has met none of its goals

After 40 years, the United States' war on drugs has cost $1 trillion and hundreds of thousands of lives, and for what? Drug use is rampant and violence even more brutal and widespread.

Even U.S. drug czar Gil Kerlikowske concedes the strategy hasn't worked.

"In the grand scheme, it has not been successful," Kerlikowske told The Associated Press. "Forty years later, the concern about drugs and drug problems is, if anything, magnified, intensified." ...

One can only hope that the powers-that-be will clue in and realize that Drub Prohibition is a colossal waste of time, lives, and resources, and it's no longer worth pandering to the moral crusaders who view drugs as EEEVIIIILLLLLLL!!!11!1

I'm not holding my breath... but at least there is a silver lining with more states cluing in that marijuana isn't the nasty boogyman its been made out to be.

 

[dtugg]

Agreed. Even if you are twisted enough to believe you have the right to tell others what they can and cannot do with their bodies, you must admit that the war on drugs has been a gigantic failure. Cocaine and heroin (for example) are cheaper than ever and are available to anybody who wants them. Not to mention the widespread violence and corruption, especially in Mexico, that is a direct result of the USA's failed war on drugs.

 

[MattusMaximus]

I know a retired drug enforcement cop who once told me that pretty much everything he and his colleagues have ever done in their career regarding Drug Prohibition was bunk. He said nothing they did enforcing drug laws ever made a difference.

 

[portlandatheist]

I think a key point to be made here is not merely to evaluate how bad drugs are or are not, but rather how enforceable the laws themselves are. We don't pass laws that it shouldn't rain on Saturday even if we all agree that would be desirable. Whether legal or not, drugs are here to stay. How best to deal with that simple fact? Obviously, other crimes are here to stay as well but we really need to consider what we intend to accomplish with our spent resources on this matter and the war on drugs has no return on investment.
There are very few "victories" in the war on drugs, Methaqualone being one of them. When it comes to pot, not only is this drug minor compared to others, but by its very nature, is unenforceable and this breeds contempt for the law in general. Not only should it be legal because its less harmful than many others, but it should be legal due to its popularity and the total lack of control we ever hope to wield over its use and production. It is also unequally enforced, some police simply through it away if they catch somebody with it and don't bother to otherwise enforce the law.
I agree wholeheartedly that we need to reevaluate our entire approach and consider radical alternatives such as legalization or decriminalization.

 

[quarky]

War on anything is suspect.
The war on communism could easily be seen as a huge failure.
The war on terror? Same deal.

How about the war against drivers speeding? How much does that cost, and how hard would it be to prevent speeding through technology?

(Not hard is the correct answer.)

These wars give people jobs. That's what's good about them.
Inventing crimes allows crime-fighters employment.

If only pot was legalized, many, many people would be put out of work.

Quick!
Look busy.

 

[ravdin]

Check out my signature line. I really wish it were satire, but it's not- it was as true in Mark Twain's time as it is today.

The government won't stop just because this ruinously expensive, wasteful, and deadly program has demonstrably failed in its stated goals. Their response will be to discount the evidence and spend even more of our money and resources to wage war on our fellow citizens.

 

[Tsukasa Buddha]

But how much worse could it be if we legalized drugs? Can't take the risk that we would be a society of drugies, and think about what Big Pharma would do.

[/da]

 

[lionking]

I agree with the OP, but what chance do you think a political party would have running on a "decrimialise drugs" platform?

 

[dtugg]

I agree with the OP, but what chance do you think a political party would have running on a "decrimialise drugs" platform?

In, the US, none at all. Far too many moral crusaders that believe drugs are evil and that they therefore have the right to ruin people's lives over them.

 

[Virus]

How do you guys actually propose legalization to work? Do you want the state to become a dope dealer?

Look at the impact the legal drugs have on society, tobacco and alcohol. Do you really want crystal meth added to that mess? Do you really want easily obtainable, cheap crack?

Sorry, I could get behind legalizing weed but the notion of flooding society with cheap, easily obtainable hard drugs supplied by the government is a stupid idea.

 

[lionking]

How do you guys actually propose legalization to work? Do you want the state to become a dope dealer?

Look at the impact the legal drugs have on society, tobacco and alcohol. Do you really want crystal meth added to that mess? Do you really want easily obtainable, cheap crack?

Sorry, I could get behind legalizing weed but the notion of flooding society with cheap, easily obtainable hard drugs supplied by the government is a stupid idea.

Which is why I used the word "decrimalisation". Still difficult, but far from legalisation.

 

[DarthFishy]

Couldn't there be a way to rephrase or change the approach, so that instead of being decriminalization of drugs, it would be something more like a tightened regulation of drugs (and in the process decriminalizing it).

Furthermore does anybody have any stats on how many people in say the US (other countries stats could also be interesting) would be willing to legalize Marijuana? I have a feeling that there is perhaps more support for this platform at a grass(he I made a funny)-roots level than expected?

 

[dtugg]

How do you guys actually propose legalization to work? Do you want the state to become a dope dealer?

It would be exactly the same as alcohol and tobbacco. Regulated by the government but sold by private companies.

Look at the impact the legal drugs have on society, tobacco and alcohol. Do you really want crystal meth added to that mess?

Meth is already "in that mess."

Do you really want easily obtainable, cheap crack?

Crack is already easily obtainable and cheap.

Sorry, I could get behind legalizing weed but the notion of flooding society with cheap, easily obtainable hard drugs supplied by the government is a stupid idea.

Hate to break the news to you, but society is already flooded with cheap (at least cheaper than they have ever been), easily obtainable hard drugs. And because of people like you extremely violent criminal gangs control their trade.

 

[r0ast_p0tat0es]

But how much worse could it be if we legalized drugs? Can't take the risk that we would be a society of drugies, and think about what Big Pharma would do.

[/da]

We already live in a society of druggies, most of whom get their dope prescribed from Big Pharma.

 

[Virus]

We already live in a society of druggies, most of whom get their dope prescribed from Big Pharma.

You mean sick people?

 

[Virus]

It would be exactly the same as alcohol and tobbacco. Regulated by the government but sold by private companies.

Yes, and and alcohol and ciggies are much more widely abused, cost society much more in damages and fill up the hospital beds much more that crackheads and cause scores more motor accidents.

Meth is already "in that mess."

No it's not sir. You can't just go down to the corner store and buy a baggie of cheap meth or LSD.

Crack is already easily obtainable and cheap.

But apparently not cheap enough and not easily available enough for you.

Hate to break the news to you, but society is already flooded with cheap (at least cheaper than they have ever been), easily obtainable hard drugs. And because of people like you extremely violent criminal gangs control their trade.

Yeah so let's have it that you can buy smack at the tobacconists. Let's make it you can get anabolic steroids over the counter. We'll put them next to the aspirin. Let's increase the number of addicts. Let's increase the number of road accidents. Let's increase the number of people who can't work because they're on smack and putting an increased burden on the health care and welfare systems. That fixes everything.

 

[dtugg]

Yes, and and alcohol and ciggies are much more widely abused, cost society much more in damages and fill up the hospital beds much more that crackheads and cause scores more motor accidents.

So you're saying we should ban alcohol and tobacco?

No it's not sir. You can't just go down to the corner store and buy a baggie of cheap meth or LDS.

Sure it is. You just call your drug dealer. He might even deliver it to you. I've had some that would.

But apparently not cheap enough and not easily available enough for you.

I don't care about how cheap or available it is. I care about personal freedom and keeping money out of the hands of violent criminals. Two things you apparently couldn't care less about.

Yeah so let's have it that you can buy smack at the tobacconists. Let's make it you can get anabolic steroids over the counter. We'll put them next to the aspirin. Let's increase the number of addicts. Let's increase the number of road accidents. Let's increase the number of people who can't work because they're on smack and putting an increased burden on the health care and welfare systems. That fixes everything.

Do you have any evidence that suggests significantly more people would abuse drugs if legal? Would you suddenly start shooting up heroin if you could do it legally? No? What makes you think that other people would then?

On the other hand, it is a fact that because of people like you, billions of dollars goes into the hands of ruthless criminals who don't think twice about killing anybody that get's in their way. It is a fact that billions of dollars are wasted every year trying to fight a war that is clearly un-winnable. It is a fact that thousands and thousands of people's lives are ruined because you think that you have a right to tell people what they can do with their bodies.

 

[Virus]

So you're saying we should ban alcohol and tobacco?

Nice try. I'm pointing out that you're shooting yourself in the foot with the argument that smack will be just like ciggies and grog when these legalized drugs are huge social problems.

Sure it is. You just call your drug dealer. He might even deliver it to you. I've had some that would.

There are already problems with youths carrying knives. So let's scrap the restrictions and say you can carry all the knives you want. If we don't ban it then people won't do it eh?

I don't care about how cheap or available it is. I care about personal freedom and keeping money out of the hands of violent criminals. Two things you apparently couldn't care less about.

What about the personal freedom of people who don't want to live amongst scores of violent, whacked out, socially useless drug addicts? What about people who don't want to get hit by a driver on crack?

Do you have any evidence that suggests significantly more people would abuse drugs if legal?

Uh, yeah. The legal drugs are far more abused than the illegal ones.

Would you suddenly start shooting up heroin if you could do it legally? No? What makes you think that other people would then?

No but there's more people in the world than just me.

On the other hand, it is a fact that because of people like you, billions of dollars goes into the hands of ruthless criminals who don't think twice about killing anybody that get's in their way. It is a fact that billions of dollars are wasted every year trying to fight a war that is clearly un-winnable.

And billions of dollars goes into health care costs of both legal and illegal drugs. This would increase by several magnitudes.

It is a fact that thousands and thousands of people's lives are ruined because you think that you have a right to tell people what they can do with their bodies.

Thousands and thousands of lives are ruined by the needle. You think you have the right to tell society what they have to tolerate. They have to tolerate violent meth heads. They have to tolerate coke fiends. They have to tolerate streets full of people shooting **** up and leaving dirty needles around. Have a look at "Needle Park", a park in Switzerland where the authorities turned a blind eye to heroin use. Tell me if that's what you'd like the streets to be.

 

[pipelineaudio]

As long as theres a war on alcohol and tobacco, I doubt there will ever be the unified swell to end the war on some drugs

 

[Lallante]

Yes, and and alcohol and ciggies are much more widely abused, cost society much more in damages and fill up the hospital beds much more that crackheads and cause scores more motor accidents.

Yes. In pretty much every scientific study of harm, alcohol and ciggies are worse than most drugs for your health (in ciggies case, much more). Why the double standard?

No it's not sir. You can't just go down to the corner store and buy a baggie of cheap meth or LSD.

Yes you can. The only difference is you buy it behind the corner store in an alley and you DONT pay tax or have any enforceable consumer rights.

But apparently not cheap enough and not easily available enough for you.

I don't think many of the legalisation crowd particularly want drugs to be cheaper. In order for legislation to be effective they would need to be no more expensive and little more difficult to obtain for most people however. The point of legalisation is to protect people (quality, contaminants, crime etc) and raise tax revenues, not make drugs more freely available.

Yeah so let's have it that you can buy smack at the tobacconists. Let's make it you can get anabolic steroids over the counter. We'll put them next to the aspirin.

Why would legalisation naturally entail free-for-all. Why not do it like the Netherlands where weed is sold and taxed by specialist "coffee shops" which require a license, or California where you must get a 'medical use card' (change this to a 'recreational use card' but continue to keep a database and require full ID etc).

Let's increase the number of addicts. Let's increase the number of road accidents. Let's increase the number of people who can't work because they're on smack and putting an increased burden on the health care and welfare systems. That fixes everything.

The nature of those predisposed to addiction is that they will become addicts whether or not the substance is illegal. There is far lower incidence of medical problems related to cannabis use in the Netherlands than in the USA (and less children try it) despite cannabis being freely available just about anywhere. There is literally nothing to suggest controlled legalisation of drugs would increase the incidence of addiction - on the contrary, it would allow governments to much more effectively finance and target treatment programmes to those that need it most. If you had to register on a database to obtain drugs, your usage could be tracked and those with a problem legally aquirable dosages tapered.

These principles aren't speculation - they have been demonstrated in trials in the UK and Scotland with Heroine addicts to have MASSIVE positive effects in fighting addiction.

Essentially, legalisation would give you a whole load more tools in your toolkit to minimise harm.