Time To End The War On Drugs

[Lil Red]

[url="http://hotair.com/archives/2008/12/05/time-to-end-the-war-on-drugs/"]Linky Loo[/url]
[quote]Seventy-five years ago today, the nation amended the Constitution to end Prohibition after a disastrous experiment in banning alcohol. Ethan Nadelmann uses the event to ask Americans whether the time has come to end its decades-long experiment in banning other drugs and allow citizens to make their own decisions on intoxicants. The appearance of [url="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122843683581681375-email.html"]this column at the Wall Street Journal[/url] shows how mainstream it has become to question the war on drugs:
[quote]Some opponents of prohibition pointed to Al Capone and increasing crime, violence and corruption. Others were troubled by the labeling of tens of millions of Americans as criminals, overflowing prisons, and the consequent broadening of disrespect for the law. Americans were disquieted by dangerous expansions of federal police powers, encroachments on individual liberties, increasing government expenditure devoted to enforcing the prohibition laws, and the billions in forgone tax revenues. And still others were disturbed by the specter of so many citizens blinded, paralyzed and killed by poisonous moonshine and industrial alcohol.

Supporters of prohibition blamed the consumers, and some went so far as to argue that those who violated the laws deserved whatever ills befell them. But by 1933, most Americans blamed prohibition itself.

When repeal came, it was not just with the support of those with a taste for alcohol, but also those who disliked and even hated it but could no longer ignore the dreadful consequences of a failed prohibition. They saw what most Americans still fail to see today: That a failed drug prohibition can cause greater harm than the drug it was intended to banish.[/quote]
No one doubts the destructive nature of most of the substances banned now, except for marijuana, where serious debate exists. Cocaine and heroin are deeply and physically addictive and deadly, as are most controlled or banned substances. But should people be left to their own devices and government stay out of the way of their behavior, only intervening when their behavior affects others? Where would that line get drawn, anyway?

Clearly, what we have been doing hasn’t worked. At the margins, it impacts behavior, but overall, Americans still create a huge demand that gets fulfilled by criminal enterprises. That is no different than what Prohibition created, and the effects have been the same: rampant violence, large wealth transfers to organized crime, dilution of law-enforcement efforts, exploding prison populations, and so on.

One definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. Under that definition, the American idea of a war on drugs is as politically insane as it gets. Succeeding administrations and Congresses led by both parties keep assuring us that they will turn the corner on the war on drugs, but nothing changes except for the names and the faces. We have enabled a powerful central government and organized crime to limit our freedoms in every direction as a result of this policy. We could at least roll back both by returning to the more rational policy on drugs that the US had before prohibition fever hit a century ago.[/quote]
so what does everyone think about this?

[CatherineM]

Sometimes we lose a war, but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't have fought the war in the first place. I've seen so many lives and families destroyed by drugs, but I don't know if legalizing them would have made it better or worse.

We only really think about the war in the US, but just looking at what the war for control of our drug trade is doing in Mexico and other developing countries, should also play into the equation. The only way that I'd say to give up on the war is if every single dollar spent on it is spent instead on drug treatment.

[HisChildForever]

The "war on drugs" is, frankly, a losing battle. This by no means suggests that we should stop, however. In my opinion we should treat drug addicts as patients with diseases, as opposed to mere criminals (even though the majority of them resort to crime in order to afford their [expensive] addiction). In all honesty there is a stereotype that drug addicts are low-lifes who lurk in alleys but I assure you this is not always the case. By opening our arms and rehabilitating these people, we take away the shame stigma which would hopefully encourage more to seek help. In truth, making cocaine and heroin legal would reduce certain violent crimes but I think opening up the drug culture would harm society in the long run, and many will probably agree with me on that.

[Lilllabettt]

The FDA regulates drugs.

We all know that before a drug can be legally sold in this country, it must go through rigorous clinical examination proving that its beneficial properties outweigh the risks associated with it. Even after a drug has passed these tests and been approved, it can be recalled if "evidence of harm" shows up in the prescribed population.

If currently illegal drugs were made legal, would they pass the FDA smell test? Alcohol, when used as intended, could pass the smell test, I think. Tobacco, on the other hand ...

Of course, with recreational drugs, the benefits are not medical, so the risk-benefit analysis would be difficult to do. Can you imagine the report? "LSD is linked to these various medical problems, but it effectively produces most excellent trips which compensate for these inherent risks."

[CatherineM]

Yeah, can you imagine any drug company wanting to market something that would automatically end them up in a class action law suit.

[Tinkerlina]

[quote name='Lil Red' post='1720185' date='Dec 5 2008, 02:35 PM'][url="http://hotair.com/archives/2008/12/05/time-to-end-the-war-on-drugs/"]Linky Loo[/url]

No one doubts the destructive nature of most of the substances banned now, except for marijuana, where serious debate exists. Cocaine and heroin are deeply and physically addictive and deadly, as are most controlled or banned substances. But should people be left to their own devices and government stay out of the way of their behavior, only intervening when their behavior affects others? Where would that line get drawn, anyway?

Clearly, what we have been doing hasn’t worked. At the margins, it impacts behavior, but overall, Americans still create a huge demand that gets fulfilled by criminal enterprises. That is no different than what Prohibition created, and the effects have been the same: rampant violence, large wealth transfers to organized crime, dilution of law-enforcement efforts, exploding prison populations, and so on.

One definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. Under that definition, the American idea of a war on drugs is as politically insane as it gets. Succeeding administrations and Congresses led by both parties keep assuring us that they will turn the corner on the war on drugs, but nothing changes except for the names and the faces. We have enabled a powerful central government and organized crime to limit our freedoms in every direction as a result of this policy. We could at least roll back both by returning to the more rational policy on drugs that the US had before prohibition fever hit a century ago.
so what does everyone think about this?[/quote]

It's certainly interesting. I agree that what we've been doing hasn't been effective, or at least not effective enough. I think there have to be some changes in the system. I'm not sure what exactly should be done. I've seen drug abuse up close and it's not easy to treat or get rid of. However, it doesn't appear that putting a drug addict in prison works either. As far as marijuana, I personally think it should be decriminalized. I'm not advocating its recreational use but I have known people who have used it medicinally with very effective results and in and of itself I don't think there's as much potential for menace to society as there is with other drugs. -Katie

[Tinkerlina]

[quote name='HisChildForever' post='1720200' date='Dec 5 2008, 02:44 PM']The "war on drugs" is, frankly, a losing battle. This by no means suggests that we should stop, however. In my opinion we should treat drug addicts as patients with diseases, as opposed to mere criminals (even though the majority of them resort to crime in order to afford their [expensive] addiction). In all honesty there is a stereotype that drug addicts are low-lifes who lurk in alleys but I assure you this is not always the case. By opening our arms and rehabilitating these people, we take away the shame stigma which would hopefully encourage more to seek help.[/quote]

Couldn't agree more-drug addiction is difficult to treat, but it is a disease and needs treatment, not punishment. -Katie

[philothea]

A decade or more ago, William F. Buckley (famed for his wacky liberalness, right? ) proposed ending the War on Drugs as well, since it obviously wasn't working.

Places like Japan appear to have "won" their war... but through drastic police action the likes of which would never fly here.

It's hard to imagine what would happen if some/all of the currently illegal drugs were legalized. It is kind of amusing to imagine a legitimate business producing crack. What kind of warning label do you put on that?

Personally, it'd be nice to be able to buy my dang decongestants without being treated like a criminal...

[Tinkerlina]

[quote name='Lilllabettt' post='1720527' date='Dec 5 2008, 10:45 PM']The FDA regulates drugs.

We all know that before a drug can be legally sold in this country, it must go through rigorous clinical examination proving that its beneficial properties outweigh the risks associated with it. Even after a drug has passed these tests and been approved, it can be recalled if "evidence of harm" shows up in the prescribed population.

If currently illegal drugs were made legal, would they pass the FDA smell test? Alcohol, when used as intended, could pass the smell test, I think. Tobacco, on the other hand ...

Of course, with recreational drugs, the benefits are not medical, so the risk-benefit analysis would be difficult to do. Can you imagine the report? "LSD is linked to these various medical problems, but it effectively produces most excellent trips which compensate for these inherent risks."[/quote]

I don't think the FDA should approve most current illegal drugs; however, I myself don't necessarily think a lot of what they've approved is very safe, and I have personally known a lot of people whose drug addictions were to prescribed narcotics, which, in one case, escalated to heroin addiction. And it seems like a great many drugs have shown "evidence of harm" without being recalled. Even though I am addicted to the stuff, much to my chagrin, aspartame, for example, was originally presented to the FDA as a drug for children with ADHD, and was rejected. How it came to be safe for consumption in food is beyond me. So I find a lot of inconsistencies in the safety of legal drugs. -Katie

[HisChildForever]

[quote]I have personally known a lot of people whose drug addictions were to prescribed narcotics, which, in one case, escalated to heroin addiction.[/quote]

Yep.

[desertwoman]

I wonder. Then what would all the corner thugs do if drugs were legal and their loyal customer no longer has to come to them.

[HisChildForever]

[quote name='desertwoman' post='1720810' date='Dec 6 2008, 11:24 AM']I wonder. Then what would all the corner thugs do if drugs were legal and their loyal customer no longer has to come to them.[/quote]

Exactly.

[Mr_Private_Person]

Make Weed Legal!

[mod]please don't post pictures of illegal activities--hsm[/mod]

[Snowflake3981]

[quote name='Mr_Private_Person' post='1721866' date='Dec 7 2008, 06:32 PM']Make Weed Legal!
[mod]edit[/mod][/quote]



Wow - I don't think that picture is appropriate - where are the moderators?!

[Lil Red]

+J.M.J.+
if you think something breaks the guidelines, hit the report button.