What if we just stopped the war on drugs? (Brown, borders, crime)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Drug dependency should be treated as a public health issue, not criminal. The threat of adjudicated treatment could be used to 'encourage' drug abusers to participate in other treatment programs.
If we stop arresting drug dealers, they will be the ones out there doing the policing. Big drug dealers will open up big drug houses for users and they will kill the small dealers trying to take their businesses. Unless it becomes all legal and businesses are allowed to sell then we have crossed a very slippery slop.
Drug dependency should be treated as a public health issue, not criminal. The threat of adjudicated treatment could be used to 'encourage' drug abusers to participate in other treatment programs.
Unfortunately, history has proven that one has to want to quit abusing drugs before addiction treatment programs will have any success whatsoever. Robert Downey, Jr. who had serious addiction problems and was ordered to undergo treatment famously told a judge in 1999 "It's like I've got a shotgun in my mouth with my finger on the trigger, and I like the taste of the gun metal." Despite having a wealth of acting talent and a successful career laid out for him, he nearly lost it all because of his demons, and it took years before he was able to kick the habit that damn near ruined him.
Now consider this is a man who was lucky enough to have a career path that would lead him to fame and fortune as a motivation to quit, yet nearly lost it to addiction. How are you going to convince someone who has been dealt a hand of poverty coupled with prostitution or gang activity from an early age that their life will improve if they get off the pipe or stop shooting junk?
How are you going to convince someone who has been dealt a hand of poverty coupled with prostitution or gang activity from an early age that their life will improve if they get off the pipe or stop shooting junk?
You are certainly not going to do it by throwing them in jail. That has been proven over and over ever since the prohibition of alcohol. It just makes things worse for both the addict and for society. They go into prison as an addict, and come out as an addict and a criminal. Now that they are a criminal, it makes breaking the law again easy for them. That's terrible. It takes people with only a health problem, imprints criminal behavior in their mind, then turns them loose on society, all on our dime. Is that really what you want?
We could learn something from our European friends, who already knows this is a health problem, not a criminal one. They have a lot fewer problems with addicts than we do, and it has been that way for decades. But between us close-minded, arrogant Americans, and a corrupt government that profits from keeping drugs illegal, we have little chance of learning from others.
Last edited by Raddo; 02-22-2016 at 09:51 AM..
Reason: typo
You are certainly not going to do it by throwing them in jail. That has been proven over and over ever since the prohibition of alcohol. It just makes things worse for both the addict and for society. They go into prison as an addict, and come out as an addict and a criminal. Now that they are a criminal, it makes breaking the law again easy for them. That's terrible. It takes people with only a health problem, imprints criminal behavior in their mind, then turns them loose on society, all on our dime. Is that really what you want?
Where did I ever advocate throwing addicts in jail for simple possession? I merely stated that the wide-open legalization of destructive drugs is a very bad idea for a number of reasons I have already posted.
Quote:
We could learn something from our European friends, who already knows this is a health problem, not a criminal one. They have a lot fewer problems with addicts than we do, and it has been that way for decades. But between us close-minded, arrogant Americans, and a corrupt government that profits from keeping drugs illegal, we have little chance of learning from others.
That's hilarious. Care to mention which member of the EU allows its citizens to walk into the local convenience store and pick up an eight-ball for the weekend?
As for having fewer problems with addiction... The Netherlands attempted an experiment where they allowed a "junkie park" to operate within the city. Basically, they allowed heroin addicts to buy, sell and use heroin in the park unmolested by the police. Within a week, the park was shut down when junkies and dealers from neighboring countries flooded the city in droves causing a major spike in overdoses and crime.
That's hilarious. Care to mention which member of the EU allows its citizens to walk into the local convenience store and pick up an eight-ball for the weekend?
Where did I mention that it was available at convenience stores, or state that it should be?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Annuvin
As for having fewer problems with addiction... The Netherlands attempted an experiment where they allowed a "junkie park" to operate within the city. Basically, they allowed heroin addicts to buy, sell and use heroin in the park unmolested by the police. Within a week, the park was shut down when junkies and dealers from neighboring countries flooded the city in droves causing a major spike in overdoses and crime.
Your example has nothing to do with overall percentage of people addicted, nor how they treat those that are.
If you would think a little deeper into your example, you would see that the root cause of it is prohibition. If there were a coordinated effort between the EU countries to try what The Netherlands tried, there would be no need for anyone to flee from one country to another.
A good example of how to properly phase-in legalization can be found in Colorado. The lawmakers knew that being the first to legalize retail cannabis meant a free for all if there were not controls in place to prevent such a zoo. So, for the first year or so of legalized cannabis, only established and licensed medical dispensaries could make the move into retail sales. There were similar controls on growing. These controls have since been phased out by design. The end result was the smooth creation of a multi-billion dollar industry.
Good lord. Cannabis is not a dangerous, addictive drug on par with heroin, cocaine, pcp or meth by any stretch of imagination. Quit acting like Colorado legalized crack, for the love of God.
Good lord. Cannabis is not a dangerous, addictive drug on par with heroin, cocaine, pcp or meth by any stretch of imagination. Quit acting like Colorado legalized crack, for the love of God.
Let me say "Thank you!" for getting that. Most prohibitionists do indeed lump it in with the rest, causing the already tangled mess that is prohibition to become even more hopelessly mired. A case in point is the previous poster who believes that anyone caught smoking weed should get a mandatory 20 years in jail.
I originally came from Oklahoma, a state who acts like cannabis and crack are the same. The lawmakers there are a good 20 years behind most other states, and if you were to ask them they would tell you in no uncertain terms that cannabis is indeed a dangerous, addictive drug on par with heroin. You would think Colorado actually did legalize crack judging by the way they are reacting. Currently they are suing Colorado because of it, against Obama's advice.
But the principle is the same. You cannot legalize pot, or crack, or even all of it, without a well-planned, coordinated effort to do so without causing chaos. Otherwise, people like you will jump on the failure and try to use it as evidence that prohibition is a good thing.
Prohibition is not a good thing. That was proven to be true a century ago when the problems caused by alcohol prohibition were far greater than the problems caused by alcohol abuse. Almost no one disputes that. Cannabis prohibition is no different, but there are many who are so brainwashed that they cannot see it.
Alcohol prohibition did not work. Cannabis prohibition is not working. It is not logical to think that it works for hard drugs either.
The most often used example is "What happened when Prohibition was ended?"
The "war on alcohol" was an abject failure; I have never understood how anybody expected the "war on drugs" to be a success.
By the way, employers and the government would still be able to say "You WILL be drug tested. If you pop positive, you are OUT of here!" So, no, there would not be drivers or pilots or aircraft mechanics or doctors or nurses at work high on drugs.
At least, no more than there are now!
IMO, the "war on drugs" should have ended long ago. The dope should all be legal. If somebody overdoses and dies, too bad. Yes, if that somebody was one of my children, I would feel the same way. In fact, if it were one of my kids I would likely say "Good riddance, my kid went away when the drugs took over and he/she became a junkie!"
It was political. In my opinion, Nancy Reagan was a socialite and a lot of people liked her. She apparently lacked the sense and education to know that the War on Drugs was bad public policy. But it did giver her something to do while hubby was president. I like how Michelle Obama is doing something innocuous like growing vegetables after that school lunch fiasco. I hope the next first lady takes up knitting as her do-gooder cause. OR better yet stays out of the spotlight and does nothing.
FYI Mrs. Reagan's Education Sidwell Friends School, Washington, D.C. 1925-1928; Girl's Latin School, Chicago, Illinois, 1929-1939; Smith College, Northampton, Massachusetts, 1939-1943, bachelor's degree in dramatic arts Nancy Reagan Biography :: National First Ladies' Library
It looks like she probably had a lot of rich friends since she went to Friends, Girls Latin and a private college in the Northeast, so nobody wanted to tell her that her war was stupid. Degree in Dramatic Arts? Why in the heck was she allowed to influence such important public policy? No offense, Mrs. Reagan.
Drug addiction IS evil, but prohibition did not work the first time. Drug addicts need help, not prison and honestly I need to be able to grow some goldurned breadseed poppies. Thanks to the War on Drugs I can't do this and right or wrong, I blame Nancy Reagan.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
