Do you believe the war on drugs is a failure?

[C_Clayton_Jones]

If so, what is your solution to drug abuse in America?

Legalize (or ‘decriminalize’) drugs and let a blend of the free market and government regulation deal with it. State and local communities could tax the hell out of drug sales, keeping drugs away from children for the most part and generating enough revenue to get many governments back in the black with enough left over for treatment programs and the like.

The settlement conditions Big Tobacco made with many of the states could serve as a template for most types of drugs, marijuana in particular.

I don't know any "liberals" who support the war on drugs.

Neither do I.

Indeed, it’s mostly your ‘law and order’ rightists in the Nixonian tradition who support the failed ‘war’ on drugs, as already correctly pointed out.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I don't know any "liberals" who support the war on drugs.

Neither do I.

Indeed, it’s mostly your ‘law and order’ rightists in the Nixonian tradition who support the failed ‘war’ on drugs, as already correctly pointed out.

You are one of the liberals that support the war on drugs by insisting that Congress has the power to regulate economic activity under the commerce clause.

 

[dblack]

Some controls are necessary, and without any regulations addictive substances will invade the bodies of younger and younger children creating a Brave New World with SOMA dispensed by anyone seeking to make a profit.

Are there any ideas out there or is the idea that no solution exists so let's default to ideology? It's much easier and doesn't require any thought.

It's not ideology. You're starting with the assumption that its a problem government should do something about. That's the premise I'm rejecting. Not all our problems can or should be solved by government and drug abuse is a perfect example.

Agreed, not all problems can be solved by the government. There are many not for profit agencies - the Salvation Army, for example - which do good work in the rehabilitation of former addicts. However, there are many more for profits and the cost is impossible for even a committed addict to avail him/her self to such treatment. Also, some drug addictions - alcohol, barbiturates for example - require medical supervision during detox - do you believe such addicts will be treated for free by the private sector?

Of course the callous conservative will default to it's all about personal responsibility so let them suffer and die. It's very easy to offer up simple solutions to complex issues, as is apparent by the 'solutions' suggested by those who default to ideology. In fact that is exactly what you have done.

It's not what I've done. And it's not my view that we should 'let them die and suffer'. I'll admit my initial answer to your question (What should "we" do about drug abuse?) was glib ("We" should not abuse drugs), but I was reacting to what I assumed was your core conviction: that any solution to the drug problem should involve government. You seem to be confirming that here.

You're evoking the same false dilemma that gets dredged up in the health care debate - namely that it's a choice between government intervention or doom and despair. In reality, I think "we" should do something about the drug problem. We should start by not abusing drugs ourselves. When we got that under control, we should work to grant our children the mental health and self-control required to avoid drug abuse. Then we should look after our friends and extended relatives - talk to those who seem to be a risk, stage an intervention if it seems necessary. How we proceed from there depends on how much time, money and interest we have in working with the community to discourage abuse and help those who fall victim to addiction.

The thing is, I think we (those of us who give as shit) can do that. You're essentially saying that it's too hard, and instead we should use the coercive power of government to force people, people who don't want to, to help us. I think that's wrong. It think there are a lot of people who have genuine personal opposition to helping out people who they believe to be immoral. Some people have had their good will abused one too many times by manipulative addicts and simply have no patience with helping them. And that's fine. Having our own opinions, and acting on them, is what freedom is all about.

 

[Katzndogz]

Legalize drugs and tax them, thereby creating an instant black market defeating the whole purpose of the tax.

Permit addicts to take drugs for the rest of their short lives and deal with protecting the public. Britian is already trying to figure out a way to deal with cannabis psychosis perhaps we will learn something.

 

[MikeK]

My best friend was a criminal defense attorney. Her drug of choice was cocaine. To her, cocaine made her a better attorney. She was sharper, more dedicated, and performed better high than not. She was a fully functioning, recreational drug user.

Her clients did not agree. The Judges did not agree. As she spiralled down she destroyed the lives of many many people. Eventually she was disbarred. Like all drug users she blamed an unreasonable bias against drugs, but not her own actions. After all, wasn't she a much better attorney because of cocaine? And why ever would she go into treatment? She performed much better under the influence. She wouldn't just give up the very thing that enhanced her peformance.

She's dead now. My friend died several years ago. She died penniless, living with an alcoholic couple who took her in. She died in complete disgrace after losing everything she had.

Considering how many habitual cocaine users (George W. Bush, for one) degenerate to the level you've described, your friend was the extreme exception and certainly not the rule. Which is not to say cocaine use is without some risk of seriously damaging physical and/or mental effects.

Unfortunately for your friend she was extremely predisposed to addiction (addictive personality).

 

[Katzndogz]

My best friend was a criminal defense attorney. Her drug of choice was cocaine. To her, cocaine made her a better attorney. She was sharper, more dedicated, and performed better high than not. She was a fully functioning, recreational drug user.

Her clients did not agree. The Judges did not agree. As she spiralled down she destroyed the lives of many many people. Eventually she was disbarred. Like all drug users she blamed an unreasonable bias against drugs, but not her own actions. After all, wasn't she a much better attorney because of cocaine? And why ever would she go into treatment? She performed much better under the influence. She wouldn't just give up the very thing that enhanced her peformance.

She's dead now. My friend died several years ago. She died penniless, living with an alcoholic couple who took her in. She died in complete disgrace after losing everything she had.

Considering how many habitual cocaine users (George W. Bush, for one) degenerate to the level you've described, your friend was the extreme exception and certainly not the rule. Which is not to say cocaine use is without some risk of seriously damaging physical and/or mental effects.

Unfortunately for your friend she was extremely predisposed to addiction.

You have one thing wrong. The habitual cocaine addict is barack obama. For years. Since high school.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Legalize drugs and tax them, thereby creating an instant black market defeating the whole purpose of the tax.

Because that's exactly how it turned out with taxing alcohol, right?

Is there a big bootlegging problem where you live?

Permit addicts to take drugs for the rest of their short lives and deal with protecting the public. Britian is already trying to figure out a way to deal with cannabis psychosis perhaps we will learn something.

There's no such thing as "Cannabis Psychosis".

 

[Big Black Dog]

If so, what is your solution to drug abuse in America?

If you fly into Saudi Arabia, on the custom forms you fill out on the plane, it states very clearly, and emphatically, "Death to Drug Dealers" printed in red. We need that sort of action in the US. If you transport drugs, or sell drugs, and happened to be caught with drugs on your person, you should be put to death - immediately after trial. None of this appeals bull shit, no sitting in prison for 10 years or so waiting to be put to death - immediately. I think this would be a good start on ending the drug problem in America.

 

[Triton]

It's not ideology. You're starting with the assumption that its a problem government should do something about. That's the premise I'm rejecting. Not all our problems can or should be solved by government and drug abuse is a perfect example.

Agreed, not all problems can be solved by the government. There are many not for profit agencies - the Salvation Army, for example - which do good work in the rehabilitation of former addicts. However, there are many more for profits and the cost is impossible for even a committed addict to avail him/her self to such treatment. Also, some drug addictions - alcohol, barbiturates for example - require medical supervision during detox - do you believe such addicts will be treated for free by the private sector?

Of course the callous conservative will default to it's all about personal responsibility so let them suffer and die. It's very easy to offer up simple solutions to complex issues, as is apparent by the 'solutions' suggested by those who default to ideology. In fact that is exactly what you have done.

It's not what I've done. And it's not my view that we should 'let them die and suffer'. I'll admit my initial answer to your question (What should "we" do about drug abuse?) was glib ("We" should not abuse drugs), but I was reacting to what I assumed was your core conviction: that any solution to the drug problem should involve government. You seem to be confirming that here.

You're evoking the same false dilemma that gets dredged up in the health care debate - namely that it's a choice between government intervention or doom and despair. In reality, I think "we" should do something about the drug problem. We should start by not abusing drugs ourselves. When we got that under control, we should work to grant our children the mental health and self-control required to avoid drug abuse. Then we should look after our friends and extended relatives - talk to those who seem to be a risk, stage an intervention if it seems necessary. How we proceed from there depends on how much time, money and interest we have in working with the community to discourage abuse and help those who fall victim to addiction.

The thing is, I think we (those of us who give as shit) can do that. You're essentially saying that it's too hard, and instead we should use the coercive power of government to force people, people who don't want to, to help us. I think that's wrong. It think there are a lot of people who have genuine personal opposition to helping out people who they believe to be immoral. Some people have had their good will abused one too many times by manipulative addicts and simply have no patience with helping them. And that's fine. Having our own opinions, and acting on them, is what freedom is all about.

Dblack, please for the sake of the country run for president now.

 

[Katzndogz]

Legalize drugs and tax them, thereby creating an instant black market defeating the whole purpose of the tax.

Because that's exactly how it turned out with taxing alcohol, right?

Is there a big bootlegging problem where you live?

Permit addicts to take drugs for the rest of their short lives and deal with protecting the public. Britian is already trying to figure out a way to deal with cannabis psychosis perhaps we will learn something.

There's no such thing as "Cannabis Psychosis".

Focus: Cannabis psychosis | Society | The Observer

The effects, which aren't at all nice.

BBC NEWS | UK | England | London | Cannabis user jailed over attack

Maybe you want more

Cannabis psychosis
Cannabis Use and Psychosis
Smoking cannabis 'doubles the risk of psychosis ' - Health News - NHS Choices
The Cannabis-Psychosis Link - Psychiatric Times

There's no such thing as what?

 

[Katzndogz]

Don't get me wrong. I say legalize the stuff, all of it. Naturally the public should be allowed all means necessary to protect themselves but the heavier the use, the more likely it is that the user will die young.

 

[Katzndogz]

If so, what is your solution to drug abuse in America?

If you fly into Saudi Arabia, on the custom forms you fill out on the plane, it states very clearly, and emphatically, "Death to Drug Dealers" printed in red. We need that sort of action in the US. If you transport drugs, or sell drugs, and happened to be caught with drugs on your person, you should be put to death - immediately after trial. None of this appeals bull shit, no sitting in prison for 10 years or so waiting to be put to death - immediately. I think this would be a good start on ending the drug problem in America.

Trial, in Saudi Arabia the drug dealer would be lucky to make it out of the airport. In China they have mobile death vans (Like New York has) that harvests organs on the spot.

The way to deal with drug use is to convince people not to want to get high. It's the only thing that will work. Meanwhile the number of addicts have to be reduced. The best way to do that is simply give them enough drugs that they will take care of it themselves.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Permit addicts to take drugs for the rest of their short lives and deal with protecting the public. Britian is already trying to figure out a way to deal with cannabis psychosis perhaps we will learn something.

There's no such thing as "Cannabis Psychosis".

But it sounds so good.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Legalize drugs and tax them, thereby creating an instant black market defeating the whole purpose of the tax.

Because that's exactly how it turned out with taxing alcohol, right?

Is there a big bootlegging problem where you live?

Permit addicts to take drugs for the rest of their short lives and deal with protecting the public. Britian is already trying to figure out a way to deal with cannabis psychosis perhaps we will learn something.

There's no such thing as "Cannabis Psychosis".

Focus: Cannabis psychosis | Society | The Observer

The effects, which aren't at all nice.

BBC NEWS | UK | England | London | Cannabis user jailed over attack

Maybe you want more

Cannabis psychosis
Cannabis Use and Psychosis
Smoking cannabis 'doubles the risk of psychosis ' - Health News - NHS Choices
The Cannabis-Psychosis Link - Psychiatric Times

There's no such thing as what?

Amazing the kind of crap a government will make up to justify things, isn't it. We used to laugh at this when I was in high school, now you think it is real

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V2FZgErvNTE]Reefer Madness - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

Let me preface this by saying that I'm a recreational drug user. At this point in my life (age 30) I've pretty much cut that use down to marijuana and occasional drinking (quit cigarettes about a year ago). In my younger days, I was way into hallucinogens and vicodin, but the damage those do to the heart, liver and kidneys curbed my desire (Hawaiian ancestry makes me a bit more prone to heart problems down the road than a good deal of my fellow Americans). In fact, my work for the day's done, so I'm actually enjoying a couple of bong hits as I type this response. Don't get me wrong, I'm not posting this because it's something of which I'm particularly proud. No more proud or ashamed of enjoying marijuana than I am of enjoying shell fish. It's just a preference. There's better things on which to base one's ego.

No, the reason I've prefaced this post is to show that I'm not just some hardcore Nixonian sympathizer who's callous because I think all drug users are inherently evil. I don't. Everybody has a vice or three. My point is this: allowing hardcore drug users to kill themselves in not just a heartless idea offered up by hateful ultra conservatives who are callous to anyone who isn't like them. It's my firm belief that the government should allow EVERYONE, not just drug users, to completely self destruct if they decide that they prefer a path that leads them to ruin. It's our right as Americans to be as ignorant and impulsive as we choose, and it's our right as Americans to say that we don't want to pay for physicians, counselors, psychiatrists, et al to save people from the consequences of their own poor decision making. If nobody in a person's family, circle of friends, or greater community, can find enough value in that person to persuade them to save him/her, then yes. . . a druggie slamming enough product to kill themselves should be allowed to perish. It might sound cold, but I refuse to be a slave, especially to needs that were only necessitated by the repetitious, long term stupidity of the need'er, and I refuse to condone enslaving anyone to any degree for that purpose. That said, I'm generally a charitable person and have helped and tried to help loved ones in my personal sphere deal with addiction problems. Just don't try and tell me it's my duty to so for everyone who needs it, regardless of the particulars of their situation and regardless of whether or not I give two shits about that particular individual. It's like when you're a toddler, and you're pushing around one of those little toy vacuums around (the ones that pop up the little plastic balls. Remember those? ). It's great fun as a kid because it's something you choose to do. As soon as mom and dad start telling you to vacuum the house every four or five days, BAM. No longer fun. Now it's a chore. Nobody wants to be forced into doing anything, and I am no exception.

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

Also, far be it for me to claim that I know better than the results of any scientific study, but I'd be lying if I said I didn't find this cannabis psychosis concept counter intuitive. I've been getting stoned on nearly a daily basis for close to 15 years and I like to think that I've still got a pretty firm grasp on reality.

I've also known a lot of other people getting stoned regularly. Never saw anyone go nuts from it. I've seen a lot of people that "smoked themselves stupid", but most of them weren't exactly NASA candidates to begin with (and I thank my lucky stars that I, apparently, had a little more to work with up stairs than they did at the onset of my drug use). But out of the dozens of potheads that have been my friends/acquaintances over the years, I have yet to see a single one display any "psychotic" personality traits.

Then again, I'm not a trained psychologist, and for all I know there's a good deal of shit that passes for psychotic that I would personally consider innocuous.

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

Yes its a failure.

As another poster stated, education and treatment.

I don't agree. I do not think you and i should have to pay for rehab on some druggie. Its called personal responsibility.

Fine - but what happens when the druggie burglarizes your house in order to get funds for more drugs? Maybe, if you and I had paid for rehab on him, he wouldn't have done that.

The thing about this is that decriminalization would reduce the cost of the drugs. When drug manufacturers could call the authorities to prevent each other from using violent tactics to eliminate their competition, you'd end up with actual business competition driving the price down. On top of that, without having to hide manufacturing operations, the actual overhead of producing the drugs would be much lower. You don't see a lot of people breaking into houses to get beer money.

 

[Bfgrn]

My best friend was a criminal defense attorney. Her drug of choice was cocaine. To her, cocaine made her a better attorney. She was sharper, more dedicated, and performed better high than not. She was a fully functioning, recreational drug user.

Her clients did not agree. The Judges did not agree. As she spiralled down she destroyed the lives of many many people. Eventually she was disbarred. Like all drug users she blamed an unreasonable bias against drugs, but not her own actions. After all, wasn't she a much better attorney because of cocaine? And why ever would she go into treatment? She performed much better under the influence. She wouldn't just give up the very thing that enhanced her peformance.

She's dead now. My friend died several years ago. She died penniless, living with an alcoholic couple who took her in. She died in complete disgrace after losing everything she had.

The only disgrace is you.

 

[Katzndogz]

Also, far be it for me to claim that I know better than the results of any scientific study, but I'd be lying if I said I didn't find this cannabis psychosis concept counter intuitive. I've been getting stoned on nearly a daily basis for close to 15 years and I like to think that I've still got a pretty firm grasp on reality.

I've also known a lot of other people getting stoned regularly. Never saw anyone go nuts from it. I've seen a lot of people that "smoked themselves stupid", but most of them weren't exactly NASA candidates to begin with (and I thank my lucky stars that I, apparently, had a little more to work with up stairs than they did at the onset of my drug use). But out of the dozens of potheads that have been my friends/acquaintances over the years, I have yet to see a single one display any "psychotic" personality traits.

Then again, I'm not a trained psychologist, and for all I know there's a good deal of shit that passes for psychotic that I would personally consider innocuous.

Two words.
Jared Loughner.

His experiences were a bit different than yours.

 

[Katzndogz]

My best friend was a criminal defense attorney. Her drug of choice was cocaine. To her, cocaine made her a better attorney. She was sharper, more dedicated, and performed better high than not. She was a fully functioning, recreational drug user.

Her clients did not agree. The Judges did not agree. As she spiralled down she destroyed the lives of many many people. Eventually she was disbarred. Like all drug users she blamed an unreasonable bias against drugs, but not her own actions. After all, wasn't she a much better attorney because of cocaine? And why ever would she go into treatment? She performed much better under the influence. She wouldn't just give up the very thing that enhanced her peformance.

She's dead now. My friend died several years ago. She died penniless, living with an alcoholic couple who took her in. She died in complete disgrace after losing everything she had.

The only disgrace is you.

Yes indeed. She died totally penniless, disbarred, lost everything she worked for and I'm just rolling along just fine. I'll take that disgrace thank you very much.

If drugs were legal and she could use cocaine legally, more than she did, she would have died before her poor performance sent so many men and women to prison. Legalize drugs, make it so cheap the cartels can't undercut .