War on Drugs Over

[harley]

What is really odd is this non sequitur.

It's just the old "Democrats want to be in your wallet, Republicans want to be in your bedroom" issue.

 

[bongo2]

As far as I can tell, absolutely everyone that does studies this issue comes to the same conclusion: that the war on drugs does far more harm than good.

From conservatives like Buckley and the National Review to the Cato institute to Rand to the centrist Economist magazine and apolitical consumer reports to liberals like Stephen Jay Gould and Noam Chomsky everyone seems to agree on this issue, though not on the exact solution.

The question really isn't if recreational drugs are good or bad. It's how long people should spend in jail if they want to use them. How long should our last three presidents have spent in jail for their drug use?

You can't find countries with legalized recreational drugs partly because they have all been strong-armed into signing treaties that require them to ban substances the US doesn't like. But, I do understand Portugal has made some steps in this direction. And there's always Denmark. Or the US prior to the 1900's.

I would be interested in any analysis anyone can find that supports drug prohibition that doesn't come from the DEA.

 

[dex]

As far as I can tell, absolutely everyone that does studies this issue comes to the same conclusion: that the war on drugs does far more harm than good.

More harm that good when compared to what?

NIDA - Research Report Series - Methamphetamine Abuse and Addiction
Long-term methamphetamine abuse has many negative consequences, including addiction. Addiction is a chronic, relapsing disease, characterized by compulsive drug seeking and use, accompanied by functional and molecular changes in the brain. In addition to being addicted to methamphetamine, chronic abusers exhibit symptoms that can include anxiety, confusion, insomnia, mood disturbances, and violent behavior. They also can display a number of psychotic features, including paranoia, visual and auditory hallucinations, and delusions (for example, the sensation of insects creeping under the skin). Psychotic symptoms can sometimes last for months or years after methamphetamine abuse has ceased, and stress has been shown to precipitate spontaneous recurrence of methamphetamine psychosis in formerly psychotic methamphetamine abusers.

 

[bongo2]

Compared to not throwing people in jail, which, as I said, can take different forms.

While total legalization of all recreational drugs is not the best solution, I believe all the above except Rand support that over the current policy. Rand proposes a more tolerant, but still highly regulated, approach.

Is there anything on the NIDA website supporting drug prohibition? There was a lot there on treatment and addiction, but I couldn't find any analysis supporting (or even statements that NIDA supported) the current policy. Their tagline "treatment is the key" suggests to me that they don't feel that jail is the most appropriate place for drug users.

 

[noworkethic]

Hey Harley, Rusty, Bongo,

The words of a very old song have been running through my mind while I've been reading this thread. Something like:

"If you waste your time talkin' to
People who don't listen to
The things that you are sayin'
Who do you think's gonna hear?"

Any of y'all know remember who sang this?

 

[dex]

As far as I can tell, absolutely everyone that does studies this issue comes to the same conclusion: that the war on drugs does far more harm than good.

From conservatives like Buckley and the National Review to the Cato institute to Rand to the centrist Economist magazine and apolitical consumer reports to liberals like Stephen Jay Gould and Noam Chomsky everyone seems to agree on this issue, though not on the exact solution.

The question really isn't if recreational drugs are good or bad. It's how long people should spend in jail if they want to use them. How long should our last three presidents have spent in jail for their drug use?

You can't find countries with legalized recreational drugs partly because they have all been strong-armed into signing treaties that require them to ban substances the US doesn't like. But, I do understand Portugal has made some steps in this direction. And there's always Denmark. Or the US prior to the 1900's.

I would be interested in any analysis anyone can find that supports drug prohibition that doesn't come from the DEA.

I only read the Rand comment and it is not as you state. The quote below from the article is more accurate.
"While Republicans and Democrats in Washington seem addicted to the old failed ways of dealing with drug-related crimes, new political voices in the states - faced with the harsh realities of shrinking budgets -- are bringing fresh perspectives to the problem. New York Gov. George Pataki recently proposed eliminating mandatory jail terms for nonviolent drug offenders and sentencing them instead to treatment or community service. Both alternatives are far cheaper: it costs $35,000 to lock up one offender for a year, compared with an average $18,000 for a year of residential care or $2,500 in an outpatient program.
Funding for treatment is the key if the Pataki approach is to succeed. Otherwise, tens of thousands of addicts will be back on the STREETS, much like the deinstitutionalization of mental patients in the 197Os which closed the asylums but failed to provide alternatives."



What we are discussing here is the legalization aspect. No one has stated that we should the current "war on drugs" is working the way would would like.


Saying that treatment is a good way for handling drug crime is not saying legalization is the answer. I don't think anyone would deny treatment is part of the solution.

 

[dex]

Hey Harley, Rusty, Bongo,

The words of a very old song have been running through my mind while I've been reading this thread. Something like:

"If you waste your time talkin' to
People who don't listen to
The things that you are sayin'
Who do you think's gonna hear?"

Any of y'all know remember who sang this?

I do not think the posters you mention need my defense but, I find your comments as a veiled attempted to insult them.
Some of them have voiced the idea that legalizing drugs such as meth is a good idea. It isn't that they are not listening. It is that fleshing out the idea of legalization is not easy and in attempting to do so the difficulties (maybe not insurmountable, maybe so) raise their head.

 

[bongo2]

What we are discussing here is the legalization aspect. No one has stated that the current "war on drugs" is working the way would would like. . .Saying that treatment is a good way for handling drug crime is not saying legalization is the answer. I don't think anyone would deny treatment is part of the solution.

I think I said above that Rand does not argue for legalization, but rather that the current emphasis on enforcement is a disaster. I'm not sure what you read that contradicted that.

I must have misunderstood the discussion. Your initial post seemed to be arguing for greater enforcement. You would support dropping enforcement of drug laws as long as they remain illegal e.g. Denmark?

 

[kumquat]

Hey Harley, Rusty, Bongo,

The words of a very old song have been running through my mind while I've been reading this thread. Something like:

"If you waste your time talkin' to
People who don't listen to
The things that you are sayin'
Who do you think's gonna hear?"

Any of y'all know remember who sang this?

Kris Kristofferson

 

[RustyShackleford]

As far as I can tell, absolutely everyone that does studies this issue comes to the same conclusion: that the war on drugs does far more harm than good.

Anyone, who is not yet convinced that our national hysteria over illegal
drugs has gone too far, should read the following article about a 13yo
girl strip-searched for suspicion of possessing ibuprofen tablets of
prescription strength (double the ones you can buy OTC):

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/24/us/24savana.html

The school's anti-drug policy ...