What is the best way to fight drug war when taking facts into consideration

You can list your own facts to take into consideration not to be biased, I am listing all major facts I can think of.
FACT 1 - There will always be idiots who will want to defy the law and do what is illegal just to be cool and different (choosing to use illegal substances weather its good or bad for health)
FACT 2 - There will always be gangs who make money bribing local officials to look the other way
FACT 3 - Criminal gangs would suffer from competition of ordinary citizens producing their own if illegal drugs be legalized
FACT 4 - poisonous mind altering drugs are similar in nature to countless other products that can not all be outlawed only not popularised as drugs - for example people can get high by sniffing glue, smelling gas, toothpaste, alcohol, drinking listerine etc. etc.

Taking these facts into consideration I believe drug war is absolutely idiotic, please give logical reasons without name calling or insults why you believe drug war makes sense including when do you think it will end, what do you say about all the gangs profiting from drug sales under current drug war,

 

The "go after stoners" portion of the war on drugs is pretty ridiculous, but there are many other elements to it. IMO, the most important part of it is the Mérida Initiative, which seeks to help the Mexican government crush the horrifically violent drug cartels that have infested the entire country and continue to wage war against government. The world would be a better place if we legalized marijuana and diverted the money we spend to lock up stoners to Mérida.

 

A good way to get funding is to create an enemy you need to fight, like for example send a thug to smash up a restaurant then the next day send a guy offering protection;... infect computer with a virus then send an email (or even in the same virus pointing to a link for a solution) drug war i see as no different at all. big money. a crime.

 

The war on drugs is lost. Let people get as high as they want. But, we should do nothing to save them. No taxpayer-provided medical care whatsoever. Also, with the additional prison space, thieves and violent criminals should do long, hard labor stretches in the pen. No more country clubs. If people want adult freedom, they should accept the consequences of their actions as adults. No more nanny state. Darwin will do the rest, and he is always watching.

 

I am at the point where I think we should legalize it completely. Social use should not carry the risk of destroying a users future.

I enjoy legal alcohol, I don't take drugs and have no desire to do so. I do know people you socially use marijuana that are productive members of society.

I understand the destructive nature that drugs can bare on a life, that is the same type of destruction that alcohol can bring. Society has decided that for some reason that alcohol dependency is a behavior that will be tolerated and dealt with , but drug use won't be tolerated and will be dealt with in the legal system.

The largest winery owner in Illinois was once the largest marijuana smuggler in the United States. The guy is brilliant and somehow was able to avoid the life destroying prosecution. Money was the difference between jail time and freedom, the majority of Americans don't have that defense.

 

Marijuana (possibly even magic mushrooms and peyote) should be legal, but it should be heavily regulated and taxed just like alcohol. Laws should be enforced in a similar way, no driving under the influence, no consumption at work, no sale to minors... etc. Initially at least.

I can't get on board with the legalization of the harder stuff. Personal experience simply won't allow it. I've seen far too many negative things happen as a result of hard drug use. Drugs like meth, crack cocaine, heroin, pcp, lsd, and ecstasy alter the mind (judgment, decision making) too much for the average person to use socially. Some people can maintain, but you can be sure that as soon as more people start to use... and use more often... an exponential increase in completely stupid and unnecessary incidents will start to occur.

I hate the thought of young kids having better access to hard drugs because older family members have them around. I don't like the idea of an even greater portion of the population becoming dependent on a substance of some sort, and the cost of treatment that will inevitably fall back on tax payers. The thought of increased crime and injury/death that will occur is not very appealing at all.

We have enough trouble with alcohol alone as is.

Legalizing drugs might ease the violence associated with the black market... but I don't think that is a good reason to do it. It doesn't justify poisoning an entire nation. I would much rather see wide scale lethal force/death penalty used against those who peddle and profit from their poisons.

In agreement with the legalization of marijuana though, a positive thing all around Tax it, release the incarcerated (pot offenses only) save and make money! Give the people a safer alternative to alcohol.

 

It's a voluntary poisoning. Why not let people do what they want to do? Why not completely eliminate that black market for drugs, why only get rid of part of it? It makes more sense to me to legalize everything and start providing free drug treatment/education than keeping on our current route.

 

People may choose to take drugs, (got to say for the record I don't really consider pot a drug) but the negative effects of widespread increased usage will ripple out to the rest of the community. It will effect everyone, even if it's only in a subtle matter, it will effect more U.S. citizens than the current chaos on the border and in the streets.

There can't be any "free treatment". Trained counselors have to be compensated, facilities used for rehab have to be funded, medications used in addiction treatment have to be produced... the people and facilities that produce the meds need compensation. There is the economic effect of lost productivity due to rehab... and generally not being able to maintain/perform at work because of an addiction to meth, coke, herion, etc. There would be an increase in drug related health issues... it goes on and on.

What is worse in my mind is the social cost. Their would be social destruction of greater quality and quantity, effecting individuals, families, communities... the nation in general.

It's a terrible idea.

 

The best argument I've seen against legalization of drugs is said by police officers across the nation:

"If you think using drugs is a victimless crime, tell that to the children of the users."

Drugs make a person more likely to neglect their children's needs in order to service their own drug using behavior. Drug addicted mom's don't feed and wash their kids. They drop them off on neighbors and family, some of which are no better than the mom and money that should be spent on needs of the child are instead spent on drugs.

Drug legalization will definitely lead to a rise in child neglect cases.

and before you say "oh alcohol! alcohol!" I say this..

There are some hypocrisies that society is willing to accept. To (*)(*)(*)(*) bad if your drug of choice isn't sanctioned. Live with it.

 

Definitely. Drugs alter peoples perception, their judgment, and decision making abilities. Many children would end up paying the price, along with a lot of other people who otherwise wouldn't have been effected by drug usage.

My reference to alcohol was just to demonstrate that we already have a legal and socially accepted substance that causes a lot of problems. The last thing we need now are even more widely available substances with harmful potentials equal to or greater than alcohol.

 

I know "free treatment" isn't free. Obviously it takes money. I think that money would easily be found from tax revenues from drugs as well as massive savings from lower prison populations and less anti-drug actions. We spend over 15 billion (with a b) on fighting drugs. Surely we could have free clinics and reasonable drug education for much less than that.

Oh and yes drug use causes issues, but those issue exist whether they are legal or not. Alcohol and tobacco are harmful (to the individual and society) yet legal, so I don't see where the problem is. I also find it doubtful drug use if really going to see a huge boost. Maybe a bit while it's new but I don't know anyone that's going to start coke or heroin just because it's legal. Legality isn't the reason people don't use drugs, it's the fact that they are drugs.

 

But we have all of those things anyway, and a lot of them are caused directly by the war on drugs, not by the use of drugs themselves. I don't think we would see an increase in drug-related health issues, or a loss of work productivity -- I think we would see an improvement in both of those areas if the drugs in question were legalized.

And especially the social cost -- that's almost entirely due to the war on drugs, and not the drugs themselves. The war on drugs ruins individuals, breaks up families, damages communities and costs the nation dearly.

 

So your argument is "too bad for you if society doesn't agree, liberty is garbage." Nice, thats exactly the stance I expect from the right.

As for the children there's a lot of bad things you can do, so why just pick and choose? Why not just take peoples kids away at birth and throw them into government camp? Surely they're less likely to deal with bad parents, whether those parents be drunk, drugged, or sober. I'd say just leave people alone. We are allowed to raise our own kids are we not? Let people do that. If it's proven they can't, no matter why, then look into taking them away. I guess what I'm saying is it's more important to take care of the individual and the way to do that is to treat each individual case as its own thing rather than support wide sweeping laws. Life isn't that black and white.

 

I disagree. I don't think that's definite at all. I think drug legalization is far more likely to lead to a reduction in child-neglect cases, 'cause there won't be so many parents in prison.

The war on drugs is a much bigger problem than the drugs could ever be. It's the war on drugs that breaks up families and ruins lives. Only rarely is it actually the drugs.

 

Do you not see the problem with that? The perpetual motion of what you suggest?

But by legalizing drugs you are now creating far more exposure, which will lead to more usage, which will lead to increased manifestation of the negative side effects and consequences of drugs.

If alcohol and tobacco were illegal, would we have as many users? Remember, these are addictive substances we are talking about here. Weed on the other hand is really no problem.

I'm sure plenty would start using if there were no legal repercussions or social stigma. A lot of people are scared to lose their jobs (hence their livelihood) over drug related incarceration or failing random drug test.

 

Sorry, but you really need to explain your logic here.

Why would there not be an increase in drug related health issues? Using that line of thought I could say that we are better off having alcohol and tobacco legal because we have fewer health related issues due to it's legality.

Widespread drug usage would for sure lead to more social destruction. Drugs are the root cause, not the war against them. BTW we are talking about the U.S. here, the war against drugs is not causing more social damage in the states than the drugs themselves.

 

I think there are more people neglecting their children everyday due to their drug habit as opposed to children who are suffering because their addicted/dealer parents are locked up.

 

I think that's true, actually -- look at the problems we had with alcohol prohibition. Did it reduce or increase the health-related issues of alcohol?

No. Drugs are not the root cause of the social destruction that results from the war on drugs, where parents are sent to prison or their families fined into poverty, where jobs are lost because someone fails a drug test. The root of that problem is either tyranny or greed, depending on your perspective -- the tyranny of people who think they should be making other peoples drug choices for them, or the greed of certain industries that profit from either the criminalization of drugs or else directly from the war on drugs -- if you want to know why police want drugs to remain illegal, ask them how much of their annual budget comes from the war on drugs.

In America, not to mention everywhere else, the war on drugs is vastly more damaging to society and individuals alike than the drugs themselves could ever be.

 

I see no more problem with what I suggested than having taxes gained from gas, oil, and car products go towards maintaining roads. If use of a product causes a problem why not have tax money gained from it go to solving that problem? Sounds perfectly reasonable to me. Certainly makes more sense than spending billions sending people to jail and trying to unsuccessful fight drug cartels in third world countries.

Usage may go up, but I don't think it's going to have that great of an impact. Sure more people might start using coke and Ecstasy before they goto the club. More people will probably smoke weed as well. I don't really see the problem though. Besides that's what drug treatment is there for. I think it would end up much like heroin treatment (methadone) clinics, except expanded to all drugs. In the end though I don't think it will be that big of a deal. Just using a drug doesn't make you an addict and there's no guarantee people are going to start using drugs they currently don't just because they're are legal. I'd be surprised if there was a sizable portion of the nation whose only reason to not use drugs is legality. The only exception I can think of off the top of my head is the military/government employees. If you're afraid that drug use will make the government will goto hell and nothing will get done, well I mean we're already there.

Last time it was illegal it didn't seem to stop anyone from drinking. All it did was increase violence and turn the average drinking citizen into a criminal. It's not like it was turned over because it was unconstitutional or anything, they had to go back and write an amendment to the constitution to get rid of an amendment to the constitution. The Eighteenth failed so specularly then it just shows the lengths people will go to get their fix and the problems caused by those lengths, much like the current drug war.

Most places that respect their employees don't test. Look at pretty much any office job. Yes if you're driving, working with machines, or in a minimum wage job you could get popped, but that's on the job not the law. If the law were lifted there is no guarantee jobs would suddenly stop testing. I also doubt being a heroin addict is going to become the 'in' thing. I could see coke and weed becoming more popular, but I don't see many people deciding meth is for them.

 

AMEN BRO, that's what I'm talking about

 

Some of the best posts I read in a while.

 

I think there are suicidal minds and healthy minds: there will always be bridges to jump off from, liquid bleach to swallow, my belief is that the hard drugs you mentioned are nothing, absolutely nothing more complex then popularised poisons, that is precisely why people die when they take just a little too much.
We have been taught to believe that government and media in USA are two conflicting forces, but then how come is it that the media keeps promoting political candidates who all admit to having used drugs in the past? (Clinton, Bush, Obama). I believe the way to have young kids avoid using drugs is offer right kind of shows, and those who want to be losers and die, it is nature, I don't think anything can be done, but I am not against the idea of taking away kids from parents who are drug addicts or unstable, actually all you have to do is clip welfare to any drug addicts. too many laws protecting low lives in this country. I believe a child in a normal family, even if its a well run government agency would never want to use drugs or jump off a bridge.

People need love and not seing gangland series on History channel where gangs are funded by drug money.

Can you describe go a little bit into detail how more crime will arise as a result of legalizing mind altering drugs and please try to be clear about it.
I BELIEVE DRUGS ARE PUBLICIZED BY BEING ILLEGALIZED - "LOOK THERE IS A NEW ILLEGAL DRUG OUT THERE THAT EVERYONE IS RAVING ABOUT" - If you dissagree, please prove that meth or other poisons are any more sophisticated then sniffing glue or drinking listerine?

 

THERE IS A BETTER WAY TO FIGHT DRUG WAR - instead of hunting drug users, hunt for trouble makers (who may or may not be using drugs) - place hidden cameras in public drug infested areas, snipe out gangsters who put grafitti, try to tamper with hidden cameras, put healthy convicts into labor camps do not let them be a burden to tax payers or property of private organizations, AND SOMEONE PLEASE EXPLAIN TO ME THIS: How come is it that we have all these gangs on History channel gangland series, how come they can video tape them and yet local police has not sniped them out? please do explain because I am seriously confused. what is going on? is it really so hard for law enforcement to place hidden cameras, gather info and wipe them out or is the law enforcement controled or profiting from this war and wants to keep it going in order to keep their jobs? HOW IS IT THAT PEOPLE LIKE ME WHO ARE FOR LEGALIZATION ARE ALSO THE ONES MORE DETERMINED TO BE MORE STRICT IN DEALING WITH THE GANGSTERS SELLING THIS S**T???

 

Just saw this in another reply and felt I should let you know that as a high school student it was easier for me to get weed, acid, shrooms, meth, heroin, coke, and crack than it was to get alcohol. Cigarettes were easier because some students were 18, but getting alcohol required shoulder tapping bums which usually took between 1 to 3 hours and wasn't a guarantee. Weed, acid, and shrooms were sold at both high schools I was at and the rest could be found downtown without much trouble. If anything legalization would make it more difficult for kids to get access to drugs because it's not so cut and dry to buy legal stuff when you're underage. Drug dealers don't check ID.

 

A screwed up nation is like a screwed up dog - barking at the owner, chasing its tail... - I do not understand why people on welfare are allowed to have cable television, or be able to play video games, I believe it would be common sense that if welfare families need social help, their children be raised by social organizations only allowing welfare parents occasional visits, I do not see how that is catastrophic because I believe creating life is a privilige not a right, too many abuse that privilege at the cost to the children which then become adults and the cycle continnues. If I had a child that i loved and hit hard times, I would try harder to find a job to get my child back full time again and not allow it to be raised by government, at the same time if I'm a drug addict I would find it nearly impossible to find a job and therefore rightfully lose the child I never deserved to have in the first place.

I dissagree. I believe idiotic laws lead to this, and when children are raised by MTV and the rap/pop culture it is just as harmful. or street gangs who are funded by drug money for that matter.