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

The war on drugs is a joke and a money spinner for all the corporations who provide all the equipment used to combat it. If you really want to stop all the deaths then just legalise everything and tax it. If it is there all the time in the shops then less people will actually partake as it will not be cool anymore and those who do will pay taxes on it so that when they need help they have already paid for it..To just go on trying to fight against drugs is a joke..

 

The major down side to prohibition was that people were making alcohol out of some pretty nasty stuff. Still the point is moot. Since alcohol is legal, there are far more users equating to a greater number of health problems.

Spend some time here http://drugabuse.gov/infofacts/infofactsindex.html

Even if things like meth are legally manufactured in controlled environments with quality controls... people will still over dose and die. People will still become addicted. People will still go on binges, freak out and do crazy things. Even more INNOCENT drug free people will be effected.

I'm speaking from experience when I say that a lot of children are better off without their drug abusing/dealing parents. Having an addicted parent hauled off to prison can be a blessing for some kids, a step in the right direction. (Now please keep in mind that I'm not talking about marijuana here) As someone who has done ample "experimenting" with a list of different substances I can say with confidence that the people I've dealt with in obtaining said substances were not fit for parenthood. Legalizing everything will not change that.

I still don't understand how you can make this claim.

http://www.justice.gov/ndic/pubs11/18862/impact.htm

 

I can't believe I'm having to explain this.

Hard drugs effect a persons judgment, and ability to make good decisions. If one becomes addicted to an illicit substance, whether it be legal or not, they are willing to do things they wouldn't normally in order fuel that addiction. Some addicts are willing to steal or commit violence in order to obtain money for drugs.

The link between meth/crack cocaine/pcp and violence is well known to anyone who hasn't been living under a rock. Drugs like this can make one paranoid and actively violent. Not just towards random people, but towards family and friends.

Once again... legalize it and you will have more users, and you will have more crime.

As I said earlier... alcohol is bad enough, any of the hard drugs we are talking about can create negative results as bad if not worse than alcohol.

http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/publications/factsht/crime/index.html

Oh, I've seen huffers btw. I've been told that the high really isn't that desirable, otherwise I'm sure that all chemicals used to create the high would need to be replaced by some other chemical that didn't produce the same effect. I'm sure you could find stats comparing the number of huffers vs. meth/crack addicts... the overall usage and net results of... no comparison I'm sure. And listerene? That's what hardcore alkis drink when they are hard up.... whats your point?

 

Well thats your story. As a kid it was real easy for my friends and I to get alcohol... easier than scoring a sack. My older relatives had it... my friends older relatives had it... and it wasn't THAT difficult to get someone to buy it for us.

I will bet anything that if all illicit substances are legalized... in no time at all you will be reading stories about kids finding their parents stash and emulating what they see their parents doing... often with terrible results I'm sure. God forbid a toddler find and eat even a quarter gram of meth, crack, or herion.

 

God forbid a toddler find bleach, Ajax, or a plastic bag. Come one now, many modern day items can kill children.

 

So you are comparing cleaning products to illegal, habit forming substances that most people use (other than addiction) for the purpose of escaping reality or self medicating?

You are comparing cleaning products to substances that negatively effect mental, physical, social, and economic health?

And since you acknowledge that there are already a plethora of things that can harm an infant in the home, are you suggesting it's okay to add another?

Legalizing marijuana is fine, it's consumption has been linked to zero deaths. It's practically harmless. Not so for the rest of the stuff.

 

Granny says, "Kill all dem Hispexican drug dealers...

... kill `em all, each an' ever' last one o' dem...

... `specially the ones with dem loud boomin' car stereos...

... let God sort `em out."

 

I already stated that the habit forming comes from publicizing and promoting certain types of these poisons - if they would promote bleach as a drug, same idiots would be crazy to get bleach. I do not care about idiots and I care more about exterminating all drug dealers then DEA, because I as a tax payer am losing to it, they as an agency who gets paid to fight them want to keep their jobs with benefits.

 

When it comes it to stuff that's bad for children to eat, yes. You were saying 'god forbid a toddler get into drugs', I'm saying your kitchen is already a toddler death zone so that's not really an argument.

Yes it's ok to add another thing that people could die from. You don't have to use it, you have a choice. You have that choice right now! At least if it were legal you wouldn't have to worry about strangely strong batches of heroin coming out and killing lots of heroin users over night. I'm sure Pfizer would have better quality control than the Taliban does.

It's not like by making drugs illegal they don't exist. If this were true then drug prohibition would actually be a viable option. In the end though drugs do exist and locking people up for harming themselves through drug use, well it just doesn't make sense.

 

So what if you stated it? It's a bullcrap statement. The "habit forming" comes about naturally because these substances are addictive. If meth, coke...etc were not dangerous and addictive there wouldn't be any need for them to be illegal... there wouldn't be any need for law enforcement to counter it's proliferation.

If bleach produce mind altering effects and was addictive... then idiots would be crazy to get bleach.

 

sex is addictive, so is jerking off, sniffing glue are you sure is not similar effect of getting high by smoking crack?

By the way, don't you think that to fight drug use we should focus on the CAUSE WHY people are using drugs rather then arresting them FOR the use? I am tired of hearing what a monster Hitler was, nazis this and nazis that but I never hear WHY this stuff hapened and it never ends as a result - this hatered for the Jews - it continnues. I think if we want to solve the problem we should find the root cause of it. sometimes it lies much closer within then we are taught to think.

 

Christ you got to be kidding me. Nobody needs crack, meth, herion, etc... er wait... unless they are addicted. There is no need for legalized hard drugs laying around the house. At least cleaning products serve a useful purpose.

Right, and legalizing will only increase usage/addiction followed by the endless chain of related negative side effects. A solution to a problem doesn't have to be absolute to make it viable.

Alcohol is legal, regulated, and produced to certain standards. Alcohol poisoning still happens, sometimes resulting in death. How? Well, people over indulge. People over indulge and end up in fights, commiting sexual abuse or being a victim of, wreck cars killing themselves or others...

More people will be effected by legalizing drugs, both directly and indirectly, opposed to the way things currently are.

Legalizing hard drugs so that a greater number of people will be needlessly effected in a negative way doesn't make much sense.

 

Hey good point. I know I consider violence or theft when I can't get me a tube of glue. And oh man!!! If I can't jerk one off.... look out!!! I'll go into withdraws, my personality flips poles, my family wonders what happen to the person I use to be... eventually I get put in rehab... time and time again... because I'm so addicted to masturbation. What a vicious cycle it is.

That could be done without legalizing.

A sure sign that someone is grasping when they randomly start throwing Hitlers name around.

 

So the only things in a house should be things you need? Who decides what you need? Society? If society deems something is unnecessary should I go to jail if I have it in my house? Why?

Do you have evidence that if drugs were legal there would be more problems than there are now? I mean you'd pretty much overnight end gang and cartel violence due to drugs. Look at alcohol and what happened when prohibition was lifted. You also don't have family members being thrown in jail for drug use, that's certainly disruptive. So yeah, a few more addicts vs continued violence and unnecessary detention of US citizens, I'll take the addicts.

Yep and the same thing currently happens with drugs. What I'm saying is that if you regulate the amount of active ingredient in drugs accidental ODs are less likely. There will always be idiots who OD, but atleast when you set a standard amount the average drug addict isn't going to get some super pure (*)(*)(*)(*) that kills them even though they took what they thought was a regular dose.

Why would a greater number of people needlessly be negatively effected? Are you gunna start shooting smack when it's legal? No? Same here! Everyone isn't just sitting on the edge of their seat waiting for heroin to be legal so they can go shoot up. If they really want to shoot up they're doing it now anyways. In any case I think it makes more sense to let people run their own lives and make their own choice. So what if they choose wrong, people choose wrong all the time. I also see no reason to continue to support a violent black market. How many more people need to die needlessly because we as a society have decided to use violence in our opposition of people doing what they want to do to themselves?

 

Didn't say that, didn't even insinuate it.

You do... but to a point.

Once your decisions start effecting everyone else. Why not?

It depends on what it is and why it's illegal.

It's sad that I should have to present some, common sense should be sufficient. But here you go http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/debate/myths/myths4.htm Please read the whole thing and give it some thought rather than finding one little thing you think is wrong with it, then coming back here and

No you wouldn't. And besides, not like all those involved with the drug trade would decide to go straight and clean up their act. A lot of them would find another criminal means of making money. Hell, some cartels might devise ingenious ways to compete with legal U.S. producers of hard substances. Maybe they could provide it cheaper, maybe they could provide a more potent product than the regulated producers are willing to make.

And what? Alcohol became legal and happily ever after? No. It might have decreased the violence related to the black market, but increased the amount of users, thus increasing the rate of incidence related to it's negative side effects. The black market mainly effects those who are involved.

People trying to "raise" children while supporting their drug habit, or while under the influence of meth, crack cocaine, heiron, pcp, lsd, ecstasy... etc is certainly disruptive. That is no environment for children.

Yep, and since there would be more users using more often there would be more ODs, addictions, health related issues, need for treatment... etc When someone becomes addicted to something like meth, more and more of the drug is needed to obtain the desired effect. If legal producers make a "safe" product, people will figure out how to concentrate it or find a more potent source to find satisfaction... until they eventually hit rock bottom or die.

Speaking of which... wouldn't that be disruptive to a family? Or not?

BECAUSE THERE WOULD BE MORE USERS... AND AS A RESULT OF THAT... nevermind, I've said it umpteen times now.

First, "our" violence in opposition to hard substances mainly effects those who are directly involved with poisoning others while making a profit. And I could hardly give a (*)(*)(*)(*) about those folks. I don't care how bad the economy is... or whatever other b.s. excuse one wants to use to justify selling narcotics. Most of those who sell drugs are simply losers, part of a culture of absolute stupidity who feel entitled... feel that somehow it's alright for them to make their money from the stupidity and addiction of others. Not that many offenders are dying anyways... well mostly at the hands of each other. That is not a good enough reason to poison the entire nation for the sake of a few idiots.

Well, feel free to reply, but I'm done discussing this with you. You're arguments are lame and illogical, you'll undoubtedly keep finding more weak points of debate that are hardly worth responding to.

Read the link.

 

So did people stop using alcohol when it was prohibited? Did people stop smoking pot when it was prohibited? Have people ever stopped using any drug ever because of legality?

Which would be the same as now, but things would be better because we wouldn't have the war on drugs to contend with as well, it being its own problem. The war on drugs is like chemotherapy -- sometimes it's worse than the disease. In the case of its modern incarnation, it's pretty much always worse than the disease -- in fact, it makes the disease worse.

Parents should raise their children. Not the state.

 

Sure you did, here:

"There is no need for legalized hard drugs laying around the house. At least cleaning products serve a useful purpose."

You're saying that because there is no need for drugs to be around the house, they shouldn't be there. Cleaning supplies on the other hand have a purpose that you see as reasonable, thus should be there.

So society matters more than the individual. Also drug use is not guaranteed to affect everyone else and even if it does so what? You can do a great many legal things that affect other people as well, including drinking.

Read the first study, the heroin one, it was a blur of nothing. I'm not going down the rest of that page unless you find a specific example that's worth while. Summary of what I read:

*England decriminalized heroin.

*This decriminalization only applied to people who were addicts and getting prescriptions from doctors

*Since prescribed heroin is being sold on the streets as doctors give out huge amounts, heroin is put in, and likely distributed from, clinics.

*There is an increase in heroin addicts by 100%.

*Heroin is replaced with methadone

*Most addicts avoid the clinic because methadone doesn't screw them up like heroin does.


So what have we learned? Well we learned that prescribing heroin to a heroin addict to help them get over their heroin addiction doesn't work. We also learned that heroin addicts prefer heroin to methadone because heroin gets them high. Another lesson is that if you over prescribe drugs that people will sell them on the black market.

So is this an argument against the legalization of drugs, no not really. It's an argument as to how addictive heroin is and how drug users prefer to get messed up when they take drugs rather than not. What's the point if you don't get high? Really though this is an argument for the need to improve treatment methods for heroin addicts, it really has nothing to do with what would happen if heroin were legal.

Sure they'd probably try to go to something else, but they wouldn't be making their cash off selling drugs in the US. You probably won't end them all together but when you take their main source of income away it'll be interesting to see what happens and where they go. At current the black market we've created provides such a ridiculous income with no overhead that it's insane. You take that away, things are going to break. Not every individual is going to just turn into some upstanding citizen but they're not all going to keep working for the gang for free.

So more people drinking is worse than people being shot?

We already have laws in place to deal with this. Legalizing drugs doesn't mean it'll be legal for mommy to store her needles in her infant.

Happens with alcohol as well. What can I say, people make bad decisions. I don't see how the current system is helping that at all. Currently what help do you get when you do hit rock bottom? Maybe you just goto jail. Why not change the system so you can get free treatment at any time? Certainly sounds more reasonable to me, for us to try to help people get over their problems rather than hide arrest them for being addicted to drugs.

Daddy banging the waitress is disruptive as well, shall we go back to locking people up for adultery? Why all this concern about families anyways, do individuals not matter? It's not like every drug user has a wife and kids.

You automatically assume we're going to have this huge surge in addicts and I don't understand why. Do you know people who don't do heroin only because it's illegal? I don't. There are many reasons to not use drugs other than their legality.

My arguments are logical and reasonable. Your arguments are based on you not liking drugs and your love of the use of violence against people selling a product others enjoy.

 

After all your effort in disecting my post nothing you said makes any sense what so ever.

 

By the way, do not assume that I am ever for allowing endangerment of other people - meth labs where gas can be transmitted to others near by I never said that is ok, and I am also for banning smoking in public places for that reason, I believe it is good that smoking is not allowed in train and bus stations. I meant legalizing substances that are harmless to others - instead of running beer commercials government could put mandatory (like taxes) drug awareness commercials during superbowl. I would be for that.

 

Hard drugs are too dangerous to legalize, if we legalized them, society would fall apart, people would turn from productive citizens into addicts. And if we even limit the amount you can sell a person(which i believed in in the past), it would just create an even bigger illegal market, because more people would be addicts.

Marijuana should be legal, but hard drugs are dangerous to the productivity of society. And as for darwinism, that is unjust and cruel to the addict, darwinism states that we should leave handicaped people in the streets, and let people kill themselves, which is incredibly cruel, a darwinist theory on legalization of drugs is no diferent. Legalizing hard drugs is like legalizing suicide. The best we can do is try to eliminate poverty and offer legitimate methods of making an income to people who lean towards selling drugs, and offer the social programs to support them in those indeavers.

 

Hey, give the rationality a break would you?

 

Late to the game here but here goes:

First of all while I'm not totally comfortable with making some drugs legal and leaving others illegal, I do understand the difference in potential harm between meth and cocaine, for example, and pot or mushrooms. But keeping them illegal is just going to focus the bad guys on that new, smaller chunk of the market.

I think the first thing to do is completely decriminalize possession for personal use. Of all drugs. This isn't legalization - I'll get to that in a second. But I don't even recognize the government's right to tell anyone what they can and can't ingest, so let's start with decriminalization. Some stuff is going to stay illegal, however. But first, pot.

Legalize pot and treat it like booze. Import the good stuff and export our good stuff. Simple.

Keep trafficking and distribution for the rest of the drugs illegal. Big quantities will put people in jail. And for possession, although no criminal charges would ever be filed, large fines will be the deterrent. So if you get caught with coke you're going to pay a few hundred bucks, but no jail or record.

 

What are you talking about? Darwinism say nothing of the sort.

Weirdo.

 

We should not fight the drug war. It is unsuccessful because of the amount of money that passes hands is enough for people to risk prison. How many SES'rs at the DEA have been caught with their hands in the cookie jar making millions helping one cartel or the next? There's too much money to do away with it.

Add to that the contractor based prison system and how much it costs to feed, clothe, AND provide armed guards for non-violent offenders. It costs more per day to keep someone in prison than it does to house someone even at a rehab as expensive as Betty Ford.

Add to that the fact that it is absolutely immoral to try and tell someone what they can do with their own body and it becomes a no-brainer.

Punish people who are intoxicated or under the influence who drive. Punish people who steal. Punish the anscillary crime.

 

Wow, I just read this...suicide is legal. Suicide should always be legal. It should be legal to be overweight. It should be legal to choose not to go through chemotherapy. It should be legal to live your life the way you choose.

And as for "hard drugs"...it's just too lucrative for drug dealers BECAUSE of the black market. 500% markup on heroin, 800% markup on meth, 200% markup on cocaine...That's certainly better than going into business to sell cars or vitamins.