Is there a more efficient and ethical way to reduce drug abuse in the US than by conducting a war on drugs?

Yes

4 of 7

by Steve Lussing

Write now Print Invite a writer™ Add to Favorites RSS Feed Contact this writer

There are practical reasons why we should rethink the current strategies of the government's Drug Enforcement Agency concerning the laws prohibiting controlled substances. Not the least of these is that unacceptable numbers of taxpayer dollars are diverted to the penal system to house, clothe and feed ordinary citizens who have done no greater wrong than to experiment with recreational drugs. Over half of the prison population in the U.S. is there because of a drug-related conviction. America has the highest per capita incarceration rate in the world.

Apparently the lessons learned concerning the prohibition of alcohol during the period from 1920 to 1933 have not been properly absorbed. Between the years 1900 and 1948, seven nations attempted to impose severe restrictions on the use of alcohol to the extent that laws were passed making consumption illegal. In all cases, those laws were repealed as a matter of common sense. This begs the question, "Why persecute marijuana users?".

There is an automatic assumption that drug use is drug abuse, and yet we do not automatically associate alcohol use with alcohol abuse. All arguments which condone moderate consumption of alcohol can be put forward for the moderate use of marijuana. A progressive and open-minded generation perceives marijuana as innocuous and benign. It is physically non-addictive, unlike alcohol. It cannot debilitate a person and make him dysfunctional the way that alcohol can when consumed in large amounts. No rational person would debate on the side for the prolific consumption of marijuana any more than one would argue for the prolific consumption of alcohol yet I would wager that of the two groups of habitual users abuse of alcohol prevails over the abuse of pot - and alcohol is legal.

There is far less involvement of organized crime in marijuana than in hard drugs like cocaine and heroin especially on the international scale because the means and wherewithal to obtain seeds and for the ability to grow marijuana for personal or small business purposes exists everywhere locally. Furthermore, there is far greater physical risk involved in transporting marijuana versus transporting cocaine or heroin when the dollar value per unit volume is considered. That is a viable argument for the case that organized crime will not stand for decriminalization of marijuana because if that money currently budgeted toward enforcement of marijuana laws were to be diverted to the cocaine and heroin budget we would see a genuine shortage in the supply of hard drugs and a considerable increase in their seizure and in the imprisonment of the principles involved. The mob lobbies for the continued criminalization of the marijuana trade.

If only a small amount of the money currently supporting the prison population who live there on marijuana-related convictions were directed toward the rehabilitation of substance abusers from glue sniffers to alcoholics and junkies we would see a genuine impact on society therefrom. The result would be greater economic productivity because there are a large number of employable and skilled people in prison who would be better served by being directed elsewhere once their charges are dropped and their records cleared. All this means that the laws should be changed to place marijuana under the same umbrella as alcohol and guns. The sacred constitutional right to bear arms is responsible for the population of Detroit, which currently stands at a surprisingly low 990,000. That is because over a million of Detroit's people have been murdered since 1950. These numbers speak for themselves. And yet guns are legal. Marijuana is illegal. Where is the sanity?

Learn more about this author, Steve Lussing.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.