Politics, News & Issues >
Drug Laws & Prevention
Get a Widget for this title
RSS FeedThe continued epidemic of drug use means we've lost the war on drugs
Results so far:
| Disagree | 44% | 226 votes | Total: 518 votes | |
| Agree | 56% | 292 votes |
Disagree
Write now
Print
Invite a writer™
Add to FavoritesStating that we have won or lost the war on drugs is suggesting that this issue can be easily defined in black and white terms. This is not the case for a variety of reasons. First, we can not win or lose a war on drugs because there is no defined enemy. The term "drugs" is a very general term. Pharmaceutical companies legally distribute some of the most dangerous, addictive, and abused substances in society. However, they are not deemed the enemy and are often close friends with politicians. Doctors, who are sought for medical advice and help, are wined and dined by these companies and write prescriptions based on these relationships. This is not to infer that these parties actually are the enemy, many prescription drugs are of great benefit and are essential in certain medical situations. But the fact is that they are not discussed during the war on drugs, and therefore inhibit accurate measurements of winning and losing.
Next, one of the most overlooked factors in the war on drugs is the number of jobs it creates in the US. It is sad to say, but rather then attempting to educate and prevent the pain that others will endure through drug use, individuals who use drugs are exploited for the benefit of others. DEA, DEU, specified police narcotic units, entire task forces, and a variety of other organizations are given enormous budgets at the expense of taxpayers. Then, rather than stopping drug use, the make arrests. By doing this they take individuals away from their jobs and families with no regard to the emotional damage incurred by the families. This could lead to the individual losing his job, the family losing their means of support, and inevitably creating a "viscous circle" which often leads to criminal acts that stem from desperate situations, not dangerous people. As this occurs, more arrests are made, and prisons are built. Prisons are on of the largest sources of employment in the US. Entire towns are employed by state prisons. Politicians lobby to have prisons built so that they can create more jobs. As a result, the financing for the drug war goes towards placing non violent individuals in prisons, again at the expense of taxpayers. Moreover, this has no impact on drug use in society because there is not enough funding for education and prevention programs. This means that once the non-violent individual is incarcerated, he will be immediately replaced in the drug market by another user.
It may sound like I'm suggesting that we are losing, but I'm not. I'm suggesting that we are going about it the wrong way. we can not win or lose because we are not fighting anything. We are profiting from the drug trade more so then drug dealers and we are doing so at the expense of people that the war on drugs should be helping.
It's easy to look at certain statistics or see stories on the news and declare that we are losing the drug war, but in fact, the drug use can not be defined by quantitative measurements. Many people may disagree with this, but attempting to measure drug use on such scales is counter productive. They simply do not take into considerations the reasons for drug use in the first place; which is exactly what must be looked at. Drugs have always been around, and in many cases, are distributed legally (i.e. pharmaceutical companies , alcohol companies, ect.). Some drugs even have practical uses and are essential in certain medical situations. Given that drugs, in one form or another, will always be present, the best strategy for minimizing drug use is addressing the issues that first cause it. Also, alternatives and help for current users can facilitate recovery. Once the market is weaker, then and only then will the presence of drugs diminish.
Learn more about this author, Kevin Pack.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
Agree
The war on drugs was lost the day it began. The main reason for the failure of this "war" was the basis upon which it was and is being fought. Abraham Lincoln was of the opinion, and I am paraphrasing here; that prohibition of any kind ran exactly contrary to the constitution. Most Americans realize that truth at a fundamental level and bristle at the idea of their government, which they pay hard earned money to support, attempting to legislate morality. The epidemic of controlled substance use and abuse will continue and will never be halted in the United States.
Making Americans aware of the dangers connected with the use of any drug, legal or illegal, has never proved to halt it's use in the population. We have known for a very very long time now that cigarettes and cigars are killers and still the companies that make those products do a thriving business. It's clear that alcohol is highly addictive and can cause any number of illnesses and yet there are more micro-breweries and liquor companies than there ever were before and they all seem to being doing a great deal of business with the American people. And the advertising budgets for these alcohol producers are growing by the day. There was, of course, a noble experiment in the twenties and thirties dealing with prohibition of alcohol that should, although it clearly didn't, teach us that prohibition cannot work. It can only provide the climate that fosters the creation of "black markets" and fertile ground for the criminal element to harvest.
Making any drug illegal and placing severe fines and jail times on offenses connected to that particular drug has done nothing to stop the use and abuse of drugs and only served to fill our prisons to overflowing with those convicted of trafficking in the drug. You can't, it appears, scare people into a morality that simply doesn't fit their particular wants or needs. People want to enjoy their drug of choice and will continue to do so regardless of anything that the government tries to do to stop them. Regardless of the millions of dollars and thousands of lives that have been wasted in an attempt to make people conform to a policy that is, as Mr. Lincoln thought, a violation of the constitution the problem rages on and is probably worse than it ever was before.
This "war" has raged on longer than any war fought between nations in all the history of the Earth and it has been lost. We have, on more than one occasion, punished the farmers of other countries by putting their crops to the torch in an attempt to force our will upon them. We have taken from the impoverished third world farmer any chance that he had to feed his family in order to insure that a Wall Street stock broker can't pick up a dime bag of coke at lunch time. We have seized the ships of other nations when we have found drugs aboard them in an attempt to insure that the high school kids can't smoke a joint between periods at school. And yet for all of this we have produced nothing but a very healthy underground of drug dealers that can make themselves rich, remain untaxed and afford the best weapons money can buy in order to protect themselves from our law enforcement officers and each other. And every time that we place another one of them in jail we see that there are ten more ready to replace him.
The only real, viable solution to the problem is to legalize drugs across the board and tax them heavily. Taking the profit margin out of the scenario for the street dealers and allowing some viable governmental control of the trade as a legal industry which can produce tax dollars for our government to use on more worth while projects such as reforming health care and balancing our budget. Keeping the drug trade a legal business allows the government to legally regulate all aspects of production, quality standards and industry practices regarding areas such as advertisement. The laws that cover the use of alcohol can easily be extended to cover the use of any other drug removing the need for any long and drawn out arguing over how to police their sale and use should they ever become legal.
Learn more about this author, Nouri Arif.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
Difference of opinion? Debate now.
- Drug Laws & Prevention
- Should Springfield de-criminalize minor offenses - like possession of less than 2.5 grams of marijuana - as a means of keeping its branch libraries open?
- Should a Constitutional amendment have been required to prohibit today's illicit drugs?
- Should the US government be in the business of telling doctors what they can prescribe to their patients?
- Is there a more efficient and ethical way to reduce drug abuse in the US than by conducting a war on drugs?
- Should welfare recipients be tested for drugs?
