1 of 2

No

Write now Article Tools

"There are always alternatives to war." That is absolutely true. However, it is sad that some people think simply surrendering to the enemy is one of those acceptable alternatives.

Oh, but wait. Some say this is just a "pretend war" with no real enemy. Yet, according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, almost 1.5 million people find themselves in some type of emergency room each year because of illicit drug abuse or misuse. That is just the number of people lucky enough to make it to the emergency room. It does not include those who die either alone or surrounded by other people not cognizant of the need for that person to go to an emergency because they also are under the influence of illicit drugs. There are hundreds of thousands drug-related suicide attempts each year due to the overwhelming incidents of depression associated with the use and abuse of these illicit drugs. If there is no enemy in this war on drugs, then will someone please tell the family and friends of these victims exactly what the cause of their suffering is? Certainly the blame should fall partially on the user, but if drug use was something that could be totally controlled by the user, it wouldn't be called an "addiction." Why would we want to legalize illicit drug use and make it even easier for people to fall victim to this beast?

Ah, yes. That's right. Drug trafficking is a profitable business. Finally, the real reason steps forwards. If there is money to be made, then surely we should dive in head first, sleeves rolled up (after all, that makes it just that much easier to see where to put the needle), and start making that all-mighty dollar. Just imagine the massive influx of money into the economy! But who will step forward to regulate this cash cow?

"Hi. We're from the government, and we're here to help." Massive government regulation is always the key to success. That is why Social Security is such an efficient program and why our country operates on an annual surplus. The previous two sentences are absolutely true, except for the fact that they aren't. Do we really want the government involved in drug trafficking? Pick up a history book sometime and read about how that turned out for other countries through the years. Instead of the sketchy guy on the corner being the heavy hand behind the flow and control of illicit drugs, by all means, put that power, control, and responsibility in the hands of the government.

As for the effects on the economy, what about the negative effects? There is a reason we always hear about someone falling into drugs and losing everything they have, including jobs and families, yet we never really hear about the crack addict who is holding down a full-time job. Unless, of course, we start counting being a crack dealer as a full-time job. Also, consider the "plus" championed by proponents of the legalization and regulation of illicit drugs that by doing so we offer "the ability to recover faster from addictions with proper treatment." We can't simply tell an addict, "Good luck getting over your addiction." It takes the implementation of programs and help groups. Not only are we looking at the costs of regulation, but now we must deal with the costs of the effects. Now, where did that massive influx of money go to?

If we were to simply stop fighting the "instinctive nature in man," then we would have no need for a criminal code at all. Legalize it all. Embrace the weaknesses. After all, hasn't doing so with tobacco and alcohol cut down on instances of lung cancer and alcohol-related abuse and deaths?

Learn more about this author, Vance Mcbrayer.
Click here to send author comments or questions.

Add your voice

Know something about Is there a more efficient and ethical way to reduce drug abuse in the US than by conducting a war on drugs??
We want to hear your view. Write now!