War on Drugs Cant Be Won, According to Global Leaders

[CRedskinsRule]

I love gov't spending, and GMScud is an awesome mod. (one of these statements is not true)

[JoeRedskin]

Damn, I thought you liked GMScud. You're a hard, hard man. But then, you're probably stoned and texting as you drive home right now.

[CRedskinsRule]

Why you gotta be putting my private life out there. I'm on the way to pick up my gov't check at the same time. It's all good.


[/sarcasm]

[MTK]

So back on topic, is the war on drugs worth it or not? I think it's obviously been proven to be a giant failure, so what's the next step?

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

So back on topic, is the war on drugs worth it or not? I think it's obviously been proven to be a giant failure, so what's the next step?

Your original statements are on point. Legalize weed (age 21), tax the $hit out of it. Illegal disti should get the same punishment as illegal cig disti. Possesion of hard drugs (coke, heroin, meth, etc.) mandatory treatment then escalate to criminal penalities. Disti of hard drugs...nail 'em just like now.

Declare a state of emergency along the border with Mexico and deploy troops, not National Guard, active duty troops. First destroy (lock-up or kill) the gangs and drug cartels in U.S., next use diplomacy (major financial sanctions) to get the Mexican gov't to clean up its act and fight the battle on their side of the border. With the firepower of the U.S. military behind them, they'll be more likely to stand up to the drug cartels.

Tax revenue will help our financial situation, less folks in jail decreases gov't spending and puts more people into the workforce/economy, lives will be saved on both sides of the border. The folks who want to smoke weed will still do it, those that don't won't. I don't believe there will be any statistically verifiable difference in overall U.S. health.

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

So back on topic, is the war on drugs worth it or not? I think it's obviously been proven to be a giant failure, so what's the next step?

Not worth it. I mean prohibition didn't work and I see this war on drugs headed in the right direction.

[Dirtbag59]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

So back on topic, is the war on drugs worth it or not? I think it's obviously been proven to be a giant failure, so what's the next step?

Just out of curiosity do you mean virtually every part of the "war?" Or just the part that puts users in jail?

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

So back on topic, is the war on drugs worth it or not? I think it's obviously been proven to be a giant failure, so what's the next step?

its not worth and its really obvious.

The next step is changing perception of the issue. Government needs to look at it (drug use) is a health issue/epidemic not a crime issue. The black market creates the criminal element.

Im more of a decriminalization of marijuana similar to the netherlands than full out legalization. But id take full legalization vs a criminal record for a joint = that sh*t is absolutely effing crazy. Hallucigens, some designers drugs decriminalize for those too.

I would not be in favor of any type of legalization of herion, cocaine or crystal methamphetimine. The potential devastation to communities would be horrible.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

its not worth and its really obvious.

The next step is changing perception of the issue. Government needs to look at it (drug use) is a health issue/epidemic not a crime issue. The black market creates the criminal element.

Im more of a decriminalization of marijuana similar to the netherlands than full out legalization. But id take full legalization vs a criminal record for a joint = that sh*t is absolutely effing crazy. Hallucigens, some designers drugs decriminalize for those too.

I would not be in favor of any type of legalization of herion, cocaine or crystal methamphetimine. The potential devastation to communities would be horrible.

Agreed with all your points.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

its not worth and its really obvious.

The next step is changing perception of the issue. Government needs to look at it (drug use) is a health issue/epidemic not a crime issue. The black market creates the criminal element.

Im more of a decriminalization of marijuana similar to the netherlands than full out legalization. But id take full legalization vs a criminal record for a joint = that sh*t is absolutely effing crazy. Hallucigens, some designers drugs decriminalize for those too.

I would not be in favor of any type of legalization of herion, cocaine or crystal methamphetimine. The potential devastation to communities would be horrible.

Good points.

Portugal has taken to viewing addiction as a health issue rather than a crime issue, as you say, and has done some serious decriminalization. Contrary to the arguments of naysayers, they have found that decriminalization actually makes drug use, and especially drug abuse, go down.

[JoeRedskin]

It seems to me that switching from criminalizing to regulating drugs will be a major undertaking in terms of the structural reboot. Laws will need to be changed, policies develeped and regulations written. Then of course their are the funding issues - certain vested interests won't want to "close down" and hand over their jobs to a bunch of bureaucratic regulators.

Part of the problem in "decriminalizing drugs" is that it is one of these things where the devil really is in the details. All of the steps to do so require developing consensus and detailed decision making that would be difficult to attain in the best of times. In the current political atmosphere of combat politics, I am thinking it is downright impossible ("My opponent, JoeShmoe (no relation to JoeRedskin) wants to legalize drugs - your neighbor's house could be a crack house!!!" etc., etc.). It is politically easier to simply maintain the status quo, even if it has some unsatisfactory results.

For all these reasons and for some that have been said before, we are simply never going to "decriminilize drugs". Law enforcement will always be present at some level. In Portugal, usage, possession and aquisition are decriminalized but, apparently, not sale or production. Portugal 2001 decriminalization of drug use - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In the Netherlands, it is still a misdeamenor to possess cannabis or produce it for personal use.

I agree the current enforcement system has serious flaws. I just don't know that there is any easy answer to fix it. I think the start may be to allow possesion, in home use (and I mean "in home" - my porch is literally 2 feet away from my neighbors, I don't want him smoking pot while my kids are eating dinner) and production for personal use of cannabis below a certain THC level. I thinks this will unclog some courts and stop creating a class of youths with criminal records. It won't, however, stop the crack heads, cocaine cartels or the Afghani opium trade.

Again, I have no problem with the general concept of not clogging the courts with possession of pot crimes. I think I may even agree to it as far as possession of crack - but not sure on that one. I just don't think "decriminalize it" is the panacea some seem to think it is.

[MTK]

Nobody said a fix is easy, but the current way is seriously flawed, costly, and ineffective. Something needs to change. Obviously a gradual change is necessary. Start with legalizing weed and go from there. I think that's the route we're slowing heading anyway.

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Nobody said a fix is easy, but the current way is seriously flawed, costly, and ineffective. Something needs to change. Obviously a gradual change is necessary. Start with legalizing weed and go from there. I think that's the route we're slowing heading anyway.

I am pretty much in agreement with you as to this statement.

[Beemnseven]

Legalize 'em -- all of them. It'll never happen, of course.

The War on Drugs is government's permission slip to snoop on our finances, to stop us if we're carrying too much cash, seize that cash, to burst through our front door in the middle of the night, to shoot our dog, to search our cars, ... on and on ...

It's also been very effective at chipping away at that pesky 4th amendment. Plus it ensures that cash continues to flow to the police departments, gives lots of government tax-feeders with plenty to do (not to mention the police union reps employed). It gives a reason for SWAT teams to exist -- making sure that after-market paramilitary equipment doesn't go to waste. The asset forfeiture laws give police departments all sorts of cool toys to play with, without even needing a guilty verdict preceding the forfeiture of the toys... It keeps the prison popluation up, keeps prison guards employed...

In other words, this endless, highly expensive "War" is just another way to keep the serfs in line, and provides the justification for tax dollars to continue to be sucked up by government.

It's a HUGE racket, and politicians aren't about to give that up.

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

Legalize 'em -- all of them. It'll never happen, of course.

I think marijuana should be legalized, not any hardcore drugs. I do however think we should decriminalize possession of hardcore drugs (anything other than selling).

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

The War on Drugs is government's permission slip to snoop on our finances, to stop us if we're carrying too much cash, seize that cash, to burst through our front door in the middle of the night, to shoot our dog, to search our cars, ... on and on ...

You are a bit off on this. Actually, the war on drugs is a effort on the behalf of lobbyist from the Tobacco, Alcohol, and other pharmaceutical industry. Know who the Partnership for a Drug-Free America is? Up until 1997, they were receiving millions of dollars from the alcohol, tobacco and pharmaceutical companies. Now, they only take checks from the pharmaceutical companies...lol OOOOoohh...the irony.

Pot Boiler

For a group fighting drug abuse, the Partnership has taken cash from some odd parties—including American Brands (Jim Beam whiskey), Philip Morris (Marlboro and Virginia Slims cigarettes, Miller beer), Anheuser Busch (Budweiser, Michelob, Busch beer), R.J. Reynolds (Camel, Salem, Winston cigarettes), as well as pharmaceutical firms Bristol Meyers-Squibb, Merck & Company and Proctor & Gamble (Marin Institute Backgrounder, 2/97).

The Partnership recently announced it will quit its alcohol and tobacco habit but will continue to mainline pharmaceutical checks (Village Voice, 3/12/97). And its silence continues on America’s deadliest drug problems: tobacco (400,000 annual deaths), alcohol (100,000, including 20,000 from drunken driving), and pharmaceuticals (6,000 to 9,000).

It's always been about money and greed and keeping their foothold in the market of consumers. It's never been about stopping drugs or helping the people.

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

It's also been very effective at chipping away at that pesky 4th amendment.

The War on Terrorism has eroded more civil liberties than anything. LOL PATRIOT ACT.

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

It's a HUGE racket, and politicians aren't about to give that up.

It is a huge racket, and politicians are going to keep taking those lobbyist checks to keep that policy intact.