Whatever happened to the War on Drugs?

[bonoman]

Has anyone else noticed that the US always has to be waring againist something. Drugs, Sex, Terrorism...

The US thinks they are the great GOOD and must be fighting evil. Even though drugs at a small level are nowhere evil.

At a small level drugs can be very usefull and medicanal. Weed is one of the most harmless drugs. But Countries keep trying to fight againist when they should be focusing on the drugs that are expensive and that give the dealers much more money. Fighting weed at a large level is a waste of time. It will NEVER be contained or limited. Its actually comical the money that is thrown at the War on Drugs. It was the laughing stock of the world. Drugs will never go away. We must all accept it. But what we shouldnt accept is the availability of hard drugs (cocaine, crack, herion, speed, meth) these are the drugs that kill. The drugs that suck you in the first time. The drugs that cost much more and that are more profitable for the manufactures.

If i had my way we would de-criminalize weed and focus directly on the drugs that are actually harmfull.

------------------
Running to Stand Still-"you gotta cry without weeping, talk without speaking, scream without raising your voice."

"we're not burning out we're burning up...we're the loudest folk band in the world!"-Bono

[Anthony]

Speedracer;

Yes, marijuana does of course present many dangers, however, other drugs present even deadlier dangers. I think marijuana should be legalised so that the government can concentrate its resources on the particularly harmful drugs. After all, some European countries legalise marijuana and they have a better handling on drug problems than most countries. ie - Netherlands.

Ant.

[speedracer]

Originally posted by Anthony:
Speedracer;

Yes, marijuana does of course present many dangers, however, other drugs present even deadlier dangers. I think marijuana should be legalised so that the government can concentrate its resources on the particularly harmful drugs. After all, some European countries legalise marijuana and they have a better handling on drug problems than most countries. ie - Netherlands.

Ant.

Ant,

My post was a light-hearted reference to Afroman's single "Because I Got High". (Didn't it hit #1 in the UK?)

Seriously though, I agree that other drugs (most notoriously, tobacco) are more dangerous than marijuana, but I still think marijuana needs to be regulated.

[Anthony]

Oh yeah, speedracer, I remember now, and I remember why I didn't get it the first time; I switched the radio off or changed the channel when I started hearing it, it really pissed me off.

Ant.

[Klodomir]

I was gonna respond to this thread, but I got high.

[brettig]

Originally posted by Klodomir:
I was gonna respond to this thread, but I got high.

classic Klod.

in answer to this question- wasnt George Bush snr. the instigator? i guess it faded like he did...its not something that the media would sustain on the front pages for long periods, so governments lose interest...

[sv]

The War on Drugs is and has always been a FRONT. Its goal is to justify U.S. support for brutal counterinsurgency programs and bioterrorism in Central and South America, which in turn enable us to keep "friends" of our business interests in power. Unfortunatly for the people living in those countries, these friends nearly always turn out to thugs, mass murderers, and human rights abusers.

Think about it. Heroin, cocaine, ecstasy, and all the other illegal drugs COMBINED cause far far far less deaths and injuries than either tobacco use or alcohol use, even when you factor in the crime aspect of the equation. I mean, it's not even close. Why would one focus on the wrong drugs?

The importance of Columbia to the U.S. has nothing to do with drugs. It has lots to do with coffee companies, livestock, and other corporate concerns, and even more to do with military control of the Panama Canal - an absolutely critical factor in helping our economy and hurting other countries' economies. (i.e. anyone not economically and politically friendly to the U.S. has to travel around Argentina to get from Atlantic to Pacific, at incredible cost - that's quite a weapon)

Study after study has shown that prevention and treatment programs SAVE LIVES in fighting drug-related problems. I mean hundreds of studies, good studies. No study has shown that PLAN COLUMBIA, which funnels 1 billion dollars to the Columbian government and its marauding paramilitaries and death squads, has any hope of controlling drug imports to the U.S. or of treating drug-related disease. This is no secret to our educated government officials. Drugs certainly have nothing to do with why we're spending that money. The U.S. has major economic interests in that country, and does not want to see socialist change there. Hence, despite the fact that Columbia has one of the world's WORST human rights abusive governments (16,000 kidnappings per year, "disappearing" people is commin, torture, etc.), they are I believe the 3rd leading recipient of U.S. aid (following other human rights standouts Israel and Turkey).

Similarly, the "War On Terrorism" is simply a way to justify U.S. intervention wherever it feels its control over critical natural resources is threatened. Control over the Central Asian oil pipelines is now ours. We are now moving to the Phillipines apparently - lots of natural resources in that part of the world (can you say oil, rubber, tin?) - and our prior endeavors to maintain control of that region's resources have not been kind (stories of U.S. soldier conduct in the 1905 U.S.-Phillipines "war" are not for the queasy).

Solving the drug problem would be easy given the immense resources of the U.S., if that was what we really wanted. Terrorism is certainly tougher, but we already know how to solve the drug problem - we're just not interested in doing it.

[joyfulgirl]

what sv said

[speedracer]

Originally posted by sv:

Think about it. Heroin, cocaine, ecstasy, and all the other illegal drugs COMBINED cause far far far less deaths and injuries than either tobacco use or alcohol use, even when you factor in the crime aspect of the equation. I mean, it's not even close. Why would one focus on the wrong drugs?

I'll believe that illegal drugs cause far fewer deaths than tobacco and alcohol. But if you count the number of years of life taken away by drugs, my guess is that it's a bit closer. Tobacco for the most part kills only users, and that at a relatively late age. Alcohol probably doesn't kill too many users--its primary victims are those involved in drunk driving accidents. People who die from using illegal drugs or from drug-related-crime die at a relatively young age, I would guess.

[joyfulgirl]

I don't know how reliable these stats are from the Honolulu Weekly, but here are some more:

Estimated U.S. deaths in year 2000 attributed to

TOBACCO: 400,000
ALCOHOL: 110,000
PRESCRIPTION DRUGS: 100,000
SUICIDE: 30,000
MURDER: 15,000
OVER-THE-COUNTER PAINKILLERS: 7,600
MARIJUANA: 0

Not to change the subject, but just to further point out that there are more important subjects for a "War on" than drugs, how about a War On Rape? Every two minutes, somewhere in America, someone is sexually assaulted.

from the Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Department of Justice:

In 2000, there were 261,000 victims of rape, attempted rape or sexual assault:

Of these 261,000, 114,000 were victims of sexual assault, 55,000 were victims of attempted rape, and 92,000 were victims of completed rape. Because of the methodology of the National Crime Victimization Survey, these figures do not include victims 12 or younger. While there are no reliable annual surveys of sexual assaults on children, the Justice Department has estimated that one of six victims are under age 12. [Child Rape Victims, 1992]


[This message has been edited by joyfulgirl (edited 01-18-2002).]

[Veranda]

If pot were legalized:

x-it could be regulated
x-it could make a lot of money for a lot of people, legally
x-it would uncrowd jails and prisons of people charged with possession who don't deserve to be there, leaving more room for violent offenders
x-people are going to smoke it regarless of whether it is legal or not. What's the big deal?


------------------
U2- The Unforgettable Fire still burns!

[Zooman91]

If they had just followed thru with that War on Poverty, then maybe a big chunk of the war on drugs would have been won. Oh well.

[sv]

There are 430,700 smoking-related deaths/year (American Lung Association) in the U.S. Most of these (350,000) are from lung cancer. Given than 1/6 lung cancer deaths are in nonsmokers exposed to passive cigarette smoke by family members, that would be something like 60,000 deaths/year in nonsmokers. Which in itself by far exceeds the total number of deaths due to illegal drugs.

In 1992, the National Institute of Drug Abuse cites 132,000 drug/alcohol related deaths, of which 107,000 were due to alchol and 25,000 due to illegal drugs.

In 2000, 40% of the 41,000 MVA deaths (the leading cause of death in 16-44 year old age group in the U.S., until AIDS passed it recently I think) were due to drunk driving (i.e. legally drunk) (National Highway Patrol data), and most studies indicate that around 70-80% of MVA deaths are alcohol-related (i.e. lower than legal limit).

The demographic of illegal drug-related deaths is certainly younger than that of tobacco deaths, and there's no question illegal drugs are a problem in the U.S. But there are at least 20 other major societal problems that are much more worthy of a "War On".

[baker6621]

Hey melon, before you diss a country, spell it fucking right. It's Colombia, buddy.

[baker6621]

Also, if your dissing Colombia I hope you know the concept of supply and demand. If there's no demand, supply would shift to the left (drop down). The U.S. demands so many drugs that obviously Colombia is going to keep producing them.

I also believe that the U.S. Gov't wants to keep pot illegal, as it has paid off a lot of debts they've owned.

[gvox]

Since most of the intelligent argument for legalization has been said already, allow me to quote the late Peter Tosh:

Legalize it
Don't criticize it
Legalize it
yea-ah yea-ah
And I will advertise it...

Yeah, well, unfortunately if weed were legalized I'd be out of busin....oops...JOKE!!

No, really, I don't think it should be legalized. If so the government will tax it to death and probably the quality will go down.

I'm more for the de-criminalization of simple possession of pot up to a certain limit. Why incarcerate a law-abiding father of two (like me) just because I happen to enjoy a weekend joint? Stupid, and besides, alcohol has far more damaging effects on your health and society in general.

Gabriel

"..well I'm not an expert on the subject (yyyyeahh ok Bono...lol) but it seems sensible enough to me.."

Bono, on whether weed should be legalized