The simple solution to the war on drugs...is for the US GOVT to buy the entire crop in COlombia directly from the farmers. We can stop wasting billions of dollars on drug interdiction..just buy the crop. THe farmers will NOT stop growing these crops because they are valued at sometimes 10 times more than can get from growing food or feed crops.
Im sure we could find a use for the crop, with some techonological advances, perhaps this could be used for other purposes...but if not...we can dump it into the sea or destroy it.
Thats for the hard drugs....
For the "soft" drugs...like Marijuana, legalize, and tax it.
This takes all drugs out of the hands of criminals. We can then focus our efforts on education and recovery for addicts.
We in the US always seem to BAN, OUTLAW, Make something ILLEGAL. We need to rethink this attitude.
In Holland EVERYTHING is legal, prostitution, drugs, you name it....and.....
They have the
Lowest teenage pregnancy rate
Lowest incidence of drug addiction
Lowest incidence of aids
lowest......you can go on...
and on all the above...we are either HIGHTEST or close to the Highest in the world.
yes buying the crop directly from the farmers is very creative idea.
i like it.
wow, would that put a whole different take on things.
Ummm, what do you think drug growers would do if we were to give them millions and millions of dollars? just disappear? or put it into weapons and more drugs?
hmmm....
They would simply grow more drugs, knowing full well that we will buy that crop as well for the same s reasons as the first.
------MYSPACE URL myspace.com/sketical_believer OR E-MAIL zappafication@hotmail.com------
------PROPS 4 BUDDHA------
I'm thinking if the crops were legal....
it might bring back family farms here in the usa to give those foreigners a run for their farming...........
the buying if the crops in columbiua and the legalization of heroin, coke, other hard drugs. our government/farmers could make a killing, and i think violence would go down, lol.
it is better to have a better life than a longer life.
We need to stop coercing Latin American countries to follow our drug policy in the first place.
The coca plant has been a part of their culture for thousands of years. Threatening to withhold aid or even military intervention if these sovereign countries don't conform to our domestic policies is wrong. What if Saudi Arabia was big and powerful and tried to make us ban and eradicate alcohol?
Those in power don't want a quick solution anyways. If they bought all the coca plants in the world and then there was no more cocaine how could they use cocaine use as a way to spread fear and then tell the public they will get tough in order to get elected. If they couldn't use that issue they'd be forced to talk about poverty, war, or global warming. Corporations don't like the solutions and they fund their campaigns, so politicians want to avoid the real issues if they possibly can and instead focus on sensationalist issues.
Is any candidate potentially willing to go out and say that perhaps our narrow minded view of drugs is not the most enlightened; and we could say, take that tax money on reefer and fund a health care policy? Creative thinking is highly undervalued.
To be honest, the central reason I'm interested in Unity08 is because of the need to change our disasterous drug policy. I, like most everyone in the drug reform community don't love addiction, and don't want kids hooked, we want a better approach that has some real impact.
The black market of illegal drugs provides an eternally flowing source of money for criminal elements. A black market is still a market, only when there's any dispute, the only way to solve it is with violence, so of course there are turf wars and innocent deaths. Cartels, gangs, and low level dealers recieve massive cash and have no oversight. Why would they ask for ID? Anyone saying that we must maintain our war on drugs for the sake of children hasn't been paying attention to the last 36 years of drug prohibiton. A war on drugs is a war on all Americans, children included.
DARE, Just Say Know, Above the Influence, they don't work. We've spent hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars, if these programs were capable of working, they would have. It's not that wanting to tell our youth that substance abuse is bad is the wrong idea, but laws don't send messages to children, parents, churches, and communities do. Islamic fundamentalism is bad, but would we solve that problem by banning the practice of Islam in America?
Aside from being expensive and not working, drug prohibition has collateral damage that effects the lives of millions of Americans with no obvious contact with narcotics. Government spending & debt, health care, the environment, and education all suffer because of prohibition. Legalization, taxation, and regulation won't fully solve any of those other issues, but there will be noticable improvements if for no other reason than greater availability in resources and time. Reforming our nations drug laws is crucial to repairing many social ills in our country, no party can get my full support without being willing to take on this issue.
Here are some more sites to look into
DrugWarFacts.org
DrugPolicy.org
NORML.org
MPP.org
The war on drugs is nonsense. We need to legalize at a minimum marijuana. and i dont even smoke the stuff. I would like to see someone call for the immediate release, pardon whatever you want to call it. but let everyone out of jail who is in jail for marijuana use or sale. this should free up valuble prison space for hard core criminals. in addition erase past and present criminal records of marijauna offedeners. if we can suggest illegal immigrants be given a pass on breaking are immigration lwas why cant we do the same for americans who have done nothing more then ingest or sell marijuan which is basically as harmless as tobacco.
cheers
Is that a Centrist Position?? Do you think it would attract a majority of voters or would a stance such as this by Unity08 make Unity08 look like its not centrist?
To join the U08 Delegate Council Online Community send an email to
u08delegatecouncil-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
stupid
Okay, I'll bite; why? You think it's a good idea to keep these folks locked up AT MY EXPENSE, when all they've done is smoke a joint?
Unfortunately the drug catels would kill any farmer who sold his crop to the U S Government. Next thing you know we have another "Police action" to deal with, trying to protect drug crop farmers.
I am new to the site and I'm not exactly sure what centrist would be defined as. Is it a mix or in the center of republican and democrat? no left no right just middle? Sounds idealistic, and from what I've taken from the context of posts on this site, the views are neither democrat, republican, or really in between. What's been lost in those politics is what, I believe, this forum of "delegates" is trying to bring back. Most of that is logic, trust, and our freedom in my opinion. But back to the marijuana topic:
Look at what the government has done since it declared a war on drugs in 1969 alone. I won't go back to the hemp cash crop days, just to 1969. The government GAVE itself the ability to schedule drugs under the controlled substances act one year after the war declaration, instead of going through regular legislation to make them illegal. Marijuana is in schedule one, meaning that there is no currently accepted medical use, it has high potential for abuse, and there is a lack for accepted safety for the use of the drug or other substance under medical supervision. It is equally scheduled with such drugs as GHB, heroin, and DMT. Under those standards, why isn't tobacco on the list? Because it is written into law that it cannot be. I think that is some undermining ridiculousness. I'm not advocating that cigarettes be put under the schedule, I'm just trying to paint a picture of how off balance the governing system is when it comes to marijuana. Furthermore, marijuana is accepted to have medical value in this country. Just not by the federal government. Who is winning here? no taxes, no medical use for those who may need it but are prohibited from doing so by law in most states, and no sense really. Even some state governments aren't complying with the wishes of there voters. Over ten years ago in 1996, voters passed the ballot for medical use at the same time Californians did. California has the rights, but why doesn't Arizona?
forget Dems and Reps, forget right and left, forget liberal and conservative...just think of centrist as the two-thirds of the voters that agree on what to do on the most crucial issues. Each of us is a centrist when we set aside our pet 'ax to grind' long enough to address the survival and well being of us all.
Bill"for what we are together"
bill713.unity08@sbcglobal.net
Marijuana should be legalized, for medical reasons if nothing else. The government has claimed many times over the years that it has no medical value. But what about the drug Marinol, its THC (marijuana crystal) produced in a lab. It is given to Cancer and A.I.Ds patients to treat nausea, vomiting and boost their appetite. No medical purpose my effin' foot.
I also believe that it should be legalized for recreational use and taxed like alcohol. We can use that money to fund some sort of heath care plan. Also, everyone convicted for the use of or selling of Marijuana should be pardoned (it's just pot). In general, cut back the whole "war on drugs" and gear that money towards a heath care plan of sorts. It could work.
------http://www.myspace.com/sketical_believer OR zappafication@hotmail.com------
---Props 4 Buddha---
I'm glad to see so many people agreeing that the War on Drugs needs to end. I could write a few comments here, or have the far more eloquent and qualified Ludwig von Mises sum it up in a nice quote:
"Opium and morphine are certainly dangerous, habit-forming drugs. But once the principle is admitted that it is the duty of government to protect the individual from his own foolishness, no serious objections can be raised against further encroachments. A good case could be made out in favor of the prohibition of alcohol and nicotine. And why limit the government's benevolent providence to the protection of the individual's body only? Is not the harm a man can inflict on his mind and soul even more disastrous than any bodily evils? Why not prevent him from reading bad books and seeing bad plays, from looking at bad paintings and statues and from hearing bad music? The mischief done by bad ideologies, surely, is much more pernicious, both for the individual and for the whole society, than that done by narcotic drugs.
These fears are not merely imaginary specters terrifying secluded doctrinaires. It is a fact that no paternal government, whether ancient or modern, ever shrank from regimenting its subjects' minds, beliefs, and opinions. If one abolishes man's freedom to determine his own consumption, one takes all freedoms away. The naive advocates of government interference with consumption delude themselves when they neglect what they disdainfully call the philosophical aspect of the problem. They unwittingly support the cause of censorship, inquisition, intolerance, and the persecution of dissenters." - Ludwig von Mises, 1949
"I am King of the Romans, and am superior to the rules of grammar." - Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor
I raise my glass in toast to Ludwig! The ATF is well entrenched, they won't give up their "war" on drugs easily.
ATF- should be a convenience store, not Federal agency!
Ron Paul...The only option for the American way of life.
I agree, i agree. Im not sure how logical the whole thing about buying the cocaine directly from the farmers is, but its one more option than I have ever heard. Marijuana is just as addictive as anything else. Its a mental issue, not a physical or chemical one (unlike, cigarettes, cocaine, etc.) Prisons are overflowing. Everyone knows this. It's the worst in California, and one must put into perspective that most of those in prison are there for small drug charges. Legalization would eliminate that problem as well as put the police force back on track to helping resolve or prevent violent crimes.
I THINK WE SHOULD LEGALIZE MARAJUANA. ALSO WE NEED TO EDUCATE THE PUBLIC ON THE ADDICTIVE NATURE OF PRESCRIPTION DRUGS. THE DRUG COMPANIES HAVE BECOME THE BIGGEST PUSHERS OF ALL. WE ALSO NEED PROGRAMS FOR THE MILLIONS OF ADDICTED AMERICANS THAT NEED TREATMENT. CRACK COCAINE IS A HUGE PROBLEM. I DON'T HAVE THE SOLUTION TO THAT ONE. ANY IDEAS? THANKS, MISTY714
True to an extent. Part of the problem is the fact they advertise every new med they make, even if it truly a drug not needed
------MYSPACE URL myspace.com/sketical_believer OR E-MAIL zappafication@hotmail.com------
------PROPS 4 BUDDHA------
Actually, there has been studies done. the reason why so many addicts relapse is because of the amount of time they are treated. Most insurance, (Medicaid and private) will only pay for 30 days and if you are lucking you will get 90 days of in patient treatment. All studies show that an addict needs at least one full year of highly structured in patient treatment with a behavior modification program. The 30 to 90 day in patient treatment programs are set up to fail. They have little structure and no real programs to help people learn new behaviors. Most treatment programs do not even address the mental health issues many of these people suffer from and without that they will continue to self medicate.
Betty McLeod
PA 06
Betty327@ptd.net
The BEST comment of the night. We as a people must decide if we want to be free or if we want the governement to tell us when and how often we need to use the restroom because we all know to be healthy you must be regular.
I live in Washington State, recently they passed law that that requires all kids under 4'8" to be in a carseat. Have you ever seen a carseat that will accomadate a 4'7" 120 pound kid. Oh i'm sure that some corporation will make one for me to buy. There is no smoking in any public place and you must be at least 25 feet from any door, window, or air intake. Oh and a carton of smokes has been taxed to a whopping $55.00.
Our government, state and federal, seems more concerned with protecting us from ourselves than protecting us from those who want to blow us up.
It's high time jail time for drugs was abolished, along this same line. Drug testing for jobs is standard unless you are a cop, lawyer, teacher or or any other govenement worker.
So do you all want to live here? We have been under democrat rule since the 1970's.
I wonder what would happen if we legalized and taxed ALL DRUGS and applied the taxes monies to: (a) educating people about the true risks and harms of dangerous drugs, (b) providing good rehab services, (c) establishing programs that give teenagers around the country positive things to do with their free time, (d) strengthening the impact of public service announcements that make drug abusers look like "losers" and (e) focus more on mental health issues that make people vulnerable to drug abuse (e.g., "self-medicating" to alleviate emotional pain).
Just my 2 cents.
Steve Beller, PhD
Wellness Wiki
Curing Healthcare Blog
That is what I believe.
Not only can we use the money generated to educate about drugs and improve rehab, but also use that money for an improved heath care system (rehab falling under health care).
I do agree that public service announcements are a great tool in educating young kids and/or teens to be aware of the choices they are making, because drugs can destroy your life is abused.
But not all drug uses are "losers" (SteveBeller I'm sure you’re aware of that why you used " "s), recreation use of some drugs (many marijuana) is basically harmless (once again, if not abused)
------MYSPACE URL myspace.com/sketical_believer OR E-MAIL zappafication@hotmail.com------
------PROPS 4 BUDDHA------
Yes, Zappafan, not all drug uses are "losers." I'd even go one step further: NO ONE IS A "LOSER," i.e., no human being can ever be a "worthless failure," although people may ACT self-destructive and unproductive ways due to many different reasons. And the legalization strategy I proposed (along with other on this forum), would also save tons of money by emptying out our prisons. Furthermore, I believe our strategy would actually SAVE LIVES by eliminating the profit motive from illicit drug sales, which would dramatically reduce gang wars and related violence, while at the same time reducing drug abuse by removing the risky-excitement and "glamor" from drug purchases.
Steve Beller, PhD
I'm not saying there is not a positive aspect of the "War on Dugs", and there should most definitely be some form restriction on the hard drugs (coke, heroin, meth etc).
The main problem is that everyone who's caught with drugs is convicted as a criminal, and that has to change. Especially if the person was simply caught with the prohibited substance (for personal use), with out any violent innocent. Perhaps they could pay a fine equal to the amount of drugs found on them, and then have to attend a rehab/addict program.
If they have an amount that can only be for the purpose of selling, depending on the drug (mainly hard stuff), a criminal sentence would be a fair punishment.
------MY MYSPACE www.myspace.com/themanwhohasnoname E-MAIL zappafication@hotmail.com------
------PROPS 4 BUDDHA------
I suggest that all drugs--hard and soft--should be legalized AND there should be restrictions on them all, e.g., age restrictions, legal places of purchase, etc.
Steve Beller, PhD
I agree, but I would not have a problem with restrctions on hard drugs.
But, when you get right down to it I believe this is America and no one has the right to tell me, or anyone else what we can put in our bodies.
------MY MYSPACE www.myspace.com/themanwhohasnoname E-MAIL zappafication@hotmail.com------
------PROPS 4 BUDDHA------
I know what would happen. Ultra conservatives would lable is anti-Christian, touchy-feely, socialism. That is why informed and intelligent people like Dr. Beller have proposed this sensible approach to this societal problem but have been summarily rejected by the "god-fearing" politicians who would lose Christian votes. I do not believe that all Christians truly feel this way but it is the bulletin board material evangelical preachers live for. Unfortunately, their irresponsible, irrational sermons influence too many otherwise intelligent individuals.
It is a great approach. I wish this country would come around to it.
In a rational world, this would be a plank. But, in our society I think it would be unjustifiably considered wacky.
--Think also of the comfort and rights of others
Let's see, first we buy Columbia's crop. Expect the harvest and cost to increase each year as farmers expand and convert to a crop that has a good payback. Then I suppose we need to purchase all of Afghanistan's crop. And of course we can expect Southeast Asia to redouble their planting efforts. And on and on and on. Not only does this not make any fiscal sense, is this a valid centrist view?
i'm thinking legalizing all
and let our economy produce it..........manage it & tax it.....
aka ~ made in america.......
I clicked on the "sugest a topic" to sugest drug policy reform and was glad to see others had already done so. There are a lot of great reasons for reform but mostly - the Constitution, the failure, the cost. Sadly politicians fear being seen as weak on crime but all that are informed know that the war has failed and made criminals rich, diverted from education and health, on and on and on... Just the fact that they make Pot a class one drug and can not seem to grasp that Hemp is not Pot shows that they do not serve the public with honor. When you meet some one who supports prohibition and has had their life and family devistated by drug addiction, remind them that it all happened DURRING the Drug War. Enough already!
I couldn't have said it better myself.
The "War on Drugs" is a waste of our tax dollars.
Prohibition did not work with alcohol, so why do people think it will work with drugs.
In general humans enjoy putting poisons in their body (we smoke, drink, eat unhealthy, and even take drugs); we have been doing it since we climbed out of the trees. Why, who knows why, it's just part of being human.
------MY MYSPACE www.myspace.com/themanwhohasnoname E-MAIL zappafication@hotmail.com------
------PROPS 4 BUDDHA------
I notice other issues have moved over to the main topics list, and I'm curious to know what level of interest needs to be expressed in an issue to make it a principle topic of Unity08. I'm not suggesting that the drug war be Unity08's central issue (though I've heard worse campaigns) but I see little reason to believe this is an issue that is unimportant to most of our new members and delegates.
Also FYI-
Here's a Time Magazine article from this month:
Bush Pledges Anti-Drug Aid to Mexico
http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1650921,00.html
Yet millions, and maybe billions more of our tax dollars are going to fight a very literal war in Mexico, which will likely make only a temporary (if any) impact on the drug trade. Any other taxpayers wanna hear how this spending bill will do now what we've been unable to do for the last 35 years?
~ lnk ~ $ cost of "war on drug wars " in america (for enforcement only).....approx. $ 13 billion / year (+ inflation) ....forever, i'm guessing.....
Thank You, Thank You Very Much
----JOIN MY UNITY 08 TRAILBLAZER GROUP AT unity08trailblazers.com/teams/zappafication----
------MY MYSPACE www.myspace.com/themanwhohasnoname or E-MAIL zappafication@hotmail.com------
------PROPS 4 BUDDHA------
i said "in america (for enforcement only).....approx. $ 13 billion / year (+ inflation) ....forever, i'm guessing....."
i shoulda said.
" ..........approx. $ 13 billion feds, + $ 30 billion state & local = approx $ 43 billion / year (+ inflation).....for ever, i'm guessing...
lnk ~ http://www.drugsense.org/wodclock.htm
Thought I would chime in on this topic with some numbers. One of my first college papers almost two years ago was on the War on Drugs. Just to clarify, the budget of the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) alone is now over $20 billion. Add in the costs from the Department of Justice for prosecutions and the Bureau of Prisons for housing prisoners along with other federal agency efforts and the number is staggering. Below is my paper with some interesting numbers all of which are cited. I think it is beneficial that everyone have an understanding where we are at with this issue. Personally, I believe this is another war we are fighting that needs a new strategy, whatever that may be because the current one is not working. BTW, an update on some numbers. The DEA recieved a 13% budget increase in 2024, while another federal department that is named in the paper (I do not want to spoil the surprise) recieved a 1.5% decrease from the year before.
America has witnessed an attempt by the federal government at nationwide prohibition of illicit drugs that started in the early twentieth century. Over the proceeding decades, more legislation was passed, along with more resources devoted in pursuit of eliminating the use of forbidden drugs in this country. During the decade of the 1980s, the effort and resources devoted to drug prohibition saw an explosive increase and has seen continued, unparalleled growth to this day. Some of the battles in this war are well known, such as Prohibition, while others remain more obscure in this ongoing war. Today, with increasing budgets for the War on Drugs, combined with net results generated, America should examine alternative uses for those resources to better benefit society.
Drugs that are legal such as alcohol and tobacco, or illegal such as cocaine and marijuana, are here to stay in this country. In a free market economy, if there is a customer with a demand, there will always be a supplier with the product if there is profit to be made. Interdiction methods, both for the supply side and demand side of the equation, are each fighting very powerful human desires. The demand side involves people who have natural urgings to either feel good, or not feel bad. The supply side involves people with a strong craving for money, or just simply power. Supply interception is not only inefficient in reducing drug consumption in this country, but if it was successful, would be counter-productive in eliminating suppliers by driving up the price, thereby the profit, insuring there will always be new providers willing to take the chance at a big payday.
Intercepting drugs from entering the country is a wasteful endeavor of eliminating drug consumption in this country. Success for preventing drugs from entering relies on patrolling thousands of miles of borders and coastline at the same time when drugs cannot even be kept out of prison facilities. A commission on federal law enforcement practices, led by former FBI director William Webster concluded, “Despite a record number of seizures and a flood of legislation, the Commission is not aware of any evidence that the flow of narcotics into the United States has been reduced” (as cited in Lynch, 2024, para.13). To further illustrate the ineffectiveness of supply eradication, the United Nations in 1963 put into action a plan to eliminate coca and cannabis production with a completion date of 1988. “An assessment conducted at the end of that period revealed that the volume of these crops had in fact increased dramatically” (Bollinger, Bullington & Shelley, 2024, para.16).
The results from the demand side of the equation look equally grim. The federal government mandate is zero tolerance to possession or use of illegal drugs. Though some of the resources are devoted to abstinence programs, a vast majority of funds have been dedicated at punishing users in the hopes of either sending a message, or rounding them all up. One result from this is a staggering prison population of drug users serving mandatory sentences, thereby taking away precious space to lockup violent criminals. In 1980 580,900 arrests on drug charges were made in this country; by 2024 that number had grown to 1,678,200 (Stamper, 2024). Norm Stamper, former chief of the Seattle Police Department commented, “We’re making more arrests for drug offenses than for murder, manslaughter, forcible rape and aggravated assault combined” (Stamper, 2024, para. 8).
Turning out violent offenders into the community because of the lack of prison space has generated a public backlash. Many states over the last decade have passed three strike measures committing violent offenders to lifetime sentences after a third felony conviction. More recently, states are passing child predator laws giving first time offenders who sexually violate children lengthy prison sentences. At some point, with such an overwhelming prison population, something will give and America will have to make a choice to either prioritize which classifications of criminals they want serving time, or build, staff and maintain new prison facilities on a scale never seen before.
These underwhelming results are not from a lack of effort by law enforcement or funding from government. The War on Drugs has become such an expensive enterprise that the capital spent rivals, or even surpasses other vitally important priorities in this nation. According to Jack Cole (as cited in Stamper, 2024, para. 12), founder and executive director of Law Enforcement Against Prohibition, the total annual expenditure to fight this war is approximately $69 billion. In comparison, the President’s total budget request for the United States Department of Education for 2024 is $69.09 billion (United States Department of Education, 2024). Educating the children of this country should be a top priority, yet the money to fight this war is now eclipsing the entire federal budget for education. Other monetary considerations involved that are considerable, yet difficult to track include property crimes by addicts to gain funding for their drug supplies and social service agencies who deal with the aftermath of underground drug use.
Alternatives exist for these valuable resources besides clogging the penal system of this country with recreational drug users. Some of these alternatives are already being used to a greater success than controlling the supply side of the equation. The RAND Drug Policy Research Center conducted a study (as cited in Caulkins, 1998, para. 6 ) that stated drug treatment programs were seven times more cost-effective at reducing cocaine use than interdiction methods used by law enforcement agencies, even though only 13% of patients experienced long-term abstinence. The study further stated that a one percent reduction annually of cocaine usage in this country over the next 15 years could be achieved by, “…upgrading efforts to control cocaine production in South America at an additional cost of almost $800 million per year…Or, the United States could spend just $34 million per year more to expand treatment for heavy users” (as cited in Caulkins, 1998, para. 6). Abstinence from drugs is a desirable goal in this war and treatment should be further funded to see improved results.
There are drug addicts who do not wish to abstain from drugs, just as there are alcoholics who do not desire to give up drinking. Destructive behavior that can come from these individuals, both to themselves and to the public can be mitigated through harm reduction. The concept of harm reduction is to lessen, or minimize the negative impacts of drug use of addicts to themselves and society. Harm reduction does not require abstinence at any point but it is hoped the individual who is shown dignity instead of contempt will see an improved quality of life and choose abstinence as the end result. One example of harm reduction used in some areas in this country is needle exchange programs. Addicts who inject drugs can get clean needles in trade for their old needles at no cost to them. The benefit of this to everyone is a reduction of contagious diseases, such as HIV, AIDS and hepatitis among addicts who have the potential to spread these diseases among the rest of an unknowing public. Critics of needle programs stress these programs promote drug use, but in actuality the decision for the individual addict has already been made to use drugs; the choice for them comes down whether to use clean and safer needles, or share dirty and perhaps contaminated needles among fellow addicts.
More aggressive and innovative approaches to combat drug use are being tried throughout Central and Western Europe using a variety of different strategies. Some approaches are more conservative such as Sweden’s acceptance of treatment for drug users in lieu of prison sentences. More progressive and pioneering methods including heroin maintenance programs in Switzerland, Holland and Germany have seen enough promising results to continue, and in some cases expand the programs (Bullington, Bollinger & Shelley, 2024). These countries, along with the United States are signatories to the same international treaties of drug control policy starting with the Hague Conventions of 1912 and ending with the 1961 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs. Therefore, no treaty obligation exists, or is enforced that prohibits the United States to examine or implement similar policies (Bullington, Bollinger & Shelley, 2024).
States within the United States have begun to take steps that deviate from the federal government policy of zero tolerance. Some have decriminalized the possession of certain illicit drugs, while others have legalized the use for medicinal purposes. The federal government and states continue fighting an ongoing battle within the courts over which level of government, state or federal, has the final say on these activities (Bullington, Bollinger & Shelley, 2024). Individual states should be given some latitude to examine alternative methods and funding to implement new programs to reduce drug consumption in this country. One area of enormous opportunity for states to examine is prevention programs for children and young adults. Today, children who are not engaged in life with activities or given a sense of purpose are at greater risk of drug use. Children from low-income, single parent families are especially vulnerable because many of the limited activities available come at a monetary price those families’ budgets cannot afford.
Abstinence and prevention programs are good options to reduce drug use in the future but are too late for solving problems looming on the near horizon. Decriminalization of certain drugs deemed least harmful, such as marijuana, would provide breathing room for the prison systems by eliminating recreational users from the population. Law enforcement and the court system would have resources freed up to address higher priority crimes, especially offenses that have recently escalated in numbers such as identity theft, computer hacking and corporate fraud. These are crimes that will affect more Americans in a negative way, for longer periods of time than recreational drug users looking to unwind from a day of work by smoking marijuana.
Even if abstinence and prevention programs along with decriminalization were deemed successful in reducing drug consumption in this country, there still would be problems that would probably require a more drastic solution. During the Prohibition Era, mobsters sold outlawed alcohol in speakeasies that generated enormous profits, power, and violence. Today, those mobsters are replaced by street and motorcycle gangs that use the same violent tactics, such as drive by shootings to control market territory. These days, instead of worrying about illegal alcohol stills blowing up, this nation is seeing increasing numbers of clandestine methamphetamine labs in residential neighborhoods. These labs not only are explosive hazards, but leave toxic waste zones which must be cleaned up before being used once again. The city of Seattle, Washington and surrounding King County had over 300 homes waiting for environmental cleanup in February, 2024. Cleanup of these contaminated sites is expensive and very time-consuming with some properties having been on the list since 1999 (King County Public Health, 2024).
To help solve the organized crime issues and secret manufacturing sites seen during Prohibition, an amendment was passed to the Constitution ending Prohibition which made alcohol legal again in this country. Legalization of illicit drugs does offer the benefit of reducing or eliminating criminal activity associated with an underground drug trade. There is also the potential for generating tax revenue to establish prevention programs and further enhance treatment facilities. Even with aggressive regulation as with alcohol and tobacco, legalization does bring potential pitfalls that need to be responsibly addressed. These negative effects can be reduced by education and legislation in a manner similar to drunken driving fatalities. In 1982, 26,173 Americans were killed in alcohol related accidents on this nation’s highways. By 2024, alcohol-related fatalities had dropped to 16,694 through continuing efforts by organizations such as Mothers Against Drunk Driving and state legislatures (Mothers Against Drunk Driving, 2024).
Assessments on the effectiveness of barring illicit drug use in this country are sobering. With the dismal results to eradicate the supply and curb the demand of illicit drugs, combined with skyrocketing budgets to fight this battle, it is time to admit total elimination of drug use in this country is unrealistic. After decades of using the same tactics with negligible positive results, a new direction will be required to make reducing drug use in this country a reality. America needs to take a long look at establishing polices that make better use of the resources being devoted to the War on Drugs, and show better results from the effort. All options should be considered including decriminalization, or outright legalization of drugs in conjunction with regulation and sound social policies. With the money spent and over 1.5 million arrests a year for drug offenses, can America afford to search out the remainder of the estimated 28 million drug users in this country using the methods of today.
Bullington, B., Bollinger, L., & Shelley T. (2004). Trends in European Drug Policies: A New Beginning or More of the Same?. Journal of Drug Issues , 34(3), 481-490. Retrieved February 13, 2024, from EBSCOhost database.
Caulkins, J. (1998). Drug Abuse Treatment Programs Are Effective. Opposing Viewpoints Series: The War on Drugs. Retrieved January 18, 2024, from Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center database.
King County Public Health. (2006). Contaminated Methamphetamine Houses. Retrieved March 2, 2024, from http://www.metrokc.gov/health/methlabs/
Lynch, T. (2004). The Demand for Illegal Drugs Remains Strong. Opposing Viewpoints Series: The War on Drugs. Retrieved January 18, 2024, from Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center database.
Mothers Against Drunk Driving. (2006). Alcohol Related Traffic Fatalities. Retrieved February 27, 2024, from http://www.madd.org/stats/1298
Stamper, N. (2005, Oct 16). Let Those Dopers Be. Los Angeles Times, p. m1. Retrieved January 18, 2024, from ProQuest database.
United States Department of Education. (2006). Department of Education Fiscal Year 2024 Congressional Action: 2024 President’s Request Total Appropriation. Retrieved January 16, 2024, from http://www.ed.gov/about/overview/budget/news.html#06action
Thanks!
Steve Beller, PhD
Legalizing drugs is an excellent idea. The difference between a fool and a wise man is that a wise man learns from his mistakes. What did we have with prohibition? Gangs riding around shooting up the place, people drinking poisons they thought were alcohol, a wealthy criminal element able to finance other illegal activity, much like what we have now with drugs. We could regulate the quality, the consumption, and put them in gov't owned stores for far less than we are spending on the DEA now. Not to mention the fiscal advantage to local law enforcement. Add a tax on top of that and it turns into a real cash cow.
We have a right to pursue happiness. We do not have a right to attain it. Without the freedom to fail, there is no freedom.
The human desire to alter our consciousness is in our genes. It's in a mammals genes. Dogs don't like the smell of alcohol, but if one ever gets a buzz, most lose their aversion. I'm an old man and have had many dogs. They all liked beer, and several liked whiskey. Before the PETAs come after me, no, I did not get my dogs drunk. They all had a one drink limit(half a beer or half a shot), and no more than once a week. Except for the one that drank from a leaking keg spigot for an unknown amount of time. Trust me, you don't want to be around a drunk doberman. Or a hungover doberman. Seriously, it's a dangerous situation.
I'm not holding my breath. I would agree with Dylan, it's not going to fly.
Has anyone ever given thought to the idea of, mind you this is after or during the process of legalization, educating some of the people in our prison system with a history of cannabis sale specifically. Teach them how to run a business lawfully, the put them to work selling the same product they were selling. I know that the idea is wacky sounding, and would take time and effort, but that's what it takes to fix a problem.
Hemp as well as the enormous potential that could be gained from it, have been unfortunate casualties of the ‘moral’ crusade called the Drug War. Hemp has been a valuable crop for thousands of years that has been used for a wide variety of purposes. However, with the American War on Drugs and the special interests that control society, hemp has been aligned and defined as marijuana (Cannabis sativa). The popularity and cultivation of hemp for ‘industrial’ purposes has grown steadily in recent years, worldwide and domestically, and it is time that the government ended the illusion and hypocrisy that hemp is marijuana.
The history of hemp can be traced back very far in time all throughout the world. Thousands of years ago, the first paper in China was made of hemp. The first Gutenberg and King James bibles were printed on hemp. Confucius and Lao Tzu wrote on hemp paper. Several drafts of the Declaration of Independence were also written on hemp paper. This was because George Washington and Thomas Jefferson were both hemp farmers, along with many other of the ‘founding fathers’. As the first laws ever passed regarding ‘illicit’ substances in this country required townships, during the colonial period, to actually grow a certain amount of hemp because it was used for many different textiles at the time. Production in America and around the world continued and produced many important commodities like rope and cloth. Almost all the covered wagons that crossed America were covered in hemp. The Mormons also used hemp heavily in building their cities. Rembrandt and Van Gogh painted on hemp canvasses. (Blair, Economics of Hemp, 2024).
However, the beginning of the twentieth century in America started a drastic step with the Pure Food and Drug Act in 1906 which was the first prohibitionist law in America. This would be the first step of what would later become the War on Drugs. From this time on hemp would be defined as marijuana and made illegal, even though the US had a long history with the plant. The outlawing of hemp started in the 1920’s. The company Dupont of Wilmington was developing and patenting fuel additives and other products. While at the same time Ford and others were working with hemp and trying to use it for fuel and other products. Also, George Schlichten made a machine in the 1920’s that made it efficient to process hemp. However, at the time the Secretary of the Treasury was a man named Andrew Mellon, who was also the wealthiest man in America at the time. He was the owner of Mellon Bank, which was the largest financer of Dupont chemicals. Also, Mellon got to appoint the top drug enforcement official at the time, who was also a former employee of Dupont (www.votehemp.org, 2024). Around the same time the government and newspapers around the country were vilifying marijuana, and using it as a weapon to discriminate against Mexicans and blacks. They were calling it the root of evil and the ‘devil weed’ and that it would lead to the corrupting of the youth of America. The government and the Bureau of Narcotics even sponsored a film called Reefer Madness trying to horrify the public with scare tactics; “The United States Bureau of Narcotics, under the direction of its former commissioner, Harry J. Anslinger, took an active role in spreading this fear and information” (Gray, 24, 2024). The direct connection between hemp and marijuana were already established at this point. With these two factors in place, the passage of the Marijuana Tax Act in 1937, which defined both hemp and marijuana as the same, put a tax on all parts of production of hemp, which made it economically unfeasible to manufacture. Even though the law at this time did not outright outlaw the substance it virtually eliminated it from the domestic market.
The US government still imported enormous quantities of textiles from the Philippines and other countries to supply the army. Then WWII struck the world and the United States found itself in war. The hypocrisy of the government and its drug laws, especially regarding hemp, were revealed when they radically shifted laws concerning marijuana (hemp and marijuana defined as same under the law), when supplies from the Philippines were cut by Japan. The governments response was to sponsor a film called Hemp for Victory, which acknowledged the great history of hemp and its vast potentials, while at the same time displaying symbols of American pride and how hemp was connected to that. With the law reversed and the government pushing for cultivation, hemp was massively produced for the war effort, which was vastly needed. Then the war ended and the foreign shipments could once again come into the country and the fear and hypocrisy of the drug laws came right back; “after the war hemp reverted to being a prohibited substance ‘without any practical usages of any kind’” (Gray, 26, 2024).
After the end of WWII a new war, the Drug War began to start growing rapidly beginning to move away from just taxing drugs to outlawing them. Laws got tougher and tougher through the fifties and sixties, reaching a peak in 1970 in the Abuse Prevention and Control Act that established the schedule of drugs (marijuana/hemp as a Schedule 1 which is the highest schedule) and the Comprehensive Crime Control Act in 1984 lengthening sentences and raising bail for drug offenders (Gray, 27, 2024). In 1986 The Anti-Drug Abuse Act increased penalties and imposed mandatory sentences for drug offenders. Laws regarding illicit substance keep getting tougher and tougher as the War on Drugs continues to grow on enormous proportions. The whole time hemp is classified as marijuana and not distinguished as a different plant under the law, with the governments reason being that hemp contains the same psychoactive chemical THC that is found in marijuana.
Hemp does contain the psychoactive chemical THC, which is the active chemical found in marijuana. However, hemp contains nowhere near the same amount as marijuana which can contain between 2%-20% THC content. Hemp has only a trace amount with at most .3% THC content. The hemp plant also contains another cannaboid, CDB, which prevents the THC from producing psychoactive effects (www.votehemp.org, 2024). The government has also given other reasons for the outlawing of hemp such as fields of hemp cultivation would hide cultivation of marijuana as they could be grown in the same field. However, this could not be done as the hemp plant would pollinate the marijuana plant and retard the THC content to unbeneficial levels for use as marijuana (NORML, www.norml.org, 2024).
During the time that America was running the War on drugs the rest of the world continued hemp cultivation and research. America even continued to import hemp under restriction and only with certain commodities such as textiles, bath products, paper, and clothing. World wide production through the 1990’s grew at 25% (Blair, Economics of Hemp, 2024), with over 30 countries now harvesting ‘industrial’ hemp including Canada, Japan, and much of the EU. Today the United States is the largest importer of hemp in the whole world, using around 60% of the world’s hemp. Companies that use hemp range from Crate and Barrel, Ralph Lauren, and The Body Shop all taking part in a very profitable industry. The benefits of hemp have been recognized around the world and in the US, and even by the federal government when it suits their interest. The benefits to the economy that it would bring would only be the beginning if hemp was distinguished from marijuana and made legal.
Hemp is a crop that is extremely versatile, easily renewable, and sustainable. Hemp’s versatility and can be used to make many products. It can make hemp oil, which contains valuable nutrients that are hard to find in other foods, and the oil can be used to make paints, inks and plastics. The hemp seed can be eaten and has lots of protein, comparable to soy. Beauty lotions and products of all kinds can be made from hemp. The stalk of the plant can be made into fibers for textiles such as clothes, cloth, and insulation. The stalk can also be converted into paper. Animal bedding can be made from it. It is hydrocarbon absorbent, so it can help clean up oil spills. The entire hemp stalk can also be used for biomass fuel, like ethanol, because of the high cellulose concentration. Hemp also is easily renewable and sustainable, not harmful to the environment. Current practices in agriculture are not sustainable and harm the environment. There is too much waste, loss of top soil, and decreasing irrigation ability. Hemp is the perfect crop to fix some of these problems. No pesticides are required in growing hemp, which means no run off of chemicals into the water. The production of hemp paper would harm the environment less, because of its high cellulose content and low amount of lignin, which is the main pollutant from paper processing. Also, hemp is nitrogen fixing, which would help in crop rotation systems with things such as soy. Also, hemp kills off parasites in the soil that harm soy. Also, as said before, hemp has multiple uses. In addition, the hemp plant is completely recyclable. Plus, growing it would also stimulate the economy. Again, the United States is the largest importer of hemp in the whole world using around 60% of the world’s hemp, and the industry would only grow if could be cultivated domestically as the price would be driven down as tariffs would no longer be a factor.
It is time that the American government accepted the vast potential to be gained from hemp and that it is not marijuana. The rest of the world has made this distinction already and four states in the US (Maryland, Hawaii, North Dakota, and Minnesota) have already passed legislation legalizing the cultivation of hemp. The hypocrisy that has run the Drug War needs to end, as hemp has been unfortunately attached to the ‘moral crusade’ due to special interests. The benefits of hemp are colossal to the economy, diet, and the environment and it is time to reap these benefits.
We are throwing away tax dollars that could be used for something worth while, like health care (if that's what Americans really want).
It is a never ending battle we can never win. Prohibition does not work
----JOIN MY UNITY 08 TRAILBLAZER GROUP AT unity08trailblazers.com/teams/zappafication----
------MY MYSPACE www.myspace.com/themanwhohasnoname orE-MAIL zappafication@hotmail.com------
------PROPS 4 BUDDHA------