How Should the U.S. Deal with Drugs?

[durutti]

I'd like to have a general discussion about U.S. drug policy. What's wrong with the current policy? And what would you propose instead -- full, mostly unregulated legalization? Regulated legalization (like alcohol)? Decriminalization? More cops and harsher penalties?

I was once for regulated legalization, but I've recently been having second thoughts.

[wysi]

1. Full decriminalization...

... and immediate release of all non-violent drug offenders from prison. Regulations (as for EtOH) are fine, as well as taxes (funnelled straight to the new National Health Care Scheme).

Use would rise slightly at first, then level off to where it is now. I suspect the legal issue doesn't stop very many people using drugs (it never stopped me or anyone I knew, but that's anecdotal evidence of course!).

I'm of the same opinion about prostitution and gambling.

[durutti]

2. How many drug offenders are really nonviolent?

If someone makes a living from substances that kill, one could argue that they are, in fact, perpetuating a form of violence.

[wysi]

6. Without splitting hairs...

... about one's personal responsibility for things, I'd argue that those who have not actually committed a violent crime *themselves* should be released.

If we adopt your definition, we're all violent criminals in some way or other. I can't imagine there's anyone who hasn't done something that has indirectly supported a person or entity that has behaved violently.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

3. Like the medical problem it is

Marijuana should be legalized and taxed. Other drugs should be decriminalized and made available via clinics for users. That way, there is no incentive for criminals, because there's no money to be made from selling drugs. Junkies know they are getting a clean fix and, at the same time, are having a chance to turn their lives around (at the clinics, where detox programs should be available). Why the US can't see this is beyond me.

[FDRrocks]

5. Agreed

Health issue.

[durutti]

9. I agree, BUT...

First, I should state that I'm currently agnostic on the drug issue. I'm looking to hear a convincing argument from any side.

I see a few problems with this argument. First of all, why should the U.S. devote resources to curing something that's self-inflicted?

Secondly: the main problem with drugs, as I see it, is not that they inflicts harm upon the individual who chooses to use them. The problem is that (at least with certain drugs) they increase the chance that the individual who takes them will inflict harm upon other people. For example, do we want folks on acid driving around?

How would this solution address that problem? And what if the problem can't be addressed? Then isn't the logical thing to do to put these people in a place where they can't do any harm to society?

[Beetwasher]

4. In Order to Take Distribution Out of the Hands of Criminals and Thugs

you have to regulate it.

Harder drugs would be distributed in clinics w/ Doctors and counselors present. If you're a junky, you'll register w/ a clinic to get your fix cheap. This way though they have access to counseling and rehab programs, clean needles, clean drugs, medical attention if necessary etc.

Marijuana should be legalized, taxed and controlled like alcohol and cigarettes. Taxes from pot could pay for all the treatments listed above and the clinics, plus all the anti-drug propoganda a moralist could think of, plus tons more to fund public education and job training programs that would stop people from being junkies in the first place.

[sweetheart]

7. End the drugs war

I have already written reams about this subject, and this other site has the general response... as you can see, the vast majority see the light of ending the drugs war entirely:

http://www.whynot.net/view_idea.php?id=210

Ending the drugs war as a democratic president is simply a matter of cutting all federal funding to the DEA and dissolving the agency. THen a presidential pardon is given to all nonviolent drugs offenders.

http://www.cato.org/current/drug-war/index.html

This link has an outstanding paper that expains this issue better than i could ever hope to.

http://www.cato.org/pubs/handbook/hb108/hb108-17.pdf

Prohibition is a failure. In order to end addiction, you need to make citizens responsible for their own behaviour. The existing system undermines citizen responsibility, and as well introduces criminalization that has done nothing but damage.

100% legalization, freedom of religion, freedom of choice, liberty and regulating the markets, bankrupting the suppliers, ending illegal unknown drugs in the streets and children dealers.... its so bloody simple, my dog could do it.. :)

[durutti]

10. The Cato Institute?

C'mon. Cato puts ideology before facts, and often distorts the facts themselves.

I don't trust right-wing think tanks, even when they're espousing progressive ideas. It would be terribly inconsistent o me to do otherwise. They're utterly unreliable.

[sweetheart]

17. read the paper first

before you slander the ideals.

I don't care who wrote it.. . the explanation regarding the legallization argument is well crafted and well researched... your ad hominem is noted, but bunk.

Cato, being libertarian, is going to argue, of course for the total end of the drugs war... but geezh? isn't that what i'm arguing in this case... so their material, were i a writer in their employee, are the same.

I recommend it, as it is better than i could whip off on a quick web chat like this, but not different than i would write given the time.

[Cleita]

8. Why not regulated legalization?

I think regulated legalization is the only way to go. For one thing alcoholism and drug addiction are diseases and should be treated as such, that doesn't mean everyone abuses them and they have right to use these products, knowing that they are safe to use.

Legalizing these products takes them out of the hands of the criminals. There is no guarantee they won't be abused, but if at least having them out in the open gets the abuser the help they need I think this is preferable. We should also put labels on them like we do on tobacco telling people what harm the products will do to them.

I really hate to see people go to prison for drug or alcohol abuse unless there was a violent crime involved.

[durutti]

12. Again with the violence...

The thing that irks me about this argument is that if you sell drugs, you're potentially responsible for many deaths.

[sweetheart]

13. wait a moment on that

by ending the spread of HIV and HEpatitis C, as well as ending overdose issues given safe knowledge of drugs potencies, the actual deaths you metion would go way down, not up... and then the violence becomes a point of false morals.

By allowing drugs to be sold at medical clinics, issues of addiction could be supervised and administered. Britain had very low heroin deaths and addiction prior to making it illegal. (before that it was legal, and drugs perscribed by by doctors)

THe prohibition is what is making the deaths. As well, the supply chain issues of guns protecting contracts and all that, are killing 1000's of poeple every month in american cities... what about them?

Death is part of life... the policy of ending the criminalization and regulating supply is "harm minimization"... it reduces addiction, diseaase, long term suffering and most deaths... not all... of course... people die.. and certainly, were i intent on committing suicide, heroin overdose is appearantly a very pleasant way to go....

[Cleita]

15. I mean if someone kills someone and then they

find that he is also on drugs, I think it's a little different than just being caught with drugs. If your argument was valid, then we would have to incarcerate all automobile manufacturers for being responsible for possible deaths.

On Edit: I meant this as a response to #12.

[LifeDuringWartime]

11. start with taking the fucking propaganda off of the airwaves

and start no-nonsense education in schools. perhaps adopt a similar system to what the Dutch use.

[KamaAina]

14. Janklow just got 100 days in jail for *manslaughter*.

In South Dakota, simple possession of less than 2 ounces of pot is a misdemeanor carrying a mandatory sentence of 1 year, plus a $1,000 fine.

http://www.norml.org/index.cfm?wtm_view=&Group_ID=4564

Clearly the system is broke, and we've got to fix it.

[MrSlayer]

16. Legalize and Tax! Duh!

Stop creating criminals with these ludicrous drug laws. All they do is hurt what are otherwise law abiding people. Stop wasting money trying to stop it from coming in, stop wasting funds on police and prisons and use it for treatment and education. Prohibition didn't work in the 20's and sure as shit doesn't work now. Legalize and take the criminal element out of it.

[DoNotRefill]

18. Treat them exactly like alcohol.

Regulate them, tax them, put the same restrictions on them, and let people choose what they're going to do.

[Edge]

19. What's wrong with the current policy????

Well, for starters, drug users spend more time in jail than murderers, rapists, child molesters, etc. Drug users don't hurt other people either (if they did drugs on their own and not through gangs, cartels, etc.) Yet they spend more time in jail than those other people who did more severe crimes. That isn't fair at all.

Secondly, drug users go to jail or pay fines for even the most minor offenses. For example, people who smoke pot often times get fined or imprisoned because of their habit. I can see if the potheads drove and were smoking weed that they should be punished. But if its at their own home and they don't plan on operating any machinery, what's the big deal?

I think these instances should be looked at again and the laws should be changed.

Edit: Some info I found on the current sentence length of drug users vs offenders who have committed criminal sexual conduct:

The average length of drug sentences was 50 months here in Minnesota (source: KSTP.com) vs 21 months for inmates who have committed criminal sexual conduct. (source: Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines Commission.)

[Avonrepus]

20. Just been down graded in the UK

From 29th it'll be a class C drug like Steroids are, but the maximum jail sentence for Class C drug dealers is 14 years now:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/drugs/Story/0,2763,580507,00.html

her is an amusing article on it:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,1129330,00.html

~Just for the record im not too bothered as i don't use the stuff but it may mean police efforts can be better directed against dealers/hard drugs.

[sweetheart]

21. welcome to DU tyke

:) My local pub is run by a yorkshireman... great respect.

Good to have you about.

regards to you and yours,

-sweetheart :)