The war on drugs

I know. I must be hallucinating when I wonder if Perdue might step up here. Given her ridiculous comments about medical marijuana, I'm sure she'd rather see drug offenders get death by electrocution than get a break.

A World Health Organization study found no relationship between harshness of drug laws and the level of drug use - a study done in 17 countries.

That's the money that would be available from stopping the war on drugs and legalizing them.

I don't know why it always seems that I am always throwing my bona fides around in here. And while I accept the possibility that it could be because those who don't know what they are doing go out of their way to tell people that they know what they are doing, hopefully this is not the case.

In less than two months I will have a Bachelor of Science degree in Criminal Justice. You can be assured that the War on Drugs was discussed in virtually every CRJ course, from Ciminology to Law Enforcement Ops to Organized Crime.

I have had a few professors advocate legalization or decriminalization, many who say that the current situation is untenable, and one or two who are for staying the course.

Here are a few facts that are, in my experience irrefutable:

-prohibition increases crime
-prohibition is extremely costly
-treatment and prevention are more effective than incarceration
-prohibition does not curb drug use

The true elephant in the room is that opposition to legalization or decriminalization boils down to conjecture.

We know what isn't working. The data does not lie. We cannot know if other options are better or worse because we lack the will to try. Even worse is the fact that these options aren't even on the table for serious discussion.

So while the poppies in Afghanistan fund terrorists, cartels in Mexico and Latin America overtake the government, our prisons fill, and our economy tanks, the United States continues to take the position more prohibition, aka more of what does not work, will make things better.

Finally, the sad thing is, as James said, everyone knows this. The cops know it. The academia knows it. Foreign governments know it. Our government knows it. This begs the question: what happens when everyone knows what to do but nobody is willing to do it? The answer, of course, is nothing.

The right to use drugs isn't at issue. The war on drugs is an assault on property rights, such as the right to cultivate, possess, and sell particular substances. These are all economic freedoms. When you undermine property rights, and claim that the state has a virtually unlimited right to "regulate" economic issues, this is the kind of non-sense you are asking for.

The war on drugs is totally unconstitutional at the federal level. This policy alone should indicate the constitution as a document limiting the power of the government is virtually useless, and that the only limit of federal power is the population's willingness to put up with tyranny.

The War on Drugs = the War on Poverty = the War on Terrorism. All battles with no end in sight. All excuses to expand federal power in the name of fighting a problem that is, to a large degree, caused by the government itself.

I am in favor of Legalizing Marijuana and Reducing the Penalty on Crack Cocaine to a Misdemeanor instead of a Felony. And we should focus on Drug Rehab instead of Locking up users! We need to implement these programs SOON or the African American Community will be extinct!

purchased the poppies in Afghanistan instead of trying to fight a drug war over there too?

And did you mention the war going on in Mexico because of our puritan politics?

And have I mentioned hemp lately?

Just like prohibition, the moralist rail against this continually, but meantime the population supports it. I have always believed that in a Republic we all have responsibitities to society, and they shouldn't need legislation and prison sentences to enforce them. We put guidelines up to show the safe limits, like speed limits, or intoxication levels, etc. Then it should be our responsibility to keep within those limits. Those who don't, pay the penalty accordingly. You can bet that if these drugs were legal, the bottom would fall on their prices, and a whole lot of crooks and law enforcement people would be poorer. The amount of this stuff available, even since the fifties, when I can remember that government on many levels were going to stamp it out, is enormous. And it couldn't be at this level without the cooperation of many levels of government. Just another racket!

Another economist makes the case.

Prohibition creates violence because it drives the drug market underground. This means buyers and sellers cannot resolve their disputes with lawsuits, arbitration or advertising, so they resort to violence instead.

Violence was common in the alcohol industry when it was banned during Prohibition, but not before or after.

Violence is the norm in illicit gambling markets but not in legal ones. Violence is routine when prostitution is banned but not when it's permitted. Violence results from policies that create black markets, not from the characteristics of the good or activity in question.

The only way to reduce violence, therefore, is to legalize drugs. Fortuitously, legalization is the right policy for a slew of other reasons.