A Solution to the War on Drugs
One issue that I feel very strong about is drug legalization. I am immensely opposed to any sort of drug legalization, and I am horrified at the fact that we are even considering legalizing marijuana. It is wildly disturbing, and I am beyond shocked that America would entertain such a horrendous idea.
At this point it behooves me to say that I have never done any sort of drug, drank any sort of alcohol, except for in my younger years I would have a miniscule shot of wine at synagogue, yet I refuse to do even that now. I refuse to do any sort of drug in college, and I do not care if it is socially crippling. I know that I am naïve and an idealist adolescent but these are my sentiments and I plan to follow through with them. Where my hatred of drugs came from I am unsure; maybe the millions that the government has spent on anti-drug propaganda worked on me. Some may hate me for my anti-drug views, and I need to do some serious character work on stopping judging people who do drugs, and I know that this will cause an issue in college. As I see, slowly but surely, people who I know from school and people who I know well experimenting with drugs and alcohol (note this is a minority of people, but one person is one too many) I feel distressed and helpless, and I fear that the fact that I am so outspoken on this issue it may compel someone to spite me by experimenting.
Now that my personal position is known, I would like to propose a plan of action for what America should do in its war on drugs. What ought to be done is not legalizing drugs but focusing more on the more dangerous drugs: narcotics, crack/cocaine and methamphetamines as opposed to marijuana. Some of the proponents of marijuana legalization claim that it would allow for the US to focus on more dangerous drugs. Yes, the US ought to do this, but legalizing marijuana does not take away the dangers of marijuana. I do not want to address its addictive nature right now, but I heard a credible statistic that it is 14 times more likely to cause cancer than a normal cigarette.
The three classes of drugs (which do overlap) are a larger threat to American than marijuana itself. They are more deadly, physically addictive, and are more of a threat to the economy than marijuana. (I site the drug videos from health class, the history channel, and magazines such as Newsweek and Time for this type of information.) Dealing with the largest threat in the war on drugs is what ought to be done. I propose a shift in federal spending to crack down on the big three, and a new focus placed on them. What this will do to marijuana is unofficially make it slightly less illegal than the others, for it is less dangerous. What this will do is deter the use of the more dangerous drugs for a time, and then cracking down on marijuana can be done in the future, once we have controlled our narcotics, crack and meth problem.
Hitherto all I have proposed for a plan of action is an increase in the percentage of federal spending to the most dangerous drugs so as to isolate that aspect of the problem to, in the future, eliminate the marijuana problem. The next step is to increase the penalties for the manufacturing and possession of marijuana. I propose mandatory sentences of say 15 to life for possession, with mandatory rehabilitation stints during incarceration. For dealers and manufactures, I propose a mandatory 20 years and a sentence of 25 to life for most dealer and manufacturers. The death penalty may be given for some dealers. To quickly address the practicality of all this, taxes must be raised slightly. Ideally, we would take this money out of the money given to the welfare system, but that is another essay.
The second phase of this newly emphasized war on drugs is more extreme. I propose an agreement, throughout both of the American continents to try to catch, and punish drug dealers and manufacturers. I admit that this is fairly idealistic, for it is far from guaranteed that Columbia would agree to this, and all of the countries are not committed to the war on drugs as America is. This will hinder the economy of some of these countries. However, if this were to be implemented the countries would not necessarily need to keep the same drug policies; they would just have to work together to attempt to eliminate the problem. There would be funding provided by all the countries, and obviously the United States and Canada would have to bear more of the economic burden, but it would pay off in the long run due to the improved economy by the decrease in the drug trade. (Here some may content my analysis). If this is a success (which it will be), other countries would be included in this organization, hopefully such countries as Afghanistan and Britain would join this organization. This would grow into a worldwide organization against drugs.
This is my idealized plan. Hopefully, the countries that have a fairly large part of their economy invested in drugs, Peru, Columbia, etc. could use that land for the growth of fruits and vegetables, and those could be sold to bolster the economy. These would be sold in their countries, and world wide, and can help to cure the poverty and hunger that exists in the world. For example, in Venezuela the drug farms could be used for produce, and it could be shipped around Venezuela. In Venezuela there is a food problem, and the socialist economy would be helped by an increase in food produced in its own country. An increase in food production from Latin America could be purchased by charity organizations and sold in countries such as Ethiopia and India. They would not necessarily be sold at the same rate the produce is sold now, and they may be sold just to these starving countries, so as to prevent inflation.
The latter part of this plan is rather idealized, and may not be realistic. However, the first half of it, the shifting of the focus of the war on drugs to the more dangerous drugs so as to eliminate that problem, then focus on marijuana and the less dangerous drugs. An increase in communication between the US and its Latin American neighbors about the war on drugs and drug policy will help the problem, and possibly an organization dealing with drugs could be formed.
The war on drugs is a terrible problem in the US today, and something must be done. Regardless if my plan is incredibly flawed and I am a rambling idiot who knows nothing about economics, politics, or drugs for that matter, it does not change the fact that we are in a dire struggle against drugs. It is unfortunate but this will raise taxes, but I believe that drug control is what our taxes should be spent on, and it is the government’s duty to ensure the safety and prosperity of its citizens. I have proposed a rather idealized and elaborate plan that may or may not work. Regardless, we are losing the war on drugs and America must act!
At this point it behooves me to say that I have never done any sort of drug, drank any sort of alcohol, except for in my younger years I would have a miniscule shot of wine at synagogue, yet I refuse to do even that now. I refuse to do any sort of drug in college, and I do not care if it is socially crippling. I know that I am naïve and an idealist adolescent but these are my sentiments and I plan to follow through with them. Where my hatred of drugs came from I am unsure; maybe the millions that the government has spent on anti-drug propaganda worked on me. Some may hate me for my anti-drug views, and I need to do some serious character work on stopping judging people who do drugs, and I know that this will cause an issue in college. As I see, slowly but surely, people who I know from school and people who I know well experimenting with drugs and alcohol (note this is a minority of people, but one person is one too many) I feel distressed and helpless, and I fear that the fact that I am so outspoken on this issue it may compel someone to spite me by experimenting.
Now that my personal position is known, I would like to propose a plan of action for what America should do in its war on drugs. What ought to be done is not legalizing drugs but focusing more on the more dangerous drugs: narcotics, crack/cocaine and methamphetamines as opposed to marijuana. Some of the proponents of marijuana legalization claim that it would allow for the US to focus on more dangerous drugs. Yes, the US ought to do this, but legalizing marijuana does not take away the dangers of marijuana. I do not want to address its addictive nature right now, but I heard a credible statistic that it is 14 times more likely to cause cancer than a normal cigarette.
The three classes of drugs (which do overlap) are a larger threat to American than marijuana itself. They are more deadly, physically addictive, and are more of a threat to the economy than marijuana. (I site the drug videos from health class, the history channel, and magazines such as Newsweek and Time for this type of information.) Dealing with the largest threat in the war on drugs is what ought to be done. I propose a shift in federal spending to crack down on the big three, and a new focus placed on them. What this will do to marijuana is unofficially make it slightly less illegal than the others, for it is less dangerous. What this will do is deter the use of the more dangerous drugs for a time, and then cracking down on marijuana can be done in the future, once we have controlled our narcotics, crack and meth problem.
Hitherto all I have proposed for a plan of action is an increase in the percentage of federal spending to the most dangerous drugs so as to isolate that aspect of the problem to, in the future, eliminate the marijuana problem. The next step is to increase the penalties for the manufacturing and possession of marijuana. I propose mandatory sentences of say 15 to life for possession, with mandatory rehabilitation stints during incarceration. For dealers and manufactures, I propose a mandatory 20 years and a sentence of 25 to life for most dealer and manufacturers. The death penalty may be given for some dealers. To quickly address the practicality of all this, taxes must be raised slightly. Ideally, we would take this money out of the money given to the welfare system, but that is another essay.
The second phase of this newly emphasized war on drugs is more extreme. I propose an agreement, throughout both of the American continents to try to catch, and punish drug dealers and manufacturers. I admit that this is fairly idealistic, for it is far from guaranteed that Columbia would agree to this, and all of the countries are not committed to the war on drugs as America is. This will hinder the economy of some of these countries. However, if this were to be implemented the countries would not necessarily need to keep the same drug policies; they would just have to work together to attempt to eliminate the problem. There would be funding provided by all the countries, and obviously the United States and Canada would have to bear more of the economic burden, but it would pay off in the long run due to the improved economy by the decrease in the drug trade. (Here some may content my analysis). If this is a success (which it will be), other countries would be included in this organization, hopefully such countries as Afghanistan and Britain would join this organization. This would grow into a worldwide organization against drugs.
This is my idealized plan. Hopefully, the countries that have a fairly large part of their economy invested in drugs, Peru, Columbia, etc. could use that land for the growth of fruits and vegetables, and those could be sold to bolster the economy. These would be sold in their countries, and world wide, and can help to cure the poverty and hunger that exists in the world. For example, in Venezuela the drug farms could be used for produce, and it could be shipped around Venezuela. In Venezuela there is a food problem, and the socialist economy would be helped by an increase in food produced in its own country. An increase in food production from Latin America could be purchased by charity organizations and sold in countries such as Ethiopia and India. They would not necessarily be sold at the same rate the produce is sold now, and they may be sold just to these starving countries, so as to prevent inflation.
The latter part of this plan is rather idealized, and may not be realistic. However, the first half of it, the shifting of the focus of the war on drugs to the more dangerous drugs so as to eliminate that problem, then focus on marijuana and the less dangerous drugs. An increase in communication between the US and its Latin American neighbors about the war on drugs and drug policy will help the problem, and possibly an organization dealing with drugs could be formed.
The war on drugs is a terrible problem in the US today, and something must be done. Regardless if my plan is incredibly flawed and I am a rambling idiot who knows nothing about economics, politics, or drugs for that matter, it does not change the fact that we are in a dire struggle against drugs. It is unfortunate but this will raise taxes, but I believe that drug control is what our taxes should be spent on, and it is the government’s duty to ensure the safety and prosperity of its citizens. I have proposed a rather idealized and elaborate plan that may or may not work. Regardless, we are losing the war on drugs and America must act!
posted by Brian Hillman at 12:29 AM
3 Comments:
In response to some of the War On Drugs--it is far too large of an issue to debate over a blog, but specifically:
"I do not want to address its addictive nature right now, but I heard a credible statistic that it is 14 times more likely to cause cancer than a normal cigarette."
I, too, have seen this stat in many places, but it can't be taken blindly. The average marijuana smoker, no matter how huge a pothead he may be, does not smoke nearly as many marijuana "cigarettes" as one does tobacco cigarettes. A tobacco smokes far more than a marijuana smoker. Also, cigarettes are packed tighter than joints. When these factors are taken into consideration, there is actually less of a chance of lung smoker from marijuana as opposed to tobacco.
"I propose mandatory sentences of say 15 to life for possession, with mandatory rehabilitation stints during incarceration."
This, in response to any marijuana possession, no matter what the size. This doesn't seem feasible, but really more of a punitive measure than a recuperative one. As a high school kid, I'm sure you know many students (and maybe even friends) who at one point have smoked marijuana before. Should all of these "recreational" or occasional smokers have their life essentially thrown away by such a severe measure? Hell, we've even had Presidents who have admittedly smoked marijuana (and maybe even done coke) and would not be able to reach any truly powerful political position with your proposed plan. It is, you admit, a plan for the far off future, but in a country where a huge number of Americans throughout the socio-economic spectrum have smoked, this doesn't seem reasonable. This, along with the proposed death penalty of certain dealers, seems to be more in your punitive straight edge thoughts rather than the ultimate (or immediate) good of society.
Also, I haven't seen any reasonable stats that have shown any increase in crime due solely to marijuana.
Feel free to refute...
Hello,
My name is Karen Shacham and I work with CNN Pipeline in Atlanta.
I thought you might be interested to know that there will be a drug control conference live on CNN Pipeline at 2:00pm ET!
National Drug Control Policy Director John Walters, Justice and Homeland Security department officials, and officials from the Mexican Embassy hold a news conference to announce the first-ever synthetic drug control strategy, focusing on curbing Mexican and international trafficking of methamphetamine and other chemicals.
CNN Pipeline is an online, commercial-free multiple live-news feed. It showcases four simultaneous news feeds from around the world and an on-demand function that allows you to select from a variety of news stories.
Please let your members know that they can go to http://www.cnn.com and click on the Pipeline link to watch it *live* and get a two week free trial.
Thanks and have a great day!
Karen
Great post! You remind me of myself 20 years ago and I think you would have voted for Reagan too.
Unfortunately, most of your ideas have been tried and failed. The usage of drugs in this country transcends lifespans and presidents (BushII and Clinton). Recreational drugs are now a part of the American culture.
Here is my post from Golden Gate Blog.
Legalize Drugs Now!
Here's an issue that really gets me going. So I did not bother including statistics, graphic charts and all the other objective nonsense to support an idea that's long overdue.
Billions of dollars are spent on the DEA, FBI, and other police agencies to enforce the unenforceable. Let's face it, you probably know someone that smokes marijuana and what's going to happen to him? Nothing. However, we love to throw our tax dollars at stopping the distributors of these kind of drugs but do nothing to test and penalize the "Casual user." This is fiscally irresponsible and moronic. "The drug war" is just another way the feds can justify your high tax payments.
But a granny near Alabama is saying:
"Oh, but I am a moral person and I don't want people hurting themselves with drugs" Puke!
Get over it! It's happening everyday and the stuff is avalilable at a corner near you. Everywhere, someone is buying marijuana, crack, and heroin from some sorry loser who doesn't pay taxes and is probably living better than us. Nevertheless, we send that 1040 form off to the IRS for them to take our money and flush it down the freaking drug toilet. I personally pay out way too much in taxes to tolerate this kind of crap.
Drug related gang violence and deadly freeway chases have taken its toll here and worldwide where many people are maimed, hurt and killed annually. Consequently, nothing is going to stop this problem because the user lives in your neighborhood, teaches in your schools, works in your hospitals and so on. Then they'll go to rehab, find Jesus and their peers can coddle them like newborn babies. Later, we'll hear "It's so good to be sober."
This lame policy has been going on for decades (Remember Paraquat?) and where are we today? Let's just legalize it and stop throwing the money into the sewer. The savings on enforcement will be tremendous and the left over tax revenue can go to something that actually benefits the average tax payor.
(Legalization should include severe DWI penalties which are missing from the books today. DWI=Felony. In other words, be a responsible user or else!)
Control it.
Sell it.
Tax it.
What do you think?
Post a Comment
<< Home