My question is what are we gonna do with all of the "war on drugs" vets? How many disabled (physical/mental) vets has the "war on drugs" produced and left to rot in prisons and on the streets? I'm sure the government's vets will be taken care up with their generous pension plans. But what about the wars rebels? The government will never admit that it carried out the "war on drugs" improperly, ineffectively, violently, wrongfully, prejudicedly, and unsuccessfully. The "war on drugs" is literally a civil war where one side doesn't even know it's in war until their face is smashed into the concrete. One side just wants to get high and the other side wants to stop you by any means necessary from fines, imprisoning, taking all of your worldly possessions, and/or ultimately killing you in one way or another. Most people would think it's wrong to arresting someone for simply possessing a bottle of alcohol, right? But seriously most (not all) drugs are less dangerous than alcohol,and that is a fact. If the government did it for a moral reason, because they cared your life and wanted you to be healthy, then I might understand but it is obvious they're not. Because if they did it for a moral motivation then the whole thing would of played out differently with a whole lot less prison and ruining your life (they are ruining people's lives worse than the drugs alone would have). How to win the "war on drugs"? Do the people of the United States want to put an end to this colossal waste of life, resources, and money? The government has been treating American citizens like enemy combatants over what they chose put into their bodies. Is this truly the will of the people? Will the government get out of the way and let the People decided based on an unbiased review of the facts? Or does the government need the "war on drugs" as a pretense to sustain a massive and militant police force? What is their motive if it isn't moral? Do we even know the governments original or present day motives? We have a right to know don't we? Ultimately there are only two options. 1-Drug users are enemies of the state therefore should be persecuted and prosecuted at any cost (government actions indicate this to be their motive). 2-drug users are citizens who need help and protection from themselves therefore the government must intervene. Even the latter sounds intrusive but if that was the motive how much different would things be?
People of all walks of life use and abuse drugs but no one should be made a criminal on par with murderers, assaulters,robbers,drunk drivers,etc. based on that alone. And almost all the crimes associated with drugs are created by the "war on drugs" i.e.cartels,drug gangs,stealing for drugs,etc. Most people who steal for drugs do it FOR drugs not because of drugs, now we can word games say it's still "because of drugs" but that is missing the point. Example: Almost every alcoholic will purchase or beg for funds for alcohol but put his back against the wall and he will steal for it, now in a sense yes booze made him do it but he wasn't even drunk when he did it so booze didn't make him do it. His desire to be drunk motivated him. Getting drunk didn't turn him into a thief and it's the same with most drug addicts. Getting high doesn't cause them run amok stealing, the desire to be high motivates the theft(after they are high they are just as much as likely to steal as is average person among the general population, maybe less). Some would have us believe drugs magically turns people into thieves in of itself. Now granted some people are thieves whether drunk, high, or sober. Am I saying someone who steals to get high is less guilty than someone who steals for the thrill or for profit? No, just as guilty but they are different, and drug thefts can be mitigated and more easily prevented . The reason we are fighting the "war on drugs" and our motivation for the "war"could determine whether or not that person ever became a thief at all and could also prevent many other criminal acts that have their basis in the criminalizing of drugs which turns users into criminals simply for using. Proponents of the "war on drugs" would have you believe that anyone who even questions the "war on drugs" and the present status quo wants to just legalize all drugs with no boundaries whatsoever but that is just propaganda to keep other voices from being heard. But that is not what the majority of those against the "war on drugs" believe. Here's how I believe we win the "war on drugs" and I'll be brief since I already written so much. 1.Quit calling it a war and stop acting like it is a war. 2.Determine the real/new motive for drug laws and publicly make it clear, and that motive should be to help someone if they are an addict and not to hurt them (physically, mentally, financially, etc.) 3.Decriminalize (not legalize) drug use. 4.Quit making drug users criminals, no matter what drug they use, this should of been number one because it is the most important,we need to quit seeing people as criminals based on drug use. 5.Reevaluate all drugs, some should be completely legal i.e. Marijuana and some should remain highly controlled. 6.Still maintain through education and culture that a drug free is the better way to live, this is not an o.k. for everyone to just start using drugs. 7.Eliminate the profit of illegal drugs, make it so there is literally no profit. 8.Control and regulate harder drugs but keep the price affordable and help eliminate drug related thefts, prostitution(this won't eliminate prostitution but a person will not have to sell their body for drugs, as many do). 9.How much freedom will a hard drug addict have? Good question and to start with they are not criminals,they are addicts who need help.Also you cannot force someone to quit and drug supply should be available and cost should be minimal(market value?).Maybe forced rehab to start with but if that doesn't work then what? Permanent assignment to a drug counselor and strict monitoring. Requirement to attend group sessions once a month or week. Given every chance to prove that they are a functioning addict. Failing that then what? Long term rehab? Assignment to a non-functioning addict center? I don't know the answer But not prison (this individual hasn't committed a crime) but obviously this person is in the "need to intervene category". But how, when, why, at what point to intervene will have to be thought about carefully,and ultimately the answers will come as to the right way to care for this human and his/her problem without turning them into a criminal or dehumanizing them, yet holding them accountable for their sake without destroying their life or throwing away the key. And if it doesn't work the first, or second, or third time then we just keep starting over, always remembering that everyday is a new day. This is just a brief outline on a matter that will require much trial and error. To some on both sides this may sound like a compromise, and really it is and a compromise is a much better way to end a war than a crushing defeat by one side especially in a civil war. The solution to America's drug problem is going to require balanced thinking on all sides. The status quo has to change but we just can't open the flood gates, some drugs should never be legalized even if though they need to decriminalized. And are we able to allow something but at the same time teach the nation and the youth that it is wrong. Are we mature enough allow something while at the same time philosophically standing against it? This has been one of our major flaws as a nation concerning certain issues, allowing a thing but not philosophically standing against it. Alcohol is a prime example with all the ups and downs it has had. Alcohol is allowed but have we done enough to warn of its dangers? Have we always been philosophically balanced in educating the youth and the nation? Have we always been able to warn of its dangers without condemning those who drink? Alcohol is a perfect case study for us contemplating the "war on drugs". I am aware of the dangers of decriminalizing drugs but I believe it is way more dangerous to continue down the path of treating fellow Americans as enemies and criminals simply for what they ingest. Right or wrong as they may be, users are still our brothers and sisters and never should the leap be made from someone having a drug problem to all of a sudden you are criminal and enemy of the state. Ludacris when you think about it. Ultimately I know my ideas barely scratch the surface of the solution for this problem but I hope one day enough people shout loud and long enough to be heard by the right people or person. God help us.