English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

All I know is that I live in a very good part of town and would have no problem getting what ever I wanted in about 15-20 minutes. Now if I can in a good part of town I have to imagine that it gets even easier the closer you get to those proverbial tracks. So what has the government done but spend $20,000,000,000? $20 billion a year and everyone can still get what ever they want, sound someone is winning.

2007-04-04 12:38:57 · 21 answers · asked by rimoneyman 2 in Politics & Government Law Enforcement & Police

21 answers

I'll preface this by stating that I am a prosecutor who spends a lot of time litigating drug crimes. The "War on Drugs" was a nice 1980's political idea, but that was it. Politics and Reality rarely mix.

Today, in many jurisdictions, there is no "War on Drugs." There is a war on specific people, and there is a war on specific drugs.

Today, not many prosecutors or agents really care about marijuana. Even large operations.

This morning, I had to deal with a case in which two young children were removed from their mother's home. They had been neglected and abused. Their mother is pregnant and her UA was five times over the threshold for methamphetamine. Her childrens' busdriver had come to the door because the kids hadn't gotten on the bus for days. Mom answered incoherently (and the condition of the house and children I will leave to your imagination). Suffice to say that the children were removed on an emergency basis.

I am in my mid-thirties and managed through law school. I now have a family. From your question, I gather that your are probably in your 20's and don't have any real responsibilities yet. Several years ago, I probably would have posted the same question you did. In fact, I may be tempted today...

I think we can agree that the "War on Drugs" was lost long ago. But there are certain drugs, like meth, that are worth fighting. I have never seen anything so destructive.

I would vote for legalization of marijuana if it meant that the federal government would actually spend some time on combatting real drugs.

Maybe this doesn't answer your question. Then again, after reading what you wrote, you don't have a question...

2007-04-04 19:46:39 · answer #1 · answered by snowdrift 3 · 3 0

I'm not sure how the war on drugs is handled. When you see people in your neighborhood selling drugs, do you call the police? If so, do they come immediately and arrest the drug dealers?

The county I live in had a real push to clean up the drugs. First, when drug dealers were reported, they were just watched for months to find out where the source was. In another round a few years later, they set up the dealers to sell drugs within 1000 feet of the school to get them on stiffer charges.

Then I noticed there were a lot of meth labs around. You could see the white smoke at night in any direction. They used airplanes to find and catch these people.

Now many are using prescription drugs as well. Oxycontin and others. Perhaps having ex drug addicts talk to all junior high students in assemblies about what using drugs did to their lives would help these kids to say "no" to drugs. Nothing like a dose of reality.

2007-04-04 13:22:45 · answer #2 · answered by BekindtoAnimals22 7 · 0 0

Perhaps you have never encountered people on methamphetamine, crack cocaine or even powder. While you might think it an odd reaction, as a defense attorney I see how this wrecks their lives, the lives of their loved ones and society generally. Nothing should be done to suggest tolerance or encourage drug use, particulary these drugs. Many times the 500 hour treatment program in Federal Prison is the only thing that brings people around. After staying up 4-5 nights (as on meth) people become psychotic and have killed family members. I believe many people are detered by the criminalization of these substances. A society of druggies would be impoverished and collapse in a hundred years.

P.S. Most of those being federally prosecuted have no money for lawyers because they've spent it all on drugs---so most of those cases are appointed by the Court and paid for by taxpayers----those cases cover our overhead only.

2007-04-04 12:50:27 · answer #3 · answered by ? 2 · 1 1

yeah, the war on drugs is making lots of lawyers plenty wealthy....its a common fact that no drug dealer goes to jail until his lawyers have drained away his cash. The war on drugs does create a lot of jobs for law enforcement, prison guards, illegal aliens (they build the prisons). It also gets a lot of folks out of the projects and into nicer digs at the state pen...other than that stuff it doesnt do a darn thing except maybe make sneaking around doing dope more exciting.

Ps I almost forgot that the war on drugs gives the government another excuse to raise our taxes. Thats an important one there.

Please take note that the dude two doors below me is a lawyer and hes all for the drug war....wow...go figure

2007-04-04 12:47:30 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

As well as costing taxpayers billions of dollars, wasting resources that could be used for less victim-less crimes, and imprisoning users for simple possession, the war on drugs has the effect of a latter-day Prohibition. Prohibition [Eliot Ness, Al Capone, etc.] firmly established organized crime in the US, and it's never gone away. The war on drugs and the criminalizing of recreational drugs - do some reading and you'll notice that the criminalization of cannabis drugs was originally political and not pharmaceutical, and is encouraged by alcohol and tobacco lobbies - has established a criminal drug industry, instead of bringing in millions of tax dollars on legal dope, which could be taxed like alcohol and tobacco.

2007-04-04 12:53:11 · answer #5 · answered by falconrf 4 · 1 0

Good points, the war on drugs is a waste. But it may actually be easier in your neighborhood because the middle class and affluent have more leeway in every law we break.

If a guilty man with a lawyer and a guilty man without a lawyer stand in the same courtroom they will leave by different doors.

2007-04-04 12:54:03 · answer #6 · answered by paralegaltechnik 3 · 0 0

Oh the war on drugs is definitely doing something.

It's raising the price of drugs on the street, meaning it is increasing whatever other crime is associated with drug use.

It's costing taxpayer dollars to fund for people to catch, try, and incarcerate offenders.

It's giving gangs a reason to shoot each other, although it doesn't help their aim enough to hit only their targets, killing innocent people in the process.

Now, if you meant is it doing anything positive, the answer is "no".

2007-04-04 13:59:35 · answer #7 · answered by open4one 7 · 2 0

I am not going to be popular for saying this, but there would be no need for a war on drugs if everyone would just stop using them. That simple--if there is no demand, no one would be trying to sell them. So don't gripe about the WAR unless you're willing to stop using drugs.

Some people think they should legalize drugs and that would solve the problem. How would you like to be driving down a busy highway with everybody f**ked up on weed? No, I don't think legalization is the answer.

Personally, I think they should let junkies have all the drugs they want so that they could go ahead and kill themselves. That may sound harsh, but drug addiction is a slow death anyway.

2007-04-04 13:04:50 · answer #8 · answered by KIZIAH 7 · 0 2

The war on drugs gives politicians an avenue and a publicly acceptable reason to reward their business-based financial supporters with money. Firesign Theater said it well 30 years ago: "Keep the problem in the pockets of the businessmen. " And ain't it the truth?

2007-04-04 12:49:54 · answer #9 · answered by bullwinkle 5 · 2 0

No I don't but I think the war on terror is.

Before we moved into Afghanistan the production of Heroin was almost zero for the first time in history now 4 years later the crop is the largest in history.
Coincidence?

2007-04-04 13:18:52 · answer #10 · answered by plainjs 2 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers