English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories
22

Is there a point to the war on drugs? We are spending billions a yr on it, and we don't seem to shut down many operations. And there is always going to be a way to get illegal things on the black market, no matter what restrictions you put on an item, there is a way to get it. So, do you think that money could be better spent on other things like feeding the hungry or free college education? If the drug trade was regulated, then you end the corruption, the possibility of "dirty" drugs would be gone, and there wouldn't be the violence that we see now. Not to mention, the gov could tax away and make even more money. So, does prohibition really work?

2007-07-20 23:52:09 · 11 answers · asked by Coma White 5 in Politics & Government Law Enforcement & Police

Also, check out the Netherlands, they have legalized many "soft drugs" as they call them.

2007-07-21 00:10:54 · update #1

SIMONE OZBOLT, anything can kill, you can overdose on water. Not to mention, there are plenty of legal pharmaceuticals to abuse.

2007-07-21 10:18:10 · update #2

mikey, I was simply asking if the war on drugs is winnable, I didn't say I wanted free drugs. I was giving the netherlands as an example that it could work to legalize some stuff.

2007-07-21 10:20:13 · update #3

11 answers

The "war on drugs" is a long running pointless nightmare. At the same time that my state, Arkansas, is spending millions of dollars arresting and locking up "drug criminals". The free treatment for the sickness of "Drug Addiction" consists of 50 beds - state wide. All drugs should be made legal. A very small percentage of the money currently spent on "drug wars" would fund all of the treatment anyone could want. The current system of selling liquor would keep it mostly out of the hands of kids, more so than the system we have now does. The tax revenue would increase. The violent crime rate would go down. Ever hear of anyone sticking up a store for a 6 pack. The gun deaths would go down. Before drugs became common, during the 50's we had lots of street gangs. They were armed with bicycle chains, glass ropes, zip guns, and brass knuckles. They would have had Thompson Machine Guns if they would have had drug money. So much crime is directly related to the criminalization of drugs that there would be a huge fall in violent and property crime. You don't need to sell stolen goods or your body if drugs are as cheap as alcohol. Would you have people ODing on drugs. Sure, you would - people drink themselves to death too. Think of it as evolution in action.

2007-07-22 11:37:48 · answer #1 · answered by oldhippypaul 6 · 3 1

The Drug War is not about sending messages: It's about sending people to prison. And prison cannot "rehabilitate" patriotic Americans who believe that marijuana prohibition is both unconstitutional and immoral: all it can do is abuse and alienate them. Society might place some reasonable regulations and restrictions on its use, as we do for alcohol and tobacco. However, it is criminal for politicians to lock people away for it. In a free country, the message should be to wait until adulthood, use common sense, take responsibility for your actions, and respect the personal freedom and privacy of others, not locks and bars for those who disagree.

There's a lot of issues here. The amount of Americans in the prison system has doubled since 1985 and 33% of inmates doing a lifetime sentence in CA are for drug related charges. The big problem now is that this "war on drugs" provides so many law enforcement jobs and is such a great excuse for taxes that it's not going to go away.

We may see marajuana decriminalized, not legalized/taxed/regulated, in the next 10 years because it's become such a nusance for many states. Many small towns in Maine and upper state New York have already decriminalized it.

In 2000, 46.5 percent of the 1,579,566 total arrests for drug abuse violations were for marijuana -- a total of 734,497. Of those, 646,042 people were arrested for possession alone. This is an increase over 1999, when a total of 704,812 Americans were arrested for marijuana offenses, of which 620,541 were for possession alone.

This is ridiculous. I could write 5 pages on this topic but nobody would read it.

2007-07-22 11:41:29 · answer #2 · answered by danksquish 3 · 2 1

If you want free "soft drugs" move to the Netherlands. The war on drugs will go on forever as the bad guys have more rights than the good guys. I agree it is frustrated, but how do you tell the victim of a drug related crime that the person is going to get away with it because the money has been spent elsewhere to prosecute the suspect? The war against drugs IS a thing that can be won. We need to get help for our addicts and have stricter boundaries and punishments for our dealers. This includes watching our borders correctly, but that is a different story. I wasn't trying to be rude, but as a cop, I see every day what happens to the people who use drugs and the people who they abuse, harm, kill and ruin. Legalizing drugs would make it even more rampant. "soft"drugs are the gateway for the "harder" ones. Do a bit more research and you will see.

2007-07-21 02:32:23 · answer #3 · answered by mikey 3 · 1 4

Prohibition does not work. All it does is encourage crime and corruption - the coca farmers in South America are not getting rich are they? Drugs will always have market, especially as life is in fact crap for most people. Drugs need to be made legal and regulated so it puts the crims out of bussines, assures quality and price. Availability of cleaner drugs will prevent many deaths. Crack should never be made legal, but there willl be enough legal choices that people would not choose this baby-killer. Driving drug users underground and awau from their families does not help anyone.
It is complicated and what I'm saying is just my opinion, any one who has had someone they love destroyed by drugs will hate me.

2007-07-21 00:06:03 · answer #4 · answered by cobra 7 · 4 3

Whoever came up with the term "war on drugs" (Nixon?) didn't exactly think it through. Any war is a war against PEOPLE.

2007-07-21 08:47:19 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

The war on drugs makes as much sense as the war in Iraq. The primary goal is providing government contracting opportunities to corporate interests. If the "war" was ever won the profit opportunuties would disappear.
This is also why cannabis will never be legalized, it would take too much profit away from Republican campaign contributors.

2007-07-21 01:13:02 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2 5

The war on drugs is a non-winnable declaration until such time as the borders are secured.

2007-07-20 23:58:02 · answer #7 · answered by spag 4 · 2 5

The war on drugs is just another prophecy or propaganda that "the man" preaches so that the general population will blind to reality.......just a thought:)

2007-07-21 00:00:13 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2 3

like the "war on terror" the drug war is not winnable. but many communities really like the money they can confiscate.

2007-07-21 00:13:17 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1 4

It is necessary ------ because drugs kill --- rather let the dealers and the bigwigs pay the price with their lives than that your child ends up on the
street with a needle in the arm instead...............................................................

2007-07-21 00:12:26 · answer #10 · answered by gorglin 5 · 4 1

fedest.com, questions and answers