|
UncleNasty -> RE: Escalating drug wars in Mexico and the US border (11/25/2008 10:08:40 AM)
|
Dnoyar,
I'm not fond of singling people out but your opinion was expressed in such bold words I feel a bit compelled. I also believe your position has been heavily influenced by experiences with people close to you being addicts. Certainly addiction is tragic and destructive, and I am sorry if you've had those experiences. But your reaction overlooks a tremendous number of facts.
According to the War on Drugs Clock we are spending $1600.00 per second on the war on drugs. I expect there are a number of costs that are not included in this figure. For example foreign aid often has money for fighting cultivation and production. I also doubt if all of the social costs are included - A father that smokes recreationally is arrested for blowing a joint and for simple possession. Mandatory minimums apply and he ends up in jail. His wife is now a single mother, his children in a single parent household, less parental influence, one income so fewer resources and opportunities. One income not being enough the mother starts sucking at the government tit, a further economic drain. The social and economic costs continue playing out for years.
Addiction is a bitch. Many to most addicts would prefer not to be. How many 12 step and rehab programs are out there trying to help people? Scads of them. And this is without much in the way of financial resources.
If we converted some to all of the $1600/second towards rehab and recovery the impact addiction has on our society would be greatly reduced. Greatly. Not everyone who gets good treatment will recover, and many will require more than one stint in a program. Recidivist rates are pretty high. Being given more than one bite at that apple also dramatically increases success rates. I'm guessing now, that a good program may cost 60K or so and might last 6 months. If those numbers are anywhere close then we could fund one recovered addict every 38 seconds, or 95 every hour. That seems a much better allocation of resources to me than prison.
It is also important to point out that rates of reincarceration are quite high so that also seems to be an ongoing expense. Effective treatment in our private and for profit prisons is really not existant. Why pay for expensive treatment programs when it cuts into the bottom line?
Prohibition has many lessons for us. It doesn't work for starters. The numbers of alcoholics actually went up as a result. When made illegal it simply moved underground and then the wrong people were made powerfull. Organized crime in the twenties flourished, and we are still dealing with models and groups prohibition empowered. The drug cartels have been schooled by the Prohibition model too.
The history of the war on drugs is also interesting. The roots and beginnings did not develop out of concern for citizens. They developed out of racism. First laws were enacted against the smoking opium of the Chinese in San Francisco. The opium in laudnum, drug of choice of victorian women, was not addressed. The racism continued with cocaine and the campaigns for laws in re cocaine were enacted out of fear that black men used it and became so crazy they ran out and raped white women.
Marijuana didn't get on the radar until the mid 30's with the passing of the Marijuana Tax Act and the formation of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics. Motives seemed to be economic for this and involved Hearst, DuPont and FBN Commissioner Anslinger. Machinery had just been developed that would separate hemp fibres much more cheaply so paper and clothing could could be made more economically than from trees and cotton.
Hearst owned papers, millions of acres of forests, and paper mills. If hemp began competing in the world of paper much of his fortune would have beem rendered worthless.
DuPont had also just developed processes, machinery and chemicals for paper production from trees and they stood to loose billions if hemp had been allowed to enter the market.
Anslinger wrote much of the campaign against hemp/marijuana and Hearst printed it in his papers, on paper produced from his trees, in his mills, using DuPont machinery and chemicals. Among the false claims made by Anslinger was that using hemp turned people into violent insane criminals. Interesting that years later he did a 180 degree turn on this when he teamed up with McCarthy in the communist witch hunts. He then made the claim that it was a red plot because it made people such pacifists there would be no resistance. Again, years later, we also learn that McCarthy had a long addiction to morphine and his drug supplier was none other than Anslinger. How is that for ironic hypocrisy.
In 1937 congressional hearings on the Tax Act the AMA was kept in the dark. Only one Dr testified saying the AMA knew of no harmful effects from marijuana, and further, between 30-40 products were on the market containing medical marijuana approved by the AMA.
Addiction is terrible. The war on drugs is a total farce. Both are true.
I didn't even mention abuse and addiction to prescription medicines.
One handed Uncle Nasty
|
|
|
|
