Forum Groups

 

Forums / Talking it Over / Drugs. Common Sense for a change

Drugs. Common Sense for a change

17 posts
  1. Larry Allan
    Larry Allan avatar
    0 posts
    4/9/2012 2:04 PM
    What is the best way to deal with drugs? Criminalizing drug users or treating them as patients? Sticking to a strict prohibitionist stance or experimenting with alternative forms of regulation and prevention?

    Latin America is talking about drugs like never before. The taboo that has long prevented open debate about drug policies has been broken -- thanks to a steadily deteriorating situation on the ground and the courageous stand taken by presidents Juan Manuel Santos of Colombia, Otto Perez Molina of Guatemala and Laura Chinchilla of Costa Rica.

    The facts speak for themselves. The foundations of the U.S.-led war on drugs -- eradication of production, interdiction of traffic, and criminalization of consumption -- have not succeeded and never will. When there is established demand for a consumer product, there will be a supply. The only beneficiaries of prohibition are the drug cartels.

    Forty years of strenuous efforts have failed to reduce the production and consumption of illicit drugs. Worse, in Mexico and Central America, prohibition-related violence and corruption have become a major threat to public safety and the stability of democratic institutions.

    In light of the disastrous consequences of the war on drugs, we took the initiative four years ago to convene a Latin American Commission on Drugs and Democracy -- and, more recently, a Global Commission on Drug Policy. Our core message was clear: The war on drugs has failed, with devastating consequences for individuals and societies throughout the Americas.

    Our commissions presented two key recommendations. The first was to end -- as soon as possible -- the criminalization and stigmatization of people who use drugs but who do no harm to others. People struggling with drug abuse or addiction may indeed harm themselves and their families, but criminalization and social marginalization are not going to help them.

    Drug abuse and addiction are public health problems. The most effective response, then, is to provide treatment and health services to all who need them. The criminalization of drug use is the primary obstacle to treatment and rehabilitation.

    Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador, Mexico and Uruguay have already passed laws decriminalizing drug possession for personal consumption. However, given that the legal distinctions between "possession" and "trafficking" are unclear, the law often leads to police corruption and outright discrimination against the poor.

    The primary objective of drug control policies should be protecting the young, seeking by all means to prevent drug abuse and addiction. This requires increased investments in prevention, treatment and social reintegration. Only such a comprehensive approach can be effective in reducing drug use.

    The full enforcement power of the state and the social and cultural pressure of society should be aimed at a relentless fight against organized crime -- rather than persecuting people in need of treatment.

    Our second core recommendation -- which is more complex but just as important for ensuring peace and public safety -- is to encourage experimentation with different models of legal regulation of drugs, such as marijuana, in similar ways to what is already done with tobacco and alcohol.

    Research has consistently demonstrated that marijuana is a less harmful drug than tobacco or alcohol. Regulation is not the same as legalization. This is a critical point. Regulation is a necessary step to create the conditions for a society to establish all kinds of restrictions and limitations on the production, trade, advertising and consumption of a given substance to deglamorize, discourage and control its use.

    The stunning reduction in the consumption of tobacco in the Americas shows that prevention and regulation are more efficient than prohibition and punishment.

    Regulation cuts the link between traffickers and consumers. It is this link that enables traffickers to impel people to use ever more harmful drugs. Since marijuana is by far the most widely consumed illicit drug in the world, regulation would also significantly reduce the vast resources -- and thus the vast power and influence -- generated by organized crime in the illegal drug markets..

    We congratulate the presidents of Colombia, Guatemala and Costa Rica for having the courage to put different options on the table that would undermine the power of organized crime and safeguard the health and security of their citizens.

    For the first time, drug policy will be on the agenda at the Summit of the Americas, which will take place in Cartagena de las lndias, Colombia, on April 14-15. It is unlikely that the heads of state will reach a consensus about such a complex and controversial issue. At this point, what is most needed is a serious and rigorous debate, enabling each country to develop its own position and to adopt more appropriate solutions that take their history and culture into account.

    Latin America's experiences in fighting drug traffic, the successful examples set by some European countries in reducing the individual and societal harms of drug misuse, the experimentation of several U.S. states with the medical uses of marijuana, the engagement of the business sector and the scientific community, and the profound wish of the young to live in peace, all point toward more balanced, humane and efficient drug policies.

    A paradigm shift, combining repression of the violent drug trade with increased investments in treatment and prevention, would be the best contribution that Latin America -- a region that has suffered so much under drug prohibition -- could make to global reform of drug policies.

    Written by Cesar Gaviria, former president of Colombia and member of the Global Commission on Drug Policy; Ernesto Zedillo, former president of Mexico and member of the Global Commission on Drug Policy; and Fernando Henrique Cardoso, former president of Brazil and chair of the Global Commission on Drug Policy



  2. Sandy Clark
    Sandy Clark avatar
    0 posts
    4/9/2012 4:04 PM
    Larry, I for one admit to be totally confused as to the best approach. I am a product of being a teenager and young 20's in the sixties but never did drugs. I was a jock and then went in the Coast Guard Reserve for 6 years and just didn't get involved. I look today at the carnage and violence on the border and what slips into the U.S. What we are doing isn't working. Do you keep more kids away from drugs by not calling it a crime and addressing the health side or continue to bang your head against the wall and watch the cartels grow more violent? I no longer have a clue on what we should be doing. I am very fortunate to have raised two sons that also avoided the temptations of drugs. Many of my friends have not been so fortunate. One very good family I have know for years had a son go to prison for selling marijuana. This kid had a ton of good things going for him. I don't think his chances are so good today.



  3. Brian Nettz
    Brian Nettz avatar
    0 posts
    4/9/2012 4:04 PM
    Interesting read for you non-Californians.

    http://westernfarmpress.com/government/california-s-growing-marijuana-business-impacting-agriculture

    Brian Nettz
    Presidio Golf Course
    San Francisco



  4. Jon Gansen
    Jon Gansen avatar
    1 posts
    4/9/2012 5:04 PM
    Im sorry all I see in the article is the increase in bureaucracy and more corruption. It can be argued that pot is the least of all evils but the legalization of it creates more problems than it cures. Tell me what about Meth, coke, heroin and any other drug that is addicting and illegal is that to be regulated too. Educate me on how drugs can be regulated dispensed to people who no longer are stigmatized or criminal and curb drug use. Seems to me you may create a larger demand one that can be taxed by government and regulated by the FDA or alcohol tobacco drugs and firearms. How does it work???



  5. Wahlin Scott B
    Wahlin Scott B avatar
    4/9/2012 7:04 PM
    If you abuse any drug including tobacco, alcohol, legal and illegal drugs you will be stigmatized. I was genetically predisposed I believe to become a nicotine addict. I abused tobacco for 30 years. I have not used tobacco for nine years, but I know I am a puff away from a pack a day. Legalizing drugs takes the violence and horror show for non-users out of it. Users of the hard addicting drugs like meth and heroine (and tobacco) are not concerned about death, much less prison. I have been blessed with my four kids, but I have a stepson who died of an overdose and a stepdaughter who is hopelessly lost in her drug addiction. Make the drug cartels be of no consequence and regulate and provide the drugs. I am not going to take up drug abuse, would you?



  6. Brian Nettz
    Brian Nettz avatar
    0 posts
    4/9/2012 8:04 PM
    Jon Gansen"]Im sorry all I see in the article is the increase in bureaucracy and more corruption. It can be argued that pot is the least of all evils but the legalization of it creates more problems than it cures. /quote]

    Wow. Were you really trying to find something between the lines on legalizing pot in that article? Better clean the magnifying glass. It's merely a fact-based article written about the unseen and unknown cartel element in the US (particularly in California) and food for thought on how their criminal agricultural activities might possibly play out on regulations and the environment. As for the bureaucracy, it merely points out how unwitting county employees might be victim to violence based on driving county vehicles in the wrong spot at the wrong time. Not sure how that plays out paperwork and red-tape wise...



  7. Jon Gansen
    Jon Gansen avatar
    1 posts
    4/9/2012 10:04 PM
    Our second core recommendation -- which is more complex but just as important for ensuring peace and public safety -- is to encourage experimentation with different models of legal regulation of drugs, such as marijuana, in similar ways to what is already done with tobacco and alcohol.

    Research has consistently demonstrated that marijuana is a less harmful drug than tobacco or alcohol. Regulation is not the same as legalization. This is a critical point. Regulation is a necessary step to create the conditions for a society to establish all kinds of restrictions and limitations on the production, trade, advertising and consumption of a given substance to deglamorize, discourage and control its use.

    This is what I was referring to...


    No Brian I had not read your article, but I did just now. My comments were based on Reds post. Your post talks of how the cartel is operating under medical pot and also in the national forests illegally. Just one more reason our border needs to be sealed up tight and how regulation by government doesnt work.

    Scott I feel for most people that I have known with addictions. I also realize that if they dont want help any help given to them is feeding the addiction. I share your thought that some people are predisposed to become addicted easier to one thing or another.



  8. James Schmid
    James Schmid avatar
    1 posts
    4/10/2012 9:04 AM
    There is a very strong argument for what this article is suggesting. "is to encourage experimentation with different models of legal regulation of drugs, such as marijuana, in similar ways to what is already done with tobacco and alcohol." The reality is that we do not know what the results of other policy programs would be, so why not try them on a small scale. What would we do on our golf courses if we had a problem? I would screw around on my nursery green with a bunch of different options until I found some solution that I could live with.

    I think most rational persons would agree that the results that have been acheived through current policy could be described as less than ideal. We could sit around and guess and hypothesize about the potential results of various policy changes, but the reality is that no one knows the answer. Why not find a community - city, county, state or whatever that is agreeable to making some policy changes, and let them do it and watch what happens. If it doesn't work, change it back, or try something else.

    Can someone think of a good reason not to do that?



  9. Larry Allan
    Larry Allan avatar
    0 posts
    4/10/2012 11:04 AM
    There is some good info on what you are spending on this page http://www.drugsense.org/cms/wodclock.
    Its a lot of money being spend with little result.Might be better spent elsewhere



  10. Jon Gansen
    Jon Gansen avatar
    1 posts
    4/10/2012 12:04 PM
    Larry Allan said: There is some good info on what you are spending on this page http://www.drugsense.org/cms/wodclock.
    Its a lot of money being spend with little result.Might be better spent elsewhere


    Its an interesting site. Its a big problem with really no clear fix. Just this morning on the radio they reported on a man from Calif. that was caught in Mass. (I think) with a joint that had a medical permit from Calf., Mass. has a law that decriminalizes it they confiscated the joint and the man was free to go. Questions I would have is how deal with a person that is driving and smoking. What about employee preliminary drug tests etc.



  11. McCallum David K
    McCallum David K avatar
    4/10/2012 1:04 PM
    An interesting and thought provoking topic. One I can honestly say I cannot add much insight into. Like Sandy grew up during a time when drinking beer at an early age was common in the south..even among the jocks. Once entering the Marine Corps and before reaching Vietnam was my first real exposure to drugs. As a 17 yo I was like a deer in the headlights about drugs. But from my upbringing I knew I did not want to even experiment with them. In Nam they were everywhere. Speaking from the Corps you had two groups.......the heads that did the drugs and the foamies that were the beer and whiskey drinkers. A clear and very defined separation when not out in the bush.........little social interaction whatsoever. Obviously carrying beer and liquor was not an option for the foamies........on the other hand the heads could and did at times carry a little grass. A very touchy situation to say the least. We had a corpsman that was a druggie..........harder stuff than grass........my comment each time we crossed the wire or boarded a chopper.........."Doc if we need morphine and we ain't got it you coming back in a body bag yourself"............he was known to pop a serrate from time to time.

    It's one hell of a dilemma we find ourselves in, in this country with drug use........not talking the old hippie doing some pot but the harder stuff.....meth and others.............meth labs are a huge business in some parts of our state.......seems monthly you read of one exploding in a trailer somewhere out in the sticks. It seems to affect so many families, my wife's family being one. Don't have a solution or even an idea of what to do to contain it.



  12. Sandy Clark
    Sandy Clark avatar
    0 posts
    4/10/2012 2:04 PM
    Speaking of smoking dope and driving, we just had a horrible accident late last week where two cars of high school kids were racing, coming home from a bon fire at the beach. Speeds were in excess of 100 when one of the cars lost control. Two kids are dead and a third just woke up from being in a coma. No telling how messed up she will be. The driver of the car losing control was 16, smoking dope and will now face a slew of major charges. At his age, he is not allowed to be driving around 10 p.m. unless coming home from a job. He also is not allowed to have passengers. So much for the dope smokers being safer or more passive behind the wheel!



  13. Larry Allan
    Larry Allan avatar
    0 posts
    4/11/2012 6:04 AM
    Sandy, again I agree. Impairment is impairment but most likely the main cause of the accident was lack of experience and the fact that young people see themselves as immortal and forget about consequences.
    When I was that age and stoned behind the wheel I stopped at a red light. A cop pulled up beside me and asked me what I was doing. I said I'm waiting for the light to turn green, officer. He said son, the red light is a full block ahead. Why don't you wait for it to change up there.
    I'm lucky, in hind site I didn't stop for the light a block late



  14. Sandy Clark
    Sandy Clark avatar
    0 posts
    4/11/2012 10:04 AM
    I agree that it was inexperience along with speed and when you add smoking dope, you further increased the chance for disaster. Driving in the dark may have added even more risk to a series of bad choices.



  15. Wahlin Scott B
    Wahlin Scott B avatar
    4/11/2012 10:04 AM
    Sandy Clark, CGCS said: I agree that it was inexperience along with speed and when you add smoking dope, you further increased the chance for disaster. Driving in the dark may have added even more risk to a series of bad choices.


    They can test to see what your blood alcohol level is. Can they check to see how intoxicated you are with pot? If not, I suppose that could be a good argument against legalization.



  16. James Schmid
    James Schmid avatar
    1 posts
    4/11/2012 11:04 AM
    Scott Wahlin, CGCS said:
    Sandy Clark, CGCS said: I agree that it was inexperience along with speed and when you add smoking dope, you further increased the chance for disaster. Driving in the dark may have added even more risk to a series of bad choices.


    They can test to see what your blood alcohol level is. Can they check to see how intoxicated you are with pot? If not, I suppose that could be a good argument against legalization.


    Scott- I can see what you are saying, but it is illegal to drive under the influence of drugs, and assumably would still be even if drug use was legalized. Kids are going to get themselves into trouble and do stupid things whether it's legal or not.

    I know when I was in high school (15 years ago), it was easier to locate and purchase, transport, and conceal marjuana than it was alcohol. Anyone who wanted to use marjuana would do so, as there was no issue with them obtaining it. I don't think that legalizing it's use would increase usage, because as I said, those who want to use it already can and do, and those who don't want to don't.



  17. Wahlin Scott B
    Wahlin Scott B avatar
    4/11/2012 2:04 PM
    James Schmid said: Scott- I can see what you are saying, but it is illegal to drive under the influence of drugs, and assumably would still be even if drug use was legalized. Kids are going to get themselves into trouble and do stupid things whether it's legal or not.


    If you are under the influence of alcohol they can quantify that by testing your breath and blood. It is my understanding that they can qualify that pot has been used up to a month after use or many months by testing hair, but can they quantify the result/determine if you were under the influence at that moment?



View or change your forums profile here.