The Global Commission on Drug Policy has announced that the "War on Drugs", a 40-year-old campaign by the United States to crackdown on drug trafficking and use, is a failure. Drug use still remains a prevalent problem, and the policy of the United States and the other participating nations involved in the War on Drugs has caused "devastating consequences".
However, nations such as Canada, the United States and Mexico staunchly refuse to reform failing drug legislation. Justice Canada spokeswoman Carole Saindon has stated, “Making drugs more available – as this report suggests – will make it harder to keep our communities healthy and safe." She does not give an explanation or reasonable rebuttal to the conclusions of the Commission's findings.
Existing drug laws have caused more problems than they have solved. There are various reasons why the government should consider legalization of both hard and soft drugs.
Reduction of Organized Crime
The War on Drugs is a prohibition. When the law makes a commodity illegal, they put the trade of that commodity in the hands of criminals. In the 1920's, the criminalization of alcohol gave birth to some that nation's most violent and organized criminals, such as Al Capone, Lester Gillis and Andy Wright.
Criminalization does not eradicate a commodity. The users will still find a way to purchase it. The only difference is that now those purchasers will be supporting gang warfare. The money used in drug purchasing aids violence and and murder in places such as Mexico, Columbia and West Africa. And it is not only the drug traffickers who who are harmed by this. Law enforcement and innocent bystanders are often caught in the crossfire. While drug users and the dealers who stand on the street corner may not always be physically dangerous by themselves, they are underlings in a wider pyramid who support the more dangerous people and organizations at the top.
Decriminalizing drugs will cut off the support systems of these criminals. When a product is legalized, private enterprise will always move in to profit off of it, and these businesses are accountable to the government for their business practices. You don't see Wal-Mart and Target employees drive-by shooting each other.
The government's current drug policy is playing into the hands of the criminal enterprise, who wouldn't be able to survive if drugs were sold by reputable businesses and monitored by the government. Crime rates would go down if drugs were decriminalized.
Drug Use and Rehabilitation
Contrary to popular belief, drug use has actually been seen to go down when it is decriminalized. Both Portugal and the Netherlands have seen decreases in drug use since decriminalization, as well as increases in rehabilitation rates. Portugal saw a 63% increase in drug users who sought treatment. Drug addicts are more likely to seek help if they know that they will not be persecuted as criminals. People with addictions are ill. They require medical help to return to health, not punishment and jail sentences.
Not only did hard drug use go down, but soft drug use, as well. Non-addictive drugs such as cannabis saw reductions in use. Some have attributed this to the social taboo of marijuana and LSD. As soon as they are no longer illegal, they are no longer rebellious and therefore no longer perceived as "cool" among youth.
Drug addicts would be safer from harm if drugs were decriminalized. The Netherlands government gives out free heroin to addicts and supervises them in order to ensure that they do not harm themselves while high. This also ensures that drugs are not cut with other harmful substances.
It is a misconception that legalizing drugs would be equal to condoning them. On the contrary. No one is saying that drugs are good for you. The message would still be sent that narcotics are harmful. Only now we'd have a more effective way of fighting them.
Cost and Economics
Decriminalizing drugs would actually save money. The cost of the War on Drugs is far greater than the cost of setting up social services for the rehabilitation of addicts.
A study by Harvard economist Jeffrey A. Miron revealed that legalizing drugs would save the United States $44.1 billion a year from law enforcement savings and $32.7 billion in tax revenue, for a combined figure of $76.8 billion a year. Taxing marijuana would alone inject $6.7 billion into the U.S. economy.
If drugs were decriminalized, less money would go to catching small-time dealers and keeping ill addicts in jail. More money would go to getting people off of drugs and targeting drug sources. Extra money could also go to solving deficit problems, infrastructure, and social services for citizens.
Current drug policies in the West only contribute to the poverty cycle. People from lower financial classes are more likely to turn to drugs or drug trafficking to support themselves. Penalties for this often include removal of education opportunities and criminal records that make it difficult to find a job, leaving the drug trade as their only option.
Obstructions to Drug Policy Reform
The reasons for Western government not yet taking action on reforming their drug policies likely has to do with public perception. So much energy has been put into the War on Drugs from the start that ending it now would "look bad" on the current politicians.
Many South American nations were economically coerced by the United States government to partake in the War on Drugs. Mexico would not be able to legalize drugs without risking sanctions by the more powerful United States.
The Harper Government in Canada is pushing to regulate drugs even further, no longer allowing people who need cannabis for medicinal purposes to grow their own crop. They also intend on making jail sentences tougher across the board. This is the wrong action to take, and it will only result in further dire socio-economic consequences. There are too many reasons to end the war on drugs and not enough to continue it, but the anti-progressive propaganda is intent on hiding that fact from the masses.
However, nations such as Canada, the United States and Mexico staunchly refuse to reform failing drug legislation. Justice Canada spokeswoman Carole Saindon has stated, “Making drugs more available – as this report suggests – will make it harder to keep our communities healthy and safe." She does not give an explanation or reasonable rebuttal to the conclusions of the Commission's findings.
Existing drug laws have caused more problems than they have solved. There are various reasons why the government should consider legalization of both hard and soft drugs.
Reduction of Organized Crime
The War on Drugs is a prohibition. When the law makes a commodity illegal, they put the trade of that commodity in the hands of criminals. In the 1920's, the criminalization of alcohol gave birth to some that nation's most violent and organized criminals, such as Al Capone, Lester Gillis and Andy Wright.
Criminalization does not eradicate a commodity. The users will still find a way to purchase it. The only difference is that now those purchasers will be supporting gang warfare. The money used in drug purchasing aids violence and and murder in places such as Mexico, Columbia and West Africa. And it is not only the drug traffickers who who are harmed by this. Law enforcement and innocent bystanders are often caught in the crossfire. While drug users and the dealers who stand on the street corner may not always be physically dangerous by themselves, they are underlings in a wider pyramid who support the more dangerous people and organizations at the top.
Decriminalizing drugs will cut off the support systems of these criminals. When a product is legalized, private enterprise will always move in to profit off of it, and these businesses are accountable to the government for their business practices. You don't see Wal-Mart and Target employees drive-by shooting each other.
The government's current drug policy is playing into the hands of the criminal enterprise, who wouldn't be able to survive if drugs were sold by reputable businesses and monitored by the government. Crime rates would go down if drugs were decriminalized.
Drug Use and Rehabilitation
Contrary to popular belief, drug use has actually been seen to go down when it is decriminalized. Both Portugal and the Netherlands have seen decreases in drug use since decriminalization, as well as increases in rehabilitation rates. Portugal saw a 63% increase in drug users who sought treatment. Drug addicts are more likely to seek help if they know that they will not be persecuted as criminals. People with addictions are ill. They require medical help to return to health, not punishment and jail sentences.
Not only did hard drug use go down, but soft drug use, as well. Non-addictive drugs such as cannabis saw reductions in use. Some have attributed this to the social taboo of marijuana and LSD. As soon as they are no longer illegal, they are no longer rebellious and therefore no longer perceived as "cool" among youth.
Drug addicts would be safer from harm if drugs were decriminalized. The Netherlands government gives out free heroin to addicts and supervises them in order to ensure that they do not harm themselves while high. This also ensures that drugs are not cut with other harmful substances.
It is a misconception that legalizing drugs would be equal to condoning them. On the contrary. No one is saying that drugs are good for you. The message would still be sent that narcotics are harmful. Only now we'd have a more effective way of fighting them.
Cost and Economics
Decriminalizing drugs would actually save money. The cost of the War on Drugs is far greater than the cost of setting up social services for the rehabilitation of addicts.
A study by Harvard economist Jeffrey A. Miron revealed that legalizing drugs would save the United States $44.1 billion a year from law enforcement savings and $32.7 billion in tax revenue, for a combined figure of $76.8 billion a year. Taxing marijuana would alone inject $6.7 billion into the U.S. economy.
If drugs were decriminalized, less money would go to catching small-time dealers and keeping ill addicts in jail. More money would go to getting people off of drugs and targeting drug sources. Extra money could also go to solving deficit problems, infrastructure, and social services for citizens.
Current drug policies in the West only contribute to the poverty cycle. People from lower financial classes are more likely to turn to drugs or drug trafficking to support themselves. Penalties for this often include removal of education opportunities and criminal records that make it difficult to find a job, leaving the drug trade as their only option.
Obstructions to Drug Policy Reform
The reasons for Western government not yet taking action on reforming their drug policies likely has to do with public perception. So much energy has been put into the War on Drugs from the start that ending it now would "look bad" on the current politicians.
Many South American nations were economically coerced by the United States government to partake in the War on Drugs. Mexico would not be able to legalize drugs without risking sanctions by the more powerful United States.
The Harper Government in Canada is pushing to regulate drugs even further, no longer allowing people who need cannabis for medicinal purposes to grow their own crop. They also intend on making jail sentences tougher across the board. This is the wrong action to take, and it will only result in further dire socio-economic consequences. There are too many reasons to end the war on drugs and not enough to continue it, but the anti-progressive propaganda is intent on hiding that fact from the masses.
