What drug problem?

Great Debates
1

As an off-shoot of the “Mandatory Drug Testing” thread, I would like to ask, in all seriousness, how big of a problem/threat are drugs in America?
I know that we are always being told that it is a huge problem, and I’m sure if you look at it in terms of how much money is spent on drugs/fighting drugs, the figures are astronimical. But I’m not interested in the money aspect becasue I don’t think it addresses the heart of the matter, namely, what are the horrors that are happening in this country due to drugs?
One thing that immediately comes to mind is gang violence. But I have to wonder what these gang-bangers would be doing if drugs weren’t illegal, or if we by some other means completely elimintaed them from our society. Would they suddenly give up their evil ways and become law-abiding citizens? I’m inclined to think not. It would be my guess (yes, I am only supposing) that they would engage in some other illegal practise. I don’t think criminals chose their crime careers based on principal (I’m going to deal drugs because I think it’s the right thing to do). I think they chose their professions based on profitability, so if the profit weren’t in drugs, they would be pimps or bookies or whatever was profitable. If that’s the case, one cannot say that gang vioence is the result of drugs. there would be gang violence either way.
A second concern is that kids are screwing up their lives. On this note I have to wonder if, were it not for the drugs, would they have not screwed up? Is there a significant amount of kids who showed great potential, but started doing drugs and ended up really screwing up their entire lives? Granted, most career criminals did do drugs as kids, but did they become criminals because of the drugs, or were they criminally orientated to begin with and doing drugs was just part of the criminal lifestyle?
Maybe there is a study somewhere on incarceration rates compared to drug useage. Of course, since they started imprisoning people for possesion, prison populations have skyrocketed. But if we eliminated from the comparrison the people who are in prison only for possesion or dealing charges with no other crime involved, and compared that to a time when drug useage were lower, could we not get a clear picture of whether or not increased drug use actually contributes to increased non-drug related crime? I wonder if the people who are robbing gas stations to get enough money for their next heroine fix would still rob the gas station to fulfill some other desire if drugs were not available. Would these people really go out and get jobs, or would they rob the gas station to buy liquor?
My opinion, at this point, is that drugs are being protrayed as a bigger scourge on society than they really are, and that it is very PC to blame everything on “the drug problem”, even when those problems would likely exist even if there weren’t any drugs.
I’m not necessarily advocating legalization here, though I realize it will be hard to discuss this without dealing with the results of drugs being illegal. My main point is that I think the drug hysteria is unwarrented.
Any opinions (facts would be even better, since I don’t have any).

“I should not take bribes and Minister Bal Bahadur KC should not do so either. But if clerks take a bribe of Rs 50-60 after a hard day’s work, it is not an issue.” ----Krishna Prasad Bhattarai, Current Prime Minister of Nepal

2

Fact: I personally know of four people who have killed by violence associated with crack cocaine.

Fact: I know of several people who are in jail right now for burglery so that they could support their crack habit.

Fact: I have see a mother nurse her child while smoking a crack pipe. (I reported her to childrens services)

Fact: I know of several woman who work as prostitutes so that they can support their crack habit.

Fact: I know three people who have overdosed on crack cocaine.

I come frm a very small rural town in Ohio and have a very well paying professional job. If I know of this much suffering then how much suffering do “normal” black working people in the inner cities know.

Yes it is a THE problem.

watch what you say
or they’ll be calling
you a radical,
a liberal,fanatical
a criminal…

3

jaydabee, all the facts you report are either in spite of or because of the illegality of drugs. Neither the “war on drugs” nor drug testing have had any significant impact on these problems.
Don’t you think it’s time to get the drug problem out of the legal system and into the medical/social system and let them have a crack (no pun) at it? At the very least the criminal element would be greatly reduced.
Peace,
mangeorge

I only know two things;
I know what I need to know
And
I know what I want to know
Mangeorge, 2000

4

Of course it is a disease and yes it should be handeled by hospitals not prisions.

One of my gripes is the amount of time and effort they spend on marijuana enforcement. Pot heads in general do not commit violence or steal to support their habits. By treating pot the same way they treat crack they are dividing there efforts. If marijuana were decriminalized (not made legal) they would have more resourses to use on truely hard core drug “pushers and sellers”. (not users who are victims themselves).
If politicians were truely concerned about their citizens and working in the public interest they would be able to grasp this. But no, they want to build up their own little empires, outfit their police forces to the teeth and seize personal property without due process of law.

watch what you say
or they’ll be calling
you a radical,
a liberal,fanatical
a criminal…

5

Alcohol is the only drug with any real connection to drug-induced violence. The violence associated with illegal drugs is a result of the fact that they are illegal – just like there was a huge increase in violence during alcohol Prohibition. See “Psychoactive Substances and Violence” by the US Dept. of Justice at http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/govpubs/psycviol.htm

That is a problem of prohibition. In places where addicts can get their drugs at reasonable cost through medical facilities, the problem is massively reduced.

If damage to children is your concern, then alcohol leads the field by several miles. None of the illegal drugs is even close. If that was a good reason for prohibition, then it ought to be applied to alcohol first. You may remember that alcohol prohibition solved nothing and created a lot of new problems.

And, once again, that is a problem that occurs primarily in places where drugs are illegal. See, for example, the 60 Minutes transcript about the heroin and crack maintenance clinics in Liverpool at http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/misc/60minliv.htm

Once again, alcohol leads the field in those kinds of deaths. In fact, alcohol and tobacco kill at least 50 times as many people as all the illegal drugs combined.

The rates of use are about the same in both black and white communities. However, black people are several times more likely to go to jail for drugs – as much as 22 times more likely in some jurisdictions. That’s not surprising, since the drug laws were originally based on racism.

Well, if you think so, then it would certainly be a good idea to learn something about the subject, don’t you think? Try reading Major Studies of Drugs and Drug Policy at http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer Start with the Consumers Union Report on Licit and Illicit Drugs.

World’s Largest Online Library of Drug Policy - http://www.druglibrary.org

6

My condolences. Was the violence the result of doing the drug, or in a dispute over the drug? What I’m getting at is, was the drug itself directly responsible, or was the violence the result of the drug being illegal? I am not in any way suggesting the crack should be legal, mind you. I’m just trying to determine the cause of the violence.

Do you think that, if these people hadn’t committed a crime to support a drug habit, they would have been upstanding citizens, or might they have been inclinded to engage in criminal activity for some other reason, say profit?

Do you think that, if she weren’t a crack addict, she would be a great mother? Or might she just be poisoning her baby with alcohol or abusing the child in some other way?

If they didn’t have a crack habit, might they work as prostitutes to support their alcohol addiction? Do you think that, in the absence of any drugs, these women would instead be upstanding citizens?

And people die of lung cancer from smoking cigarettes, liver damage from alcohol, heart disease from a diet of twinkies and coke…

I’m not trying to argue that drugs are a good thing, I just wonder if there really would be a big change in society if drugs were completely wiped out. I honestly don’t think so.

“I should not take bribes and Minister Bal Bahadur KC should not do so either. But if clerks take a bribe of Rs 50-60 after a hard day’s work, it is not an issue.” ----Krishna Prasad Bhattarai, Current Prime Minister of Nepal

7

CliffSchaffer wrote:

Really? I’d think PCP would have a pretty strong correlation with violence, too – considering that it usually causes a reduced sensitivity to pain and psychological effects like overconfidence and increased tendency toward aggression.

8

I guess that I feel that this sociey that we live is is never going to legalize, decriminalize, or even make hard drug use socially acceptable.
So the crimes that I mentioned in my previous post will still be with us for the foreseeable future. It called reality.

We can sit and discuss all night what would happen if drug use was made acceptable, but it just anit gonna happen. So, what can we relistically do with this political hot potato.

watch what you say
or they’ll be calling
you a radical,
a liberal,fanatical
a criminal…

9

Compared to alcohol and tobacco? Well, for starters, alcohol and tobacco kill more people every year than all the people killed by all the illegal drugs in the last century.

The best example we have so far is the end of alcohol prohibition. At the end of prohibition, the homicide rate dropped dramatically, and most of the thugs went out the liquor business. Organized crime lost the biggest source of funding it had ever had.

There aren’t that many job openings for pimps or bookies, and both of those are hard work compared to dealing drugs.

[quote]
If that’s the case, one cannot say that gang vioence is the result of drugs. there would be gang violence either way.

[quote]

There will always be some, but it would be greatly reduced. The best example is the drop in the homicide rate at the end of alcohol prohibition.

The biggest single cause of drug epidemics among kids is anti-drug campaigns, starting with the alcohol drinking epidemic inspired by alcohol prohibition. Government surveys show that kids report that illegal drugs are more available than ever, and often more available than legal drugs.

Research shows that the majority of these people had criminal careers before they became involved with drugs.

You can find a ton of that sort of info under http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer I suggest you start with the Consumers Union Report on Licit and Illicit Drugs, which you will find under Major Studies of Drugs and Drug Policy.

If you want some good background on the history of these laws and their effects see Historical Research under http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer Start with the history of the marijuana laws by Professor Charles Whitebread at http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/History/whiteb1.htm

Well, there is no chance that drugs will ever be “not available” so scratch that idea. We didn’t have these problems until the drugs were made illegal. See, for example, the first twenty chapters of the Consumers Union Report.

The experience with the heroin maintenance clinics in Europe shows that the majority of them will get jobs and otherwise be productive citizens if they get their drugs through a regulated medical source.

You are right, but I don’t think you really grasp how right you are about this point. Read the references I mentioned.

Yes. Like, for instance, the US Official Expert on Marijuana who testified in court, under oath, that marijuana had turned him into a bat.

See http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer for the best collection of research on the net.

World’s Largest Online Library of Drug Policy - http://www.druglibrary.org

10

from: http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/GovPubs/psycviol.htm

Psychoactive Substances and Violence
by Jeffrey A. Roth

Series: Research in Brief, US Dept. of Justice

Published: February 1994

Key findings:

. . .

Of all psychoactive substances, alcohol is the only one whose consumption has been shown to commonly increase aggression. After large doses of amphetamines, cocaine, LSD, and PCP, certain individuals may experience violent outbursts, probably because of preexisting psychosis. Research is needed on the pharmacological effects of crack, which enters the brain more directly than cocaine used in other forms.

Alcohol drinking and violence are linked through pharmacological effects on behavior, through expectations that heavy drinking and violence go together in certain settings, and through patterns of binge drinking and fighting that sometimes develop in adolescence.

. . . .

Illegal drugs and violence are linked primarily through drug marketing: disputes among rival distributors, arguments and robberies involving buyers and sellers, property crimes committed to raise drug money and, more speculatively, social and economic interactions between the illegal markets and the surrounding communities.

World’s Largest Online Library of Drug Policy - http://www.druglibrary.org

11

Who, besides some silly prohibitionists, ever said anything about making recreational hard drug use socially acceptable?

As for legalization or decriminalization, I guess you aren’t keeping up with current events around the world. It will happen, and in our lifetime. You will understand why if you read the research on the subject.

More accurately, it is called the effects of prohibition.

Who, besides you, suggested that it should be made “acceptable”?

Your own education is a good place to start. You could start by reading what your own government has recommended in the largest study of the subject they ever did. You can find it at http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer under Major Studies of Drugs and Drug Policy.

World’s Largest Online Library of Drug Policy - http://www.druglibrary.org

12

I got my education at Screw U, on the streets where it is actually taking place. a discussion with you is useless. Good-Bye

watch what you say
or they’ll be calling
you a radical,
a liberal,fanatical
a criminal…

13

Thanks a lot, Cliff, for the excellent links. I have a lot of reading ahead of me.

Jaydabee;
While I appreciate your arguments, I was not looking for a debate about legalization or whether or not drug use should be socially acceptable. I was questioning the current procilivity to blame all evils on drugs. If you don’t want to play “what if”, that’s fair enough, but this was more the angle I was coming from. Forget legalization for the moment. Pretend drugs just don’t exist. My contention is that it would have very little effect on the crime rates (with the exception of those convicted of possesion or dealing) and the evils perputrated against society. My reason for thinking this is that I believe criminals are criminals because that is thier nature; not because of the effects of drugs.

Cliff brought up the reduction in homicide rates when prohibition was lifted. I wonder why this was? Al Capone, for example, certainly didn’t go straight. He just persued other lucritive criminal activities. I find it hard to believe that someone who was making a living as a moonshiner decided to give up the criminal life and take an honest job when alcohol became legal again. I’m sure there were many people who were just making a bit of moonshine in their basements who, after prohibition, became law-abiding citizens again, but I doubt this was the case with hard-core career criminals.
My belief is that if there were no drugs, gangs would be fighting over who got to extort money from the local merchants, who got to run the betting shops, who got to control the neighborhood’s prostitutes, etc. I don’t think the drugs are causing the crime. I think the criminals are using the opportunity of the very profitable drug trade to their advantage. Take that away, and they’d find another black market commodity to make money off of.

“I should not take bribes and Minister Bal Bahadur KC should not do so either. But if clerks take a bribe of Rs 50-60 after a hard day’s work, it is not an issue.” ----Krishna Prasad Bhattarai, Current Prime Minister of Nepal

14

Do you really think anyone is going to respect that approach to the subject?

World’s Largest Online Library of Drug Policy - http://www.druglibrary.org

15

Well… by the same logic, since I’ve never met any victims of drug violence, murder, etc, it must not happen.

However, I’ve noticed a lot of people eating Big Macs lately and expanding at the waist. I saw this out there on the street and believe me, it is THE problem.

We need more laws!!! YEAH!!!

16

[quote]
Thanks a lot, Cliff, for the excellent links. I have a lot of reading ahead of me.

[quote]

I am sure you will find them quite fascinating and surprising. For most people in the US, most of what they think they know about the subject is wrong.

Generally, that is true. The crime career usually precedes the drug career. However, when a criminal becomes addicted, their output of property crime can increase dramatically in places where the drugs are prohibited.

The gangsters weren’t fighting over alcohol sales turf anymore.

No, Al Capone went to jail for income tax evasion and ultimately died of syphilis. Most of his cohorts (those who didn’t go to jail or die) went to other avenues of crime, but didn’t have the huge funding they had before. As for the other bootleggers, Seagrams became the huge conglomerate we know today, and Joseph Kennedy became Ambassador to Great Britain and fathered John F. Kennedy, President of the US.

Most of them did. You have to remember that most of the people involved in the bootlegging trade were people who were not involved in crime in other respects. For example, there were more illegal speakeasies in New York during Prohibition than there were bars before Prohibition. They were mostly staffed by people who did not engage in crime other than violations of the Volstead Act.

Hard core criminals lost their biggest single source of funding and their ability to buy whole cities and police forces. In addition, the worst corruption problem in the police force that we have ever experienced (until recently) was also ended when Prohibition was ended.

You are wrong. Extortion is a lot of work, low profit, and there are a lot of people to turn you in. Bookmaking is also a lot of work compared to drugs, and the market just isn’t nearly as big. And it is pretty silly to say that all those people would be fighting for the relatively few pimping jobs.
Face it, there just isn’t any other line of work which offers the low risk, easy work, and high profits of illegal drugs.

For the most part (with the exception of alcohol), they aren’t.

I heard someone make this statement on a call-in radio show. The host responded with “Like what?” There was a stuttering and stammering on the other end of the line and suddenly the guy said, “They would sell kiddy porn!”

That is, of course, silly. There is nothing that competes with illegal drugs for making a living.

World’s Largest Online Library of Drug Policy - http://www.druglibrary.org

17

Your points are well taken, Cliff. I believe it is a reasonable argument to say that the drug trade creates “jobs” for criminals and, as with any other sector of the economy, when a need arises, people fill it. On the flip side, when an industry closes, the “employees” need to find a new line of work. It makes sence that there would not be enough slots available in other criminal sectors to absorb all those who previously worked in drug trafficing.
And, of course, you are right about Capone. (Shame on me, being a Chiacgoan and all). But, my crappy example aside, I think it still stands that there is a sector of the criminal element that will find a new game when whatever they’re working dries up. Perhaps the mob under Tony Accardo is a better exapmle; making the move from bootlegging to illegal gambling (and, under later bosses, racketeering and the drug trade).
But this also supports the basic economic theory underlying the whole issue. When prohibition ended, the people most able to take over other criminal rackets were those with enough money and muscle to steal the business from the people who had been running it. And that’s exactly what happened. I have no idea what the people who used to run those rackets did for a living instead, but it’s clear that they didn’t all form rival gangs and compete with the mob for their business.
Of course, once the drug trade became so profitable, there were many more opportunities created in the criminal field and, just like my old Econ text predicted, people came to fill the demand.

“I should not take bribes and Minister Bal Bahadur KC should not do so either. But if clerks take a bribe of Rs 50-60 after a hard day’s work, it is not an issue.” ----Krishna Prasad Bhattarai, Current Prime Minister of Nepal

18

We should also take note that the drug trade is by far the easiest way to recruit people into a criminal life – just as bootlegging was during prohibition. Any kid who smokes a joint and then procures some for his friends has joined the criminal underworld (and they often take some pride in that). The same thing happened during alcohol Prohibition. Children became involved in the bootlegging trade. That was one of the major reasons it was repealed.

Even for those criminals who don’t take up honest employment, they will have to work considerably harder to enjoy the same standard of living they would get from drugs. With nearly all crimes, if they work that hard, they are going to get caught before too long.

Besides, the effort against illegal drugs accounts for about half of all our criminal justice resources. If the drug laws were changed, we would effectively have twice as many cops to go after the really bad guys.

World’s Largest Online Library of Drug Policy - http://www.druglibrary.org