| Home | Community | Message Board |
|
You are not signed in. Sign In New Account | Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery » |
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.
|
Threaded
Previous
Index
Next
| |||||||
 millzy   Registered: 05/12/10 Posts: 12,431 |
| ||||||
|
i was browsing through some stuff from last semester and decided it might be neat to share my term paper on drug prohibition. this was the result of an entire semester of research. in the end, it was a bit rushed, but i ended up making an A on the assignment.
enjoy, or not. lol Drug Prohibition: Beyond the Bounds of Reason For nearly 40 years the American government has waged a war on its own citizenry, namely the drug war. This is not a conventional war where victory is attainable, but rather an unrelenting war of attrition in which generations of people are perpetually victimized at the hands of profiteers. The American drug war is a complex – a vast system of lawful, enduring relationships between the public and private spheres that seeks to achieve a common goal. In the case of the drug war complex, this common goal is the implementation and enforcement of drug prohibition. For Abraham Lincoln, “prohibition goes beyond the bounds of reason in that it attempts to control a man’s appetite by legislation and makes crimes out of things that are not crimes [and] strikes a blow at the very principles upon which our government was founded“ (Gray 34). For drug users, drug addicts, and non-drug users of today the questions regarding drug prohibition are universal: How much institutional control do we allow over our personal choice to explore altered states of consciousness? To what end? And at what cost? By explaining to my classmates - who undoubtedly fall into one of the three categories of drug user, drug addict and non-drug user - the history and problems regarding prevalent drugs and drug prohibition as well as introducing alternative solutions to these problems, it is my aim to bring us to the consensus that drug prohibition has failed and must be replaced with more humane policies. Societies have always had complex and problematic relationships with drugs. Alcohol and coffee are both drugs that feature such multifarious relationships. For 10,000 years ethyl alcohol played an integral role in daily human life as both a source of calories and uncontaminated fluids in the western world. During the middle ages the process of distillation was perfected by Arab alchemists; the term “alcohol” is derived from the Arabic al kohl, an alchemical term referring to a material's base essence. Alcohol's intoxicating effects were viewed by every western society as pleasurable, medicinal and sacred. Alcohol was even viewed as a military commodity. In 1777 Prussia's Frederick the Great was deeply disturbed by the rising popularity of coffee because he feared that soldiers who drank coffee rather than beer would be unreliable on the battlefield. “Wars have been fought and won by soldiers nourished on beer” says Frederick (Vallee 80-83). Likewise, coffee shares a similarly profound relationship with society. Like alcohol, it was perfected by Arabs during the middle ages, who learned to brew the familiar beverage we know today and used it for medicinal and recreational purposes. By the 19th century coffee’s popularity had reached a global scale. In Europe coffee was often referred to as the official “drink of democracy”, and European coffee houses became known for their fashionably diverse and enlightened clientele (Reich 9-10). However, the prevalence of drugs like coffee and alcohol in society have never been without high human costs. The demand for coffee in the 19th century resulted in mass enslavement. Indigenous peoples of European colonies as well as imported African slaves were forced to work on South American coffee plantations. By 1830 Brazil alone had a slave population of one million largely dedicated to coffee production (Reich 10). Ironically, the slave driven mass production of coffee dramatically drove its price down, making it possible for the newly vogue coffee houses across the Atlantic to open their doors to their forward thinking patronage. When slavery was abolished in Brazil in 1888, “coffee autocrats” soon divided its landscape into fiercely – and violently – competitive “patriarchal blocs”, setting the stage for a paternalistic economic environment that devalued manual labor (Freyre 630). To this day Brazilian smallholder coffee farmers continually face crushing disadvantages in their efforts to compete with big business (“Fairness”). Moreover, the human cost of alcohol’s prevalence in society cannot be overstated. As alcohol was the trusted drink of the frontier due to concerns regarding water contamination, alcoholism ravaged the countryside of 19th century North America. In 1813, Dr. Benjamin Rush, a signer of The Declaration of Independence, published a series of essays that correctly established alcoholism as a disease; a fact which progressive groups used as a means to eventually implement American Alcohol Prohibition from 1919-1933 (Vallee 85). Alcohol now claims the lives of 2.5 million people per year (“Fact Sheet: Alcohol”). Marijuana is yet another drug with a history of medicinal and recreational use dating back as far as 2700 B.C.E. From China to Egypt to Sumeria to Rome, marijuana has been a staple of both the ancient and modern worlds. From 1850 to 1942 marijuana was recognized as an official medicinal drug by the American government (Cohen 35). The period from the “baby boom” through the 1960's featured a marked rise in the recreational use of marijuana in America, which was met with significant government attempts to suppress its use. In spite of President Richard Nixon's plea to Congress in 1971 for a “total offensive” against illicit drug use, which he deemed to be “public enemy number one“, by 1977 a reformist movement to decriminalize marijuana had captured the attention of the public. Among its endorsers were the American Medical Association, the American Bar Association, and the American Public Health Association as well as President James Carter (“Suspects”). In the wake of the recent 2012 Presidential Election, both Colorado and Washington have voted in favor of the outright legalization of marijuana. But the reaction from the Federal government remains to be seen. "This is a symbolic victory for (legalization) advocates, but it will be short-lived" says Kevin Sabet, former adviser to the Obama Administration's Drug Czar (“Short-Lived”). Prior to the historic events surrounding the 2012 Presidential Election, the marijuana reformist movement in America of the 1970's was overshadowed by the introduction of cocaine into middle class culture in the 1980's. Cocaine caused a sea change in the public's perception of recreational drug use. In response to community outcry and Congressional pressure, on October 2nd, 1982, President Ronald Reagan declared an all out “War on Drugs”. This began an era of “the greatest buildup and mobilization of law enforcement resources in American history” (“Suspects”). At the peak of the late 1980's crack epidemic, this endeavor was dramatically escalated by President George H.W. Bush and continues into the present day. Proponents of drug prohibition view society’s access to certain drugs as hazardous, inferring that drug prohibition combined with harsh punitive measures for drug offenders ensures the safety of society and its children by keeping drugs and drug users off the streets. Meanwhile drug prohibition’s opponents view the institution as oppressive and destructive, only serving the interests of profiteers in both government and black markets. In spite of extreme polarization on this issue, there is common ground. Each side clearly recognizes the problems associated with the prevalence of drugs in society, and each side clearly recognizes a set of goals that must be met in order to minimize the harms that prevalence can cause. James P. Gray succinctly sums up these goals (36). 1. Reduce the exposure to and usage of drugs by children. 2. Stop or materially reduce the violence that accompanies the manufacture and distribution of drugs. 3. Stop or materially reduce the corruption of companies, public officials, and individuals that accompanies the distribution of drugs. 4. Stop or materially reduce crime by both people trying to get money to purchase drugs and those under the influence. 5. Stop or materially reduce the flow of drugs into our country. 6. Maintain and reaffirm our civil liberties. 7. Reduce health risks to people who use drugs. 8. Reduce the number of people being put into jails and prisons. 9. Stop or materially reduce the flow of guns from the United States into other countries. 10. Increase respect for our laws and institutions. James P. Gray is a former “drug warrior” and retired judge of the Orange County Superior Court in California. Judge Gray argues in favor of a libertarian approach to society‘s drug problem. “Illicit drugs certainly can be harmful, and nothing I say [is] intended [to] minimize those harms” says Gray (35). However, “treating the manufacture and sale of these drugs just like we treat alcohol - as legal for adults - will actually and fairly quickly accomplish each of those goals and, further, that pursuing our present policy of Drug Prohibition will never accomplish any of them” asserts the former Judge ( Gray 36). Age restriction has proven to be highly successful in reducing childrens' exposure to drugs in the cases of both alcohol and cigarettes. However, in Gray’s words, “[t]oday’s illegal drug dealers don’t ask for ID” (36). Allowing for legal distribution would immediately eliminate violent territorial disputes according to Gray. “If Budweiser has distribution problems with Coors, its leaders don’t put thugs with guns onto the streets to resolve them. Instead they file a complaint in court and have it peacefully adjudicated by judges like me” (Gray 68). Furthermore, with drug distribution being legalized, the need for corruption in support of its propagation would be eliminated. Domestic cultivation and manufacture of drugs would likewise eliminate any opportunities for black market profiteering. “[W]e do not see Mexican drug cartels planting illegal vineyards in U.S. forests to compete with Robert Mondavi!” exclaims Gray (69). The lack of a black market for drugs would also have a significant impact on funding for terrorist groups. Gray explains that “[a]ccording to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, during the year 2010 alone, 5,800 metric tons of opium (which is used to make heroin) and between 1,500 and 3,500 metric tons of hashish were grown in Afghanistan. Many of the profits from the sales of those drugs went to fund the operations of the Taliban. Thus, following the above logic, repealing Drug Prohibition would deprive the Taliban and most other terrorist groups of a great deal of money” (69). The absence of a black market for drugs would not only remove the agent by which terrorist groups acquire their income - drug dealers - but would also greatly diminish other groups’ ability to buy weapons to export from America in support of their respective causes; causes which would also be largely eliminated in themselves by dissolving the black market for drugs. Cartels, which thrive solely from to illegal drug trafficking, would no longer have markets to move weight into and therefore no need for weapons to defend those territories. In one fell swoop the legalization of drugs would significantly diminish the power of these organizations and their ability to act against society at large. Admittedly, keeping these clandestine groups out of legitimate drug trade would present its own set of problems. However, a vast majority of drug dealers are not directly involved with these groups, and if they are involved it is highly likely that those individuals are ignorant of that fact. In any case, by eliminating most drug dealers and all drug consumers from this picture, the solution to these new problems that might arise from legalization seems to appear more manageable, if not completely realistic due to the sheer numbers. Sheer numbers also suggest that legalization would dramatically reduce incarceration rates because vast amounts of people who were formally criminals would no longer be considered as such. From a law enforcement perspective the math is quite simple; a handful of criminals is easier to stop than millions. Additionally, providing a secure environment in which a drug consumer could go purchase drugs, like a shop, would significantly reduce the risk of violent crime, like robberies, at the hands of criminal predators. By having less opportunities for crimes to happen, law enforcement resources are thus freed up for more pressing matters. Numbers once again seem to point to drug legalization being the most logical conclusion to the drug problem of society. In addition to reducing the societal harms of drugs by eliminating the black market and the violence and mass imprisonment it ultimately fosters, legalization would also dramatically improve the safety of drugs at a consumer level. “Most drug-related health risks are caused by the unknown strength and purity of the drugs and by things like HIV/AIDS and hepatitis, which are transmitted by unclean needles. We know these are relatively easy problems to resolve. The repeal of Alcohol Prohibition virtually eliminated the “bathtub gin” impurities problems, and the FDA resolved [those problems] years ago“ says Judge Gray (69). Since the late 1990's Switzerland has been running a medical intervention program in which heroin addicts are safely prescribed heroin at competitive prices under the condition that they do not commit any crimes while participating in the program. “What were the results? Crime went down in the neighborhoods surrounding the clinics, and so did drug usage. Clients knew that if they were ever arrested for selling drugs or for another criminal violation, they would be dropped from the program, and that would make their lives much harder” (Gray 69). Reduced harm equates to an overall reduction in both crime and drug usage in the case of Switzerland. More so than any weapon or any prison cell, the most destructive effect prevalent drug use of any kind in any society, regardless of its legality, is addiction. The destruction that addiction reigns down on an individual‘s life cannot be overstated and is beyond the scope of this essay. In the scope of an argument in favor of drug legalization, however, it is suffice to say that drug prohibition has created an environment where addicts face exploitation at the hands of dealers, abuse at the hands of healthcare workers, and incarceration at the hands of law enforcement although addiction is a prison unto itself. Growing up, I had a friend named Marc. His mother and mine were best friends before we were born, which was incidentally four days apart. We were raised like brothers. Marc was born with a congenital heart defect, which kept him from playing sports starting in his early teen years. It was a blow from which I do not think he ever recovered. During our mid teen years Marc, unbeknownst to me, took on an IV heroin habit that quickly became an addiction. Marc was not the “addict type”; he was clean cut and highly functional. Marc was out on his own years before I was, working a respectable job and attending junior college. By the time we were 21 years old, Marc began a downward spiral that resulted in repeatedly having to be hospitalized due to complications arising from his lifestyle combined with his heart condition. Marc had a “tough love” sort of doctor who would purposely make his visits to the ER uncomfortable, and would attempt to berate and bully him into giving up his addiction. I am ultimately led to conclude that this strategy drove Marc further underground in his addiction, and even further from seeking the professional help he needed. On March 22nd, 2000, Marc was found dead in bed in his apartment by his girlfriend. The causes of his death were numerous, with ulcers from alcohol abuse being among them. But deadly levels of opiates were found in his blood. I am led to believe this was a suicide, but that is mere speculation. The loss was utterly devastating. To this day I still cannot bring myself to visit his grave. I can only imagine how things may have turned out if our society promoted a more compassionate set of values and policies towards people with Marc’s condition. For some though, this “tough love” outlook on drug addiction is exactly what we need in order to maintain a relatively well functioning society. Michael Gerson, former speechwriter and top aide to former President George W. Bush, claims that “[r]esponsible, self-governing citizens do not grow wild like blackberries. They are cultivated in institutions - families, religious communities, decent orderly neighborhoods. And government has a limited but important role in reinforcing social norms and expectations - including laws against drugs“. For Gerson and his fellow defenders of drug prohibition, libertarianism is a “second-rate value” that, in the scope of drug prohibition, is “contempt for the suffering”. The suffering being those who are too weak to not abuse the “freedom they would be given” by a relaxed approach to prevalent drug use, namely addicts (“Second-Rate”). The government's role is to promote institutions that help to protect society from the bonds of the inevitable wave of addiction that would consume the weaker among us should drug prohibition be abandoned. Gerson's position is not without its dissenters. David Boaz, leading voice in the American libertarian movement, in response to Gerson's diatribe points out that “Gerson wants to treat [drug addicts] with compassion. But let's be clear: He thinks the compassionate way to treat suffering people is to put them in jail”. Boaz then deftly illustrates the weakness of Gerson's argument by pointing out that the none of the examples he cites in his column as being victorious in their struggles with addiction ever went to jail, but rather “through faith and personal responsibility” - with former President George Bush being among those examples. Boaz then points out that both “Gerson and Bush support the drug laws under which more than 1.5 million people a year are arrested and some 500,000 people are currently in jail”. “Our last three presidents have all acknowledged they used illegal drugs in their youth. Yet they don't seem to think — nor does Gerson suggest — that their lives would have been made better by arrest, conviction, and incarceration. If libertarianism is a second-rate value, where does hypocrisy rank?” asks Boaz. As our world continues to struggle with addiction and its dire consequences, developments in alternative treatments for addiction have begun to surface. The highly potent psychedelic ibogaine is a mixture of alkaloids extracted from the West African shrub Tabernanthe iboga. Reports indicate that this compound may have anti-addictive qualities that last up to 36 months (Briedis, et al. 182). Nick Sandberg of Iboga.co.uk reports that “[w]hen administered to persons seeking to beat addiction...a single dose of ibogaine typically achieves the...complete removal or severe attenuation of the symptoms of drug withdrawal, allowing painless detoxification...[T]he removal of the desire to use drugs for a period of between one week and three months”. However, in 1970 the FDA classified ibogaine as a Schedule I substance, thereby stifling research into the compound in America (Briedis, et al. 188). Moreover, the stigma of addiction created by drug prohibition rhetoric has also played heavily into why this potentially powerful tool in treating addictions has been left on the fringes in clinics operating outside of the jurisdiction of American drug laws. As a society who outwardly prides itself on its compassion, and a country that is so consumed by addiction, how can we allow our attitudes towards the sick – and the laws that are informed by those attitudes - stop us from helping them? Where drug prohibition does not foster societal harm, it creates it. It is a monstrous solution to a monstrous problem. Nietzche says “battle not with monsters, lest ye become a monster.” In our battles with the monster that is drug-related societal harms we have abandoned our reason and thus our humanity. We have become monsters through the creation of a complex that attempts to disrupt supply and quell demand for drugs through Draconian penalties for possession of miniscule amounts of substances we have arbitrarily deemed to be illicit. We have become engulfed in a sea of unreason by handing our sovereignty as individuals over to profiteers who only seek to perpetuate and escalate the drug war. And at the heart of the matter, we have criminalized behavior that simply is not criminal in itself. Absolute freedom to choose what we will with our minds and bodies carries the burden of personal responsibility as well as the risk of entering monstrously irrational territory. It behooves us to confront this territory with open hearts and serene, thinking minds in order to traverse it. Works Cited Boaz, David. "Drug Decriminalization Has Failed?" The Cato Institute. August 26, 2011. 8 Oct 2012. Briedis, et al. "Ibogaine, An Anti-Addictive Drug: Pharmacology And Time To Go Further In Development. A Narrative Review." Human & Experimental Toxicology 27.3 (2008): 181-194. Academic Search Complete. Web. 8 Oct. 2012. Cohen, Peter J. "Medical Marijuana: The Conflict Between Scientific Evidence And Political Ideology."Utah Law Review 2009.1 (2009): 35-104. Academic Search Complete. Web. 29 Oct. 2012. Dobuzinskis, Alex. “Marijuana Legalization Victories Could Be Short-Lived” Reuters. November 07, 2012. 3 December 2012. “Fact Sheet: Alcohol.” WHO, February 2011. Web. 28 October 2012. Freyre, Gilberto. "Slavery, Monarchy And Modern Brazil."Foreign Affairs 33.4 (1955): 624-633. Academic Search Complete. Web. 28 Oct. 2012. Gerson, Michael. “Ron Paul's Land of Second-Rate Values.” The Washington Post. May 9, 2011. 8 October 2012. Gray, James P. "Drug Prohibition Is the Problem: Reflections from a Former Judge." Tikkun 27.3 (2012): 34-71. Web. 3 October 2012. “Introduction to Ibogaine.” Iboga.co.uk, n.d. Web. 30 October 2012. Neuman, William. “A Question of Fairness.” The New York Times. November 23, 2011. 28 October 2012. Vallee, Bert L. "Alcohol In The Western World." Scientific American 278.6 (1998): 80. Academic Search Complete. Web. 28 Oct. 2012. Reich, Anna. "Coffee & Tea History In A Cup." Herbarist 76 (2010): 8-15. Academic Search Complete. Web. 28 Oct. 2012. Sandberg, Nick. “An Introduction to Ibogaine.” Iboga.co.uk, March 20, 2012. Web. 30 October 2012. Wisotsky, Steven. "A Society Of Suspects: The War on Drugs and Civil Liberties." The Cato Institute. October 2, 1992. Web. 4 Oct 2012. -------------------- I'm up to my ears in unwritten words. - J.D. Salinger Edited by millzy (01/18/13 12:15 AM)
| |||||||
 TurkeyTom Trippy   Registered: 08/02/11 Posts: 2,435 Last seen: 4 years, 9 months |
| ||||||
|
I'll be honest, I didn't quite read all of it, but most of it at least. From what I read, it was a great paper! I'm actually a bit jealous, I wish I could write that well.
--------------------  
| |||||||
|
millzy Registered: 05/12/10 Posts: 12,431 |
| ||||||
|
thanks! i know it's a little dense. it's ten and a half pages printed.
i edited the post to try to make the paragraphs stand out. thanks for reading it in any case. 
-------------------- I'm up to my ears in unwritten words. - J.D. Salinger Edited by millzy (01/17/13 11:36 PM)
| |||||||
|
TurkeyTom Trippy Registered: 08/02/11 Posts: 2,435 Last seen: 4 years, 9 months |
| ||||||
|
that looks much better! yeah it was just tough since the paragraphs werent spaced. I think too many psychedelics have made it hard for me to read lots of texts
I'll probably finish reading it later --------------------
| |||||||
|
millzy Registered: 05/12/10 Posts: 12,431 |
| ||||||
|
no, it's dense without the spacing. if you get around to reading it, i hope you like it.
-------------------- I'm up to my ears in unwritten words. - J.D. Salinger
| |||||||
| |||||||
Edit 
Reply 
|
| Similar Threads | Poster | Views | Replies | Last post | ||
 |
 |
How Prohibition Increases the Harm It Tries to Reduce |  Annom |
1,967 | 8 | 11/18/03 04:05 PM by DailyPot |
|
|
Penn & Teller call BULLSHIT! on The War on Drugs |  TheShroomHermit |
2,627 | 12 | 04/29/04 06:42 AM by Annom |
|
 |
Drugs are needed for our society to continue... (  1 2 all ) |
 DailyPot |
6,552 | 23 | 03/06/17 09:13 PM by triphead9428 |
|
 |
Made A Pact with some people to stay off of drugs ( 1 2 all ) |
 Live406 |
3,777 | 25 | 04/26/04 11:56 AM by Vulture |
|
|
The Rise in the Use of Hallucinogenic Drugs in the 1990s |  I_Fart_Blue |
2,905 | 9 | 10/03/16 04:31 PM by g00ru |
|
 |
New to the forum, thought I'd share an experience.... | sk8rjeff |
1,415 | 11 | 08/01/04 12:39 PM by iloveraving |
|
 |
Drug Test Your Teen Dot Com |  carbonhoots |
5,666 | 12 | 01/02/04 02:16 AM by Anno |
|
 |
Excited to share some new piano music I wrote (10 Whispers for piano, Vol.1) | Alice101101 |
170 | 1 | 03/09/18 01:54 PM by Alice101101 |
| Extra information | ||
| You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled Moderator: Entire Staff 838 topic views. 8 members, 4,742 guests and 259 web crawlers are browsing this forum. [ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ] | ||