The War on Some Drugs
Posted: 17 Dec 2008, 15:07
Okay, this has been a pet peeve of mine for a while, and I've mentioned it in passing in the past.
Why do we, as a society (this covers pretty much most of modern society) insist on taking a "drugs are bad, mmmkay" attitude?
There are three major problems that I can see this causes:
1) The creation of a multinational, lucrative and very aggressive black market for recreational drugs.
2) A head-in-the-sand approach to drug awareness - "Just say no" is inadequate as an education. Any time someone tries to provide a useful and sensible position on recreational drug use, the Mrs Lovejoys get up in arms and it gets squashed.
3) A lack of societal support for those whose lives are significantly disrupted by drug abuse.
The Black Market
Think of the crime - gangs, shootings, drug dealers, drug growers, smuggling, drug "cook houses" - which exists purely because the vast majority of drugs which could be used for recreation are banned.
Lift the ban and suddenly that entire market, everything it supports and that supports it is gone.
Recreational drug prices become regulated by a free market, or by government intervention (or both, I don't really care), and as a result, burglaries, muggings, theft - all down.
The legalisation and regulation of recreational drug use also gives us an opportunity to bring drug use into the open; people who aren't committing a crime have less reason to hide (but obviously may still choose to do so. Whatever).
Just say no!
Actually, this is one area in which society seems a little more relaxed than has been in the past. I know that the curriculum here in WA includes some fairly broad health education, allowing students to research and present both the effects and side effects of various drugs. This is a good start.
Then when you start reading stories like the one above (banning an entirely sensible leaflet), you begin to despair.
Let's take a quote from our Very Good Friends, the zealots of Drug Free Australia:
"Schools play a crucial role in preventing drug problems when students bring drugs to school or use drugs at school. According to research, at least 50% of senior students in Australian school have tried cannabis".
Of fucking course >=50% of senior school students have tried cannabis. That's what people do. That statistic is wholly uninteresting, except to prove the point that over half our population has taken a banned substance at least once and, crucially, our society has not fallen apart.
Far more interesting, would be a study that shows how many of the students who've tried cannabis went on to use it regularly?
How many students overall go on to use regularly?
But doing these studies is really fucking hard because somebody has broken the law whenever they take a puff.
There comes a point (hint: it's high school) where you need to stop treating children as children, and start treating them as the young adults they are. It is not beneficial to society, or kids to try to keep breastfeeding babies until the age of 18, when suddenly they get spit out into the world and are expected to behave like adults.
What else do we have from these paragons of education?
"Drug Free Australia will continue to strive for pro health alternatives to illicit drugs and to ensure that harm prevention is not only a household catch phrase, but a reality, put into good practice, throughout our country."
I couldn't agree with this more. Let's start by removing the vast majority of drugs from having illicit status. Bam. That simultaneously reduces the number of illicit drugs and increases the number of "pro health alternatives" (whatever the hell those are).
More constructively though, the use of the phrase harm prevention is a brilliant one. Let's apply that phrase instead of any of the following ones:
*Drug Ban
*Zero Tolerance
*Tougher Laws
*Oh Won't Somebody Please Think of the Children?
We're cookin' with gas!
Before I start getting stuck into these twerps, let's ask what would be involved in the Cart Method of Drug Regulation and Education:
*Drugs would be taxed, sold only by approved, regulated and audited sources. We would have similar restrictions on drug use as we do on cigarettes and alcohol.
*The money from the taxes would go into a fund. This fund would be used for: treatment centres - rehabilitation - education - research - enforcement
Even with a reasonably heavy tax, I'd wager that recreational drugs would be cheaper to purchase than they are now, while still maintaining acceptable margins.
Much of the "cost" of drugs today are with regards to the risk and illegality of their production, movement and sale. Those costs would all be gone.
This would have the added benefit of pricing unauthorised dealers (effectively the current black market) out of the market.
*We can now educate about the full effects of drug use. We can also more effectively research said effects, produce "cleaner" and safer drugs.
*People who choose to take drugs are better informed from both ends - drugs sold through authorised retailers are transparent in their strength and content. This makes everyone's life easier.
[tangent]
Indulge me a little: now to the DFA's patron, one "Dr" Margaret Court.
Firstly, we need to be a little more precise about the fact that Ms Court's qualifications lie primarily in the arenas of law and tennis, and nowhere near medicine.
Presenting your patron on the home page as "Dr Margaret Court" lends your organisation (which is based primarily on health issues) more credence than it is due (some people actually believe that one's qualifications shouldn't automatically imbue one with more authority on a subject than, say, the field itself, but I digress).
This is also someone who has some wonderfully progressive views on other "controversial" topics. Okay, that really shouldn't matter either way, but I guess I'm just a spiteful person.
Actual content follows.
[/tangent]
Societal Support and Acceptance
Drug use isn't a thing to hide and be ashamed of - people are far more likely to search out and accept support if they aren't made to feel guilty for their choices.
If someone develops a drug problem, they need all the encouragement and support they can get. Our current society provides this for alcoholics. Our current society does not encourage other drug users to step up and take charge - after all, they're guilty of doing something illegal.
I'm aware of nutjobs on both sides, and often times both sides have good points, which need to be taken into consideration.
But nobody even seems to be considering the case for legalising all recreational drugs, bar the odd fringe crazies in Russia a few years back.
Madness.
Why do we, as a society (this covers pretty much most of modern society) insist on taking a "drugs are bad, mmmkay" attitude?
There are three major problems that I can see this causes:
1) The creation of a multinational, lucrative and very aggressive black market for recreational drugs.
2) A head-in-the-sand approach to drug awareness - "Just say no" is inadequate as an education. Any time someone tries to provide a useful and sensible position on recreational drug use, the Mrs Lovejoys get up in arms and it gets squashed.
3) A lack of societal support for those whose lives are significantly disrupted by drug abuse.
The Black Market
Think of the crime - gangs, shootings, drug dealers, drug growers, smuggling, drug "cook houses" - which exists purely because the vast majority of drugs which could be used for recreation are banned.
Lift the ban and suddenly that entire market, everything it supports and that supports it is gone.
Recreational drug prices become regulated by a free market, or by government intervention (or both, I don't really care), and as a result, burglaries, muggings, theft - all down.
The legalisation and regulation of recreational drug use also gives us an opportunity to bring drug use into the open; people who aren't committing a crime have less reason to hide (but obviously may still choose to do so. Whatever).
Just say no!
Actually, this is one area in which society seems a little more relaxed than has been in the past. I know that the curriculum here in WA includes some fairly broad health education, allowing students to research and present both the effects and side effects of various drugs. This is a good start.
Then when you start reading stories like the one above (banning an entirely sensible leaflet), you begin to despair.
Let's take a quote from our Very Good Friends, the zealots of Drug Free Australia:
"Schools play a crucial role in preventing drug problems when students bring drugs to school or use drugs at school. According to research, at least 50% of senior students in Australian school have tried cannabis".
Of fucking course >=50% of senior school students have tried cannabis. That's what people do. That statistic is wholly uninteresting, except to prove the point that over half our population has taken a banned substance at least once and, crucially, our society has not fallen apart.
Far more interesting, would be a study that shows how many of the students who've tried cannabis went on to use it regularly?
How many students overall go on to use regularly?
But doing these studies is really fucking hard because somebody has broken the law whenever they take a puff.
There comes a point (hint: it's high school) where you need to stop treating children as children, and start treating them as the young adults they are. It is not beneficial to society, or kids to try to keep breastfeeding babies until the age of 18, when suddenly they get spit out into the world and are expected to behave like adults.
What else do we have from these paragons of education?
"Drug Free Australia will continue to strive for pro health alternatives to illicit drugs and to ensure that harm prevention is not only a household catch phrase, but a reality, put into good practice, throughout our country."
I couldn't agree with this more. Let's start by removing the vast majority of drugs from having illicit status. Bam. That simultaneously reduces the number of illicit drugs and increases the number of "pro health alternatives" (whatever the hell those are).
More constructively though, the use of the phrase harm prevention is a brilliant one. Let's apply that phrase instead of any of the following ones:
*Drug Ban
*Zero Tolerance
*Tougher Laws
*Oh Won't Somebody Please Think of the Children?
We're cookin' with gas!
Before I start getting stuck into these twerps, let's ask what would be involved in the Cart Method of Drug Regulation and Education:
*Drugs would be taxed, sold only by approved, regulated and audited sources. We would have similar restrictions on drug use as we do on cigarettes and alcohol.
*The money from the taxes would go into a fund. This fund would be used for: treatment centres - rehabilitation - education - research - enforcement
Even with a reasonably heavy tax, I'd wager that recreational drugs would be cheaper to purchase than they are now, while still maintaining acceptable margins.
Much of the "cost" of drugs today are with regards to the risk and illegality of their production, movement and sale. Those costs would all be gone.
This would have the added benefit of pricing unauthorised dealers (effectively the current black market) out of the market.
*We can now educate about the full effects of drug use. We can also more effectively research said effects, produce "cleaner" and safer drugs.
*People who choose to take drugs are better informed from both ends - drugs sold through authorised retailers are transparent in their strength and content. This makes everyone's life easier.
[tangent]
Indulge me a little: now to the DFA's patron, one "Dr" Margaret Court.
Firstly, we need to be a little more precise about the fact that Ms Court's qualifications lie primarily in the arenas of law and tennis, and nowhere near medicine.
Presenting your patron on the home page as "Dr Margaret Court" lends your organisation (which is based primarily on health issues) more credence than it is due (some people actually believe that one's qualifications shouldn't automatically imbue one with more authority on a subject than, say, the field itself, but I digress).
This is also someone who has some wonderfully progressive views on other "controversial" topics. Okay, that really shouldn't matter either way, but I guess I'm just a spiteful person.
Actual content follows.
[/tangent]
Societal Support and Acceptance
Drug use isn't a thing to hide and be ashamed of - people are far more likely to search out and accept support if they aren't made to feel guilty for their choices.
If someone develops a drug problem, they need all the encouragement and support they can get. Our current society provides this for alcoholics. Our current society does not encourage other drug users to step up and take charge - after all, they're guilty of doing something illegal.
I'm aware of nutjobs on both sides, and often times both sides have good points, which need to be taken into consideration.
But nobody even seems to be considering the case for legalising all recreational drugs, bar the odd fringe crazies in Russia a few years back.
Madness.