Children addicted to drugs

I am about to become a father. I have had a bug in my nether regions for a long time that has become frustratingly real to me as of late.

I am not comfortable with a drug policy that virtually guarantees that my child will have access to the most dangerous chemicals in the world at their high school. Prohibition creates a black market that enriches the worst people out there, criminal organizations and terrorists, because they are the ones who control the supply. These people have every reason to sell to children; they are less likely to call police; they are easier to sell fake, cut, and adulterated substance to; they are willing to pay a premium, etc. Under prohibition, this will not change and my child will have the same statistical probability of using drugs in high school as kids have today.

I think we can come up with a reasoned drug policy that does not drain the taxpayers of over $100 billion per year, saves lives, and most importantly keeps drugs out of the hands of children. The first step is freeing the choker that the federal government has on the states. A great first step would be to let the states experiment to help us find a reasonable policy that we can go forward with permanently. Several states have passed medical mar1juana laws only to have the DEA raid providers' offices, confiscate the legally prescribed plants, and arrest deputies of the city. Other states would experiment with other drug policies across the nation if given the chance.

I am sure that a reasoned approach based on science will involve regulating and taxing the industry, which is more than prohibitionists can bear. We can win the drug war if we just learn from our mistakes and change our strategy for dealing with the problem.

What do you think?

 

That argument (about black tar heroin) is one that the prohibitionists use to spread Fear Uncertainty and Doubt (FUD) among the general populace. The argument is kind of like the commercial that the ONDCP (drug czar's office) ran where one guy is talking about decriminalizing and another guy starts spewing nonsense about selling drugs in vending machines.

If you want to talk about heroin, there have been extremely successful trials of prescription heroin in Europe, and Switzerland just extended their program of free prescription heroin until 2009 due to the programs success in making heroin users into productive members of society who work and pay their taxes. Heroin should be regulated to the point that we know EXACTLY how much of it is used in our country, by whom, and what we can do to help people that want to stop. I mean, we have the ability to trace every Oxycontin pill that is consumed but we can't even get a close estimate of how much heroin is used, despite the fact that heroin is MUCH more dangerous than every other drug out there.

Cocaine is in the same boat, we need to regulate it to the point that we know everything about use patterns, effective treatment modalities, and what makes a person want to use that poison. Once we know what makes people use, we can use that information to educate people so that they won't even want to try the stuff (demand reduction).

mar1juana is the only drug I would treat even roughly the same as our existing recreational psychoactives, nicotine and alcohol. Even so, there are new technologies that will allow us to more closely track it, like RFID tags (bar codes that can be read from 5 feet away) to eliminate the possibility of minors shoplifting the stuff.

The FUD the prohibitionists spew about drugs being available on street corners if we regulate the industry is kind of a strange argument considering that there are plenty of street corners in America today where ANYONE, kids included, can acquire anything they want.

I want to create system where, after an adult has been educated about the drug he/she intends to put into their body (and I believe that alcohol and nicotine need to be included in this educational process), that adult can legally acquire that product from a licensed business. We have made HUGE strides reducing the levels of teen use of alcohol and tobacco whereas the levels of illegal drug use have increased or stayed level since the War on Drugs started in 1972.

If an educated adult chooses to poison themselves slowly with drugs, the governments job at that point is to collect tax money that can be used to rehabilitate that person and to fund other initiatives, like prescriptions for the elderly. If some rich moron wants to go through thousands of dollars in unnecessary drugs, that moron should be paying the bill so that her/his grandparents won't have to spend their social security checks on NECESSARY drugs.

The argument I hear against letting adults buy drugs is one that goes "if they can buy it, kids will be able to pay people to get it for them." Not if, as part of the education process, we make it clear that providing drugs to minors is serious enough to draw a year in jail for the first offense, 5 for the second, 10 for the third, and 20 for the 4th. If we are actually trying to keep drugs from kids with our drug policy, this policy would be more effective.
The number one priority, before all other considerations, should be reducing the number of young people who are exposed to drugs and the wreckage they can make from your life. We can do that, but it will take a change in strategy. In Holland, mar1juana is effectively decriminalized (a more problematic situation than what I am proposing) and they have the lowest rate of teen drug use in the world. It's true, look it up at the UN.

BTW, I don't want to LEGALIZE anything. I want to regulate the heck out of the most dangerous chemicals in the world in order to actually reduce the numbers of people (especially young people) using those chemicals.

 

The science shows that if we REGULATE (again, I don't want to legalize anything) these substances, use rates will drop. In addition, we will see reductions in:

Violence, as drug dealers won't be shooting each other over turf and police won't be knocking down doors in the middle of the night.

Teen drug use, as the "forbidden fruit" aspect will be taken away.

Addiction rates, as we will be able to have medical professionals examine the records for drug users to identify abusers and target treatment at those people.

Drug war expenditures, which now total over $100 billion per year (we really don't know how much because the government doesn't track all those dollars).

We will also see increases in:

Police/neighborhood trust, as we will eliminate the one thing that makes the police the enemy in so many of our neighborhoods.

Tax revenue to make these idiot drug users pay for the societal costs of drug use.

BTW, if you are going to respond that someone's argument is inane, you should spell the word correctly and then use logic or facts to back up your opinion, not conjecture and FUD.

 

I want to create a set of regulations that make it somewhere between difficult and impossible for children to get their hands on drugs. I know that it is possible to reduce rates of drug use with different policies because other countries have done it.

If this means that physicians can prescribe heroin or cocaine so that these drug users are working or paying taxes, I think it is a policy that COULD be worth taking a look at.

Regulating mar1juana will take it out of the hands of dealers and put its sales in the hands of responsible adults who will be penalized for providing it to minors, and this type of regulation has been proven to reduce the rates of teenage use (alcohol and tobacco).

The policy we have now makes it so that kids can acquire drugs more easily than alcohol (I'm not making it up, there was a study).

This is a failed policy that has 2 million mostly black and brown people in jail today.

I'm just saying that it is time for a reasoned debate, not just the rhetoric of "what about the message to the kids." The message to the kids under prohibition is "you won't get punished very badly for doing drugs when you're a kid, so do 'em while you're young!" I'm tired of politicians trying to send messages, I want them to find a policy that works.

 

I have the necessary information to educate my child(ren) about the dangers inherent in any drug use and especially drug use by children. I am pretty confident that I will be able to steer my kids clear of drugs since I have been studying drug policy for almost 15 years as a counselor.

At this point, I am starting to worry about my mother, America. We have police who bust down doors in the middle of the night and set off concussion grenades in the houses of 57 year old women (Alberta Spruill in New York 2 weeks ago) who die on their way to the hospital on the word of some junkie who wanted to get a fix. We have 1/3 of the black men in America between the ages of 18 and 33 under the supervision of the criminal justice system (in jail, on parole, or on probation). We have levels of corruption and violence not seen in this country since our last failed attempt at prohibition.

To make matters worse, WE HAVE NOT REDUCED LEVELS OF DRUG USE IN OUR SOCIETY SINCE THE DRUG WAR STARTED IN 1972.

I am fighting this for my grandchildren and my country.

 

Thank you for the congratulations. I am going to have fun with fatherhood!

I am already 33 and became a drug counselor when I was 19. I have studied this problem for over a decade and my wife's pregnancy has only strengthened my resolve. This is something that I have to do for their sake and for my grandchildren. I mean, I think I can sufficiently warn my children of the danger because I have studied this issue for so long. But what about all the other people who have been caught up by the monster that our drug policy has become?

 

Studies, eh? Here is a brief run down of drug studies from the 1800's till the 1990's and their conclusions.

Indian Hemp Drugs Commission. mar1juana. 1893-94. (UK)
A seven volume, nearly 4,000 page report on the use of mar1juana in India by British and Indian experts who concluded, “the moderate use of these drugs is the rule, and that the excessive use is comparatively exceptional. The moderate use produces practically no ill effects.”


Panama Canal Zone Military Investigations. 1916-1929. (U.S.)
Recommended “no steps be taken by the Canal Zone authorities to prevent the sale or use of marihuana.”


Departmental Committee on Morphine and Heroin Addiction. Report. (The Rolleston Report), 1926. (UK)
Codified existing practices regarding the maintenance of addicts on heroin and morphine by doctors.


Mayor's Committee on Marihuana. The Marihuana Problem in the City of New York, 1965. (U.S.)
Concluded mar1juana use was non-addictive, and did not lead to morphine, cocaine or heroin addiction.


Committee of the America Bar Association and American Medical Association on Narcotic Drugs. Drug Addiction: Crime or Disease? Interim and Final Reports. 1961. (U.S.)
Concluded drug addiction is a disease, not a crime; harsh criminal penalties are destructive; drug prohibition ought to be reexamined; and experiments should be conducted with British-style maintenance clinics for narcotic addicts.


Interdepartmental Committee. Drug Addiction. (The Brain Report), 1961. (UK)
Endorsed the Rolleston Committee's advice which recommended that doctors in the United Kingdom be allowed to treat addicts with maintenance doses of powerful drugs when it was deemed medically helpful to the patient.


Interdepartmental Committee. Drug Addiction, Second Report. (The Second Brain Report), 1965. (UK)
Made recommendations for the monitoring and licensing of doctors in the United Kingdom who prescribe maintenance doses of drugs.


Advisory Committee on Drug Dependence. Cannabis. (The Wooton Report), 1968. (UK)
Endorsed conclusions of the 1965 New York report which said mar1juana was non-addictive and did not lead to morphine, cocaine or heroin addiction. Also endorsed the conclusions of the Indian Hemp Commission.


Government of Canada, Commission of Inquiry. The Non-Medical Use of Drugs, Interim Report, (The Le Dain Report), 1970. (Canada)

Recommended serious consideration be given to decriminalization of mar1juana for personal use.


National Commission on Marihuana and Drug Abuse, Drug Use in America: Problem in Perspective, 1973. (U.S.)
Appointed by President Nixon, it recommended possession of mar1juana for personal use be decriminalized.


National Research Council on the National Academy of Sciences, An Analysis of mar1juana Policy, 1982. (U.S.)
Recommended immediate decriminalization of mar1juana possession and suggested the United States experiment with allowing states to set up their own mar1juana controls, as is done with alcohol.


Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs, AIDS and Drug Misuse, Part 1 1988, Part 2, 1989. (UK)
Concluded that “The spread of HIV is a greater danger to the individual and public health than drug misuse.” Supported a comprehensive health plan that promoted abstinence, but above all health and life
------------------

Data from The Office of National Drug Control Policy said that the price of heroin has dropped from approx $3,200 in 1981 to approx $1,200 in 1995. The price of cocaine has similarly dropped from $275.12 per gram in 1981 to $94.52 in 1996. A kilogram of raw opium sells for $90 in Pakistan, but that same kilogram is worth $290,000 in the United States.

Since 1975, the federal government has been asking high school seniors how easy it is for them to obtain mar1juana. Adolescents' access to mar1juana has been virtually unchanged by the drug war. In 1975, 87% of youths said it was “very easy” or “fairly easy” to obtain mar1juana. Twenty-three years and millions of arrests later, 89.6% said it was easily obtained.

You also might find this quite enlightening, the 1937 Marihuana Tax Act passed by Congress http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/hemp/taxact/taxact.htm