War On Drugs

By chance I ran into an article regarding how women are suffering inequitably in the War on Drugs. Here is the article at Yahoo.What's interesting is that it is not just that women are getting caught up because of using drugs, but rather in the attacks on production and distribution.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

Thanks for the link. This is a very interesting and thought provoking thread.

quote:

---

As has been mentioned, Sherlock Holmes is a heroine addict, and this was not astoundingly remarkable, nor was it obligatory to paint him as a stumbling buffoon - quite the opposite, he is lauded for his intellect.

---

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Sherlock Holmes is a fictional character, right?

quote:

---

The number of folk that will simply drop out and stay high all the time will still be fewer than the number of folk we have locked up.

---

Why do you keep writing as if I want to lock up drug addicts when I have told you at least three times that I am FOR the DEcriminalization of drug use?

quote:

---

Why not?

---

Wow, jar, I guess you do really live a sheltered life or something. I guess that's the luxury of not having to think about how to protect yourself from rape.

quote:

---

Again, I just don't understand your objections. The drug isn't the issue, rape is the issue. Punish the folk for their behavior. I'm sure all the date rapists will gleefully trot down to the clinic, sign up to get their date-rape drugs.

---

Yes, I actually think that is EXACTLY what will happen, especially if there is no cost and no questions asked. Maybe you don't realize it, jar, but most rapes are planned in advance by the rapist.This is similar to the way that men who wanted to kill their wives, and had been convicted of violent crimes in the past, used to be able to trot right down to K-Mart and buy guns and ammunition, no questions asked.

quote:

---

Again, I clearly explained the answer to that. Under the system I propose the distribution point will be in health care clinics.

---

Well, this is certainly better, but you have to admit that this is also a bit different from what you originally proposed. You are now putting conditions upon the distribution of the drugs where before you were not.

quote:

---

And as I said before, "How does the current system help anyone recover from addiction?"

---

Jar, I'd like you to read this next part very carefully, because I am getting rather tired of repeating myself.Why do you think I support the current system, when I have stated (this will be at least the fourth time now) that I SUPPORT the decriminalization of drug use and I SUPPORT making drug treatment abundant and free and easy to get into? I think the current "war on drugs" is stupid. I simply do not think that your extreme "baby out with the bathwater" proposal is the correct answer.I'd really like you to discuss what my actual views are, not the strawman you insist upon tearing down.

quote:

---

however the effects of the drug itself are often confused with the effects of the "junkie" lifestyle.

---

Well, this hasn't been my experience.The people at my workplace who were high when at work, were high at work.They stumbled, they stood in one place for minutes at a time, eyes half closed, they didn't eat.

quote:

---

Oh you mean like marijuana, which is legal in the Netherlands and is a part of everyday life like cigs are?

---

No, I don't mean like MJ. MJ to me is a lot like alcohol, only less harmful. It's effects are mild and not addictive, and it does not tend to lead to violent behavior the way alcohol does.Heroin and crack are in a completely different category. They are extremely addictive, just like nicotine. Unlike nicotine, however, heroin and crack impair cognitive function and judgement, usuually to a significant degree.

quote:

---

I tend to think hard drugs would be viewed by families as alcohol and alcohol addiction is. It is not glamorous and a pretty healthy sign for people to be very careful.

---

LOL! And yet we have a large alcoholism and alcohol abuse problem in the US, even though most people understand that alcoholism and alcohol abuse is bad. Binge drinking has become normalized on college campuses, and going out and getting trashed is just something that many people do sometimes.

quote:

---

Look, this is just silly. First of all Jar was clearly talking about dispensing drugs out of a clinic and not in bar bathrooms. Second, you are now trying to drag this into some gun rights issue for criminals... do you view people that go to nightclubs equivalent to violent criminals?

---

Let's review.

quote:

---

In any case, let's assume they are handed out freely. So what? If you are knocking someone else out rather than yourself then you are commiting a crime. If another person knocks themself out and you rape them then you have commited a crime. What is the difference if the person who bought the drug got it full price, discount, or free?

​

You can rape a person who passed out from alcohol, or you conked on the head. The fact that they are handing out "clubs" for free, does not mean more people will be conking people out in order to rape them.

---

Several problems here. It is much more likely that a person in a bar or at a party will not drink so much that a rapist will be assured that they will pass out at all, or stay passed out during the entire rape. GHB takes care of this problem. Also, hitting a person on the head hard enough to knock them out is not something that some rapists want to do. It is also true that the victim might wake up from being knocked out in the midle of the rape, whaere this is not an issue when using GHB. If alcohol or hitting a person on the head was just as effective a way to render someone unable to resist compared to GHB, then why would it ever have gotten so popular in the first place? Obviously it works better than those methods.If it doesn't matter if drugs commonly used to facilitate specific violent crimes are handed out freely with no questions asked, then why not just have them where people are going to want them, like night club bathrooms, or maybe the supermarket? I know it seems like a silly suggestion, but I wasn't the one sggesting we hand out GHB for free, no questions asked.

quote:

---

You really got something against tobacco.

---

Yes, I do.

quote:

---

This is not really true is it? What is the percentage of people that smoke who get cancer from smoking, or some other ailment?

---

Statistics from the CDC* Tobacco use is the leading preventable cause of death in the United States.1 Cigarette smoking causes an estimated 440,000 deaths, or about 1 of every 5 deaths, each year.2,3 This estimate includes 35,000 deaths from secondhand smoke exposure.2* More deaths are caused each year by tobacco use than by all deaths from human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), illegal drug use, alcohol use, motor vehicle injuries, suicides, and murders combined.* The risk of dying from lung cancer is more than 22 times higher among men who smoke cigarettes and about 12 times higher among women who smoke cigarettes compared with never smokers.6* Since 1950, lung cancer deaths among women have increased by more than 600%.1 Since 1987, lung cancer has been the leading cause of cancer-related deaths in women.1* Cigarette smoking results in a two- to three-fold increased risk of dying from coronary heart disease.6* Cigarette smoking is associated with a ten-fold increased risk of dying from chronic obstructive lung disease.6 About 90% of all deaths from chronic obstructive lung diseases are attributable to cigarette smoking.1,6* Pipe smoking and cigar smoking increase the risk of dying from cancers of the lung, esophagus, larynx, and oral cavity.7 Smokeless tobacco use increases the risk for developing oral cancer

quote:

---

Then compare this with the percentage of everyone else that gets long debilitating illnesses before they die.

​

I think the best you will come up with is that perhaps on average, smokers will get their debilitating illnesses earlier than nonsmokers.

---

I also looked for statistics regarding non-smoking related cancers, and found that they are also on the rise, but pale in comparison to those from smoking, especially among women. another report, Baby Boomer-specific

quote:

---

Intriguingly the smokers I did know all lived pretty long lives (of those that have died). The one guy I know that died of lung cancer was an avid nonsmoker and admitted the irony of his suffering and death (before his death of course).

---

The statistics are pretty clear and damning. People, especially women, who smoke have a much greater chance of getting a variety of debilitating illnesses in the first place compared to non-smokers.As for the argument for the government being in the business of producing and distributing all illicit drugs, I have some thinking to do. You have brought up some good points, but I still think that Jar's approach is very extreme. Of course, he is continuing to modify it and put qualifiers and conditions on his original completey laissez faire notion.Incidentally, I have known several people who have died in their fifties from smoking-related illnesses, and my parents have both been in poor health since their late fiftes/early sixties from smoking-related illnesses (and other lifestyle issues in my father's case, such as a lot of stress and obesity. My mother's series of mini-strokes was due to smoking alone). Now, when they should be travelling and enjoying their retirement, they can only sit around and wait to die, basically.

No problem. We agree on decriminalization.I simple believe that even with decriminalization, we won't solve the problem. Until we can take the cost and profit motive out of drugs, we will not address the issue.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

You know your source on smoking did not answer my question. Neither did it provide what you really wanted to say, though it looks great from a relative distance.If you want to go toe to toe on smoking, fact vs fiction, I would be willing to open a thread on that. It'd give me an excuse to peruse more of the literature.In any case, while I am not a smoker and dislike smoking en masse, I think you are taking things further than evidence and reason actually take you. You don't have to hate or fear smoking as much as it seems you do.It sounds like your family had a tragic experience with smoking, that certainly can happen just like anything else. If they ended up the way they did because of an addiction then that is added tragedy. My arguments are not to convince people that smoking is a great and healthy activity, just that it is not some satanic pasttime. It does not need to be demonized as it has been.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

The hardass in me wants you to acknowledge that I have my knee on your neck regarding the GHB and "families will view hard drugs like they do alcohol abuse and Alcoholism" stuff, but I'm afraid that this will just get you turned on, so I won't mention it.

To be honest, you had me turned on at "hardass".I actually skipped the GHB and Normalization issues because I had to go make dinner and wasn't going to be able to respond to your reply. I figured though that I could mention starting a whole other thread for the smoking issue as it is a bit offtopic, yet a "burning" issue.Regarding GHB, I still am not convinced of its relevance to this topic or its correct analogy being handing out guns to convicts as they exit prison. Both seem stretched.I see the problem you are getting at. There is a valid question of why would anyone want to be handing out a drug with only one purpose (knocking a person out), and has recently been popularized because some people knock out other in order to sexually assault/rape them? I agree, why would anyone want to?However I don't believe that if this happened it would necessarily make more people want to use it on others, unless getting assaulted/raped became something of an in thing and so acceptable/nonprosecuted. I also don't see how it would help a person who did such a thing get out of the legal repercussions of having used it.As far as the Normalization issue, I think we are talking past each other to some degree. I do agree with you that certain drugs are much more addictive than others, and so even if their use is normalized by society, they will carry negative effects. Thus there is a difference between legalized and normalized use of MJ and shrooms vs heroin and cocaine.So I think we agree with those facts. The question then is what is the best way to treat those drugs. To my mind we are still left with legalization and normalization.Just because "hard drugs" such as heroin and cocaine come with much greater risks, I do not see how making them illegal will improve or soften their effects on people taking them. Purity concerns alone argue for legalization.I think you might end up agreeing with me about that, but have problems regarding what you see as coming after that: The normalization of hard drug use. The idea that normalization of H will look the same as normalization of MJ or cigs or OH (alcohol), is a stretch to me.Extreme sports are legal and normalized in a sense, yet not everyone is racing to engage in them. Some would that might not if it wasn't legal or normal, but then is that not them finding themselves? I guess I see human life as people taking risks which involves the chance that bad things happen.High risk will bring with it a stigma that no laws ever could create. Thus it is unlikely you'll see Mr Cleaver coming home to do some H with mrs Cleaver while the Beaver and Wally look on in eager anticipation of getting to try it. It may happen in some families, but the risks involved and results of "not making it" will stand as a pretty good scarecrow for most.As it is I think your mentioning alcoholism and nicotine addiction only prove my case. While many use that stuff, and may even be addicted, they are personal issues just like any other personal issues humans confront (like anorexia, or workaholics). Thankfully they are not tied to criminal issues, like alcohol was in the past (and remember that was production and distribution, not possession or use).Once we make personal problems, societal problems, then we artificially exaggerate their scope, and reduce the ability of individuals to find solutions that work for them.I guess its been noted a couple times now that the fictional character Sherlock Holmes was an addict. That showed the normalization of drugs at the time and did it have a an effect of swelling addiction and use? No. It showed people this wasn't the greatest thing to be doing, as well as showing that people can be productive even if addicted.You might counter that he was fictional, but there most certainly were productive addicts over the years. I'm sure you can think of a couple, right?

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

quote:

---

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Sherlock Holmes is a fictional character, right?

---

Yes, but the point was that did not oblige the author(s) to paint him according to the modern druggies stereotype. Functional upper class users were normal and known - many od these drugs were available from the local chemist. The point was to illustrate that the stereotype of drug-users we have is not universal by a long shot, and shoulf not be assumed to be accurate merely because it is common.

Ah, I understand, thanks for explaining.

Just wanting to make sure you saw my earlier general post to this thread #61. It was specifically for you, showing that even production/distribution ends of the drug war are coming around to bite women in the ass.It was short, and so likely to have been missed.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

quote:

---

Regarding GHB, I still am not convinced of its relevance to this topic or its correct analogy being handing out guns to convicts as they exit prison. Both seem stretched.

​

I see the problem you are getting at. There is a valid question of why would anyone want to be handing out a drug with only one purpose (knocking a person out), and has recently been popularized because some people knock out other in order to sexually assault/rape them? I agree, why would anyone want to?

​

However I don't believe that if this happened it would necessarily make more people want to use it on others, unless getting assaulted/raped became something of an in thing and so acceptable/nonprosecuted. I also don't see how it would help a person who did such a thing get out of the legal repercussions of having used it.

---

See, I do think that we would see an increase in people wanting to use it to rape others.It's a lot like looting.Most people would be unlikely to knock off an electronics store when someone is there, or steal something out of a home where people are currently living, where all the security measures and police protection are in place. They just don't want to take the risk of getting caught.However, if there is a situation where the police are not going to come protect that store, and the power is out in town, or a house is unoccupied but contains valuable carved mantles and light fixtures, some of those people are going to regognize the opportunity to get away with this criminal activity because the risk of being caught was just lowered quite a lot.Add to that the fairly widespread attitude in our culture that men have a right to women's bodies to use as they see fit. (and before you protest, I know that most men DO NOT RAPE, and in fact are sickened by the idea. Nevertheless, we live in a culture where rape of women is romanticized and only recently even recognized spousal- and date-rape as existing at all)Similarly, if nearly all chance of being caught or having any difficulty with the victim is removed is combined with the free and easy and no-risk aquisition of GHB (or other rape-facilitating drugs), I do think that more rapes would occur.

Thanks for the reminder.It's a interesting article, and agree that many of these women should be in treatment for drug addiction and/or domestic abuse, not prison.It's poorly written laws that are the culprit here.