Posted: Fri Feb 12, 2010 2:40 pm
First, to get the labeling straight---instead of being a self-described liberal, in the speech Friedman described himself this way : "I am a limited-goverriment (sic) libertarian, not an anarchist libertarian, though I have a great deal of sympathy for anarchist libertarians, including the fact that my son is one."
Cigaret smoking has declined so significantly because it was recognized as a public health crisis and the population was educated about it. The % of smokers has been reduced by more than half. More people quit and more never started. The hearts and minds were won over concerning risk and smoking has become increasingly less socially acceptable. Today kids make their parents squirm if they smoke. If a pregnant woman is smoking or drinking, people are horrified. If it had simply been criminalized, that change in attitude toward wouldn't have occurred. Hearts and minds are being won over. It took time.
The war on drugs hasn't and won't work because the hearts and minds of the population haven't been won over. Somehow we adopted a military approach to this "war". Where there is demand, someone will supply. Cigaret use didn't decrease because the suppliers were put out of business or became more responsible. People learned about smoking and smokers learned how to stop. It'll have to be the same with drugs. Prior to the mid-1960s, very few people would consider using drugs. That's changed and there needs to be a massive and effective education campaign. It's slow, but it works. Active addicts don't need to be educated. They know better than anyone what a nightmare addiction is. Once addicted, no one wants to continue to be an addict, but they haven't been able to stop. Like cigaret smokers, they want to stop, but haven't found a way to. They need access to treatment. Incarceration is not treatment.
Drugs are going to continue to be available. I wouldn't favor legalization of hard drugs. I wouldn't make them more or more easily available. Our experience with tobacco and alcohol should discourage that. Drugs are manufactured right down the street---crystal meth--or come into the country quite easily. And again, the Taliban may be a lot of things, but they're not the ones providing heroin to the U.S. Most heroin (and cocaine) reaching the U.S. is from Mexico or South America (primarily Colombia). Big busts look good on television, but they're such a tiny drop in the bucket as to be meaningless. The truth is that we can't stop drugs from being available. The trade is so extensive and highly organized that it can't be disrupted in any significant way. In the case of crystal meth, it's the reverse--- small-scale, disorganized, transitory operations. The funds and resources are wasted and the agencies are satisfied with busts that have only PR value and let the TV viewers believe that we're making a "dent". Guys in uniforms aren't going to be the key people in addressing the drug epidemic.
And since drugs are going to continue be available the only approach that has any chance of working is to change hearts and minds. Put the money into making treatment available. Stop filling prisons with people who need treatment. And make a serious commitment to dealing with this public health crisis. We hopped on H1N1 pretty quickly. At the start we didn't do to well addressing the AIDS epidemic, but eventually came around to an effective approach. People will die today from drug-related causes. There needs to be a serious commitment to addressing it.
We're urban dwellers We've lived in a large city for years, so this gives us a bit different perspective than many on this forum. This is close to us. Daily. My work also brings me into direct contact with folks with substance abuse problems. These are not statistics or nameless, faceless people to us. Time to recognize the drug epidemic as primarily a public health crisis and to organize it and fund it appropriately.
Cigaret smoking has declined so significantly because it was recognized as a public health crisis and the population was educated about it. The % of smokers has been reduced by more than half. More people quit and more never started. The hearts and minds were won over concerning risk and smoking has become increasingly less socially acceptable. Today kids make their parents squirm if they smoke. If a pregnant woman is smoking or drinking, people are horrified. If it had simply been criminalized, that change in attitude toward wouldn't have occurred. Hearts and minds are being won over. It took time.
The war on drugs hasn't and won't work because the hearts and minds of the population haven't been won over. Somehow we adopted a military approach to this "war". Where there is demand, someone will supply. Cigaret use didn't decrease because the suppliers were put out of business or became more responsible. People learned about smoking and smokers learned how to stop. It'll have to be the same with drugs. Prior to the mid-1960s, very few people would consider using drugs. That's changed and there needs to be a massive and effective education campaign. It's slow, but it works. Active addicts don't need to be educated. They know better than anyone what a nightmare addiction is. Once addicted, no one wants to continue to be an addict, but they haven't been able to stop. Like cigaret smokers, they want to stop, but haven't found a way to. They need access to treatment. Incarceration is not treatment.
Drugs are going to continue to be available. I wouldn't favor legalization of hard drugs. I wouldn't make them more or more easily available. Our experience with tobacco and alcohol should discourage that. Drugs are manufactured right down the street---crystal meth--or come into the country quite easily. And again, the Taliban may be a lot of things, but they're not the ones providing heroin to the U.S. Most heroin (and cocaine) reaching the U.S. is from Mexico or South America (primarily Colombia). Big busts look good on television, but they're such a tiny drop in the bucket as to be meaningless. The truth is that we can't stop drugs from being available. The trade is so extensive and highly organized that it can't be disrupted in any significant way. In the case of crystal meth, it's the reverse--- small-scale, disorganized, transitory operations. The funds and resources are wasted and the agencies are satisfied with busts that have only PR value and let the TV viewers believe that we're making a "dent". Guys in uniforms aren't going to be the key people in addressing the drug epidemic.
And since drugs are going to continue be available the only approach that has any chance of working is to change hearts and minds. Put the money into making treatment available. Stop filling prisons with people who need treatment. And make a serious commitment to dealing with this public health crisis. We hopped on H1N1 pretty quickly. At the start we didn't do to well addressing the AIDS epidemic, but eventually came around to an effective approach. People will die today from drug-related causes. There needs to be a serious commitment to addressing it.
We're urban dwellers We've lived in a large city for years, so this gives us a bit different perspective than many on this forum. This is close to us. Daily. My work also brings me into direct contact with folks with substance abuse problems. These are not statistics or nameless, faceless people to us. Time to recognize the drug epidemic as primarily a public health crisis and to organize it and fund it appropriately.
