Marijuana actually is bad for you, mmkay — Many times now I have received comments praising the effects of marijuana. You should get stoned and drop out, man.
Efficiency[ edit ] Drug laws are effective[ edit ] Supporters of prohibition claim that drug laws have a successful track record suppressing illicit drug use since they were introduced years ago. With illicit drug use peaking in the s in the United States, the "Just Say No" campaign, initiated under the patronage of Nancy Reagan, coincided with recent past month illicit drug use decreases from Sweden is an excellent example.
Drug use is just a third of the European average while spending on drug control is three times the EU average. For three decades, [nb 1] Sweden has had consistent and coherent drug-control policies, regardless of which party is in power. There is a strong emphasis on prevention, drug laws have been progressively tightened, and extensive treatment and rehabilitation opportunities are available to users.
The police take drug crime seriously. Governments and societies must keep their nerve and avoid being swayed by misguided notions of tolerance. They must not lose sight of the fact that illicit drugs are dangerous — that is why the world agreed to restrict them. After so many years of drug control experience, we now know that a coherent, long-term strategy can reduce drug supply, demand and trafficking.
If this does not happen, it will be because some nations fail to take the drug issue sufficiently seriously and pursue inadequate policies. Many countries have the drug problem they deserve. Inefficiency[ edit ] Drug laws are ineffective[ edit ] One of the prominent early critics of prohibition in the United States was August Vollmerfounder of the School of Criminology at University of California, Irvine and former president of the International Association of Chiefs of Police.
In his book The Police and Modern Society, he stated his opinion that: Stringent laws, spectacular police drives, vigorous prosecution, and imprisonment of addicts and peddlers have proved not only useless and enormously expensive as means of correcting this evil, but they are also unjustifiably and unbelievably cruel in their application to the unfortunate drug victims.
Repression has driven this vice underground and produced the narcotic smugglers and supply agents, who have grown wealthy out of this evil practice and who, by devious methods, have stimulated traffic in drugs. Finally, and not the least of the evils associated with repression, the helpless addict has been forced to resort to crime in order to get money for the drug which is absolutely indispensable for his comfortable existence.
The first step in any plan to alleviate this dreadful affliction should be the establishment of Federal control and dispensation — at cost — of habit-forming drugs. With the profit motive gone, no effort would be made to encourage its use by private dispensers of narcotics, and the drug peddler would disappear.
New addicts would be speedily discovered and through early treatment, some of these unfortunate victims might be saved from becoming hopelessly incurable. Drug addiction, like prostitution, and like liquor, is not a police problem; it never has been, and never can be solved by policemen. It is first and last a medical problem, and if there is a solution it will be discovered not by policemen, but by scientific and competently trained medical experts whose sole objective will be the reduction and possible eradication of this devastating appetite.
There should be intelligent treatment of the incurables in outpatient clinics, hospitalization of those not too far gone to respond to therapeutic measures, and application of the prophylactic principles which medicine applies to all scourges of mankind.
Consensus is growing within the drugs field and beyond that the prohibition on production, supply, and use of certain drugs has not only failed to deliver its intended goals but has been counterproductive.
Evidence is mounting that this policy has not only exacerbated many public health problems, such as adulterated drugs and the spread of HIV and hepatitis B and C infection among injecting drug users, but has created a much larger set of secondary harms associated with the criminal market. These now include vast networks of organised crime, endemic violence related to the drug market, corruption of law enforcement and governments.
The United Nations Office of Drugs and Crime has also acknowledged the many "unintended negative consequences" of drug enforcement. Danny Kushlik, head of external affairs at Transform, said the intervention of senior medical professionals was significant. The Hippocratic oath says: Physicians are duty bound to speak out if the outcomes show that prohibition causes more harm than it reduces.
Notwithstanding the vast public resources expended on the enforcement of penal statutes against users and distributors of controlled substances, contemporary drug policy appears to have failed, even on its own terms, in a number of notable respects.
This conclusion becomes more readily apparent when one distinguishes the harms suffered by society and its members directly attributable to the pharmacological effects of drug use upon human behavior, from those harms resulting from policies attempting to eradicate drug use.
It does so by permitting and indeed, causing the drug trade to remain a lucrative source of economic opportunity for street dealers, drug kingpins and all those willing to engage in the often violent, illicit, black market trade.
Meanwhile, the effect of present policy serves to stigmatize and marginalize drug users, thereby inhibiting and undermining the efforts of many such individuals to remain or become productive, gainfully employed members of society.
Furthermore, current policy has not only failed to provide adequate access to treatment for substance abuse, it has, in many ways, rendered the obtaining of such treatment, and of other medical services, more difficult and even dangerous to pursue. However, available systematic indicators show that the prevalence of drug use has increased since aroundthat the decrease in drug incidence was particularly marked during the s and that some indicators point towards an increase during the s.
They noted that unlike most of Europe, Sweden did not have widespread and lingering youth unemployment until the early s financial crisissuggesting that unattractive future prospects may contribute to the increase in drug use among the young. He said that Sweden are serving the role of being welfare alibi for, and lending legitimacy to the US drug war.National prohibition of alcohol ()—the “noble experiment”—was undertaken to reduce crime and corruption, solve social problems, reduce the tax burden created by prisons and poorhouses, and improve health and hygiene in America.
The results of that experiment clearly indicate that it was a miserable failure on all counts.
Get the latest international news and world events from Asia, Europe, the Middle East, and more. See world news photos and videos at timberdesignmag.com Here is a full author Q&A about LITTLE BEE / THE OTHER HAND – everything from the true stories surrounding the novel right through to discussion of its characters and themes.
These are the questions that readers and interviewers have been asking me, and I’ve tried to answer them as best as I can. I hope you’ll find this helpful. Get the latest health news, diet & fitness information, medical research, health care trends and health issues that affect you and your family on timberdesignmag.com The debate continues today, with Attorney General Jeff Sessions taking a firm stance against legalization and insisting that federal prohibition laws be enforced, even where states have made it legal.
Cannabis law in Australia differs from state to state. This situation adds to the already significant harm that prohibition causes to our youth, and is seen by many experts as futile and a total failure as drug .