NY Times Editorial: Not Winning The War On Drugs

Search

Honey Badger Don't Give A Shit
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
46,540
Tokens
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica] US NY: Editorial: Not Winning the War on Drugs

[/FONT]​
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica] URL: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v08/n636/a04.html
Pubdate: Wed, 2 Jul 2008
Source: New York Times (NY)
Page: 18, Section A
Copyright: 2008 The New York Times Company
Contact: <script>male2('letters','nytimes.com');</script>letters@nytimes.com
Website: http://www.nytimes.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/298

[/FONT] [FONT=Arial,Helvetica]NOT WINNING THE WAR ON DRUGS

According to the White House, this country is scoring big wins in the war on drugs, especially against the cocaine cartels. Officials celebrate that cocaine seizures are up -- leading to higher prices on American streets. Cocaine use by teenagers is down, and, officials say, workplace tests suggest adult use is falling.

John Walters, the White House drug czar, declared earlier this year that "courageous and effective" counternarcotics efforts in Colombia and Mexico "are disrupting the production and flow of cocaine."

This enthusiasm rests on a very selective reading of the data. Another look suggests that despite the billions of dollars the United States has spent battling the cartels, it has hardly made a dent in the cocaine trade.

While seizures are up, so are shipments. According to United States government figures, 1,421 metric tons of cocaine were shipped through Latin America to the United States and Europe last year -- 39 percent more than in 2006. And despite massive efforts at eradication, the United Nations estimates that the area devoted to growing coca leaf in the Andes expanded 16 percent last year. The administration disputes that number.

The drug cartels are not running for cover.

Mexico and parts of Central America are being swept up in drug-related violence. Latin Americans are becoming heavy consumers of cocaine, and traffickers are opening new routes to Europe through fragile West African countries. Some experts argue that the rising price of cocaine on American streets is mostly the result of a strong euro and fast-growing demand in Europe.

Workplace drug tests notwithstanding, cocaine use in the United States is not falling. About 2.5 percent of Americans used cocaine at least once in 2006, the same percentage as in 2002, according to the Department of Health and Human Services.

While cocaine use has fallen among younger teenagers, 12th graders are using more: 5.2 percent used cocaine last year -- up from 4.8 percent in 2001 and 3.1 percent at the low point in 1992, says a Monitoring the Future survey done by the University of Michigan.

All this suggests serious problems with a strategy that focuses overwhelmingly on disrupting the supply of drugs while doing far too little to curb domestic demand.

Washington spent $1.4 billion on drug-related foreign assistance last year -- mostly to equip Colombia's security forces and spray coca crops in the Andes. It spent another $7 billion on drug-related law enforcement and interdiction efforts at home and abroad. It spent less than $5 billion on education, prevention and treatment programs at home to curtail substance abuse.

The counternarcotics effort has produced some successes. Marijuana use in the United States has declined since 2002, the earliest year for which the government has comparable data. Teenage use of other drugs, like methamphetamine, has fallen sharply. With American aid, Colombia's armed forces have severely weakened the FARC guerrillas, a major player in the drug trade.

The next administration should continue to help Latin American governments take on the traffickers. But it must learn from the current strategy's shortcomings.

Eradication efforts are most likely to have more success if more money is spent on programs to wean coca growers from the business and improve the lives of their families and communities. Mexico, in particular, is in deep trouble, and the next American president should build on the Bush administration's plans to provide counternarcotics aid. There needs to be a different mix: less money for equipment for security forces and more for economic development and programs to reform and strengthen Mexico's judicial system.

Above all, the next administration must put much more effort into curbing demand -- spending more on treating drug addicts and less on putting them in jail. Drug courts, which sentence users to treatment, still deal only with a small minority of drug cases and should be vastly expanded. Drug-treatment programs for imprisoned drug abusers, especially juvenile offenders, must also be expanded.

Over all, drug abuse must be seen more as a public health concern and not primarily a law enforcement problem. Until demand is curbed at home, there is no chance of winning the war on drugs.
[/FONT]
<hr noshade="noshade"> [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]MAP posted-by: Richard Lake[/SIZE] [/FONT]
 

bushman
Joined
Sep 22, 2004
Messages
14,457
Tokens
If they won the war on drugs they'd all be made redundant Barman.

Like with the war on terrah.

It's a job for life with a nice steady government salary and a fat government pension...but only so long as you don't win that war.
 

New member
Joined
Oct 27, 2006
Messages
2,151
Tokens
the elicit drug trade finances it all...the real engine of the worlds economy

been that way for hundreds of years, will be for hundreds more.... rest assured that is the true source of wealth for many of history's "heroes" - well they are heroes at least as told by the history books

important to note said "war on drugs"- "war on terror" - soon to be "war on commodity speculators"...basically whenever our government wants sole access to a particular thing, war is declared on it.
 

Honey Badger Don't Give A Shit
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
46,540
Tokens
If they won the war on drugs they'd all be made redundant Barman.

Like with the war on terrah.

It's a job for life with a nice steady government salary and a fat government pension...but only so long as you don't win that war.

Well yeah.

I know that you know that I know that.

Now we have yet another major media outlet sternly denouncing the White House "War on Drugs" - aka, a War on Americans.
 

Honey Badger Don't Give A Shit
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
46,540
Tokens
Not winning the war on drugs because too many users

That's a fundamental reason, yes.

When upwards of 150 million Americans regularly violate the laws in order to consume one or more desired drugs, it's utterly absurd to even propose that much of anyone is truly interested in waging this War.

In order to endorse the War On Drugs to its fullest, one must be prepared to endorse the arrest, prosecution and likely imprisonment of an average of one in every two adults in your immediate family, neighborhood and social circles.
 

RX God
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Messages
2,409
Tokens
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica]Cocaine use by teenagers is down, and, officials say, workplace tests suggest adult use is falling. [/FONT]

ulquickfix.jpg
 

New member
Joined
Feb 3, 2007
Messages
1,916
Tokens
too much money to be made from the war on drugs: politicians, dea, cia, local law enforcement, attorneys, judges, prison guards, mandated rehab programs, etc...
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,119,884
Messages
13,574,712
Members
100,882
Latest member
topbettor24
The RX is the sports betting industry's leading information portal for bonuses, picks, and sportsbook reviews. Find the best deals offered by a sportsbook in your state and browse our free picks section.FacebookTwitterInstagramContact Usforum@therx.com