Global War On Drugs "has failed"...

[zachdamacman]

The Global Commision on Drug Policy states in a report that between 1998 and 2008, opiate use has increased 35% worldwide, cocaine by 27%, and cannabis by 8.5%.

Article

[Gimmick]

waves arms

That was the past. This is the present.

[zachdamacman]

At 6/2/11 11:07 AM, Sanjeev98 wrote:

waves arms

That was the past. This is the present.

This article was just posted today. The statistics were to put the increase in perspective.

[Asandir]

It´s sad that the use of drugs has increased that much, although the used statistics are quite old.

[Killerhammer]

If some dope fiend wants to shoot up three consecutive syringes of heroin he's a idiot and deserves to be plucked out of the gene pool. Why try to keep him alive so he can have children who will probably do the same thing, wasting even more of the world's time and resources that can be used for something more worthwhile?

[CharltonChinchilla]

Where there is demand there will be supply one way or another. Just stay away from them yourself the vast majority of drug addicts have themselves to blame for getting hooked.

[seel]

At 6/2/11 11:13 AM, Killerhammer wrote: If some dope fiend wants to shoot up three consecutive syringes of heroin he's a idiot and deserves to be plucked out of the gene pool. Why blahblah

The problem is they're hurting people who are not involved with drugs. Besides, most heroin addicts don't overdose, not until they're really old.

[Dromedary]

Its because I smoke so much weed errday

[Lintire]

Maybe they might want to back off for a bit, see what happens. Stop acting on fear and let statistics count for themselves.

I'm not surprised that the "war on drugs" is failing miserably - and its downright pathetic that even with all their efforts, drug use is still on the substantial rise. They should be reevaluating their actions, instead of insisting that shit is going to go down - when frankly, I don't think it ever has.

"War on Drugs" is a really terrible term to put on it. "War" suggests that there's a definitive enemy - when frankly, there's not. When you're fighting the people of your own populace, you're fighting yourself.

This is the same reason that nothing short of total domination is going to stop file-sharing, or pornography, or anything else the close-minded fundamentalists of the world have a problem with (with the exception of peer-to-peer networking, because that really is just plain thievery).

This "War" is better classified at what it really is - desperate, unorganized, flailing struggle against a substance that is easily moved, easily distributed under the authorities very noses.

Yes, drugs fuck people up. Excessively. So why the hell aren't they focused on education - real education, not the propaganda shit they seem intent on blasting out, the nation hasn't fallen for scare tactics in the last 30 or so years. I want them to admit, to suck it up and say that a small uses, or more accurately recreative use of (recreative) drugs isn't bad for you.

Because it isn't.

From there, label out how they work, what works.... and shit, it's never going to happen. I really wish there was an option to withdraw your personal contribution of tax money from projects you don't agree with - hows that for democracy?

[IncendiaryProduction]

As I have said before, the war on drugs is not just to keep people from using them.

The insurgencies that produce and sell these drugs (except weed, which is mostly domestically grown) are what the war is against. It is a literal war.

These insurgencies run on drugs and terror, and are a nightmare for the host nations and civilians alike.

[steph2568]

Like it would have actually worked.

[IncendiaryProduction]

At 6/2/11 11:50 AM, Lintire wrote: "War on Drugs" is a really terrible term to put on it. "War" suggests that there's a definitive enemy - when frankly, there's not. When you're fighting the people of your own populace, you're fighting yourself.

This is mostly wrong, sorta right.

Again, the war is literal. It is against Central and Southern American insurgencies. When troops are deployed, and fire fights happen, most people would call that a war.

But then again, insurgencies by nature include un-uniformed enemies, so you are right when you say there is no definitive enemy.

[FUNKbrs]

It's more about the prevalence of escapist philosophy than about the failure of the government.

Drugs=escape reality.

If they would teach philosophy in schools instead of anti-drug propaganda, kids would be more satisfied with their lives, and not feel the need to escape them.

[Sanch]

At 6/2/11 12:29 PM, IncendiaryProduction wrote

Again, the war is literal. It is against Central and Southern American insurgencies. When troops are deployed, and fire fights happen, most people would call that a war.

what. cartels are made to profit, not to replace the government. that's not an insurgency

and no it's not a literal war. the united states is not invading anyone because they produce drugs. opiate (poppy) and bud production in afghanistan, which is being occupied and has an actual resistance movement, is completely ignored. the US is not involved in any conflicts in the americas

you're 15, and judging from your profile, a dumb military cock-lover. kids really shouldn't be talkin about shit they don't understand

[Spartan204]

Well thankfully I don't do drugs, just weed.

[Earfetish]

I am delighted that the UK media seem to have started promoting a more progressive drugs policy.

Literally delighted, and if the government follow suite I will vote for them for the rest of my life

[Luke]

No shit - People will always be able to get something if they want it bad enough.

[Light]

At 6/2/11 10:57 AM, zachdamacman wrote: The Global Commision on Drug Policy states in a report that between 1998 and 2008, opiate use has increased 35% worldwide, cocaine by 27%, and cannabis by 8.5%.

Article

We need to cease this fruitless war on drugs. It's just a major inconvenience to everyone.

[SpaceWhale]

smoke weed
erryday

[The-Great-One]

I love percentages and how "experts" and the media use them to manipulate information however they want.

[GamesArmor]

At 6/2/11 11:31 PM, Space-Whale wrote: smoke weed
erryday

We pro rebels in the hood, bitch.

[swaenK]

drugs=awesomesextime
drugs=predictthefuture
drugs=talktogod
drugs=musicintensified
drugs=overdose.

win win win win LOSE.

roulette is a rough game.

[Irrelephant]

At 6/2/11 11:48 PM, swaenK wrote: drugs=awesomesextime
drugs=predictthefuture
drugs=talktogod
drugs=musicintensified
drugs=overdose.

win win win win LOSE.

roulette is a rough game.

sounds like some kinda middle school health class poster

[Warforger]

No shit people. It's already something we've been knowing for decades, fact is they're just trying to cap an industry that will boom. Things like Cannabis is fine as long as it is not abused, everything can be abused too, like say eating too many chesseburgers, or say playing too many video games, but the solution to these problems isn't to ban cheeseburgers and video games is it?

There are other things like say meth which do alot of damage, but the simple fact is this, addicts do not want to be addicted, however if they turn themselves in they risk going to jail, which they don't want, so if its legalised they go to rehab, which is what happened in Portugal and has worked VERY well.

[unowned]

thats great, except most of the drugs that do most of that stuff on the list are very hard to overdose, which are psychedelics.. stimulants and dissociatives are more likely to overdose and alter senses/ratio and that good awareness but not as much

[unowned]

you mean "some addicts"

[Eclipse]

war on drugs is fail
tldr
smoke up people, who gives a shit, the majority will use drugs regardless of legality, just sayin :)

[Head-Full-Of-Acid]

The War on Drugs would actually mean something if we took a realistic approach to dealing with drug users.

You can't just use scare tactics to coerce people into abiding the law; it has never worked, and it never will work. Zero tolerance policy only promotes ignorance. By taking a direct response to the consequences of drug use, we'd be weakening the reliance and the consumption of illegal drugs.

Heroin users, for example, become physically and psychologically dependent to their drug, and depending on their financial situation, they will resort to crime in order to fuel their dependence. To combat the need of crime to support that dependence, nations have supported the idea of prescribing methadone, and even heroin, to alleviate the physical and psychological demands of the drug. By doing this in large scale, you'd be redirecting the addict's needs from the drug market to something that can be regulated and monitored, eliminating the association to the black market.

The War on Drugs shouldn't just be about fighting the large cartels that are dominating crime, it should also deal with the problems that exist to us on a local scale. Drug users are still people, and the small measures that we take could keep us in the right direction.

[Stereocrisis]

At 6/2/11 11:13 AM, Killerhammer wrote: If some dope fiend wants to shoot up three consecutive syringes of heroin he's a idiot and deserves to be plucked out of the gene pool. Why try to keep him alive so he can have children who will probably do the same thing, wasting even more of the world's time and resources that can be used for something more worthwhile?

While I will agree that most people who are wasted 24/7 aren't any use to society, I will say that many forms of our entertainment industry, (movies, TV, books, music, magazines, and even sports, etc...) can thank drug addicts. Or should I say, you can thank drugs, because drugs probably had something to do with their genius. Especially comedians and musicians. (Or sports figures on steroids...)

[Tony-DarkGrave]

I say we should crack down (minus cannabis of course unless if its laced with shit) like crack cocaine and etc.