Stopping Drugs at the Source by Cutting Off the Supply
Reducing Demand by Holding Users Accountable
Redefining Drug Use as Addiction, Not Criminal Behavior
Certain drugs are illegal for a reason -- they're so dangerous that there is no safe way to have them in our society. We have to do everything possible to keep illegal drugs out of the country and off the streets. We need to cut off the supply of drugs by targeting traffickers and dealers, both wholesalers and street corner drug dealers. Tougher enforcement and stricter sentencing of dealers and users helped to deal with the crack cocaine epidemic of the 1990s and kept overall drug use at stable levels. To win the war on drugs, we need to pursue this strategy aggressively, making every effort to identify, prosecute, and imprison drug dealers, thus cutting off the drug supply both at home and abroad.
The drug problem has persisted because millions of drug users continue to buy them. Despite abundant evidence of their corrosive effect on users and the society as a whole, drug use is still widely tolerated and even glamorized in the media. Sports stars use steroids and many people abuse even over-the-counter inhalants and prescription drugs. The war on drugs will be won only when millions of users are persuaded to stop, and young people are persuaded not to start. We have to make zero tolerance for drugs a top national priority -- starting at home, in the schools, and the workplace.
The drug problem has persisted, and in some respects worsened, because we've gone at it the wrong way. The war on drugs isn't working and even if it was, the price is too high. The prohibition on drugs leads to black market prices. It generates crime and violence as dealers fight over turf and sales, and drug users steal to buy illicit substances at inflated prices. The drug laws turn users -- who need treatment -- into criminals. We'd be far better off if drug use were regarded as a health problem. We should legalize at least some drugs and reduce the harm they cause by regulating their sale and treating their victims.
Stopping Drugs at the Source by Cutting Off the Supply
Reducing Demand by Holding Users Accountable
Redefining Drug Use as Addiction, Not Criminal Behavior
What should be done?
Take more aggressive measures to prevent drugs from crossing our borders. Help drug-producing nations with eradication efforts and other enforcement activities, including the destruction of clandestine labs and airfields. Demand international cooperation in cutting off the drug supply. Reward countries that crack down on drug growers with aid and support and impose economic sanctions on countries that refuse. Impose swift and certain punishment on drug dealers, including consistent mandatory minimum sentences. Expand sanctions against convicted dealers, such as confiscating autos and other personal property, and taking away driver's licenses. Consistently enforce the laws that prohibit drug use.
Do everything possible -- in the schools, in the workplace, in homes and in the media -- to convey the message that drug use is dangerous, unacceptable, and not chic. Punishing drug users, even those who only occasionally use drugs, is one of the strongest ways of sending an anti-drug message. Users should be penalized by fines, arrest, and forfeiture of driver's licenses. Random urine testing for drugs should be required in schools, the workplace and in professional sports. Zero tolerance should be taken literally, and employees who test positive should be dismissed. Enact laws that would withhold federal money from any organization that cannot guarantee a drug-free workplace.
Treat drug abuse as a public health problem rather than a law enforcement issue, and eliminate criminal penalties for personal drug use. Regulate drug sales, and permit the use of some, like marijuana, under a doctor's care Expand drug treatment programs, including those in prison. Require insurance companies to cover substance abuse the same way they would any physical illness. The goal should be to provide treatment to anyone who needs it.Restrict drug use among minors by regulating drug sales. Focus enforcement on drug traffickers and drop mandatory sentencing for drug offenses.
Arguments For This Approach
Illegal drug use is morally wrong and terribly destructive. There can be no compromises, no unenforced laws, no distinctions between hard and soft drugs, between dealers and casual users. Drug dealers and users are also likely to commit other crimes, either to support their habit or protect their business. Cracking down on drug offenses will help cut crime in general.In many communities, police are outnumbered and overwhelmed by an army of drug dealers. Internationally, drug gangs are so strong that they can undermine national governments and some terrorist groups use drug sales to raise money.Continued widespread sale and use of illegal drugs undermines respect for the law.
Since it's impossible to stop the supply of illegal drugs, the only way to win the war against drugs is to reduce the appetite for them. Since drug use is not always apparent, testing is the only way to ensure that people remain drug free, and it is an effective deterrent. Drug users may be victims, but they don't only hurt themselves. The use of illegal drugs is linked to domestic violence, school failure, crime, AIDS, and workplace injuries. For everyone's sake, we need force drug users to take responsibility for the consequences of their actionsReducing demand in the U.S. is the best way to help drug-producing nations locked in a struggle with corruption and narco-terrorism.
The harm done by drugs is predominantly caused by the fact that they're illegal. A more sensible policy would control their distribution and discourage their use. Prohibition of alcohol didn't work in the 1920s and drug prohibition doesn't work now. Decriminalizing drug use would destroy the illicit drug trade. The war on drugs has done tremendous harm by sending thousands of drug users to prison instead of salvaging their lives and communities with treatment. Drug treatment should be widely available, and stigma-free. Studies show that treatment programs are the most cost-effective way of dealing with the drug problem. Even expensive treatment programs pay for themselves by reducing the costs of lost productivity, crime, and health care. Decriminalizing certain drugs -- such as the use of marijuana -- will permit law enforcement officials to focus on more pressing priorities.
Arguments Against This Approach
This is a losing battle. As long as drugs are illegal and very profitable, there will be dealers willing to sell them. The war on drugs comes at a huge cost in money and jail space. Thanks to rigid mandatory sentences, we imprison drug users who might be able to change, if we gave them treatment.The get-tough policy has taken an unfair toll on poor, minority communities, where drugs are common and too many people have too few alternatives in life.This no-holds-barred approach to drug enforcement infringes on civil liberties. The U.S. cannot dictate policy to other nations. In many countries, it is legal to grow coca, which people chew as a mild stimulant and to counter the effects of hunger.
While no one opposes antidrug educational programs, there's not much evidence that this approach actually reduces drug use. Addiction is a medical problem. You don't punish people for getting sick. Besides, addicts need treatment to get clean -- so how does it help to leave them unemployed and without health insurance? Random drug tests and the kinds of drug searches that take place in schools and some workplaces are an invasion of privacy and a threat to our civil liberties. As long as drugs are available, some people will be tempted to use them. The only way to win the war is to cut them off at the source by targetting growers and drug dealers.Alcohol and tobacco are both addictive substances that cause a great deal of social damage. Yet both are legal. Millions more are addicted to drugs legally prescribed by their own doctors. Why should we treat other drugs differently?
Making it easier to get drugs would inevitably make them more widely available. For example, legal prescription drugs are tightly regulated but are still the second most common form of drug abuse.Too many people believe that making something legal also makes it moral. Drug abuse is morally wrong and blurring this fact by calling it a health problem will only compound the problem. Treatment programs are important, but not the whole answer to the illegal drug problem. Many treatment programs have low success rates because so many people relapse.Organized gangs won't simply go away if we legalize drugs. They'll move into other forms of crime, just as the bootleggers did after Prohibition ended.If illegal drugs become legal products, will companies be allowed to market them and promote their use, the way tobacco, alcohol and pharmaceutical companies do? That could make the problem of teen drug use much worse.
Talk It Over