Reducing Demand by Holding Users Accountable
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.
What Should be Done?
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.
Arguments For This Approach
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.
Arguments Against This Approach
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?
Tags: 
Comments
Post new comment