As someone who has interacted with law enforcement several times in the past in a Drug War-related fashion, I definitely appreciate the swing towards treatment in recent years. I think the author is basically correct in his assessment (although I'm more than annoyed that this option is largely limited to the wealthy- I was lucky enough to find a treatment option that only cost a few grand & managed to make it work, unlike so many).

One thing about his conclusions surprised me, however. While certainly some people who support or implement the War on Drugs do so for moral reasons, the reality is that vast amounts of money flow into State & Federal coffers due to this insanity, money taken from those least able to defend themselves. The real motivation isn't "moral", it's monetary.

Personal property & funds can be seized without real proof of wrong-doing & before trial. To add insult to injury, the "criminal" can be "taxed" both coming & going, either on the value of their supposed drug-derived property or in disproportionate fees & fines. Even if the individual can prove that said property had nothing to do with drugs, it's often absurdly difficult to get it back. & let us not forget the huge industry of the increasingly privatized prison system.

It's like finding free money for these crusaders, & good luck weaning them off their habit.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Regarding the Josh Hamilton story, please note:

1. Alcohol/drug treatment is available for anyone who wants it in the U.S. for free.

2. Rehab is a wonderful idea. Yet, from my experience, a rehab's success rate with its clients runs about 10 percent. Wretched? Yes it is. Hamilton went to a number of rehabs, each of which cost thousands of dollars. (Rehab is a cash cow for a lot of people.)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

...to thank god a lot for his rehab. I wonder why his god did not stop him or protect him in the first place?

In addition he thanked God after hitting 28 home runs during the All-Star game. Then God must have thought that was enough as He apparently made Josh lose the contest in the end, even though he had a big lead. God is funny that way. Like when he makes you sick and sometimes heals you. Or when he feels its time for you to go to a "better place."

The announcer even had the rocks to note that "It's a lousy night for atheists."

So does Hamilton LOSING make it a lousy night for Christians? It seems his imaginary Jesus still can’t deliver the goods.

It was a feel good story till that point.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

there are $$$$$trillions of bucks tied to addicting citizens of the world to various products.
The craving associated with cocaine addicting products is severe. To watch crack addicts being lectured by uninformed, uh stupid, authoritative figures is cruel and unusual punishment just for the observer. The brain of the crack cocaine addict is severely physically affected. To see these addicted citizens then thrown into a cold cell and continued to be abused more by society is @#$%^& NUTS.

There is just too much money being made in all areas of this illegal trade to stop the product from being brought to the marketplace.

One USA B2 Steath Bomber costs the American taxpayer one $$$Billion dollars. Eliminate just one Bomber and give each American THAT surplus to work on addiction control we would have the problem solved shortly. Let's see just how much would each of the 300 million American citizens receive???? Does $$$300 million each with some left over, sound right???

Sound like fantasy?

Uncle Sam spends BILLIONS on throwing people in jail for growing a Cannabis plant on their own property and for their own use. Cannabis is NOT a narcotic or is it ADDICTIVE. Those in control of the "underground" market have lots of influence in Washington, so why wouldn't MJ remains illegal?

It's just a crazy world out here.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

There are no "former" drug addicts. Only addicts who have found another way.

And last time I checked, AA/NA didn't require dues or fees.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

as drugs, like food, are neutral. There are no "addictive" drugs (or foods) or "habit" forming drugs, there are just people with emotional problems, most of whom are clinically depressed, that are self-medicating. The addicts makes the drugs, the drugs do NOT make the addicts.

There are differences in toxicity and general classes (i.e. stimulants, depressants, etc.) of drugs, so the side effects do vary with some being much harder on the body. Alcohol and tobacco are particularly damaging to the body since they cause a breakdown at the cellular level. However, our drug laws are not based on relative toxicity and disease, but rather on myth and political "realities", or else both alcohol and tobacco would have been banned long ago.

You can play word games (like the cops and politicians do) with this issue all day, but in the end, all psychoactive drugs fall into the same boat, and it is up to the individuals with the emotional problems to choose which one(s) to use to self-medicate, based on which one(s) work for them. The fact is that MOST people use these same "addictive" drugs recreationally and NEVER develop an unhealthy relationship with them. It is one thing to use a drug (taking a little vacation) and totally another to abuse a drug (living there full time). The difference is the emotional problems of the user, not the "addictive" properties of the substance.

The drug war is based on myths like these, where perfectly 'normal' and innocent folks come into contact with the "evil" substance and slide down this slippery slope into addiction. This myth takes personal responsibilty completely out of the equation and is perpetuated by researchers and practicioners alike, who obviously have never experienced the effects of the substances in question. It is just so much easier and simpler to blame an addiction on a substance than to deal with the psychological reasons that the addict is taking it.

Folks assign imaginary labels like "gateway" to drugs that are less effective to self-medicate depression, and reserve terms like "addictive" to the ones that cause more of a euphoric effect. There seems to be even some underlying religious significance to this line of thinking since euphoria is nearly a universal taboo in many religions...something to do with the devil's playground.

That is why our simplistic legal approach and governmental policies are geared towards eradiction of the drug sources, dealers, etc., and not in fixing the emotional problems that are causing the addicts to need to self-medicate all the time. Drug abuse is always a medical problem and never a legal one. The legal system is just the wrong tool for the job.

It is much more complex to think about addiction as a symptom of the problem, which is probably why most folks just don't get it. We don't really have a drug problem, we have a severe clinical depression problem. Some folks just have a hard time living in this "modern" society with its unnatural stresses. Unfortunately, our jails are full of people who do NOT have drug problems but were caught up in either the illegal drug business or simply partaking in recreational use, and therein lies the rub.

It is time that we admit and acknowledge that the so-called drug addicts have serious emotional issues from their childhood that caused them to want to stay fucked-up all the time. We are stuck on the comfortable mythology that if they can just stay away from the substances, that everything will be OK. Most stories of addicts (or obese people) blame the drugs only, instead of the admission that the problems lay within themselves. The same myths lure obese people to have their stomachs stapled, only to realize that even though they are skinny, the underlying problems still exist and that their lives are even more screwed up afterwards.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

than a "Prison Industrial Complex".

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]