This is kind of interesting in a wilight zone kind of way.
Argument for treatment. Sounds good. Nice touchy feeley type of thing. Main problem is that the addict has to WANT treatment for it to work. Real world parallel is AA for alcohol addiction. Now if the substance was not banned by law, why SHOULD an addict want treatment? After having spoken to seveal addicts, booth under arrest and not they almost all agreed on one thing. The LIKED the feeling of being high and would do it again in almost any way they could. Only ones disagreeing were those who, like the AA patients, hit bottom and wanted to rebuild a life / family.
No victims of drug useage. Nice sounding but flawed statement. That is the same as saying there are no victims of alcohol abuse. There are thousands of people each year who pay a penalty in only one area due to alcohol abuse. That is on the roads of the US. Still better than 40% (probably closer to 60%) of fatal wrecks are "alcohol related" Like many of the other drugs out there alcohol affects the brain. Something that should be clear and functioning to operate deadly equipment in a crowded environment like an urban street / highway. Many other problems related to alcohol such as family / spousal abuse, health issues, lack of self control and violent behavior outside of the family happen due to te abuse of this legal substance.
Lets not EVEn talk about tobacco. Still legal but blamed for health problems relatede to addiction. Think about it. Who would be responsible for the problems related to addiction of other newly legalized substances. Would it be the tax payers, government or business who make /market / tax / provide the stuff that will be the subject of lawsuits over the problems related to the use / abuse of the new legal item? Please don't claim that there are no known health related problems to use of even such minor drugs as marijuanna. Over use of ANYTHING has health problems just like tobacco. Hell even artificial sweeteners have cancer inducing properties if overused.
Santa, the term drug related in regards to prison is very vague. In some cases mere possession of the drug DID result in jail time. Particularly in 3rd offens areas. However, there are many there who committed other crimes while on or searching for drugs. Burglary, assault, murder, robbery and many of these would be considered "drug related" since drugw were either part of or the motive for the actions committed. This does not exclude those who trafficed in drugs getting others to use so they could support their own habit. Starting kids young into the use of "softer" drugs insures a steady resale market. It is not uncommon to see kids even in grade school who have been exposed to or use drugs.
Current substances and newer ones are out there and are being touted as "safe" highs. Ecstacy is one that is big on the "scene" right now. I suppose you could call them new trends. They are still causing deaths due to complications, overdoses and actions taken while high. It's a big deal for kids at raves right now as it has yet to be declared a banned substance. Although that is likely to happen very soon unless it has already been done. Not too sure myself.
I have no idea, really, what shgould be done. I do know that the roads are hazardous enough right now with the impairment of alcohol alone. I have a real hard time with the concept of sharing the road with a large number of people who are using some other substance that has an effect on the brain. I aslo include legal drugs here as well. It makes no difference if the impairment is from legal or non legal substances. The results are just as harmful in traffic.
The next few years are going to be "interesting". I just hope it isn't in the same vein as the chinese curse.
I think it will all come down to a final view of personal responsibility. Are people responsible enough to "police" their own behavior. So far the record is pretty abysmal. I don't know that the "war" is winable but I truly fear the repercussions of an unconditional surrender.
Mav
