At least in Oregon, methamphetamine-related deaths vastly outnumber deaths related to heroin, and meth is cheaper and more lethal than ever. And while in 2006 Oregon required prescription for the nasal decongestant used to make meth, and the number of domestic meth labs has decreased, the amount of meth on the streets has increased.
Questions
- What is your opinion on the government's war on drugs? Do you think it is effective? Is there a better way to decrease drug use?
9 comments:
I think the New York Times article definitely presents an opinion on the way the government is handling the war on drugs. It mentions that meth is super accessible in Portland, despite what the government has done. In fact, to quote the article "12 years after Congress took aggressive action to curtail it, meth has returned with a vengeance." Maybe this isn't so much a topic for the government to quickly try to fix, but instead, maybe they should use this as an opportunity to fix what went wrong. Why was meth able to come back even more lethal than it was? Perhaps it was too much of a regulation, or the type didn't work out. Anyways, it truly shouldn't be ignored, and should be used as a lesson for the present.
I think the whole war on drugs is silly. We should legalize all drugs and finesse everybody other ways. Nations that have legalized drugs and provided better health services, access to clean needles, drug education campaigns, etc, have much more success keeping drug deaths low than we do. And it helps eliminate some crime, get rid of some of the stigma and makes it easier for people who face drugs to get the help they need. Also how can we be a free country if we make drugs illegal? Let the people get high if they want. We let them buy guns to kill other people if they want. Why let them shoot other people with guns and not themselves up with heroine. But even if you're not into the libertarian argument as to why drugs should be legal, its simply better for everyone in the long run, and so insanely cheaper for the government - plus, it opens up a new market. There's strong utilitarian reasoning behind legalizing and regulating drugs that way, and that's the side I prefer.
I still believe that the most effective way of limiting drug use is by starting from the beginning: teaching children that certain drugs are, well, bad. It's a lot less likely that teens will end up addicted to meth or heroin as an adult if they aren't curious enough to try other gateway drugs. The government should focus more on drug education for longer-lasting effects in the future.
(Also, Gabe's response looks incredibly satirical even though it's a completely valid argument. Maybe that's a side effect of growing up in California)
Right, legalizing drugs would create more safety and open up new markets. The drug trade can be more effectively monitored for cleanliness, users can fell safe about going to rehab with no legal consequences, there will be less violent gangs that exist in order to supply illicit drugs... The list of positive effects goes on and on. The government has wasted billions of dollars in a useless and harmful war on drugs (pretty much the only screw up Reagan had), and ending it will benefit many people.
The government is being very inefficient by trying to continue its war on drugs, as the demand for drugs will always exist, so drugs will never really be eradicated. I mean, if we look at Prohibition during the 1920s, it's clear that when there's a demand, there will always be a way to supply it because it's a way to make money. If we instead find a better way to stop the use of drugs at its roots, I think we would find a lot more success.
I agree with Jason on the point that the demand for drugs will continue. In order to prevent deaths and violence, drugs must be regulated. If we could control what these addicts are using, the number of overdoses would plummet. By preventing overdoses, we allow these people to get help rather than be prosecuted for something that they physically cant stop doing.
I don't know much about the government's war on drugs but I think the government has a responsibility to condemn drug use and discourage it. While I still think they should try to regulate it, they could also focus on drug education in schools as another option to try to target drug problems early and focus on prevention.
I agree that educating people especially at a young age would be helpful in preventing people from using drugs. The government taking more action to discourage drug use and targeting that to areas where drug use is a big issue. Also improving healthcare would help too.
I don't think the government can do much because people are just going to do what they want to do. They already made it illegal but people keep on doing these drugs. I think that educating children is a good take on this problem because children are persuaded more easily and they will be brought up with the idea that these drugs are bad. I don't think it'll stop everyone but it would make the situation a lot better.
Post a Comment