Should we really waste tax dollars on arresting drug users?7

does arresting addicts really help the drug problem?

I personally think it don't do anything but waste money better spent elsewhere. drug dealers on the other hand should be gone after and punished money well spent and less availability for users to get it..

Yes or No?

No. It is a waste of resources. I feel the same about all vice crimes.

allalone said:

does arresting addicts really help the drug problem?

I personally think it don't do anything but waste money better spent elsewhere. drug dealers on the other hand should be gone after and punished money well spent and less availability for users to get it..

Yes or No?

Click to expand...

No, arresting addicts does not help the drug problem.

In fact, the "drug problem" did not exist as we know it today UNTIL the government put the drug laws on the books. The prohibition has caused the "drug problem", just as it did with the Volstead Act in the last century.

No, we should legalize all recreational drugs.

K

Thoreau72 said:

No, arresting addicts does not help the drug problem.

In fact, the "drug problem" did not exist as we know it today UNTIL the government put the drug laws on the books. The prohibition has caused the "drug problem", just as it did with the Volstead Act in the last century.

Click to expand...

Yes I agree we are wasting more time and money / resources arresting and holding them in jail when all that effort would be focused better trying to get them clean and help and go after the Scumbag that was hand feeding he or she the **** that got them hooked

No.

I'd say perhaps consider making intoxication an aggravating factor for other offenses committed while intoxicated (aka, you assume the risk you do something bad when high), and that goes for alcohol too. Maybe. I'm not too keen on increasing penalties.

But as for possession? No. Full decriminalization followed by further legalization of certain drugs. Diversion programs, voluntary or otherwise, depending on circumstances. Vancouver or Switzerland style programs that provide a safe place to use for the worst drugs (Swiss even provides clean heroin to users who go through a process and receive it on-site; who the hell is going to publicly declare addiction just to try heroin, after all?).

There are plenty of things we can do. I have heard a very few people say that being jailed actually gave them the final impetus to get straight. But that's a very small number as far as I can tell.

Otherwise, it causes more harm than good. It also leads to corruption of prison officials. Drugs are rampant in prison and they aren't all getting there via someone's arse.




I could keep going, but the bottom line is simple: the War on Drugs failed. The entire concept of Criminalization, extending back 120ish years, failed. There's no point to keep doing something that doesn't work, even if some people feel all self-righteous and superior because they oppose drugs. That's the worst reason to do anything.

allalone said:

does arresting addicts really help the drug problem?

I personally think it don't do anything but waste money better spent elsewhere. drug dealers on the other hand should be gone after and punished money well spent and less availability for users to get it..

Yes or No?

Click to expand...

No. As a rather unwilling participant in the WOD, I can tell you it's an utter and complete waste of time, enriching some people but ruining the lives of others.

Masterhawk said:

No, we should legalize all recreational drugs.

Click to expand...

Somehow I think it wouldn't work out so well if you could literally buy heroin or meth in CVS. And why the distinction between recreational and medicinal?

Surely, if we trust people with the freedom to freely buy something like meth, crack, or heroin, we don't have much of an argument about ritalin or codeine.

allalone said:

does arresting addicts really help the drug problem?

I personally think it don't do anything but waste money better spent elsewhere. drug dealers on the other hand should be gone after and punished money well spent and less availability for users to get it..

Yes or No?

Click to expand...

We should spend our money putting dealers to death. Especially if they sell to kids. Anything stronger than marijuana especially

allalone said:

does arresting addicts really help the drug problem?

I personally think it don't do anything but waste money better spent elsewhere. drug dealers on the other hand should be gone after and punished money well spent and less availability for users to get it..

Yes or No?

Click to expand...

When a drug addict is arrested, it is usually because he/she was caught in another illegal activity.

So, yes; they should go to jail/prison ... and receive treatment there.
After release, they should have the opportunity to attend something similar to AA.

If a drug user can't break the cycle with medication and support groups, tax payers should not be burdened with indefinite pandering to and coddling of drug abusers.

Lock them up and throw away the key.

Barnacle said:

When a drug addict is arrested, it is usually because he/she was caught in another illegal activity.

So, yes; they should go to jail/prison ... and receive treatment there.
After release, they should have the opportunity to attend something similar to AA.

If a drug user can't break the cycle with medication and support groups, tax payers should not be burdened with indefinite pandering to and coddling of drug abusers.

Lock them up and throw away the key.

Click to expand...

Wow, you should be POTUS!

What you suggest is exactly what we've been doing for a number of decades with fantastic success, eh? :mrgreen:

Arresting addicts for simple possession is one thing, but arresting addicts caught in criminal activity such as burglary, assault, and other forms of theft is another thing altogether.

The lack of rehab centers is the United States is problematic, and leads to a revolving door process with the legal system for a lot of street addicts.

no, we shouldn't arrest drug users. treatment should be free and more readily available. health care in general should also be a public service. the way that we do it now is dumb in a way that is unparalleled in the rest of the first world.

allalone said:

does arresting addicts really help the drug problem?

I personally think it don't do anything but waste money better spent elsewhere. drug dealers on the other hand should be gone after and punished money well spent and less availability for users to get it..

Yes or No?

Click to expand...

Yes, we should absolutely arrest illicit drug users. They are the market that the drug dealers exist to profit from.

ObamacareFail said:

Yes, we should absolutely arrest illicit drug users. They are the market that the drug dealers exist to profit from.

Click to expand...

And the drug dealers you reference WOULD NOT EXIST if not for the prohibition created by poor legislation in 1914 and subsequent. Let's keep things in perspective, please.

ObamacareFail said:

Yes, we should absolutely arrest illicit drug users. They are the market that the drug dealers exist to profit from.

Click to expand...

Its political.

In the 1980s and early 1990s --- the US Drug Enforcement Agency became a political organization - similar to what the FBI is today. Drug Cartel members , traffickers were all given free rides to distribute illegal drugs -- heroin and cocaine ; in exchange for information ( being a narc ). That information received by the DEA from the "Narc" -- may .......or may not have been acted upon.

Yes --- Drug Cartel members and medium as well as sometimes ....low level traffickers could sell illegal drugs, and sometimes commit severe violence and murder --- for simply just being a snitch for the US Drug Enforcement Administration. Tit for Tat folks ---- information sold , criminal activity allowed. Gee.....what a great trade.

Then in the 1980s ; Florida - especially south Florida became a war zone. Fights over drug territory ; Murders and assassinations. Innocent people getting killed in drive by shooting and bombings. Local Law Enforcement busted their butts ----- more than 110 % ; because the DEA was partial to whom they arrested --- They had Agents on the inside - Undercover operations that were bragged about all the way to Washington DC -- to justify budget concerns ; and they had their hidden assets ( people ) --- whom were feeding them info. And President Reagan made a promise to the American public......to curb the influx of illegal drugs coming in from South America. I know for a fact --- the US Military was in South America .....Watching Drug Cartels from hidden spots in the jungle.

To do your job , or not to do your job. How far and how much are sacrifices made? It seems that even when human lives are on the line.......The DEA makes exceptions so some low life can still breathe.

And now.....we have the FBI , modeling themselves after the DEA and their fiascos that happened decades ago. Hillary Clinton has not been indicted ...... and Comey said to Trey Gowdy , that Hillary Clinton did not know she was breaking the law. A lawyer....did not know. Gee - I'll bet she was top of her class in Law School.

Politics plays a part in the Federal system, Judicial system --- and most everyday life. Poor tactics , inconsideration ---- and disregard for human lives are a natural occurrence.


Damn that's a shame !





Major Lambda

Skeptic Bob said:

No. It is a waste of resources. I feel the same about all vice crimes.

Click to expand...

Same here. I agree. let the law of the jungle weed out the weak-minded who feel drugs are their only option.
Most people reading this have had issues in their life where turning to some drug would be an excuse, but they did not.
They dealt with the problem and moved on.
For those sad individuals who turn to drugs for their problems, it is sad, but it should not be illegal in itself.
Committing crimes to pay for their drugs should be illegal, but addiction itself is just nature's way of weeding out the weak-minded.
No tax money should be paid to arrest them, house them, or anything else.
Rehabilitation should be a private affair.

Mr Person said:

No.

I'd say perhaps consider making intoxication an aggravating factor for other offenses committed while intoxicated (aka, you assume the risk you do something bad when high), and that goes for alcohol too. Maybe. I'm not too keen on increasing penalties.

But as for possession? No. Full decriminalization followed by further legalization of certain drugs. Diversion programs, voluntary or otherwise, depending on circumstances. Vancouver or Switzerland style programs that provide a safe place to use for the worst drugs (Swiss even provides clean heroin to users who go through a process and receive it on-site; who the hell is going to publicly declare addiction just to try heroin, after all?).

There are plenty of things we can do. I have heard a very few people say that being jailed actually gave them the final impetus to get straight. But that's a very small number as far as I can tell.

Otherwise, it causes more harm than good. It also leads to corruption of prison officials. Drugs are rampant in prison and they aren't all getting there via someone's arse.




I could keep going, but the bottom line is simple: the War on Drugs failed. The entire concept of Criminalization, extending back 120ish years, failed. There's no point to keep doing something that doesn't work, even if some people feel all self-righteous and superior because they oppose drugs. That's the worst reason to do anything.

Click to expand...

I'm for legalizing all drugs, and produce them so they are not tainted, give them away for free but users should be quarantined and attempt to help them, therapy, etc. Not talkin' about light drugs like pot and kratom or kava, but meth, heroin, morphine, etc.

Not sure if that is the answer, invite feedback.

OscarLevant said:

I'm for legalizing all drugs, and produce them so they are not tainted, give them away for free but users should be quarantined and attempt to help them, therapy, etc. Not talkin' about light drugs like pot and kratom or kava, but meth, heroin, morphine, etc.

Not sure if that is the answer, invite feedback.

Click to expand...

It's what Switzerland does with heroin (perhaps others), unless they've changed their policies since I last looked. The addicts will be addicts until they reach a final decision to quit, then actually quit. So they pursued a harm reduction strategy where addicts can go through some paperwork and get a precise dose of clean heroin at a clinic. Result: less overdoses, drug gangs get less money, and now there's a regular interaction with people - maybe you get a few more to decide to quit, etc.

The trouble in the U.S. is that our drug laws are all built around moralizing at or about drug users. We can't get past "drugs are bad" and over to a sensible harm-reduction policy until we accept reality for what it is; pragmatism over self-righteousness.

allalone said:

does arresting addicts really help the drug problem?

I personally think it don't do anything but waste money better spent elsewhere. drug dealers on the other hand should be gone after and punished money well spent and less availability for users to get it..

Yes or No?

Click to expand...

Often, arresting the user leads to the arrest of the dealer.

So...yes.

allalone said:

does arresting addicts really help the drug problem?

I personally think it don't do anything but waste money better spent elsewhere. drug dealers on the other hand should be gone after and punished money well spent and less availability for users to get it..

Yes or No?

Click to expand...

No, all recreational drugs should be legalized.