80% of Drug Policy Experts Oppose the Drug War
What happens when a diverse group of drug policy experts from throughout North America convene to discuss solutions to the world drug problem? They begin by agreeing that the drug war must end.
Beyond 2008 is a worldwide forum sponsored by the United Nations to solicit expert testimony evaluating the UN's international drug strategy. The north American conference, which just concluded in Vancouver, brought together an impressive coalition of AIDS organizations, public health groups, human rights advocates, treatment specialists, former police officers, substance abuse researchers, academics, government officials, and others.
Perhaps unintentionally, the UN had created an unprecedented opportunity for a broad coalition of interested parties to articulate their consensus that the time for drug policy reform has come.
As long as the U.S-style "war on drugs" continues, criminals will control what drugs are sold, how much they cost, how deadly those drugs are, and how young their customers will be.That was the message delivered yesterday by Jack Cole, a retired New Jersey police officer who spent 26 years making arrests in connection with "billions of dollars in cocaine and heroin" as well as other drugs. [The Province]
Surprised to find themselves outnumbered and outclassed, the drug warriors in attendance struggled to retain their composure. Some failed:
Cole's message at the conference drew criticism from Dr. Kevin Sabet, a former speechwriter for the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy, who is now with Project: Sundial (Supporting United Nations Drug Initiatives and Legislation).
Sabet criticized the Vancouver forum for being made up "80 per cent" by "people who all agree with each other."
The observation that the experts are lined up against him is easily the most accurate claim ever made by this former speechwriter for the Drug Czar. It is typical of the authoritarian drug warrior mindset to conclude that this overwhelming consensus undermines the event's credibility rather than his own.
But this was no hempfest. This was a UN forum featuring respected experts with vast experience and impressive credentials. Their motives could not be impugned. Their agenda could not have been more transparent. They are the voices of everything that is true and real in the drug war debate and their consensus is a force that cannot be dismissed with the flippant pothead jokes and statistical shell-games we've come to expect from the likes of Kevin Sabet.
The drug policy reform consensus is a value statement reached through contemplation not naivety, compassion not selfishness, research not rhetoric, and hope not surrender. That our arguments are increasingly visible in any serious drug policy discussion is no coincidence or conspiracy. We'll fill every room, large or small, until peace is restored and this terrible war is banished into the bowels of history where it belongs.
Update: Kevin Sabet disagrees substantially with what I've written. His response is available here.
digg
redditTo a Royal Canadian Pain In The A$$
Comment posted by Anonymous on Thu, 02/07/2008 - 7:57am**Sgt. Scott Rintoul of the RCMP's drug-awareness section, slammed LEAP and its pro-legalization stance....
"But for these guys to come in and talk about legalization of drugs is to just give up. It's like they want us to throw our hands up and say, 'We've lost the war, let's legalize drugs,' " said Rintoul.**
Versus we lost the war so lets continue funneling tens of billions of dollars into the hands of drug dealers who make drugs easily accessible in schools and residential areas?
**"Half of the RCMP's enforcement budget is spent on alcohol-related crime, and alcohol is legal and regulated," he said.**
I'm against the out-of-control alcohol market as much as the out-of-control illicit drug market. Only by the biggest stretch of the imagination would you call the alcohol model a good model for currently illicit drugs with all its multibillion dollar promotion of alcohol use on TV programs that kids watch, or allowing the sale of beer in every convenience store.
Legalization Support
Comment posted by Anonymous on Thu, 02/07/2008 - 10:02am"It's like they want us to throw our hands up and say, 'We've lost the war, let's legalize drugs,' "
This is why I advocate full legalization supported by an effective system of abuse prevention and treatment.
Alcohol problems are born from people exercising abusive behavior (drinking too much), not people having a glass of wine with dinner.
Including alcohol abuse, the system of overall abuse prevention today is awful, supported at best by campaigns like "just say no" and "above the influence".
From the website for the prohibitionist U.S. National Institute on Drug Abuse, "Researchers have long recognized the strong correlation between stress and substance abuse."
Yet today's abuse prevention fails to mention stress at all, when all people should be learning how to identify abnormal stress levels within themselves and how to properly resolve that abnormality, instead of heading to the liquor store to get a mind-numbing substance, for example.
Proper stress management leads not only to reduced substance abuse, but to a healthier society overall.
To eliminate demand for highly physically-addictive substances, all people should know which substances are highly physically-addictive.
For the remaining non-highly physically addictive substances (e.g. psychedelics), all people should know where to find well-organized proper usage guidelines.
Once abusive behavior is properly identified (instead of today's unsubstantiated 'all use = abuse' approach), we can focus on eliminating the problem (regardless of the substance, both in existence and whatever emerges), while respecting the freedom of those who want to properly use substances.
Full legalization supported by an effective system of abuse prevention and treatment is truly the right direction to head in.
Regulation is the winner
Comment posted by Anonymous on Thu, 02/07/2008 - 10:48amRegulation = effective common sense. Control = You lost it when you started it. If they call it a war ,then they say it MUST be won . I say it's not a war ,it's about control. War's over .Hurray!!! Eat it control freaks.
Addiction Is A Genetic Disease
Comment posted by M Simon on Fri, 02/08/2008 - 8:27pmYou don't catch alcoholism from alcohol. You don't catch drug addiction from drugs.
Addiction Is A Genetic Disease.
Thus any regulation but the most minimal - can't sell it to children - would be useless.
There is no such thing as "abusive behavior/addictive personality".
Drugs are addicting for the same reason insulin is. Some people have chemical deficiencies.
deficiencies?
Comment posted by mlang52 on Sat, 02/09/2008 - 12:53pmDear Mr Simon,
As a physician, I cannot refute your claim. " And why does it happen?", you might ask. Because the majority of the people with these deficiencies dont matter to us (the government) anyway. They are all throw-away lives! The justice system abuses them, because they don't have the money to buy their way out! Our society is broken! Research? We save it for those who do not fit into the category of people mentioned (the throw-away part).
To a Royal Canadian Pain In The A$$
Comment posted by Anonymous on Thu, 02/07/2008 - 7:51amVersus we lost the war so lets continue funneling tens of billions of dollars into the hands of drug dealers who make drugs easily accessible in schools and residential areas?
I'm against the out-of-control alcohol market as much as the out-of-control illicit drug market. Only by the biggest stretch of the imagination would you call the alcohol model a good model for currently illicit drugs with all its multibillion dollar promotion of alcohol use on TV programs that kids watch, or allowing the sale of beer in every convenience store.