Pubdate: Wed, 12 Apr 2006
Source: Kentucky Kernel (KY Edu)
Copyright: 2006sKernel Press, Inc.
Contact:  http://www.kykernel.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/790
Author: Wes Blevins
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/decrim.htm (Decrim/Legalization)

ALL I AM SAYING IS GIVE DRUGS A CHANCE

With the ongoing war on terror taking up a significant portion of 
news budgets across the United States, another war within our own 
borders has gone largely ignored in the public eye. Our generation 
has been inundated with anti-drug campaigns for years - from "This is 
your brain ... this is your brain on drugs" to "A very special 'Fresh 
Prince.' "

As we entered our teenage years, the majority of us were probably 
scared of drug use - scared of the physical effects and the social 
and legal consequences. But now that we've all grown up, it would be 
safe to assume that a large majority of us have either tried drugs or 
been around when others have.

I've smoked marijuana in the past. It didn't lead me down the path to 
"hard" drugs, as we've all heard it does. Personally, I've never had 
the urge to try harder drugs such as cocaine, heroin or meth. I'm 
also not homeless, nor have I been arrested - two other supposed 
consequences of drug use. I smoked willingly, I never became addicted 
and somehow I doubt my purchases funded terrorism.

I'm not ashamed of my marijuana use. Why should I be? Why shouldn't 
I, or any other willing adult, be able to come home and smoke 
marijuana, provided there is no driving afterward? If you're 21, you 
can buy a case of beer or a bottle of whiskey and drink it. Studies 
have shown that drinking and driving is just as dangerous as driving 
while high, if not more so. Plus, the long-term effects on your body 
aren't nearly as bad as those attributed to alcohol abuse.

But you'll probably never see a study that says marijuana really 
isn't that bad for you.

What you will hear is politicians talking about wasteful pork barrel 
spending. You might also hear the Pentagon purchased a toilet seat or 
a hammer for $500. But $500 is nothing compared to what the 
government wastes ever year on the so-called "war on drugs."

In 2003, the federal government spent an estimated $19.2 billion 
fighting drug use. States added an additional $20 billion to that figure.

Wouldn't it be better for everyone if the "war on drugs" simply went 
away? The $40 billion spent by the federal and state governments 
could be put elsewhere. Perhaps Kentucky would be able to give more 
money to UK, thereby slowing the perpetual tuition increases. Better 
still for the state, if drugs were legalized, they could be sold in 
specialty stores and taxed, much like alcohol and tobacco. The tax 
money would put additional revenue into the state economy every year.

Drugs have been legal in the Netherlands for years. The Dutch 
addiction rate is much lower than that of the United States. Studies 
have shown that after drugs are legalized, there is an initial spike 
in usage, probably due to curiosity. But after that, drug use levels 
off to more manageable levels. Selling drugs in specialty stores 
would also reduce the risks associated with using infected needles to 
inject drugs.

The drug war is likely not about the scientific issues involved or 
the effects that drugs may or may not have on humans. What it boils 
down to is the stigma that society has attached to drugs through the 
years. Until people accept the fact that the drug war is a massive 
waste of money and law enforcement hours, drugs will inevitably 
remain illegal, and hundreds of thousands of people will be arrested 
every year for possession.

Iraq has been called George W. Bush's Vietnam. But the war on drugs 
has been around a much longer time than the war on Iraq. If critics 
want to look for another Vietnam, they can find it within the borders 
of the United States.

The war on drugs is a war that the government does not know how to 
fight and ultimately can never win.

Wes Blevins is a journalism senior.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Beth Wehrman