War on drugs has failed, say former leaders

[mentalfloss]

War on drugs has failed, say former leaders

NEW YORK — The global war on drugs has failed and decriminalizing narcotics such as marijuana could finally help weaken organized gangs, former world leaders said Thursday in a controversial report.

Arguing for a new approach to national and global drug control policies, the Global Commission on Drug Policy called for nations to "break the taboo on debate and reform."

"The global war on drugs has failed, with devastating consequences for individuals and societies around the world," the members of the commission said in the report released in New York. "Fifty years after the initiation of the UN Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, and 40 years after President (Richard) Nixon launched the US government's war on drugs, fundamental reforms in national and global drug control policies are urgently needed."

The commission includes former Brazilian president Fernando Cardoso, former Colombian president Cesar Gaviria, Mexico's former president Ernesto Zedillo as well as ex-UN chief Kofi Annan. It also includes noted writers such as Mexico's Carlos Fuentes and Peruvian Nobel laureate Mario Vargas Llosa.

The millions of dollars poured into the fight against drug producers and traffickers over the past decades "have clearly failed to effectively curtail supply or consumption," the report said. "Apparent victories in eliminating one source or trafficking organization are negated almost instantly by the emergence of other sources and traffickers."

AFP: War on drugs has failed, say former leaders

 

[Praxius]

Another link:

High-level commission declares drug war unwinnable
High-level commission declares drug war unwinnable - CTV News

Some snippets:

..... "Political leaders and public figures should have the courage to articulate publicly what many of them acknowledge privately: that the evidence overwhelmingly demonstrates that repressive strategies will not solve the drug problem, and that the war on drugs has not, and cannot, be won," the report said.

...... In its report, the commission recommends governments:

• end criminalization of drug users "who do no harm to others," as well as low level farmers, couriers and "petty sellers"
• experiment with legal regulation of drugs "to undermine the power of organized crime and safeguard the health and security of their citizens"
• offer health and treatment services such as supervised use facilities and syringe access rather than "abusive practices carried out in the name of treatment -- such as forced detention"
• abandon the 'just say no' approach to education in favour of "efforts grounded in credible information and prevention programs that focus on social skills and peer influences"
• focus law enforcement efforts "not on reducing drug markets per se but rather on reducing their harms"

Gee, it took a high-level commission to come to these conclusions when I and millions more over the decades have been stating all this as common sense.

This caught my eye:

War on drugs a bust: commission
http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2011/06/02/drug-war-report.html

White House differs

"Drug addiction is a disease that can be successfully prevented and treated. Making drugs more available — as this report suggests — will make it harder to keep our communities healthy and safe," Office of National Drug Control Policy spokesman Rafael Lemaitre said.......

...... Gaviria responded to the White House criticism saying there is agreement with the U.S. on reducing consumption and the drug czar agrees that the phrase "war on drugs" doesn't help produce good policy.

"But they need to go further," Gaviria told reporters. "They need to mobilize resources from law enforcement … (and) to move from the jail system to education, treatment and the health system. Just changing language is not enough."

Several European members of the commission cited evidence from Portugal, Germany, Switzerland and other countries that shifting from criminalizing drug users to treating and supporting them has reduced drug deaths and has either stabilized or reduced drug use.

At the press conference, the commission received an online petition collected by the global campaigning organization Avaaz and signed by 544,961 people from countries all over the world calling for an end to the war on drugs and backing its recommendations.

 

[Highball]

This is a huge undertaking organized by our goverenment and it is a big dark hole where we pour hard earned tax monies. It is now another section of our government that is a dynasty. Hundreds of thousdands are employed and the results are dismal. This was setup bt retired Army General's who are regarded by some segments of the media as "Experts." They must be. Someone reaches into our pocketbooks and takes tax money every day to support this failed exercise.

 

[Unforgiven]

Taxes go to fund the court system and the prisons.
Lawyers work within the court system and the political system.
Doing away with the war on drugs reduces funding directly.
Lawyers make the laws.

Yes you are being taken advantage of.
No they aren't going to cut their own money supply.
It won't change just because you know about it.

It's easy to arrest someone with a little Cannabis on them and run them through the system.
It's very difficult to arrest someone with ties to organized crime because they have money to spend on lawyers
who trip up police and the Crown often resulting in the case being thrown out.
When the stats are done numbers count not how much work goes into each case.

Lawyers make the laws.

You will have to get off the Internet to make changes to this.
Use the facts.
Embarrass politicians on this matter every chance you get.
In public is better.
In front of media coverage, even better.

 

[Colpy]

Yep.

An acquaintance of mine has worked in California for 20 years. He is a civil engineer, with an income of well into 6 figures. He has a lovely home, and a common law American wife.............he is 55 years old.

On Monday, June 6, he was notified that he is to leave the USA permanently by June 25.

He was arrested with a single marijuana joint.

In Canada.

When he was 17 years old.

He has received a Canadian pardon.

The Yanks are nuts on this stuff, especially when the last three US presidents all admitted to drug use when they were young.

Just insane.

 

[taxslave]

Yep.

An acquaintance of mine has worked in California for 20 years. He is a civil engineer, with an income of well into 6 figures. He has a lovely home, and a common law American wife.............he is 55 years old.

On Monday, June 6, he was notified that he is to leave the USA permanently by June 25.

He was arrested with a single marijuana joint.

In Canada.

When he was 17 years old.

He has received a Canadian pardon.

The Yanks are nuts on this stuff, especially when the last three US presidents all admitted to drug use when they were young.

Just insane.

I'm surprised such an obvious major criminal wasn't tossed in jail for a decade or two first. It is not like he was just running around killing people or blowing up schools.

 

[dumpthemonarchy]

Decriminalize all drugs, they all need to be regulated so citizens can legally buy what they want from authorized outlets. There are angry ignorant people out there who don't care about the money, they are just spiteful and mean when it comes to drugs and want to jail them. But many drink like fish. It's a joke.

I've noticed people who are harsh are crime, which is many people, I think keep the drums beating for the war on drugs. Just go after the bad guys they think, get them out of my life and punish them.

 

[CUBert]

YouTube - ‪Bull**** War on Drugs (Part 1 of 2)‬‏

YouTube - ‪Bull**** War on Drugs (Part 2 of 2)‬‏

The Yanks are nuts on this stuff

This is an understatement.

 

[coldstream]

There is a big difference between ending the 'War on Drugs' in the States, with its ridiculous decades long sentences for possession of personal amounts of illegal substances.. that has devastated low income and especially black young males.. and their neighbourhoods.. and 'decriminalizing' drugs. The former has been a failure.. and might well be termed 'racist', atleast in its outcomes.. the latter will present a whole new set of problems.

The biggest proponents of drug legalization now, are not aging 60s counterculture types.. but Radical Libertarians.. who see all government regulation of personal behaviour.. drugs, guns, taxes, consumption, commerce, trade.. and on.. as a abridgement of fundamental liberties. They have actually become anarchists.

If the U.S. does not want a nation of zombies.. but a sober, reasoning coherent culture.. they would be advised to keep tight control of drugs.. and maintaining criminal penalties, hopefully more proportionate.

 

[CUBert]

There is a big difference between ending the 'War on Drugs' in the States,

No there isn't. Some countries will execute your ass if you're holding a joint.

http://www.encod.org/info/DEATH-PENALTY-FOR-MARIJUANA-IN.html

Legalize drugs and the cartels and organized crime worldwide are impacted substantially.

 

[dumpthemonarchy]

There is a big difference between ending the 'War on Drugs' in the States, with its ridiculous decades long sentences for possession of personal amounts of illegal substances.. that has devastated low income and especially black young males.. and their neighbourhoods.. and 'decriminalizing' drugs. The former has been a failure.. and might well be termed 'racist', atleast in its outcomes.. the latter will present a whole new set of problems.

The biggest proponents of drug legalization now, are not aging 60s counterculture types.. but Radical Libertarians.. who see all government regulation of personal behaviour.. drugs, guns, taxes, consumption, commerce, trade.. and on.. as a abridgement of fundamental liberties. They have actually become anarchists.

If the U.S. does not want a nation of zombies.. but a sober, reasoning coherent culture.. they would be advised to keep tight control of drugs.. and maintaining criminal penalties, hopefully more proportionate.

I'm not a Radical Libertarian who thinks all govt regulation as bad, I'm no anarchist. I want govt regulation of drugs, it won't be perfect but it gets the gangs out of it.

Yes, those poor blacks in the USA have possibly the worst neighbourhoods in the world with black ghettos. Third World regions really. That's not our problem, or the world's.

The first video says that heroin is now 600 times cheaper than in 1970 and more pure. The war on drugs has FAILED.

 

[WLDB]

If memory serves either Obama or Hilary Clinton said something to the effect that the war on drugs has failed then said they weren't going to change their strategy-which I really don't get. Some politicians can be idiots at times.

 

[The Old Medic]

The ONLY sensible answer is to legalize virtually all drugs, allow them to be sold like alcohol is now to adults, and to REALLY crack down on driving under the influence, providing drugs of any type to minors, etc.

Frankly, I would like to see anyone that provides drugs to a minor get a MINIMUM of 10 years in prison for their first offense (including parents that give drugs to their children), and life without the possibility of parole for selling drugs to minors.

DUI should get a MINIMUM of 60 days in jail for a first offense, with the vehicle being driven impounded at the drivers expense while the person is in jail.

2nd Offense, a minimum of 6 months in jail, and 5 years probation with regular checks for drug or alcohol usage. Impound the vehicle, at the drivers expense, for the entire 6 months. Suspend the driving rights for 5 full years, and prohibit ANY vehicle from being registered at the address where the offender lives, during that 5 year probation.

3rd offense, 5 years in prison, a lifetime ban on driving, and confiscation and public of the vehicle being driven. It would not matter if that vehicle belonged to someone else, confiscate it and sell it.

If a person prohibited from driving is caught driving, 5 years in prison, without parole, and confiscation of the vehicle (unless it had been reported as stolen BEFORE the person was caught driving it).

Any further DUI, would result in Life in Prison without the possibility of parole. The person would actually be convicted of attempted vehicular homicide for each offense, making them a convicted felon!

That's what DUI actually is, attempted homicide. The person that drives under the influence is deliberately choosing to drive a vehicle that is quite capable of killing people, while too impaired to control that vehicle properly. it is NOT a trivial offense, and should not be treated as trivial.

And, impounding or confiscating vehicles would stop friends and relatives from letting convicted DUI criminals from driving their cars. Who would loan their car to someone, if they knew that they could, and likely would, lose that vehicle for months (or permanently)? No rental car company would rent out a car to an unlicensed driver, so why should friends or relatives be allowed to get away with it?

It's about time that society get real with this problem. If people want to smoke, sniff, shoot up, or whatever, let them do it through licensed dealers where the price is kept low, and the drugs are pure and unadulterated with dangerous substances. Frankly, it would be a LOT cheaper to supply addicts with free drugs, and free food and lodging and basic medical care, than it is to keep them in prison.

It would cut crime by a massive amount. Why hold up a store, or steal stuff, if you can just go to your local pharmacy and get your drugs perfectly legally and cheaply?

BUT, dealing drugs without a license, make that a serious crime, one with a minimum of 20 years and confiscation of 100% of the person assets.

Sell drugs to children, the death penalty!

 

[WLDB]

The ONLY sensible answer is to legalize virtually all drugs, allow them to be sold like alcohol is now to adults, and to REALLY crack down on driving under the influence, providing drugs of any type to minors, etc.

Frankly, I would like to see anyone that provides drugs to a minor get a MINIMUM of 10 years in prison for their first offense (including parents that give drugs to their children), and life without the possibility of parole for selling drugs to minors.

DUI should get a MINIMUM of 60 days in jail for a first offense, with the vehicle being driven impounded at the drivers expense while the person is in jail.

2nd Offense, a minimum of 6 months in jail, and 5 years probation with regular checks for drug or alcohol usage. Impound the vehicle, at the drivers expense, for the entire 6 months. Suspend the driving rights for 5 full years, and prohibit ANY vehicle from being registered at the address where the offender lives, during that 5 year probation.

3rd offense, 5 years in prison, a lifetime ban on driving, and confiscation and public of the vehicle being driven. It would not matter if that vehicle belonged to someone else, confiscate it and sell it.

If a person prohibited from driving is caught driving, 5 years in prison, without parole, and confiscation of the vehicle (unless it had been reported as stolen BEFORE the person was caught driving it).

Any further DUI, would result in Life in Prison without the possibility of parole. The person would actually be convicted of attempted vehicular homicide for each offense, making them a convicted felon!

That's what DUI actually is, attempted homicide. The person that drives under the influence is deliberately choosing to drive a vehicle that is quite capable of killing people, while too impaired to control that vehicle properly. it is NOT a trivial offense, and should not be treated as trivial.

And, impounding or confiscating vehicles would stop friends and relatives from letting convicted DUI criminals from driving their cars. Who would loan their car to someone, if they knew that they could, and likely would, lose that vehicle for months (or permanently)? No rental car company would rent out a car to an unlicensed driver, so why should friends or relatives be allowed to get away with it?

It's about time that society get real with this problem. If people want to smoke, sniff, shoot up, or whatever, let them do it through licensed dealers where the price is kept low, and the drugs are pure and unadulterated with dangerous substances. Frankly, it would be a LOT cheaper to supply addicts with free drugs, and free food and lodging and basic medical care, than it is to keep them in prison.

It would cut crime by a massive amount. Why hold up a store, or steal stuff, if you can just go to your local pharmacy and get your drugs perfectly legally and cheaply?

BUT, dealing drugs without a license, make that a serious crime, one with a minimum of 20 years and confiscation of 100% of the person assets.

Sell drugs to children, the death penalty!

I'm glad you're not in parliament. I agree with about 20% of what you said. Everything about DUI to the last point-about a life sentence. That I cannot agree with. Attempted homicide is difficult if not impossible to prove as the person is intoxicated and cannot have the guilty mind for such a crime.

Also, there are no felons in Canada as we have no felony offences. Here they are called Indictable offences.

And there is no death penalty in Canada. And it wont be coming back. The world wide trend is away from the death penalty. I refuse to allow my government to kill its own citizens, that is too much power. Particularly not for something as small as giving kids drugs. Of course its a serious problem but not serious enough to kill over.

Overall I think you'd really like living in Singapore.

 

[Unforgiven]

There is a big difference between ending the 'War on Drugs' in the States, with its ridiculous decades long sentences for possession of personal amounts of illegal substances.. that has devastated low income and especially black young males.. and their neighbourhoods.. and 'decriminalizing' drugs. The former has been a failure.. and might well be termed 'racist', atleast in its outcomes.. the latter will present a whole new set of problems.

The biggest proponents of drug legalization now, are not aging 60s counterculture types.. but Radical Libertarians.. who see all government regulation of personal behaviour.. drugs, guns, taxes, consumption, commerce, trade.. and on.. as a abridgement of fundamental liberties. They have actually become anarchists.

If the U.S. does not want a nation of zombies.. but a sober, reasoning coherent culture.. they would be advised to keep tight control of drugs.. and maintaining criminal penalties, hopefully more proportionate.

Stupid reasoning of the year? What say you?

 

[taxslave]

If memory serves either Obama or Hilary Clinton said something to the effect that the war on drugs has failed then said they weren't going to change their strategy-which I really don't get. Some politicians can be idiots at times.

Its all about buying votes to stay in power. Since Obama no longer has a hold on both houses he must kiss a certain amount of ass to get other things. Most voters from the center to the extreme left would vote for Obama regardless of what he does but he needs to get a few vote from the slightly right to stay in power.
In comparison whit the US Harper would be a democrat while most of the republicans are even nuttier than YJ.