Ever since President Richard Nixon declared war on drugs in 1971, we've heard much talk about America's drug-prevention initiatives. Each year, billions of dollars are spent on keeping illegal substances out -- and reducing drug use nationwide. However, some argue the battle is ineffective or perhaps even counter-productive. Is this effort worth continuing, or is it time to search for alternatives?
Please select the category that most closely reflects your concern about this content,
so that we can review it and determine whether it violates Civility 101 or isn't
appropriate for some other reason.
Abusing this feature is also a violation of Civility 101.
Explanation:
Biweekly updates on new debates and experts
Please check your email to confirm your subscription.
© 2008 Opposing Views, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Opposing Views, Inc. is not responsible for the content posted on this website. Please view full disclaimer under Terms
No civil right to take drugs
Poorly Informed much?
If recreational drugs had absolutely no other use, the are still valued for the pursuit of happiness (some nations have thought this important from time to time), and most of them are less harmful than most prescription drugs, alcohol , cigarettes , cars, guns , or even tylenol in some cases.
Most of our drugs laws were blatantly racist until the 60's and 70's when the Drug War became the weapon of choice against the youth and peace movements. The last 3 decades the drug war has become to big of a business for most parties to be impartial about, especially political parties.
Where and when have lax drug laws lead to increased drug use ? And what problems resulted?
- Submariner June 12, 2009 4:04PM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.