Should the U.S. Continue its War on Drugs?
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?








The War on Drugs Has Reduced Drug Use
Where's the beef?
You casually skip over the other significant effect: the costs involved in perpetuating a losing war.
Consider: the war on drugs has destabilized many countries causing them to become more and more dependent on US aid (Latin America), has increased the level and nature of violence around the world, created black market empires out of thugs, increased the danger of narcotics by increasing potency that drug sellers push, aided and abetted the manufacture of methamphetamines as a cheap substitute for cocaine and other amphetamines as the government violently cracked down on cocaine distribution networks, put a disproportionate number of urban black males in prison, destroyed the lives of casual and non-violent users.
In the meantime, our police forces are slowly taking the form of a military and people are far more prone to having their rights violated by authorities under the guise of drug use today than any other period of time in our history. And you call that better?
- sumwatt July 24, 2008 2:01PM
Reply to this Recommend
(7)
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.