War on Drugs is Burning Out

[Azure]

About time too.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics...0150108?page=4

Fascinating read.

Federal drug sentencing remains draconian: Locking a person in a cage for five years for possessing five grams of an intoxicant is not a rational policy. But the Holder reforms may signal that the flood of Drug War incarceration has reached its high-water mark. For the first time in 34 years, the federal inmate population is falling, down 4,800 in the past year. By 2016, a drop of 12,200 is projected – equivalent to more than six federal prisons filled to capacity.

Holder, who will be leaving office upon the confirmation of his successor, views this as a legacy issue. "For far too long," he said in a September speech focused on the harms created by the Drug War, "our system has perpetuated a destructive cycle of poverty, criminality and incarceration that has trapped countless people and weakened entire communities – particularly communities of color. . . . We are bringing about a paradigm shift."

[blankall]

Not burning out soon or fast enough. What a devastating and totally illogical policy. It's right up there with apartheid and residential schools as far as effectiveness go.

[polak]

Good.

[Bill Bumface]

^

[FlamesAddiction]

Too bad Canada has been ramping up the last few years with mandatory jail sentences and such.

Canada's drug prohibition history is pretty interesting. We were actually one of the first countries to throw down the gauntlet in the war on the drugs.

[polak]

It doesn't matter. Once the boomers kick the can the war on drugs will have pretty much no support...

Jeeze so much good will come to the world once those guys die

[Table 5]

Originally Posted by polak

It doesn't matter. Once the boomers kick the can the war on drugs will have pretty much no support...

Jeeze so much good will come to the world once those guys die

Funny, because the boomer generation probably took more drugs than everyone else combined.

[polak]

Originally Posted by Table 5

Funny, because the boomer generation probably took more drugs than everyone else combined.

we're doing our best.

[corporatejay]

Originally Posted by Table 5

Funny, because the boomer generation probably took more drugs than everyone else combined.

Yes but if you believe the Harper Government marijuana is 1000000000x more potent today then it was in the 70s.

[Table 5]

Originally Posted by polak

we're doing our best.

If you were, you'd be too busy debating the meaning of life with a giant purple pineapple right now, instead of being on a hockey forum.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Table 5

If you were, you'd be too busy debating the meaning of life with a giant purple pineapple right now, instead of being on a hockey forum.

Are you insinuating that the internet is keeping kids off the street and off drugs?

The internet is.....good??

[nik-]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Too bad Canada has been ramping up the last few years with mandatory jail sentences and such.

Canada's drug prohibition history is pretty interesting. We were actually one of the first countries to throw down the gauntlet in the war on the drugs.

Yeah. It's pretty sad how this country is moving backwards. Other countries are learning lessons, and moving away from failed policy and we're starting to implement them.

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by Table 5

Funny, because the boomer generation probably took more drugs than everyone else combined.

I would actually be pretty surprised if stats showed that the boomers consumed drugs at a higher rate than subsequent generations. Drug use was more open and played a significant role in their social movements at the time unlike drug use by the Gen X and Millenials.

[dissentowner]

As an officer I can tell you the war on drugs is a waste of resources and an impossible battle. It also has caused more damage than anything beneficial. I don't make the rules though.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

As an officer I can tell you the war on drugs is a waste of resources and an impossible battle. It also has caused more damage than anything beneficial. I don't make the rules though.

As a former Federal Crown agent, I would agree with that.

However, the policy in the Netherlands has not been without problems.

http://www.drugwarfacts.org/cms/neth....duR0dlCX.dpbs

http://www.cedro-uva.org/lib/reinarman.dutch.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_po...he_Netherlands

Criminal investigations into more serious forms of organized crime mainly involve drugs (72%). Most of these are investigations of hard drug crime (specifically cocaine and synthetic drugs) although the number of soft drug cases is rising and currently accounts for 69% of criminal investigations.[29]


In a study of the levels of cannabis, cocaine, ecstasy, meth and other amphetamine in wastewater from 42 major cities in Europe Amsterdam came near the top of the list in every category but meth.[30]


In the province of North-Brabant in the south of the Netherlands, the organized crime organizations form the main producer of MDMA, amphetamine en cannabis in Europe. Together with the proximity of the ports of Antwerp and especially Rotterdam where heroin and cocaine enter the European continent, this causes these substances to be readily available for a relative low price. Therefor there is a large quantity drugs of a relative high quality with few pollution available. This means that users will not have to rely on more polluted substances with greater health risks. Together with an approach that focusses on easily accessible health care, harm reduction and prevention, this causes the medical condition of the Dutch addicts to be less severe than that of many other countries.[31]

[polak]

Originally Posted by Table 5

If you were, you'd be too busy debating the meaning of life with a giant purple pineapple right now, instead of being on a hockey forum.

I can post on here while at work. I don't do LSD at work anymore though. It gets too hard to control the monkeys after the tree stump takes my tamagochi.

[Hemi-Cuda]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

As an officer I can tell you the war on drugs is a waste of resources and an impossible battle. It also has caused more damage than anything beneficial. I don't make the rules though.

It was never meant to curb drug use at all, it was all about money. It's not a coincidence that private for-profit prisons started appearing at the same time as the war on drugs ramped up. More people in jail, more money for the owners, more money funneled to the politicians. It also opened up a big revenue stream for the CIA when they got into the drug smuggling business

[nik-]

Originally Posted by Hemi-Cuda

It was never meant to curb drug use at all, it was all about money. It's not a coincidence that private for-profit prisons started appearing at the same time as the war on drugs ramped up. More people in jail, more money for the owners, more money funneled to the politicians. It also opened up a big revenue stream for the CIA when they got into the drug smuggling business

I don't necessarily agree with that. I think it was started with good, albeit misguided, intentions. It's really during Reagan that it ramped up into ridiculousness. This is also when the private prisons first really started booming.

So, basically, #### Ronald Reagan.

[DoubleF]

Kept looking at thread title and expecting a play on words.

Leaving disappointed but more educated about the war on drugs.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by corporatejay

Yes but if you believe the Harper Government marijuana is 1000000000x more potent today then it was in the 70s.

You would get a better high off today's shake than the best weed available in the 70's. It's not 100000x stronger but it's significantly more potent. Crappy stuff today we would call wheelchair pot in the 80's.