Topic: War on Drugs

[codger]

WAR AGAINST DRUGS?  2 snapshots from the frontline

1.
In 1992, BBC journo John Simpson went to Peru, the source of much of the world’s cocaine.

“Each month there was a meeting of the senior government officials in the town: the Army commander, the police commander, the chief prosecutor, the sub-prefect.  Zambrano [newly appointed s-p] attended his first such meeting:

‘It was decided which drug running ‘firm’ would be used, how much they should pay for each flight.  The drug trade is co-ordinated from the military base here, headed by Commandante Alfonso.  Wherever his men are stationed there is an airstrip which the drug traffickers can use, under Army protection.

For each drugs flight that took off from the local airstrips, Commandante Alfonso received $5,000.  The police commander received the same.  So did the public prosecutor.  The sub-prefect, who unlike them had no power to intervene with the trade, received only $200 per flight:: still a considerable amount of money in Peru, sufficient to keep a family comfortably for a month.  There was probably at least one flight every day of the week.  The profitability of each plane-load of coca paste may be judged by the fact that the traffickers paid bribes of more than twenty thousand dollars per shipment in Tocache alone.  Another payment was made, with rather greater care: $1,000 per flight to Shining Path [the ‘Marxist’ guerrilla army] to permit free passage of the coca paste to the airstrip.”

…[Zambrano said]
The main aim of the Army commander in this area is to maintain the state of emergency. Whenever the Army has caught a Shining Path leader, it has always set him free.  That is after a payment of six thousand, or eight thousand, or ten thousand dollars, depending on his degree of responsibility.  So Shining Path operate with impunity, because they know they will always be set free.”

2.
A decade later, Craig Murray was Ambassador in Uzbekistan, on the northern border of Afghanistan.

“One area where the Karimov [‘President’ of Uzbekistan] was protected by its alliance with the United States is narcotics trafficking.  The US, Germany and the UK bilaterally, and the European Union, have all put money into narcotics control. At Termez, where the Friendship Bridge crosses into Afghanistan, they have provided Uzbek customs with every modern facility from sniffer dogs to giant X-rays that can scan an entire container. 

United Nations famine relief trucks are sometimes stuck for weeks at this border, waiting to get in to Afghanistan.  But if you stand there for a little while, you will start to notice the convoys of Mercedes with black windows and of six-ton military trucks which are waved onto a track around the customs facilities and never stopped.  They carry 40% of Afghanistan’s heroin production.  Mostly it is then placed into cotton bales and sent up the railway to the Baltic at Riga and St Petersburg for onward shipment into Europe.
…the few interceptions of narcotics by the Uzbek authorities were best characterised as removing private sector competition.”


Sources
1
SIMPSON: ‘In the forests of the night’ [Hutchinson: 1993]

2.
MURRAY: ‘Murder in Samarkand’ [Mainstream 2006]

[ewok-red]

given that the war on drugs has been going on for decades now with no impact one can only conclude that the people on drugs are winning and if therefore we are losing a war against a stoned enemey which does not say much for the anti drugs lobby.

[Corkboy]

Legalise, legalise, legalise.

Oh, and legalise.

[ewok-red]

Legalise, legalise, legalise.

Oh, and legalise.

legalise the war on drugs? no thanks

[hide5seek]

Twas lost years ago.

[Fiend]

Who is in favour of the 'War against Drugs'?

Politicians, Old people, Religious nuts and Drug Dealers

[Monkey Red]

Legalise.

Get rid of drug related crime to a great extent.
Get rid of teenage prostitution to a great extent
Make drugs cheaper, over the chemists counter, thus controlling the consumption and provide cleaner drugs.
It would bring money to the Goverments coffers, not the drug barons.
Makes drug smuggling and peddilng on the street corner obsolete.
At the same time still provide help for those trying to kick the habit, just like smokers.

Obviously introduce rigorous laws and continue educating people on the negative side of the use of drugs.

The way I see it is just like the alcohol problem. Kids do drink underage, but, you don´t see them breaking into houses to finance the habit, or sell their bodies on the street. You don´t see gangs killing each other over alcopops or home brew!

[Andy @ Allerton!]

Legalise.

Get rid of drug related crime to a great extent.
Get rid of teenage prostitution to a great extent
Make drugs cheaper, over the chemists counter, thus controlling the consumption and provide cleaner drugs.
It would bring money to the Goverments coffers, not the drug barons.
Makes drug smuggling and peddilng on the street corner obsolete.
At the same time still provide help for those trying to kick the habit, just like smokers.

Obviously introduce rigorous laws and continue educating people on the negative side of the use of drugs.

The way I see it is just like the alcohol problem. Kids do drink underage, but, you don´t see them breaking into houses to finance the habit, or sell their bodies on the street. You don´t see gangs killing each other over alcopops or home brew!

That's far too simplistic and you would just end up with a load of addicts.

Alchohol may be bad for a limited few - but given the public and private problems of many - Hard Drugs appear to destory lives from the word go.

If these drugs are 'legal' - who fixes the prices?

And if you think that there wouldn't be a black market source undercutting these prices you are dreaming!

[GoonerD]

There is no way things will change.

The illegal drug business is the largest industry (even larger than automobile industry!) with the highest profit rates on almost all levels of distribution.

Ever thought about where all the billions dollars of profit go?  No, they don´t just sit in some dodgy bank on the Cayman Islands.  They are re-invested in legitimate businesses and they are then reinvested in financing all kinds of stuff - including political campaigns, candidates and so on.

Things are never going to change.  The whole Fuzz about Afghanistan is simply the safeguarding of drug-flow into the Western World, which the Talibans have pretty much effectively stopped during their terror regime.

Fight against Terror my arse.....

[Branno]

The Talliban are the only people to make an impact on drugs !

[kesey]

The Talliban are the only people to make an impact on drugs !

Do you think thats why the goodies invaded Afghanistan?


More smack on the streets of the West.

[kavah]

Scientists want new drug rankings
 

The drug classification system in the UK is not "fit for purpose" and should be scrapped, scientists have said.
They have drawn up an alternative system which they argue more accurately reflects the harm that drugs do.

The new ranking system places alcohol and tobacco in the upper half of the league table, ahead of cannabis and several Class A drugs such as ecstasy.



Full story

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/6474053.stm

[elmer dinkley]

There is no war against drugs, never has been. The whole thing is a shammery of a mockery of two mockerys of a sham.

I'm living in Sydney, over here the sum total of the 'war effort' is to raid nightclubs and arrest punters. It's not a war against drugs, it's a war against personal freedom.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/dance-party-shut-down-after-drug-crackdown/2007/02/26/1172338500365.html

[Andy @ Allerton!]

There should be a drugs against War I reckon.

Heey!! Wild man! Purple spinning triangles.

[Gnurglan]

Oh, the big debate of the late 80s and early 90s is back.

[hoonin]

Legalise.

Get rid of drug related crime to a great extent.
Get rid of teenage prostitution to a great extent
Make drugs cheaper, over the chemists counter, thus controlling the consumption and provide cleaner drugs.
It would bring money to the Goverments coffers, not the drug barons.
Makes drug smuggling and peddilng on the street corner obsolete.
At the same time still provide help for those trying to kick the habit, just like smokers.

Obviously introduce rigorous laws and continue educating people on the negative side of the use of drugs.

The way I see it is just like the alcohol problem. Kids do drink underage, but, you don´t see them breaking into houses to finance the habit, or sell their bodies on the street. You don´t see gangs killing each other over alcopops or home brew!

I'm not so sure we'd see much of that, bar the crime related stuff. The government cant control the flow of drugs now, so legislation wont change that. It'll just provide another avenue on top of the existing ones.

I have absolutely no faith in any government to legalise and control drugs for any other reason than making money for the Chancellor. The perfect model to emphasise that is the handling of ciggies and booze. The government tax the arse out of both, so people find alternative ways of buying them on the gray market for less.

Legalising wouldn't put all low level dealers and suppliers out of business, they'd just be in competition with authorised sources, making availability higher and possibly even driving prices down.

Additionally, legalising presents the government with additional moral responsibility to fund treatment and educational schemes. I dont know if taxes alone would sustain that?

Things are never going to change.  The whole Fuzz about Afghanistan is simply the safeguarding of drug-flow into the Western World, which the Talibans have pretty much effectively stopped during their terror regime.

Fight against Terror my arse.....

Apart from the CIA drug runs that fund their bribes/payoffs.

[codger]

Oh, the big debate of the late 80s and early 90s is back.

Well, I've always been a bit behind the times.

Just happened to have read these 2 books recently.

[Fiend]

How would the government tax a few plants growing in my spare bedroom?

Ah ha! Maybe that's why it's illegal!!! 

[Anywhichwayicant]

The U.S. federal government spent over $15 billion dollars in 2010 on the War on Drugs, at a rate of about $500 per second.

Source: Office of National Drug Control Policy

State and local governments spent at least another 25 billion dollars.

Source: Jeffrey A. Miron & Kathrine Waldock: "The Budgetary Impact of Drug Prohibition," 2010.



People Arrested for Drug Law Offenses this Year

 

Arrests for drug law violations this year are expected to exceed the 1,663,582 arrests of 2009. Law enforcement made more arrests for drug abuse violations (an estimated 1.6 million arrests, or 13.0 percent of the total number of arrests) than for any other offense in 2009.

Someone is arrested for violating a drug law every 19 seconds.

Source: Uniform Crime Reports, Federal Bureau of Investigation



People Arrested for Cannabis Law Offenses this Year

 

Police arrested an estimated 858,408 persons for cannabis violations in 2009. Of those charged with cannabis violations, approximately 89 percent were charged with possession only. An American is arrested for violating cannabis laws every 30 seconds.

Source: Uniform Crime Reports, Federal Bureau of Investigation



People Incarcerated for Drug Law Offenses this Year

 

Since December 31, 1995, the U.S. prison population has grown an average of 43,266 inmates per year. About 25 per cent are sentenced for drug law violations.

http://www.drugsense.org/cms/wodclock


So the Americans have been wagin' war on drugs for the last 40 odd years yet the problem seems just as rife now as it's always been. Is it a case of just lockin' up the problem rather than addressin' it?

[Anywhichwayicant]

Brenda Pearson is a mother of two children and wife for over 20 years; she is now serving a minimum of 50 years in prison.

Pearson could be considered a completely normal American woman, except for one thing. Pearson is a heroin addict.

While Pearson never stole from anyone or sold drugs to support her addiction, she made one mistake that she will regret for the rest of her life.

About fifteen years ago one of Pearson's close friends, who was also a heroin addict, moved across the country. Upon arriving there her friend asked her to send heroin to her through the mail because she could not find any on her own.

When the authorities learned that Pearson was doing this, they charged her with heroin distribution. Pearson pled guilty to 10 of these charges and is now serving a minimum of 50 years in prison before she is eligible for parole.

This unfortunate story, along with many others just like it, is featured on the Families Against Mandatory Minimums' website.

Pearson is in a rapidly growing section of the American prison population made up of non-violent drug offenders.

According to a study by the U.S. Department of Justice, of the 2.2 million Americans that are currently incarcerated, 21.2 percent of them are non-violent drug offenders.

While these individuals are felons, they are not career criminals, just people who were caught up in a drug addiction. However, the U.S. justice system does not differentiate between the two.

The mission statement of the Federal Bureau of Prisons states " It is the mission of the Federal Bureau of Prisons (…) to assist offenders in becoming law-abiding citizens."

The regular prison system may be designed to turn regular criminals into law-abiding citizens, but these non-violent drug addicts are not receiving the type of rehabilitation that they need by receiving lengthy prison sentences.

Most studies conclude that 50 percent of prisoners released from prison eventually end up returning, this includes non-violent drug offenders.

However, there are numerous drug rehabilitation facilities across the country that have success rates of up to 80 percent.

By giving these non-violent drug offenders shorter, mandatory sentences in a rehab facility, the government would not only save hundreds of millions of dollars but it would be greatly reduce the number of reoccurring criminals.

For most of these non-violent criminals, the only crimes they have ever committed in their lives have been drug possession, and if they are successfully rehabilitated they would be no more likely to commit a crime than the average American.

Drug addiction is a terrible affliction that is becoming a problem for more and more Americans. There is no doubt that addiction drives many people to commit serious crimes, but the American judicial system needs to begin fixing the problem instead of simply locking it away.

http://www.scccampusnews.com/non-violent-drug-offenders-fill-prisons-1.709045

[Sudden Death Draft Loser]

The imprisonment of drug users is of no benefit at all to either the "offenders" or to society in general. Unless they are given a proper program of treatment to cure their addiction and counseling in order to address the issues that led to their addiction then the result is more likely to be a reinforcement of their problems. I am not sure about the US prison system, but in the UK drugs are at least as easy to obtain in prison as they are on "the outside". Prison is to some extent a "school of crime", as illustrated by something i experienced: i was waiting in the holding cells (exactly like you see on US dramas, big steel cage) to go before the magistrates (for being involved in the Manchester airport protest), the other occupants were "career criminals", one of them said to me "don't worry if you end up in Strangeways, we'll turn you into the best car thief in the country". Add to this the huge amount of money, time and resources used to facilitate the "war on drugs" and the current approach makes no sense at all.

[Veinticinco de Mayo]

are a great band.  Check em out

[jaffod]

The U.S. federal government spent over $15 billion dollars in 2010 on the War on Drugs, at a rate of about $500 per second.


State and local governments spent at least another 25 billion dollars.

Fucking hell, imagine the drugs you could buy with that.

[Rigga]

Fucking hell, imagine the drugs you could buy with that.

I am

I'm also thinking about the amount of 'Christians' in the US;  The fact that "little Sookie has to walk 15 miles to the well...; "x amount of people die of malaria every year, a mosquito net costs just £x;  the many benefits cannabis can bring, and what research into other drugs could reveal; famine in Somalia;  and, of course, man utd's crippling debts... 

[P45]

You have 35 000 mexicans killed, Heroin is funding the taliban in Afghansitan, the current policies make no sense at all. Hasnt Portugal recently decriminalised drugs?

[redpirate]

You have 35 000 mexicans killed, Heroin is funding the taliban in Afghansitan, the current policies make no sense at all. Hasnt Portugal recently decriminalised drugs?

Heroin is funding the Taliban? Where'd you get that from?

[ghost1359]

Heroin is funding the Taliban? Where'd you get that from?

Afghanistan is the largest exporter of heroin in the world is it not? The Taliban are not Al Queda it should be said.

[Corkboy]

On a slightly different slant, does anyone remember Obama saying (as he did on countless occasions) that he would "go through the federal budget line by line, eliminating those programs that don't work"?

Well, I've got one for him which fits the description and it's costing a bucket. On a quick estimate, the "War On Drugs" costs a basic $20 billion a year in federal funding, before you go into state funding, which is estimated to be about $25 billion a year. Then you have the cost of convictions as well as the cost of incarceration. I've read estimates of $450,000 per dealer, which translates to a number that must be wrong, it's so high ($200 billion, in case you were wondering). I am open to dispute on any of these figures, by the way, just google "war on drugs cost".

So, Mr Obama, if we take those levels of spending over the next four years, I can save you at least $100 billion off the federal budget, and countless more billions in savings on incarceration and the criminal process. I mean, we're all in agreement that the War On Drugs simply isn't working, right?

[Mumm-Ra]

It'll drive you mental if you think about it too much. It's all so obviously wrong, every educated person that writes about it, every think-tank that is compiled, lays out why this war is pointless and futile, and yet here in the States there's literally no mainstream discussion about changing anything. And there won't be for 10 years. And when there is, it'll be instantly drowned out by:

"Oh so you want your kids to be buying crack at the corner shop?"

 

[El Campeador]

Here's a shout out from Phoenix Arizona: Mexico is in danger of becoming a failed state because it, unlike this country, cannot afford a full on war on drugs.

[Rigga]

El C.  What would that mean?  Team USA gets another member, an actual 51st state?  Has that been the end game all along?  It would be satisfying to learn that there's at least been a point to all this. 

Is there any signs of sanity on the horizon for uk drug laws?

[pantbash]

Is there any signs of sanity on the horizon for uk drug laws?

A few.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/aug/04/liberal-democrats-decriminalising-drug-possession

Expect it to be shouted down by the Mail & their political cronies.

[Rigga]

Cheers Pantbash, that's promising news although, as you alluded to, Cameron and Daily Mail types will probably shout loudest as usual.

I won't support this unless the legal price of cannabis is better than the £10 per gram currently being offered by greedy dealers.  3.5g for £20 to 2g for £20 in about a year round here.  Too many middlemen or just plain greed?  All I know is I can't afford it now.  It's bollocks!  I'd grow my own but don't want to draw attention to the place what with having 2 young children.  A mate's suggested 'low-riders'.  Anyone know anything about them?  Or is this not the place?  I'd appreciate a PM if anyone's got a solution...

[Enemy]

Cheers Pantbash, that's promising news although, as you alluded to, Cameron and Daily Mail types will probably shout loudest as usual.

I won't support this unless the legal price of cannabis is better than the £10 per gram currently being offered by greedy dealers.  3.5g for £20 to 2g for £20 in about a year round here.  Too many middlemen or just plain greed?  All I know is I can't afford it now.  It's bollocks!  I'd grow my own but don't want to draw attention to the place what with having 2 young children.  A mate's suggested 'low-riders'.  Anyone know anything about them?  Or is this not the place?  I'd appreciate a PM if anyone's got a solution...

 

So it's all about money then? What an odd view to take.

[Rigga]

So it's all about money then? What an odd view to take.

That would be an odd view to take.  It was meant Tongue-in-cheek, sorry.

[sparkiemark73]

If the 'war on drugs' boils down to the authorities vs dealers, who's winning then?

[Rigga]

The authorities are a fixed, inflexible force.  The dealers are more of a Hydra: Cut one off and two more will grow, creating more problems for the authorities to talk about, and more full prisons.

[Slick_Beef]

A few.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/aug/04/liberal-democrats-decriminalising-drug-possession

Expect it to be shouted down by the Mail & their political cronies.

Cheers Pantbash, that's promising news although, as you alluded to, Cameron and Daily Mail types will probably shout loudest as usual.

I won't support this unless the legal price of cannabis is better than the £10 per gram currently being offered by greedy dealers.  3.5g for £20 to 2g for £20 in about a year round here.  Too many middlemen or just plain greed?  All I know is I can't afford it now.  It's bollocks!  I'd grow my own but don't want to draw attention to the place what with having 2 young children.  A mate's suggested 'low-riders'.  Anyone know anything about them?  Or is this not the place?  I'd appreciate a PM if anyone's got a solution...

Decriminalizing is not the same as legalizing. You can't go into a shop in Portugal and buy an eigth, nor could you in the UK under these proposals. It would remain illegal to buy drugs, as it is in Portugal. It just means that users are treated as people with issues rather than criminals, so the state can focus on rehabilitating them rather than taking them to court, whilst the police have more time to go after dealers.

[Rigga]

Thanks for that, Slick_Beef.  What about medicinal marijuana, any mention of that?

[givemekaliber]

An American Scouser is arrested for violating cannabis laws every 30 seconds.