Drug war proponents often justify stricter policies by citing rates of drug use, but this strategy paints a very limited picture, particularly when no distinction is made between problematic and non-problematic drug use. Some people who use drugs face serious physical and social problems, but many more experiment with or use drugs recreationally without experiencing serious health consequences. The hypocrisy of the drug war is also evident in policies that arbitrarily ban some drugs but allow others, like caffeine and alcohol. We believe strongly that an individual’s decision to use or not use drugs is a matter of personal choice and does not determine whether he or she is strong or weak, responsible or irresponsible, moral or immoral. No one should be punished for what they put in their bodies, absent harm to others, and all are entitled to their individual privacy.
Drug war advocates evaluate policy success almost solely according to slight fluctuations in reported drug use. Because this standard does not distinguish problematic from non-problematic drug use, it gauges very little about actual changes in harmful behavior or social wellbeing. It also fails to account for the social costs of drug war policies, including high incarceration rates, violence generated by the criminal market, the preventable spread of HIV and other infectious disease, and the loss of individual privacy and freedom.
While DPA does not encourage or advocate drug use, we are guided by the strong conviction that the decision to use drugs is a personal choice, not the business of the government or criminal justice system. DPA advocates for a compassionate, judgment-free approach to drug use that respects individual privacy and allows people who do want help for problematic drug use to access treatment without being stigmatized or enmeshed in the criminal justice system.
Currently, 22 states have criminalized Salvia divinorum, either by placing it into a Schedule I category or by prohibiting its consumption; several more state legislatures are considering legislation related to Salvia. However, some states have rejected criminalization and instead established age-control restrictions and other regulations such as marketing, branding and retail display limitations. Emerging scientific evidence demonstrates that Salvia has significant potential for medical applications and an extremely low risk for abuse.
Scheduling K2 as a controlled substance will have unintended detrimental consequences. If K2 were banned outright, young adults could face immediate, devastating and life-long legal barriers to education, employment, voting and government benefits for K2-related drug law violations, despite a lack of evidence of harm to themselves or others. The use of scarce government funds to enforce, prosecute and incarcerate people who use K2 would put a strain on criminal justice resources.
Ethan Nadelmann
Ethan Nadelmann, Executive Director of the Drug Policy Alliance, talks about individual rights and how the war on drugs oversteps those bounds.
This is the fifth update from DPA's No More Drug War campaign.
Syracuse University Press. April 1996.
In this book author and psychiatrist Thomas Szasz argues that the government's attempt to control what drugs people can and cannot put into their own body, and under what circumstances, is futile, does more harm than good, and violates fundamental rights.
In this book author Jacob Sullum makes a powerful case that science and other evidence overwhelmingly shows that most people who use drugs, whether it's alcohol, marijuana, cocaine, or heroin, use it responsibly and never create a problem for themselves or others. The Washington Post calls it a "welcome departure from the choreographed outraged of the war on drugs."
The Center for Cognitive Liberty & Ethics (CCLE) is a network of scholars elaborating the law, policy and ethics of freedom of thought. Our mission is to develop social policies that will preserve and enhance freedom of thought into the 21st century
Legislators appreciate hearing from their constituents, and they are elected to represent our views. Always give your legislator your name, address, and telephone number so that they know you are one of their constituents. Be sure to include this information whether you visit in person, call, or write.
When you contact your legislators, a short sentence or two about why you personally support or oppose a certain proposal is fine.
Most importantly, always be courteous and clear when communicating with your legislators. Remember, legislators are people, too!
Erowid is a member-supported organization providing access to reliable, non-judgmental information about psychoactive plants and chemicals and related issues.
Print
Email
Share
