Index
to Issues Raised by Readers of the Editorial "Legalizing Marijuana (and
Other Drugs) in the U.S."
(Click on an issue )
Should we legalize drugs but keep drug testing?
How can we legalize drugs and still discourage drug use/abuse?
The "medical marijuana" issue.
The "state's rights" drug-law jurisdiction issue .
Should we legalize drugs but keep drug testing?
Drug testing is intrusive and distasteful. That is why I did not support it in my OP/ED page. While I do not personally support drug testing, I will elaborate on the issue here.
A major obstacle to legalizing drugs in the USA is the desire of large corporations and other employers to ban drugs in the hope of keeping the American labor force clean, sober, safe and productive.
• Corporations and employers might be more receptive to the idea of legalized drugs if they could still test employees for the drugs that they wish to ban from the workplace.
• The government could have a list of "restricted" drugs that employers could choose to ban from the workplace.
• The choice of which of these formerly illegal drugs to ban from the workplace would be at the discretion of the employer.
• There would be no legal penalties for employees failing drug tests, but they could be sent to treatment or terminated at the discretion of the employer.
• Not all employers would choose to test employees for drugs, nor would they be required to do so.
How can we legalize drugs and still discourage drug use/abuse?
Any proposed legislation to legalize drugs in this country must take the "anti-drug" viewpoint into consideration.
Many of our nation's more conservative citizens and leaders hold the viewpoint that, "in the best interest of the nation", "drug use" as well as "drug abuse" should be actively "discouraged".
The current "drug enforcement" system has gone entirely too far in its mission to stamp out "drugs" and "drug users".
• Filling our jails and clogging our court systems with otherwise law abiding, productive, taxpaying, non-violent drug offenders is an inexcusably inhumane way to "discourage" drug use.
• Drug offender's lives (and often their families' lives) are ruined by "drug laws" not "drugs".
• The new "Drug Courts" are not necessarily much better than the criminal courts because the "drug offender" can still be charged with a "crime" and can be forced to submit to "treatment" even if they are not an "addict" and are instead merely guilty of "possession".
As outlined in my editorial, legalizing drugs and providing accurate information right on the package regarding their true risks is a more humane way to discourage undesirable behavior with regard to substances.
• Most people really do care about their mental and physical health and most people will not take undue risks with regard to their mental and physical health if they are provided with scientifically valid, accurate information about how substances can affect them.
• Giving the government 50% of the label space on legalized drug and/or paraphernalia packages would help to get the government's anti-drug abuse message to the targeted audience.
• Information on the label would include health risks, addiction treatment information as well as clearly stating the laws and rules regulating use. Additional information could be provided on package inserts.
• What I am suggesting here goes much further than the small, unreadable health warnings currently on alcoholic beverage labels.
While I fully advocate the controlled legalization of all currently illegal drugs, I do not feel that people should be encouraged or enticed in any way to use drugs if they are made legal.
• The drug-legalization scenario outlined in my editorial prohibits selling drugs and drug paraphernalia in stores, shops or bars and limits the venue of purchase to phone, mail or web order only.
• There would be no "headshops" or Amsterdam-style "coffeeshops" in the community to offend or to tempt anyone.
• Tight restrictions on advertising currently illegal drugs and paraphernalia would be most appropriate if they are legalized.
• Legalizing drugs does not have to mean that the government (or society) "approves" of people using drugs, anymore than government (or society) "approves" of people using alcohol or tobacco.
The "medical marijuana" issue.
I did not discuss the "medical marijuana" issue in my OP-ED page because I feel that it is a "health freedom" issue rather than a "drug legalization" issue.
• We should all fully support the freedom of adult citizens (and their physicians) to make their own informed choices about whatever substances may be of use to them in order to alleviate the symptoms of illness, cure illness, prevent illness, or extend lifespan.
The "state's rights" drug-law jurisdiction issue .
It would seem reasonable for states and local governments to be the ones to decide if legal drug use was right for their state or community.
Unfortunately, the drug-law issue has gone beyond the old State's Rights vs. Federal Government argument.
We now have to deal with pressure from the United Nations to "reduce demand" for drugs since The United States is a signatory to several international treaties (as well as some conventions and resolutions) requiring our Federal Government to enact anti-drug laws, policies and programs to control drug use here.
This is a link the official U.N. page briefly describing the main treaties.
http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/un_treaties_and_resolutions.html
For more information here is a link to the main "United Nations Office of Drugs and Crime" site:
Additionally, the "New United Nations" also deals directly with our citizens and businesses, instead of just our Federal Government as it did in the past.
• Quote from Secretary General Kofi Annan - "The United Nations once dealt only with Governments. By now we know that peace and prosperity cannot be achieved without partnerships involving Governments, international organizations, the business community and civil society. In today's world, we depend on each other."-quote from United Nations web site.
Here is a link to the United Nations home page:
The "everyone will use drugs if they are legal" argument:
Given accurate information about their risks, most people would not use or abuse drugs simply because of the "self-preservation" instinct.
In the Netherlands, where the enforcement of drug laws is very relaxed, there has not been a dramatic increase in drug use.
For more on this issue see the excellent policy paper: Policy Analysis 121:"Thinking About Drug Legalization" from the Cato Institute. You can find this policy paper on the web here:
http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa121.html
Can I link to your site or use the content on my own site?
Any like-minded individual can link to my site.
The text on my site can be used with the following qualifications:
As long as my words are not taken out of context, and as long as their source is acknowledged, the text on this site may be freely quoted, freely copied, freely reproduced, and freely distributed across all media, including print, e-mail, news, chat and web.
You also have my permission to put the ideas presented on this site into your own words and to call the result your own.
http://profiles.yahoo.com/zen4usa
< Home > < Should We Legalize Drugs but Keep Drug Testing? > < Links >