Marijuana.com

Pompo

War on Drugs a failure
5/30/08|The Willits News| by Dr. Monte Lieberfarb, M.D. - Opinion

For those readers of The Willits News who may have seen the "Yes on Measure B" paid advertisement in last Friday's paper in which 79 inland Mendocino County's fine physicians endorsed the measure, I would like to explain why my name was not among them (in case anyone noticed).
My reason is simple: I oppose the War on Drugs, which came into existence in 1970 under Nixon, and it is really the War on Drugs that is the problem. The fact Measure G invited abuse is self-evident at this time, no doubt. But that abuse exists only within the context of a legal system in which recreational and therapeutic drugs have been categorized by their potential to help or harm, often arbitrarily and certainly by other people's estimation.

The net result of this puritanical approach to human behavior that people want to feel better than they do has been the criminalization of millions of otherwise decent fellow citizens, the ruination of their families, and the loss to society of immeasurable potential. Not because of the drugs themselves, or their immediate or long-term health consequences, but because of the results of involvement in the criminal justice/penal system created to capture, prosecute and penalize those whose only real crime was using a substance someone else didn't approve of.

It is easy to argue that more harm than good has occurred over the past 38 years to individuals and society because of the drug war. Billions of taxpayer dollars have been spent. Lives have been lost and careers wasted. Whatever may have been the motivation at the time, the War on Drugs has failed utterly to solve that which it intended: To create a drug-free America.
Instead it has helped create a world of secondary crime, often violent, where little if any existed before. It has helped create an incarceration industry and spawn a police state to deal with offenders. It brought about drug cartels, and governments at times in collusion and at others times in battle with them. It commonly corrupted those involved, the pursuers and the pursued. And there are far more illegal drugs to be used now than 1970, and more people using them.

I hope you will not misunderstand my point. I am not pro-drug use of any sort. Ideally, no one would use or have a need to use any drug of any kind, including alcohol and tobacco. Unfortunately, this is not the case. Sooner or later, we all take something for some perceived ailment or pleasure, self-diagnosed or medically-diagnosed; acute, chronic or potentially fatal. That "something" may be legal or illegal, prescription or over-the-counter, pharmaceutical or herb, used to treat disease, relieve symptoms, alleviate pain, or lessen mental duress.

Some people use drugs to get high, some to relieve suffering. Everyone ultimately is trying to feel better than they may be otherwise.

Trying to feel better is not immoral, nor should it be illegal. Doing so and hurting others in the process is a different story altogether. Kids doing drugs is also another story, as their nervous systems are still in development and should be drug-free in order to develop normally. That goes for pregnant women as well.

If the issue with Measure B is actually commercial pot growing, we need to ask the fundamental question: "Why would anyone want to produce anything commercially?" The answer is very simple: Because there is a profit to be made. However it is the illegality of something that creates a black market for that item and hence an unnatural and inflated profit that would not otherwise exist.

We have learned to accept alcohol and tobacco, with certain use limitations, despite knowing their downside risks, thus avoiding the added calamities of illegality. Placing consumption taxes on them helps add to the public coffers.

When an item must be procured outside of legal markets, these funds are lost to society. Its price will have little to do with its intrinsic value, its production cost, or even its availability. The law of supply and demand will still prevail, but in a perverted way. In particular, as long as marijuana is illegal anywhere, its price and profitability will flourish, and there will be those who will want to join in.

Let's allow our criminal justice/penal system to put its resources to work instead on those who truly hurt others and society by their lying, cheating, stealing, maiming and killing. Those are the things we must have protection from. Let's reallocate those funds and energies away from criminality, punishment and incarceration of drug offenders, and towards education and therapy instead.

Save the jails for those who really do harm.

The War on Drugs itself is a bust, as was Prohibition, and it must end if we are to move on as a society. In the meantime, I'll abstain from Measure B, as I abstained on its predecessor, Measure G, and keep advocating for real change.

Dr. Monte Lieberfarb, M.D.

Willits

 

SirSmokaALot

Yes! The best argument ever!.... i <3 this person. But sadly i know there are plenty of people who will over look that important last sentence.

Rumblerod

In Denver the speacial council to the Mayor has recommended that the DA doesn't prosecute pot cases where there is less than an ounce involved and no other crime has occurred although I cannot imagine why anyone would consider smoking pot a crime. My question is what happened in Nevada? I know they had something going as well as Denver.....

Buzzby

Since I don't live in Mendocino County or even California, I had no idea what they were talking about in the article concerning "Measure G". I looked it up.

Up to 25 plants for medical or recreational personal use? How come I never heard of this before? If I had, I'd probably be living there!

Measure B not only repeals Measure G, it opens the way to outlaw medical marijuana completely. The second to last paragraph of Measure B reads:Since federal legislation doesn't allow for medical marijuana at all, that would set the amount at zero.

__________________

reggie_the_dog

for all adults by county law. The problem is that state law does not allow the 25 plants.

 

SpiralArchitect

Still, that is pretty interesting. I haven't seen a county law that says you can have up to 25 plants for recreational and medicinal use. Good find Buzzby.

edit// Oh yes, the article. Another good one, I wonder if people in the DEA or the government even read this stuff... Maybe it might help pry open their eyes...

My favorite line

Amen. I am not hurting ANYONE by using marijuana safely in my home.

__________________
.

Buzzby

Unless you're stopped on the freeway, it's very unlikely that you'd have to deal state cops. The municipal cops and the country sheriffs would go by county law and not make an arrest. That's how it's been working to date.

reggie_the_dog

I was just looking out for all of the folks bringing their extras down to my buddies in the bay area.....

blondie0420

...well obviously.

__________________

SpiralArchitect

I can't wait to read about the War on Drugs failure in American history textbooks, 30, 40 years down the road... It really is history repeating itself. Our kids will ask us what it was like living then (now)...