Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Substance abuse reality argues against decriminalizing drugs', Sheriff Cannon Posted & Currying

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    http://www.charleston.net/news/2009/...gainst_d74415/

    By J. Al Cannon, Jr. Tuesday, March 10, 2009
    Steve Chapman's Feb. 21 op-ed in The Post and Courier addresses the "reality" of the long and losing Drug War. I would place his drivel in the "two-cents worth" category. Apparently it was prompted by some Latin American commission's startling conclusion that the "Drug War" has been lost. I hope the commission was well paid for this bit of earth-shaking news. Chapman then moves right into the worn-out arguments against such a war and for the de-criminalization and treatment model. And this is his "reality." It's not mine.

    Notwithstanding the fact that many law enforcement officials have used the phrase "War on Drugs," and thus given their approval to such use, we are not, nor have we ever been engaged in a "war." That is an inaccurate and worn-out analogy. If we must use a military analogy, it would be more accurate to describe law enforcement's efforts in terms of a "holding action," with success waxing and waning. The fact is, success in addressing the many faces of substance abuse, including the abuse of "legal" drugs, is determined by the extent to which our society deems substance abuse acceptable, or unacceptable. As long as it is not sufficiently condemned, it will not be diminished.

    Many myopically look at all the effort and liken its lack of success to that which resulted from the efforts to rid our society of alcohol in the 1920's through Prohibition. Let's look at that effort and the results obtained. I believe that very experience serves to prove my fundamental theory that until society sufficiently condemns the practice, efforts will be limited in impacting the problem. This was not the case with respect to alcohol in the 1920's. Nor does our society condemn alcohol use today.
    To suggest that the repeal of Prohibition solved the problems that Prohibition created, i.e. Al Capon, and company, is disingenuous. While that may be true to an extent, the legalization of alcohol has amplified other problems. Alcohol remains one the most abused drugs in our society, and the age of those with alcohol-related problems gets younger. Alcohol is implicated in a majority of domestic violence and traffic fatalities. The cost to our society of alcohol-related issues are tremendous. One alcohol related note: Where society has condemned alcohol and driving, the result of efforts of organizations like Mothers Against Drunk Drivers (MADD) and strict laws and enforcement has resulted in a decrease of drunk driving.

    In Chapman's "reality," I guess that when we legalize drugs, drug dealers will just shrug their shoulders and say, "Well, it was good while it lasted. Now we'll have to get an honest job." If we weren't talking about something so important, that would be hilarious. The fact is, drug dealers will look around and figure how to beat the system, the way they do now with prescription drugs. Oxycontin is a highly abused drug, and the abuse of prescription (legal) drugs is one of America's dirty little secrets.

    That abuse gives a great deal of insight as to what legalization of hard drugs would do. The drug dealers would sell more potent versions of drugs that would be legal, they would create new drugs, or they would concentrate on younger customers. In short, they would do whatever it takes to keep their business going. This is an aspect of legalization that is rarely addressed by "experts" like Chapman.

    The end of Prohibition did not end organized crime. The legalization of drugs will not end the gangs associated with the drug trade, either as sellers or as customers. Another problem with the "reality" that proponents of the legalization and treatment model have is the concentration on the drug abuser as a "patient" and "victim." The fact remains that almost every abuser initially made the decision to use substances that led to their addiction. That is the same person who must first accept that they have a problem before there is any chance of that person overcoming their abuse.
    I readily accept that treatment is needed, but that does not cure the general problem of substance abuse. And the police can not win this "war" alone. The police are a convenient target for all the failings of our society. The fact is police are not the panacea. There are some things we do very well, and there are some things we don't do very well. However, saying that the police are losing the "War on Drugs" should not be the same as saying that the police should stop fighting the war and that we should legalize drugs. That's my two cents worth.

    J. Al Cannon, Jr. is sheriff of Charleston County.


  2. #2
    Regular Member hp-hobo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Manchester State Forest, SC
    Posts
    399

    Post imported post

    Can someone explain to me why the above post is taking up space on an open carry forum? Where is the gun content?

    Carry on.
    "The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun, is a good guy with a gun."

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    The owner and moderator know full well that I welcome their attentive deletions. This opinion that I posted is by the Sheriff that is my acquaintance and that may administer your permit.

    Over and out.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Alabama, ,
    Posts
    1,338

    Post imported post

    Has anyone ever heard of an army that CC's?

    I wish it was a war on drugs, then the leo's would be guilty of war crimes for
    targeting unarmed civilians.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Greer, South Carolina, USA
    Posts
    8

    Post imported post

    Sorry I'm simple minded, but what does all that mean and how does it pertain to us?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •