As long as there is a demand for any product, there will be a supply. Drug Producing Countries are reacting to a market that will be supplied for as long as there is a demand. If Columbia suddenly got out of the Cocaine business, then other competitors would step in and fill the gap in production for as long as the market exists.
To curtail drug use, you must face two facts:
1. No matter what you do, there will always be drug users. History has proven this fact.
2. Drug users will always obtain drugs, one way or another. You can control it, or somebody else will.
If you are willing to accept these facts, then you should understand why attacking drugs from the supply side, simply does not work. As long as you have drug prohibition, you will have a Blackmarket. So forget trying to win a Drug War by attacking the supply, because as fast as you take down suppliers, new ones will pop up. Why? Financial Gain.
If you are open minded enough to realize that consumption of drugs will always Demand a Supply, then then you know you have a choice as a government. You can control the supply, (which eliminates the Blackmarket completely), or prohibit drugs, and inadvertantly contribute to the growth of the Blackmarket.
The heart of the problem is drug use, or should I say drug abuse. As with Alcohol Abuse, Drug Abuse causes loss of productivity in industry, as well as family problems. Lets be honest, drug use or alcohol use, when used moderatly, is not the problem. These are social issues that government should not be involved in. When others are affected by an out of control addict, and I mean alcoholic, also, then treatment should be offered, Not Jail, unless other laws are broken.
So, whether you are willing to face the facts or not, if you really want to end the drug war, these things need to be considered. Focus on Education and Treatment, and Eliminate the Blackmarket that creates corruption, violence, and everything that goes along with it, by Controlling the Supply and gettting it away from organized crime,that's our choice.
Either it's controlled legally or it's controlled illegally, just as the prohibition of alcohol proved 80 years ago. When our government realizes that the rules of Supply and Demand aren't going to change to fit government policy, we can focus on the problem that really exists. Addiction.
Our government recognized the importance of reducing fuel consumption years ago. They had the automakers design cleaner running more efficient engines. These engines get better gas mileage, resulting in cutting back on the demand for fuel. Would it have made sense to have cut back on oil production, the supply side, to conserve fuel? I don't think so. If we went that route, we would still have the same demand for fuel as before, but we would only have succeeded in driving up fuel prices. The only winner in this situation are the suppliers, oil companies. Bottom line in this case is, our government policy was right by attacking the demand side, not the supply side in dealing with oil.
If our government attacked the demand side of drug use, by putting a priority on education & treatment, we would see much more success in reducing drug use. But by focusing most of their efforts on the supply side of drug use, we only guerantee higher prices, without affecting demand at all. The only answer to reducing drug use is to prioritize education & treatment, which will reduce the demand for drugs. As with oil, there will always be a demand for drugs, but it can be minimized this way. Rusty
If crack was legal, would you rush right out and buy it? I don't think so.
Sky-diving, racing,and extreme sports will give a rush that can't be equaled.
