[dghughes]

>I’m glad we are moving away from the incredibly destructive drug policies that have been in place for so long

The point of the polices was to counter the incredibly destructive result of the surge of cocaine, crack, heroin use in the mid 1970s and early to mid 1980s. And the deaths from the drug use and the gangs fighting over the spoils. It really was a war. Mexico didn't seem to make it, I think the drugs won.

I know for some people these days it's cool to poo poo the so-called "war on drugs" but to Gen X who lived through the surge it was not a great time. Every day some news of deaths, fights, we were constantly reminded of it. Something had to be done and the free-for-all didn't seem to be working. I guess just like psychology you hear of examples where the stern family raises a wild child and the carefree family raises a straight-edge child the program backfired.

Drugs are chemicals just as is water and yes if a drug is useful then study it and use them for good if possible. But to others it seems many view all drugs as holy and that they can do no wrong is ridiculous.

[ihunter2839]

"The point of the polices was to counter the incredibly destructive result of the surge of cocaine, crack, heroin use in the mid 1970s and early to mid 1980s."

This would be plausible if the policies were focused on those drugs exclusively. However, I see the draconian policies targeted towards cannabis, hallucinogens, and amphetamines as pretty ample evidence that the "war on drugs" had much wider ambitions than curbing the usage of these hard narcotics.

Edit) To your point of folks speaking harshly of our current drug policies - look at where we are now, 50 years later. A nationwide opioid crisis created by pharma companies. A generation, if not two, of young men and fathers locked up in prison with little to no room for upwards mobility. Communities, already economically deprived, losing stability, obliteration of the nuclear family core, and enduring oppressive policing policies. So yes, I think its entirely fair for a new generation to shit on the war on drugs. Even if the policy was formed with good intentions (which is, frankly, debatable), it is still bad policy.

[throaway46546]

Ironically you are describing the consequences of the "war on drugs" which started in 1971. Many overdose deaths are directly related to the unknown quality of black market drugs. There would be no gangs "fighting over the spoils" if it were legal. You are conflating the consequences of prohibition with the consequences of drug use. That isn't to say all drugs are good, but as we learned in the 1920s prohibition is assuredly worse.

[Texaner]

Thanks for saying this. The parent comment just shows how deeply the propaganda has worked. There would be no gangs fighting and much lower levels of overdose and abuse if you could pick up your cheap, clean, legal cocaine/heroin/etc. at an official dispensary if you needed it. Portugal is showing the way.

[Klinky]

The "War on Drugs" did little to solve the social causes of drug addiction and dealing, and mainly focused on expensive law enforcement operations and penalizing impoverished people further. With the opioid epidemic, white-collar drug dealers were free to make huge profits getting people addicted, with little repercussions for decades. The "War" was targeted to a very specific demographic.