politics and politicians
See other politics and politicians Articles
Title: Jeff Sessions' Terrible Truth About Drugs Is a Lie
Source:
Reason
URL Source: https://reason.com/archives/2017/03 ... ons-terrible-truth-about-drugs
Published: Mar 22, 2017
Author: Jacob Sullum
Post Date: 2017-03-23 06:22:19 by Deckard
Keywords: None
Views: 3054
Comments: 32
"Our nation needs to say clearly once again that using drugs will destroy your life," Attorney General Jeff Sessions declared last week. The main problem with that message: It isn't true. Yes, using drugs, both legal and illegal ones, can destroy your life, but typically it doesn't. By arguing that drug education should proceed from a false premise, Sessions reminds us what was wrong with the Just Say No propaganda he would like to revive. Sessions, a former senator who was the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of Alabama in the 1980s, looks back proudly at his efforts, alongside Nancy Reagan, to "create a hostility to drug use." For Sessions as for Reagan, tolerance is a dirty word. "We must create an atmosphere of intolerance for drug use in this country," the first lady wrote in a 1986 Washington Post op-ed piece. "Each of us has a responsibility to be intolerant of drug use anywhere, anytime, by anybody." Sessions likewise emphasizes the importance of "preventing people from ever taking drugs in the first place," even if "this may be an unfashionable belief in a time of growing tolerance of drug use." The "prevention" Sessions favors is not simply unfashionable; it is fundamentally dishonest. Among other things, Sessions said at a Senate hearing last April, prevention aims to teach teenagers that "good people don't smoke marijuana." According to the National Survey on Drug Use and Health, something like 118 million Americans have used marijuana, 36 million of them in the last year. Does Sessions honestly think all those people are bad, or that anyone would believe they are? "Educating people and telling them the terrible truth about drugs and addiction will result in better choices," Sessions says. But his terrible truth sounds a lot like a lie. Sessions claims marijuana is "only slightly less awful" than heroin, and in 2014 he strenuously objected after President Obama conceded that marijuana is less dangerous than alcohol. "I'm heartbroken," Sessions said. "It's stunning to me. I find it beyond comprehension." Judging from his response, Sessions literally did not comprehend Obama's point. Sessions tried to rebut Obama's statement about the relative hazards of marijuana and alcohol by declaring that "Lady Gaga says she's addicted to [marijuana] and it is not harmless." Let's put aside the merits of treating Lady Gaga as an expert on the effects of marijuana, or of extrapolating from this sample of one to the experiences of cannabis consumers generally. The most disturbing aspect of Sessions' argument was his failure to grasp that one substance can be less dangerous than another without being harmless. Saying marijuana is less hazardous than alcohol by several important measures—including impairment of driving ability, the risk of a fatal overdose, and the long-term damage caused by heavy use—is not the same as saying marijuana is 100 percent safe. Sessions not only has no patience for such nuance; he considers it a menace to the youth of America. Sessions is especially offended by the suggestion that marijuana legalization could reduce opioid-related harm by providing a safer alternative. "Give me a break," he said in a recent speech to the National Association of Attorneys General. "It's just almost a desperate attempt to defend the harmlessness of marijuana or even its benefits." Uncharacteristically, Sessions conceded that "maybe science will prove I'm wrong." If he bothered to research the subject, he would discover that several studies have found an association between medical marijuana laws and reductions in opioid prescriptions, opioid-related deaths, and fatally injured drivers testing positive for opioids. Sessions plainly is not interested in what the evidence shows. Although he says law enforcement officials have a duty to "speak truth as best we can," he seems to view truth as the enemy in the war on drugs. Nancy Reagan, who said drug use "isn't fun" and insisted "you cannot separate drug use that 'doesn't hurt anybody' from drug use that kills," would have been proud. The attorney general stages a revival of the "Just Say No" show.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 28.
#1. To: Deckard (#0)
Reason, the libertarian magazine is at it again where yet another of their so called “drug experts” says that “using drugs, both legal and illegal ones, doesn’t typically destroy your life,” and there is nothing to worry about here folks. While the analysis from the National Safety Council, a nonprofit and nongovernmental agency promoting safety in the workplace, declares that America’s prescription drug epidemic is a growing problem at work causing workers with substance use disorders to miss nearly 50% more days than their peers and up to six weeks of work annually. Furthermore, it is important to carefully consider that drug overdoses has eclipsed car crashes as the leading cause of preventable deaths among adults and also killed more people than guns and falling. But these facts are relegated to being unimportant by Reason since “using legal and illegal drugs typically doesn’t destroy your life.” And, good old Reason promotes that ”prohibition kills” and ”drugs are made more dangerous by banning them.”
Can't handle the truth, can you? Drug warriors such as yourself refuse to learn that lesson from alcohol prohibition in the 20's and early 30's.
And libertarian assholes like yourself are stupid to believe that legalizing all drugs does not pose an even greater problem where the risks are tremendously stupefying. You are completely benumb to the lack of faculties that continually cause you to be put in the constant stupor you live you live your daily life with. It is a problem well know to recovering drug addicts …
If I were a recovering drug addict as you so sinisterly imply, wouldn't I be in favor of killing all the druggies like you apparently are in favor of? BTW - for the record, I do not use any drugs. Like I told stone, after the trillions of dollars wasted, your drug war hasn't done a damn thing to stop drug use. World Leaders Aggressively Call To Legalize All Drugs And End The Failed Drug War Leaders around the world have surged, in speaking about legalizing drugs. The Global Commission on Drug Policy has released their annual report and stated that we must end both civil and criminal penalties for drug use and possession. The war on drugs has failed, they say, causing more disruption than ever intended. The number of drug users have increased by almost 20 per cent between 2006 and 2013, to 246 million people and, says the report, the prohibition of drugs has resulted in mass incarceration and executions in direct violation of international law. The report also warns that a blanket prohibition drives human rights abuses by those who supply the drugs.
You support world government pretend international laws. Just like the antichrist. Satan wants legalized soul crushing mind weakening drugs God wants his people of sober mind. So it would be accurate to say you are doing Satan's work. But that is what the reptilian libertines are all about. Do what though wilt. Right out of the "satanic bible".
Change the wording of the question to: “Should Christians Support the Use of Illegal Drugs?” Then see what replies you get from Christians …
Obviously you didn't bother to read the article - the headline was "scary" enough to cause you to flee in fear of what Vance might have to say. As a believer in moral absolutes, I consider the use of any drug for any reason other than because of a medical necessity to be dangerous, destructive, and immoral, but I also consider the government’s war on drugs to be dangerous, destructive, and immoral. As an adherent to the ethical principles of the New Testament, I regard drug abuse to be a vice, a sin, and an evil that Christians should avoid even as they avoid supporting the government’s war on drugs. As a Christian, I oppose root and branch every facet of the government’s war on drugs just as much as I oppose the use of drugs themselves. Yes, I know I am being redundant. But that’s because some Christians still just don’t get it. So let me make myself perfectly clear: drugs are bad. Smoking crack is evil. Getting high on marijuana cigarettes or brownies is a vice. Snorting cocaine is destructive. Shooting up with heroin is sinful. Swallowing ecstasy is immoral. Injecting yourself with crystal meth is dangerous. But none of these things means that there should be a law against doing any of them. And it is a myth that those who favor marijuana legalization or drug decriminalization just want to get high without being hassled by the police. Pat Robertson certainly doesn’t. And I certainly don’t either. There are many reasons why Christians should not support the war on drugs. Constitutionally, the federal government has no authority whatsoever to regulate drugs, let alone criminalize their manufacture, sale, and use. Just like the government has no authority to control what Americans choose to eat, drink, smoke, inject, absorb, snort, sniff, inhale, swallow, or otherwise ingest into their bodies. Philosophically, it is not the purpose of government to be a nanny state that monitors the behavior of its citizens. It is simply not the purpose of government to protect people from bad habits or harmful substances or punish people for risky behavior or vice. Drug prohibition is impossible to reconcile with a limited government. Pragmatically, the war on drugs should be ended because it is a complete and total failure. As I have pointed out many times, the war on drugs has failed to prevent drug abuse, reduce drug trafficking, or reduce the demand for drugs. It has ruined more lives than drugs themselves. Practically, the war on drugs should be ended because all it does is clog the judicial system, unnecessarily swell prison populations, foster violence, corrupt law enforcement, hinder legitimate pain treatment, and unreasonably inconvenience retail shopping. Medically, the war on drugs is misguided. In a study by the Independent Scientific Committee on Drugs published in the prestigious medical journal The Lancet, it was alcohol that ranked as the "most harmful drug," beating out heroin, crack cocaine, and ecstasy. And then there is the fact that tens of thousands of people die every year from prescription drugs and reactions to over-the-counter drugs like aspirin. Financially, the costs of drug prohibition far outweigh the benefits. According to a 2010 study by the Cato Institute, spending on the drug war tops $41 billion a year. What have we gotten for this except the militarization of the police, the erosion of civil liberties, and the destruction of financial privacy? Theologically, and most importantly, there is no warrant in the New Testament for Christians to support a war on drugs by the government. And it is the theological reason that I wish to focus on.
In a study by the Independent Scientific Committee on Drugs published in the prestigious medical journal The Lancet, it was alcohol that ranked as the "most harmful drug," beating out heroin, crack cocaine, and ecstasy. And then there is the fact that tens of thousands of people die every year from prescription drugs and reactions to over-the-counter drugs like aspirin. Prohibition increases profits, and promotes sales & usage. They started with illegal booze.
There are no replies to Comment # 28. End Trace Mode for Comment # 28.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest "Our nation needs to say clearly once again that using drugs will destroy your life," Attorney General Jeff Sessions declared last week. The main problem with that message: It isn't true. Yes, using drugs, both legal and illegal ones, can destroy your life, but typically it doesn't.
#2. To: Gatlin (#1)
(Edited)
And, good old Reason promotes that ”prohibition kills” and ”drugs are made more dangerous by banning them.”
#5. To: Deckard (#2)
Drug warriors such as yourself refuse to learn that lesson from alcohol prohibition in the 20's and early 30's.
#15. To: Gatlin (#5)
(Edited)
It is a problem well know to recovering drug addicts …
#18. To: Deckard (#15)
direct violation of international law.
#24. To: A K A Stone (#18)
So it would be accurate to say you are doing Satan's work.
#26. To: Deckard, A K A Stone (#24)
Should Christians Support the War on Drugs?
That is a complex question fallacy [a loaded question] that contains a controversial and unjustified assumption….so typical of the crap coming from lewrockwell.com, a discredited source you continually post from..
#27. To: Gatlin (#26)
That is a complex question fallacy [a loaded question] that contains a controversial and unjustified assumption
#28. To: Deckard, booze the gateway drug, tater drunk (#27)
Replies to Comment # 28.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]