The War on Drugs and the Costs of Surrender

So how are we doing on the war on drugs?  Nationally, fentanyl is estimated to kill 70,000/year.  In Colorado, overdose deaths from meth have increased from 349 in 2019 to 749 to 2022. In 2021, fentanyl and methamphetamine overdoses were the highest per capita in history.

Driving while under the influence of drugs recently eclipsed driving while under the influence of alcohol with many testing positive for both.

Recent studies have suggested that marijuana usage has adverse effects on the brains of younger people up to their mid-20s which results in a dismal set of life outcomes including poor school performance, higher dropout rates, increased welfare dependence, and greater unemployment.

Our relaxation of drug laws has made us more stupid as another study showed that persistent marijuana use was linked to a decline in IQ. The most persistent users experienced a drop in neuropsychological functioning equivalent to about six IQ points That's in the same realm as what you'd see with lead exposure.

Four libraries in the Denver metro area were recently closed as a result of the discovery of methamphetamine residue in bathrooms and heating vents. In the Boulder Public Library, remediation costs have reached $173,000 in cleanup efforts; so far, money that could have been spent on well…. books, for example. Clean up areas included exhaust fans in the childrens’ theater, the story time area as well as family bathrooms. Measurements at the baby changing tables were 15 times higher than what’s considered to be acceptable levels.

Drug abuse is rampant throughout an increasing homeless community affecting those who are drugs abusers as well as those who self-medicate for mental disease.  As a result, others no longer feel safe in certain areas of the city or on mass transit.

And the drugs are getting worse. Xylazine (street name “tranq” for all of you who want to be up to speed on the various drug lingo) has been finding its way into street drugs. It is a cheaper ingredient mixed in with fentanyl, heroin, and meth.  It can produce a more prolonged high, of course accompanied by a harder withdrawal if the high is not maintained.  Also, Narcan the new “miracle cure” for drug overdoses is not effective against overdoses caused by tranq.  Tranq also causes wounds around injection sites killing the flesh which may ultimately result in amputation.  It’s nasty and growing.

Communities and families have been ripped apart by drug use, resulting in death, domestic abuse and depletion of financial resources to fund drug habits and multiple rehab efforts.

Have we had enough?

The current governmental response to this crisis can best be best described as policies designed to absolve drug users from any personal responsibility. As a result it enables drug use for current and new drug abusers.  In surrendering, governments now profit from drug use by taxing sales from marijuana dispensaries.

We have spent millions on the usual education and counseling programs although I wonder if the drug programs in our schools’ “health" classes just educate our youth on the availability and recommended dosages for new mind-altering drugs.

We are distributing fentanyl and tranq test strips in order to facilitate drug usage to allow those who have access or can afford the strips to have fewer overdoses and deaths.

Of course, we are spending money on the aforementioned Narcan issued in greater quantities to police, firefighters and librarians who seek to bring drug users back from the dead in order to live out their lives in mindless oblivion.

Further enabling drug use, we have begun to sanction “safe injection sites”.  In Colorado, sites are currently banned by State law, but a bill in the current legislature would allow cities to make the decision to open drug sites as a “local option”, meaning that if passed, Denver (which has already approved the concept) will soon have injection sites coming our way.  In New York, in the 15 months since sites have opened there, more than 2300 people have used their services with 701 overdoses which doesn’t seem too safe to me, but hey, what do I know.

To further smooth the way for continued drug use, federal and state governments prohibit requiring abstinence or drug treatment in order for individuals to qualify for free government housing.

One “expert” commenting on the meth contamination in our libraries and other public places and the costs of cleanup suggested that we just not test for meth because the concentration levels “probably” won’t lead to long term harm.  I call this the “close our eyes and hope it goes away strategy.”

Have we had enough?

Look, I am all for people having a good time.  However, at some point, we may have to determine what it is about life that would lead people to “turn on, tune in and drop out” of society to live a drug hazed existence choosing to delete themselves as productive members of society to be a burden to the rest of us. As Desmond Tutu has said, “There comes a point where we need to stop just pulling people out of the river.  We need to go upstream and find out why they’re falling in.”  However, that important issue is for another day.  For the current crisis, we need to figure out how to stop or at least slow the decline of our society that is being caused by the proliferation of deadly drugs.

While not particularly comforting, this ambivalence toward drug use and its place is our society has persisted for a long time. Morphine was first isolated from opium in the early 1800s and was used to treat wounded Civil War soldiers. However, this led to widespread morphine addiction among veterans of that war. Products such as heroin were sold over-the-counter in the form of a cough syrup.  Laudanum, an opioid, was a common part of the home medicine cabinet.

It took until 1914 with the passage of the Harrison Narcotics Act for the federal government to prohibit the use and sale of opium and cocaine. Heroin followed suit in 2024.

In 1970 following the rise of psychedelics and drug use in the 1960s, and the return from Vietnam of soldiers addicted to heroin, Congress passed the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act which created our current drug schedules.

Then in the early 1980s, there was a significant increase in the use of crack cocaine. Crack was popularized because of its affordability, its immediate euphoric effect, and its high profitability. The crack epidemic had particularly devastating effects within the African American communities of the inner cities causing an increase of addictions, deaths, and drug-related crimes. Ronald Reagan signed the Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984, which among other things expanded penalties towards possession of marijuana and instituted a federal system of mandatory minimum sentences.

However, in the 1990s, the discussion turned to issues of race and equity as opponents of the drug laws abandoned the issue of what was an appropriate response to minimize harmful drug usage. The debate focused on equity claiming that blacks who were violating drug laws were more likely to be incarcerated than their percentage representation in the population. This led to the decriminalizing of drug laws and the acceptance and normalization of drug usage in our society resulting in an explosion of drug use and its adverse effects on society.

Have we had enough?

We can all understand that once someone is addicted that there are difficult although not impossible paths to get clean, but for non addicts, there is always some point when they take that first step to sample drugs or that second step to reuse.

Many view drugs in a favorable light.  The cool people do it. Being stupid and silly is amusing rather than pathetic.  We believe that drugs can expand our consciousness and cure us of disease without consequence.  Our children smoke marijuana and do drugs because their parents, friends and those they look up to do it.  Only when they go too far, when it’s too late, do we experience any anguish or regret.

We should view drug use as bad and unacceptable, that only despised people do it, like those who spit tobacco into spittoons, smoke cigarettes, or are racist. Until society rejects its ambivalence toward drug use, the adverse effects of death, overdoses, crime, and homelessness will be something that we will have to live with.

Have we had enough?

What society can’t do is believe that it can have its drugs and acceptably manage its adverse effects.  We have too much experience to reasonably believe that any longer. It is unreasonable to presume that we can attack drug distribution while maintaining that drug use itself is acceptable. If we gain a consensus that drug use is bad and should be minimized, we can move forward to reduce its use.  This will require criminalization of not only drug sales but drug possession and usage, as well. 

We have tried an exclusive use of the carrot, and now, I would suggest that we will have to adapt a reasonable use of the stick. If there are no consequences to the drug user for drug use, we will only get increased drug use and increased adverse consequences for drug users, their families and society.

It will be unhappy for some Americans who want to live their lives in mindless oblivion regardless of the consequences to themselves and others.  On the other hand, parents will no longer have to mourn at their children’s funerals for lives cut too short. Other beneficiaries will be citizens relieved from crimes from those who would steal to fund their drug habits, and fewer innocent drivers will be injured by those under the influence.

We are not the only country which has had to make this choice.  In Asia, many countries have strict anti-drug laws with some offenses culminating in execution. As Brittany Greiner learned with her attempted smuggling of hashish oil into Russia, other countries have a different view of what drug use is unacceptable and have adopted strict policies in order to limit it.  Currently in China, if caught possessing or using drugs, they are seized and put somewhere for 30 days.  It is an administrative punishment and as a result not susceptible to a trial. They just disappear. Of course, for more serious offenses, the penalty is death.

It appears that the application of criminal penalties for drug users is on a continuum.  The harsher the penalties the less usage occurs with the resultant fewer collateral adverse effects.  The more lax the penalties, the greater the drug use and resultant harm. Personal responsibility and incarceration may not deter all drug use, but it is going to deter some, maybe a lot.

Do I think we can ever “win” the war on drugs?    No, not any more than we can eradicate original sin. But we shouldn’t give up just because we have an unrealistic view of how we define success in holding down drug use.  While we may never be 100% successful, at least we can try to hold the line on the war on drugs and cut down on the casualties. We have seen the results of not trying.

Have we had enough?