How to end the “drug war” and win

More lives have been lost, more careers ruined, more homes shattered and families destroyed, more property stolen, more freedom lost and more money spent and wasted by the phony “drug war” than by all the drug users and addicts in American history.

Each individual has a God-given, inalienable right to do with his or her body what he or she sees fit to do in pursuit of life, liberty and happiness. That being said, children have rightful claim upon their parents for support. Employers have rightful claim upon their employees for labors paid for. And benefactors have claim upon beneficiaries for the fulfillment of certain duties and obligations, among them being the responsibility not to squander the proceeds of that beneficence.

Drug users seldom act without hurting others – and ought to be held accountable -- but not for doing drugs. They should be punished for not taking care of their kids, for not doing their jobs they get paid to do, for not conserving the resources entrusted to them. They should be punished for real crimes – for hurting others – never for hurting themselves.

When we hurt ourselves, we've already paid the price.

Drug users generally are not a problem. People use drugs all the time. People have used drugs since the beginning of time. Drugs will always be with us. We cannot effectively outlaw and eradicate something that, in one form or another, exists naturally, whether as a weed, a mushroom, or a concoction that ferments all by itself in a toilet or old wine skin.

The mere fact that drugs can be bought, sold and used in prison demonstrates that drugs can never be eradicated from an imprisoned society, much less a free one.

Is this not the land of the free? Then how can we claim to be “drug free” except by personal choice?

Power must be returned to the people and to each accountable individual. The nanny state must be dismantled...for our own good and our own freedom.

Here's how:

Retain the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), but vastly curtail its powers.

Continue to grant the FDA the discretion (it now has) to define what are “FDA-approved” and “non-FDA-approved” drugs, products and services. These would be drugs, products and services deemed “safe and effective” when used as intended – in prescribed dosages and for specific purposes (like kidney dialysis, open-heart surgery, pain relief and the promotion of health and wellness)...in other words, the system we now have.

Let doctors continue to write prescriptions and legally regulate FDA-approved drugs, products and services.

But grant legal immunity from prosecution (except in the case of fraud and gross neglect) to those who do so. Set at liberty from prosecution every manufacturer, marketer, wholesaler or retailer – heck! – to the purveyors of any substance, product or service that can be shown to be “safe and effective” when used as intended, being granted FDA approval.

Competition will rise and costs will plummet. We will all be better off.

Are cars “safe and effective” when used as intended? Yes. Then they ought to be “approved” and be immune from prosecution. How about guns? Yes again. Knives? Screw drivers? Yes and yes. No arsenal, kitchen or tool kit ought to be without them!

Drugs? Yes! In certain quantities, formulations and for certain purposes, almost anything can be found to be “safe and effective” when used as intended and ought to be available for use by responsible adults (and minors), even if under supervision, by legal prescription.

Things that are “safe and effective” when used as intended ought not be outlawed (even if they are regulated).

How about those things not used as intended? Should they be outlawed? Whose fault is that?

The user should be held accountable. And, in some cases, the manufacturer, marketer, and retailer, as well.

A “safe and effective” car is driven into a farmers' market, killing many. Is the car at fault? Or the driver? Should "safe and effective" cars be outlawed? Or murderous drivers?

A gun is used to defend against a would-be robber or rapist, but an innocent bystander is also wounded. Should all firearms be outlawed for personal protection? Or should the shooter (or, better yet, the would-be rapist and murderer) be held accountable?

Gasoline is used to power a lawnmower, but one's neighbor's house is also accidently set ablaze. Should gasoline or lawnmowers be outlawed?

Must we outlaw everything that is potentially dangerous to us? How then would we be “free”? Free to do what exactly?

Recreational drugs may be used by habit or for pleasure, but drugs may also incapacitate one from doing his or her job effectively. Should those drugs – like alcohol and marijuana – be banned? (We tried that. It doesn't work!)

No, we shouldn't “ban” dangerous or deleterious things. Not in any case. Rather, we should hold people responsible.

Allow people to produce, buy and sell FDA-approved and non-FDA-approved things. Those who “stick” with FDA-approved things, by and large, are protected by law from any claim of liability. (Ford Motor Company, for example, ought not be sued if its product can be shown to be “safe and effective” when “used as intended”, even if someone uses that product to mow down a bunch of pedestrians! Killing innocent shoppers is not the obvious intent of manufacturing and selling a car! Same for guns, gasoline and drugs.)

Certain drugs (perhaps) have no obvious “safe and effective” use or dosage. Certain substances (like cyanide or nuclear weapons, perhaps) may be intrinsically unsafe and ineffective for any conceivable purpose (other than mayhem).

These substances or products can still be bought and sold...but their producers and users must be held strictly liable: the producers and users must bear the full burden of any repercussions from said use. (Fortunately, atom bombs are too difficult and too expensive to build for most criminals to get their hands on them!)

You make or use a non-FDA-approved product that eventually kills someone? You should be held accountable for manslaughter. You sell a non-FDA-approved drug in a form that causes someone to be become addicted or incapacitated? You should suffer the liabilities and consequences of that action.

Given the choice between FDA-approved and non-FDA-approved dealings, people, by and large, will choose FDA-approved deals. It's simply safer and less "risky".

But people will still have the choice. If they believe smoking crack cocaine is in their best interests, then so be it! If they want to make and use crack cocaine for themselves, why not? That's their choice!

But, in all cases, just like it is now, if they “choose” to hurt others, they should be held accountable.

What's stopping someone now from flooding a school auditorium with gasoline and killing thousands? Or driving through a park on the 4^th of July and squashing hundreds? Or poisoning a city water supply with “legal” drugs and harming millions?

Nothing.

Yet it seldom if ever happens. Why?

Only the good will of the people at large preserves our safety and security.

We can never be completely safe. Murder is outlawed but people still commit murder. Laws and confiscations and prohibitions alone can never save us.

Only we can.

We can't "guarantee" anyone's safety.

But we can completely lose our freedom.

The current “drug war” has robbed more people of more liberty than anything else I can imagine. We are not presently free in our persons and effects, but under the guise of "keeping us safe", we have transferred power to a tyrannical government, subjecting ourselves to surveillance, inspection, confiscation and incarceration. And for what? Because we want to get high? Because we have a back ache?

This is silly. Prosecute those who injure, abuse or neglect others. Not for doing drugs, but for injuring, abusing or neglecting others!

If we turn our lawyers loose to find and prosecute those who harm others, who engage in non-FDA-approved dealings, those dealings will naturally dry up, without police or checkpoints or drug-sniffing dogs or people stealing and killing just to "get by" and support their habits or their illegal enterprises.

The world will return to “normal”. To sanity. To personal accountability. There will still be addicts. There will still be drunk drivers. There will still be kids stealing cigarettes and joints and people getting high and even killing themselves or others. 

But when people are held accountable for the harm they do to others and not to themselves, the focus will change. It will return to where it should be: to the rightful exercise of power and control, even good government.

A free people are only free inasmuch as they are left alone to govern themselves.