THE WAR AGAINST ANTI-DRUG ADS

Unless you live without a television, chances are you have seen the latest
advertisements run by the Partnership for a Drug-Free America that purport
to "tell the truth" about drug use. The most recent of these ads have
blatantly linked the use of marijuana to the act of rape, unprotected
sexual activity leading to pregnancy, manslaughter, and terrorism (both
domestic and international).

Because I grew up with the "Just Say No" philosophy of the U.S. Government
(and was part of the first fifth grade class to receive D.A.R.E.
education), I guess I shouldn't have been surprised that Washington would
capitalize on ridiculous shock tactics to convince the public that we are
winning our $20 billion a year "War on Drugs." However, unlike "Just Say
No" and D.A.R.E., which simply labeled illegal drugs "bad" and told kids
not to take them because only losers used them, the current wave of tactics
employed by our government use guilt, misinformation, and stereotypes to
convince people that drug use will utterly destroy your life and the lives
of those around you.

I am not writing this column to advocate drug legalization or to suggest
that all illegal drugs pose no threats to the livelihood of the people who
choose to use them. But what I do want to point out is that the money our
government spends on these ads (around $200 million) is essentially wasted
on any person who can think or ask questions.

Is marijuana a gateway drug? Well, chances are if you ask heroin users if
they used marijuana before they started shooting up, the answer will be
"yes." But did any of them experiment with alcohol before they tried their
first joint?

How many date rapes have been caused by over-zealous, drunken partygoers?
How many unwanted pregnancies? If a kid blows his friend's head off with
his parent's handgun after taking bong hits, is that the marijuana's fault?

Or the fault of his parent's for keeping a loaded handgun in an unlocked
desk drawer? I would like to see the evidence that buying grass funds Osama
bin Ladin (rather than some guy in Vancouver or southern Missouri). I would
also like to see someone explain how filling up my car with gas doesn't
help put money in the hands of shady OPEC-associated terrorist organizations.

The only truth here is that our government has arbitrarily decided that
certain drugs are legal and others illegal, irrespective of their proven
addictiveness, effects on health, or on society.

How many people reading this column needed a cup of coffee this morning?

Or rushed out of class to grab a quick smoke?

Or had a few drinks to relax after a long day of work? How many people used
drugs in the 1960s and 70s, and yet despite "flirting with disaster"
managed to raise normal, healthy families and be successful?

The fact is humans have always loved to alter their consciousnesses, no
matter the harmful effects.

Banning substances will never decrease the demand for the ability to
temporarily break with normal existence.

Whether we like to think of them this way or not, our lives are filled with
any number of substances which alter the way we approach the world.

Using the argument that marijuana or any other drug impairs judgment, poses
a health risk, or can lead to further illegal acts to justify its
illegality is completely fallacious. Alcohol radically impairs your
judgment, has destroyed countless families and lives, and is highly toxic
to the human body. But no one would dare consider re-instituting prohibition.

Again, I am not advocating drug use (legal or otherwise)--particularly
among young kids. I have known too many people whose use of legal and
illegal drugs destroyed their lives and the lives of others.

In fact, I would have no objections to advertisements that were based on
undisputed scientific research or well-founded statistics, rather than on
scare tactics and ridiculous scenarios that, in most of these ads, typify
human stupidity or poor choices rather than drug-use. But these
advertisements are both an insult to those who can think and another sign
that Washington is more interested in maintaining the status quo of the
bloated and misguided "War on Drugs" than on creating rational, effective
drug policies.