Winning the war on drugs by playing dirty

Post Reply New Topic

N.B Im for legalisation and regulation because I dont give a toss what anyone wants to do with their body quite frankly.
I AM NOT ADVOCATING TOTALITARIANISM

I believe that it is in fact possible to win the war against drugs despite skepticism from critics. In 50 years its likely that we'll have alot less freedom than we do now. Something like government mandated blood tests for narcotics will probably be acceptable in half a century. It would be an administrative nightmare but a specially appointed division could divide a country into zones which are subjected to random drug tests. Around 30% of the population in these zones would be processed (technology will have made this possible I assume) within a week or less. Each zone could have its own division theoretically which could continually administer tests for the panoply of substances. Any new substances would be caught and added to the list pretty quickly.

Being caught would result in some kind of sanction which would be visible to employers and doctors. That individual would then be monitored and imprisoned if drug use continued.

I can see this happening in the future. Even more interestingly there are vaccines for cocaine which were patented a while back. These actually make you immune to the effects of the drug. This will probably be used for criminal drug users.

The point im making is that the war on drugs is only being hampered by political "courtesy" and scientific limitations. You could reduce demand for drugs by a significant amount with the above policies. The committed users would be apprehended imprisoned and monitored aggressively on release.

Last edited by Ectryon on 27 Aug 2014, 8:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.

/\ Aside from creating more of a police state, what's the actual value in that plan?

1) If an individual believes that there's a high chance that they may be caught with narcotics in their bloodstream they're less likely to use. Even the prospect of someone they know being caught could be leveraged since I would expect such a police state to focus on immediate contacts of apprehended individuals.

2)People who persistently use drugs would be removed from society eventually and thus their drug supply. That's a terrifying thought for any addict

3) The decline in demand this would cause would be followed by increased drug prices due to increased risk (obviously possession and supply would be even more violently prosecuted) this would make demand decrease even further

4)The loss in profit would seriously harm drug suppliers

It could make addiction and drug use far far rarer within a decade I would expect. Or it could be an unmitigated disaster with blood samples being mixed up and innocent people being brought in haha

That doesnt answer the question of the actual value in it. How would the end justify the means? Not that the desired end could ever be fully achieved.

I personally dont see value in this method im just using it as an example to illustrate that the war on drugs could be won if a totalitarian state were rolled out. Whether its justified or not is not really relevant. I personally believe it to be unjustified but that's not the point

A totalitarian state would rather have people f****d up on some kind of substance abuse so they don't realise how miserable they are.
That's why vodka was so readily available in the USSR.

I doubt it, peoples' quality of life would no doubt be much the same. Crime would be vastly reduced too. Society would be highly stratified and regimented however so I would imagine that there would probably be an expansion of the extreme poor. Without government oversight there would be greater inequality. I dont think that a totalitarian government would oppress the people however. That would be counterproductive.

Theyre developing antidepressants which actually increase levels of all the important neurochemicals so in half a century I wouldnt be surprised if we have ultraprozac XD

Not completely immune.

http://www.popsci.com/science/article/2 ... re-cocaine

that title just made me laugh. I'd say that that's immune "to all intents and purposes" lol. Noone can realistically maintain that kind of addiction for any length of time. Cocaine bankrupts movie stars and CEO's

The real problem is not necessarily the drugs in themselves.

You cannot win a war on drugs when alot of people go out of their way to do them any way they can. Just about anything you consume can be considered a drug. Alcohol, tobacco, coffee, tea, hot peppers, marshmallows, whatever?

What are we talking about here?

What about pregnant junkies? What about their foetus getting brain damaged, deformed and hooked on crack before it is even born?


That isn't going to work with back street junkies and cheap hookers, they are typically past caring about prison. The only thing most junkies think about is how they are going to get their next fix, they don't give a fig about any consequences beyond that.

What would you do with a prison full of junkies anyway? Apparently many have no problem getting drugs even while inside prison.

By being totalitarian itself is oppressive. I'd rather have a society of dopers than a totalitarian state.

The war on drugs is a looser. A fabrication with no end unless it is put down. It is a corporate conundrum. It doesn't matter what state, religion, policy, country, or political background you have. There will always be a society of dopers. It is, has been, and always will be here. For all we know, it very well may be a defining characteristic of why we evolved into humans. People need to open there eyes. You have more than two.

That doesnt come under the bracket of what you do with your body. This is no different than feeding a paralytic heroin without consent. Im talking about things adults do to their own body. Crackheads will be crackheads prohibition or not.



Prison drug supply is more reliable than outworld drug supply. This is a problem with corruption within the system. Prison officials are complicit obviously. The proposed system asssumes that the government actually WANTS to eliminate drug use. In this scenario there would be incentive to drug test inmates and place them in isolation for extended periods.

Alternatively antipsychotics and other drugs given to a drug user can prevent them getting high or elevate the amount required to untenable levels. I think they give one of these to self harmers to prevent the endorphin release. You could just as easily inject repeat offenders with extended release thorazine and that would prevent any high for quite some time as well as induce tardive dyskinesia! Pleasant.

I'm against the coercive use of force.