Global War On Drugs 'Has Failed' Say Former Leaders

[dps]

Having a prescription doesnt mean your medication is covered.

True, it depends on what medications are covered by whatever insurance scheme your particular jurisdiction uses.  But the point is for legalization to work it would have to be covered.

Under your plan, would they be covered only for people who were actually addicted, or would they be covered for people who just aren't addicted (yet, anyway), but just want to get high occasionally?  What about people who haven't even used hard drugs before, but want to try.  Would they be covered as well?  How about people who like to use recreational drugs which are currently legal, like tabacco and alcohol?  Covered, or not?  I know it sounds like I'm joking, but I'm serious.  If I want to get a pint of liquor to get drunk on, why should I have to pay for it out of pocket, but a guy who wants to drop some acid would get it provided at no charge to him?

[Malthus]

Having a prescription doesnt mean your medication is covered.

True, it depends on what medications are covered by whatever insurance scheme your particular jurisdiction uses.  But the point is for legalization to work it would have to be covered.

Under your plan, would they be covered only for people who were actually addicted, or would they be covered for people who just aren't addicted (yet, anyway), but just want to get high occasionally?  What about people who haven't even used hard drugs before, but want to try.  Would they be covered as well?  How about people who like to use recreational drugs which are currently legal, like tabacco and alcohol?  Covered, or not?  I know it sounds like I'm joking, but I'm serious.  If I want to get a pint of liquor to get drunk on, why should I have to pay for it out of pocket, but a guy who wants to drop some acid would get it provided at no charge to him?

There are two issues (1) ability to get a prescription; and (2) coverage under some form of medicare plan (presumably, socialized).

To my mind, actual coverage under socialized medicare would only apply in exactly the same circumstances as with other drugs - in Canada, that means you have to be either poor, over 65, or on a specialized treatment program. In all cases there would have to be a prescription, which means some healthcare professional has designated you as addicted.

Acid wouldn't be covered at all, as it is not particularly addicting. Socialized funding for drug addicts ought to be limited to drugs that addict people, like heroin and nicotine.

For those not already addicted, coverage would not be availavble.

Way I see it, drugs would fall within two classes:

(1) drugs that are not particularly addicting. These should be legalized, regulated and taxed, like any other consumer product.

(2) drugs that are particularly addicting. These should be treated in a two-tier scheme:

- available as consumer products, as above; and

- available as prescription products to those who are diagnosed as addicts. In that case, reimbursement may be available, if they otherwise fit the criteria.

The difference between the two should be based on an objective analysis of harms [for example, on any objective analysis, alcohol itself would fit within category (2) alongside Heroin, as would tobacco].

[dps]

So you're saying we could buy heroin OTC if we're not addicted to it, but would need a prescription if we are addicted? 

[grumbler]

My only point in bringing up the "philosophical" difference, was to point out that BB wasn't being deliberatly  dishonest, because he honestly believes that taking drugs ought to be inherently criminal. Has nothing to do really with the argument.

Actually, he doesn't.  He takes drugs himself (alcohol).  He thinks that taking illegal drugs should be illegal.  It is a tautology, and absurd.

[Malthus]

So you're saying we could buy heroin OTC if we're not addicted to it, but would need a prescription if we are addicted? 

No, you'd need a prescription if you expect to have your addiction publicly-funded (together with meeting a means test) - all in the interests of keeping degenerate addicts off the streets and away from committing crimes to support their fix.

Think of it in terms of alcohol, another drug known to cause physical degeneration, liver and brain damage, and addiction.

If you are not an addict, but are and adult, you can go to a store, or a bar, and buy enough booze to literally kill you - if you want. We as a society sorta expect that most people won't drink themselves to death, but will instead (say) enjoy a cold beer or two.

However, if you become a drunk, and enter that downward spiral, at some point you mayl use up all your money and piss off all your relations and end up on the street, as a typical street person.

Under this scheme, at some point in that downward spiral (presumably, before you are pushing a shopping cart, drinking Lysol strained trough a sock and mumbling to yourself) the social workers and docs can say to you 'you are an addict - here are various treatment programs. You always have the choice of entering treatment. However, if you can't or won't, the state will support a medically-supervised maintenance of your addiction as a harm-reduction measure - a certain amount of alcohol per week, available by prescription'. Presumably, this will avoid you spending your last dime on booze.

I doubt this will be all that attractive to those who are not already addicts. People will not say "hey, I can ruin my life with addiction, and the state will give me free booze! Let's do it!". It is more of a last-ditch measure for the incurable (sadly, a lot of addicts are basically incurable, as addiction above all erodes the will). 

[Razgovory]

My only point in bringing up the "philosophical" difference, was to point out that BB wasn't being deliberatly  dishonest, because he honestly believes that taking drugs ought to be inherently criminal. Has nothing to do really with the argument.

Actually, he doesn't.  He takes drugs himself (alcohol).  He thinks that taking illegal drugs should be illegal.  It is a tautology, and absurd.

Perhaps we should wait for Barrister to tell us what he thinks, rather then have you tell us what he thinks.

[Jacob]

Yeah, I'm with you on this Malthus. Perhaps you can lobby your local MP for something like this?

[Phillip V]

Another victory in the War On Drugs.

Unarmed kid gets shot in his bathroom possibly over a bag of weed. 

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/04/nyregion/raymond-kelly-voices-concern-on-fatal-police-shooting-in-bronx.html

[garbon]

Another victory in the War On Drugs.

Unarmed kid gets shot in his bathroom possibly over a bag of weed. 

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/04/nyregion/raymond-kelly-voices-concern-on-fatal-police-shooting-in-bronx.html

What was the point of your posting that?

[Eddie Teach]

Phil has become Tim, while the old Tim has to resort to mining the Off-Topic thread for news stories to post. 

[Razgovory]

Another victory in the War On Drugs.

Unarmed kid gets shot in his bathroom possibly over a bag of weed. 

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/04/nyregion/raymond-kelly-voices-concern-on-fatal-police-shooting-in-bronx.html

Excellent news.

[Siege]

Why make new drums when all the drummers are dead?

[Siege]

The only drug I crave can only be found on the battlefield.

Nah, i'm talking shit.
I just had a shitload of lite beer.
There is nothing worthwhile to be found on the battlefield.
Well, maybe the valor of men that found themselves in situations they really didn't want to find themselves.

[CountDeMoney]

Mexican army finds 15 tons of pure methamphetamine

GUADALAJARA, Mexico (AP) - The historic seizure of 15 tons of pure methamphetamine in western Mexico, equal to half of all meth seizures worldwide in 2009, feeds growing speculation that the country could become a world platform for meth production, not just a supplier to the United States.

The sheer size of the bust announced late Wednesday in Jalisco state suggests involvement of the powerful Sinaloa cartel, a major international trafficker of cocaine and marijuana that has moved into meth production and manufacturing on an industrial scale.

Army officials didn't say what drug gangs could have been behind the dozens of blue barrels filled with powdered meth. Army Gen. Gilberto Hernandez Andreu said the meth was ready for packaging. There was no information on where the drugs were headed.

Jalisco has long been considered the hub of the Sinaloa cartel's meth production and trafficking. Meanwhile, meth use is growing in the United States, already the world's biggest market for illicit drugs.

The haul could have supplied 13 million doses worth over $4 billion on U.S. streets.

The Sinaloa cartel, headed by Joaquin "El Chapo" Guzman, is equipped to produce and distribute drugs "for the global village," said Antonio Mazzitelli, the regional representative of the U.N. Office on Drugs and Crime.

"Such large-scale production could suggest an expansion ... into Latin American and Asian markets," Mazzitelli said. But he also noted, "it may be a product that hasn't been able to be sold, and like any business, when the market is depressed, stockpiles build up."

A senior U.S. law enforcement official in Mexico said the operation raided in Jalisco was "probably Sinaloa."

The official, who could not be quoted by name for security reasons, said Sinaloa may be trying "to reduce its reliance on Colombian cocaine by flooding the market with meth."

Reporters were shown barrels of white and yellow powder that filled three rooms on a small ranch outside Guadalajara, Mexico's second-largest city.

The lot around the house, which included an empty swimming pool, was littered with metal canisters and cauldrons used in the production process. While the equipment appeared makeshift and partially dismantled during a tour of the facility given to news media, it was apparently used intensively.

There were no people found on the ranch or arrests made, although it appeared 12 to 15 people worked there.

The seizure of such a large quantity of meth is expected to have a big impact on the U.S. meth market. A pound of meth can sell for about $15,000.

"This could potentially put a huge dent in the supply chain in the U.S," said U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration spokesman Rusty Payne. "When we're taking this much out of the supply chain, it's a huge deal."

But that may not ultimately mean less meth in the U.S. Law enforcement officials in California's Central Valley, a hub of the U.S. methamphetamine distribution network, say a cutoff in the Mexican supply could mean domestic super labs will increase production.

"This will be a big seizure and will most likely slow down distribution for a short period of time until manufacturing can continue," said Robert Penal, a meth expert and former commander of California's Fresno Methamphetamine Task Force. "However, when there is an interruption in supply it is not uncommon for domestic super labs in California to start up operations to fill the void until the supply from Mexico can be restored."

Tom Farmer, director of the Tennessee Methamphetamine Task Force, believes the seizure could have a big impact in his state. Tennessee led the nation in clandestine meth lab busts in 2010 with 2,082, but the majority of meth in the state comes from Mexico.

Farmer said the Mexican meth is often made without pseudoephedrine, an ingredient commonly found in cold and allergy pills, which has been banned in Mexico and restricted in the United States. Most meth made in clandestine U.S. labs is made with pseudoephedrine, making it a more powerful high, he said.

"Meth users prefer domestic dope," Farmer said. "What they end up using is a combination of both. They'll use the local dope for special occasions, but when it comes to feeding their habit, they'll revert back to Mexican meth."

The Mexican army said troops received several anonymous tips and found the big drug stash in the township of Tlajomulco de Zuniga, near the Jalisco state capital of Guadalajara. The army statement said that "the historic seizure (is) the most important in terms of quantity of methamphetamines (seized) at one time."

The previous biggest bust announced by the army came in June 2010, when soldiers found 3.1 metric tons (3.4 tons) of pure meth in three interconnected warehouses in the central state of Queretaro, along with hundreds of tons of precursor chemicals used to make meth. A giant underground lab was also found in Sinaloa state.

Those other seizures were believed to be linked to the Sinaloa cartel.

The size of the Jalisco bust stunned Steve Preisler, an industrial chemist who wrote the book "Secrets of Methamphetamine Manufacture" and is sometimes called the father of modern meth-making.

"I have never seen quantity in that range," Preisler wrote. But he added: "The amounts of precursors they were importing would produce multi-tons of product."

Preisler was referring to the dramatic increase in seizures in Mexico of chemicals used to make methamphetamine, usually imported from countries such as China.

In December alone, Mexican authorities seized 675 tons of a key precursor chemical, methylamine, that can yield its weight in uncut meth. All of the shipments were headed for Guatemala, where the Sinaloa cartel is also active. Officials in Guatemala, meanwhile, seized 7,847 barrels of precursors in 2011, equivalent to about 1,600 tons.

The supply of methamphetamine in the United States has been growing, mainly due to its manufacture in Mexico, according to U.S. drug intelligence sources.

Between 2007 and 2009, seizures of methamphetamine by U.S. authorities along the Mexican border increased by 87 percent, according to the 2011 U.N. World Drug Report, the most recent statistics the U.N. has available.

Eighty percent of the meth caught being smuggled into the U.S. is seized at the Mexican border, according to the National Drug Intelligence Center.

Few drugs do as much widespread damage - both to users and the general public - as meth, which is highly addictive. It's produced with volatile chemicals that can lead to explosions.

Chronic use can lead to psychosis, which includes hearing voices and experiencing hallucinations. The stimulant effect of meth is up to 50 times longer than cocaine, experts say, so users stay awake for days on end, impairing cognitive function and contributing to extreme paranoia.

Users are known to lose massive amounts of weight, suffer scabs on their bodies and even lose teeth to "meth mouth" caused when saliva dries up and decay takes over.

[Admiral Yi]

I figured the meth demand curve would follow the path taken by crack, since both suffer from a scarcity of repeat customers.