SeekingGrowth

This is a really interesting thread. To me, the strongest argument against legalization of any currently illegal addictive drugs is to look at the result of legalizing alcohol. The number of alcoholics exponentially eclipses persons addicted to any other drug. This is due both to increased, easy accessibility and the fact that "legal" equals "socially acceptable" and that it "must not be THAT bad". One of the reasons alcohol addiction has one of the worst relapse rates is because IT'S EVERYWHERE, and the majority of people drink. You can't go to an event, can't go to the grocery store or the drug store or even a gas station without it being there, and society tells you there is a "coolness" factor to having a drink. The costs of alcoholism are exponentially higher than the costs of any other drug abuse, in terms of car and other accidents, lost productivity, health care costs, not to mention the misery of the person addicted and their family. Are we so happy with the results of legalizing alcohol that we think we should try it with something else? Mind you, I'm not arguing for a return to Prohibition - that ship has sailed! But I have real concerns with the idea of legalizing anything else. I know that draconian criminal penalties aren't the answer, and that we can't incarcerate our way out of the drug problem, but I don't think legalization is the answer either. We need some middle road.

And by the way, THIS is the most powerful anti-drinking and driving ad I've ever seen. Someone suggested earlier that there doesn't need to be any big anti-drinking campaign, that everyone already knows the risks of drinking and driving. Well, I don't think anyone ever quite envisions the realities of THIS ad. I wish they WOULD air commercials like this in the U.S. We need to see them.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7l5Wa94ynss

philly76

There are dynamic factors regarding the "dangers" of each substance that make them hard to compare. Nicotine, heroin, and crack-cocaine remain the three most addictive with alcohol at number four. Where alcohol tops the ranks is in toxicity and withdrawal, both attributes significantly higher than in nicotine and crack-cocaine.

One study concluded that alcohol is the "most harmful drug," but that study includes the drugs' potential harm to others, factors that include drunk driving. The most dangerous drugs for individuals are still heroin, crack-cocaine, and methamphetamine.

In the United States, alcohol was never "legalized," at least not in a legislative sense. Rather the 21st Amendment of the Constitution repealed the 18th, which prohibited the sale and consumption of alcohol.

I don't think Prohibition is the way to go. Like I mentioned before, it failed miserably and inadvertently created crime syndicates that the nation spent a century battling. Likewise, the illegality of substances as benign as marijuana inadvertently foster a more dangerous market than need-be. Not only are users often unsure whether they're purchasing something reasonably safe, the illegality creates a market for a dangerous criminal element (cartels and drug dealers) that would become largely irrelevant if pot were simply legalized, which is what slowly began happening after Prohibition was repealed.

I also don't think that legality creates a coolness factor. In fact, I think it does just the opposite. It is illegal to purchase or consume alcohol in the United States for those under 21, and American college students drink heavily. It's sexy because it's forbidden.

The same thing happened in speakeasies during Prohibition. Illegal bars began popping up everywhere because Prohibition created an underground allure for many people who had previously written alcohol off as a dirty drug that poor people abused. As soon as it was banned, the wealthy flappers, the children of the Industrial Revolution, were paying top dollar for the cheap swill a sailor wouldn't have touched ten years prior.

-Sorry for time traveling, that period fascinates me

But back on topic, like you mention, harsh incarceration isn't the answer, particularly for people with problems.

However, not all drugs are created equal, and like the varying factors regarding a drug's potency - addictiveness, toxicity, withdrawal, etc. - there are also varying factors in how the drugs, and their abusers, are publicly perceived. I don't think alcohol has the same allure it did when it was prohibited and I think that's a good thing.

But despite alcohol's potency and high marks as a drug, it's by far the most acceptable drug in western nations. As far as my personal addictions go, I don't need legislation to quit drinking or smoking, and I don't want it. But I do think there's an unfair public dialogue that applauds people who quit smoking while disparaging alcoholics.

That's a bad place to be when you're craving something to depress your mental faculties. It's much easier to encourage an alcoholic to drink than to get an ex-smoker to smoke because the smoker is mostly in their "right mind." You might have that one cigarette, but you'll be sitting on a ball of anxiety and bad breath for the rest of the day that reminds you why you quit in the first place. But once an alcoholic takes his/her first sip, inhibitions decrease, and the urge to resist the next drink goes right out the window.

Slightly related but a bit tangental, that is why I have trouble (to put it politely) with the rigid approach to alcoholism recovery. Alcohol is a drug that weighs heavily on an individual's psychology. While anyone who smokes enough cigarettes will eventually become addicted, alcohol doesn't afflict everyone who binge drinks. The popular, one-size-fits-all approach to alcohol recovery can't possibly meet the needs of all alcoholics because alcoholism isn't an all-for-one and one-for-all problem. It afflicts us all differently, and unless you can afford $100 therapy sessions or fall into that percentage that benefits from meetings, there aren't a lot of places to turn.

That's where I think the public can - and maybe should - play a greater roll. And maybe it's on us, or those of us who have successfully recovered, to prove that alcoholism, or alcohol recovery, isn't something to be pitied, but something positive.

When someone wants to quit smoking or stop doing crack, the public says "GOOD!" When someone wants to quit drinking, it's more like, "What's wrong with you?" Pity isn't fun to face when you already feel like **** about yourself. I feel the same way about the rigid rules that come with alcohol recovery. It's a "safe place" as long as you don't speak out of line. "I have a problem" might work for some people, but in my mind, it's "I have a goal." I'm looking for the silver lining in what I've learned from alcoholism and how that applies to my future, not the dark places it took me.

If a public campaign can curb nicotine use - the most addictive substance we know of - by 25% in fifty years, then a positive, understanding, and accepting outlook towards alcoholism and alcoholics on the part of the general public could certainly help. Bottom line - and sorry for the essay (rant) - I just think it's ironic that the oldest drug problem known to humans has the least amount of public support. I don't want to be a part of a sober, insular community. I don't want the public to look at me like I'm "diseased." I'm still me, I'm just better than I was.

Again, this is just my take on it all. I'm sure everyone faces addiction in a different way.