Tsar admits: we've lost the war on drugs

The Scotsman ^ | Sun 18 Jun 2006 | MARCELLO MEGA AND KATE FOSTER

[SittinYonder]

SCOTLAND'S drugs tsar has sparked a furious row by openly declaring that the war on drugs is "long lost".

Tom Wood, a former deputy chief constable, is the first senior law enforcement figure publicly to admit drug traffickers will never be defeated.

Wood said no nation could ever eradicate illegal drugs and added that it was time for enforcement to lose its number one priority and be placed behind education and deterrence.

But his remarks have been condemned by Graeme Pearson, director of the Scottish Crime and Drug Enforcement Agency (SCDEA), who said he "strongly disagreed" with Wood.

The row has erupted as concern mounts about the apparent inability of police, Customs and other agencies to stem the flow of illegal drugs. It was reported yesterday that an eight-year-old Scottish school pupil had received treatment for drug addiction.

And despite decades of drug enforcement costing millions of pounds, Scotland has one of the worst drug problems in Europe, with an estimated 50,000 addicts. At least half a million Scots are believed to have smoked cannabis and 200,000 are believed to have taken cocaine.

Wood holds the influential post of chairman of the Scottish Association of Alcohol and Drug Action Teams, a body which advises the Executive on future policy. The fact that Wood and Pearson are at loggerheads over the war on drugs is severely embarrassing for ministers.

Wood said: "I spent much of my police career fighting the drugs war and there was no one keener than me to fight it. But latterly I have become more and more convinced that it was never a war we could win.

"We can never as a nation be drug-free. No nation can, so we must accept that. So the message has to be more sophisticated than 'just say no' because that simple message doesn't work.

"For young people who have already said 'yes', who live in families and communities where everybody says 'yes', we have to recognise that the battle is long lost."

He added: "Throughout the last three decades, enforcement has been given top priority, followed by treatment and rehabilitation, with education and deterrence a distant third.

"In order to make a difference in the long term, education and deterrence have to go to the top of the pile. We have to have the courage and commitment to admit that we have not tackled the problem successfully in the past. We have to win the arguments and persuade young people that drugs are best avoided."

Wood said he "took his hat off" to the SCDEA and added that it was essential to carry on targeting dealers. He stressed he was not advocating the decriminalisation or legalisation of any drugs.

"It's about our priorities and our thinking," said Wood. "Clearly, at some stage, there could be resource implications, but the first thing we have to do is realise we can't win any battles by continuing to put enforcement first."

But Pearson, director of the SCDEA, said he "fundamentally disagreed" that the war on drugs was lost.

"I strongly disagree when he says that the war on drugs in Scotland is lost. The Scottish Executive Drug Action Plan acknowledged that tackling drug misuse is a complex problem, demanding many responses. It is explicit within the strategy that to effectively tackle drug misuse, the various pillars of the plan cannot operate in isolation."

Alistair Ramsay, former director of Scotland Against Drugs, said: "We must never lose sight of the fact that enforcement of drug law is a very powerful prevention for many people and, if anything, drug law should be made more robust.

"The current fixation with treatment and rehabilitation on behalf of the Executive has really got to stop."

And Scottish Conservative justice spokeswoman Margaret Mitchell said: "I accept Wood's sincerity, but this is a very dangerous message to go out. I would never say that we have lost the war on drugs. Things are dire, but we should never throw up the white flag."

But Wood's view was backed by David Liddell, director of the Scottish Drugs Forum, who said: "We have never used the term 'drugs war' and it's right to move away from that sort of approach. For every £1 spent on treatment, £9-£18 is saved, including in criminal justice. The balance has been skewed towards more punitive aspects."

And John Arthur, manager of the drugs advice organisation Crew 2000, said: "I think Tom Wood is right. This is something our organisation has been arguing for for a long time and it is good to see this is now coming into the mainstream."

Among the ideas now backed by Wood is less reliance on giving methadone as a substitute to heroin addicts.

He says other substitutes should be considered, as well as the possibility of prescribing heroin itself or abstinence programmes.

One new method being examined by experts is neuro-electric therapy, which sends electrical pulses through the brain. One addict with a five-year habit, Barry Philips, 24, from Kilmarnock, said the treatment enabled him to come off heroin in only five days.

Wood said: "We need to look at the other options. Other substitutes are used in other countries. They even prescribe heroin in Switzerland and there is a pilot in Germany, with pilots also mooted in England and, more recently, Scotland. We need to have a fully informed debate."

A Scottish Executive spokesman said: "We have a very clear policy on drugs, which is to balance the need to tackle supply and challenge demand. They have to go hand in hand and we make no apology for that."

[robertpaulsen]

"It's just as likely that demand has skyrocketed, and supply has more than kept pace"

So, supply has more than kept pace, THC content increased, and the price went down. All this put together tells you that marijuana use has increased? Uh-huh.

Past month use is up a little, but it's been flat since 2002.

[tacticalogic]

As long as the demand stays down, I could care less about supply.

Last I checked the only thing you cared about was making sure your kids never smoked it, and you could care less about what you did to make it happen.

[Ken H]

Those statistics show that annual drug arrests tripled. They show that the rate of commitment to state prison quintupled. They show that time served by drug offenders in state prisons increased. During that same period drug use dropped 60% and you're calling it a mere coincidence!!!

That same survey shows past month heroin use ROSE by 30% from 1979 to 2004!!

-- http://www.briancbennett.com/charts/nsduh/heroin-number.htm

Remember-- correlation is not the same as causation.

[Ken H]

Past month use is up a little, but it's been flat since 2002.

There have been over 14,000,000 past month users for 3 straight years now, so you are correct. BUT-- those are the 3 highest recorded numbers since 1985. According to the NSDUH surveys, the last 3 years have seen the highest past month mj use since the office of Drug Czar was created in 1989!

http://www.briancbennett.com/charts/nsduh/past-month.htm

[robertpaulsen]

"Remember-- correlation is not the same as causation."

Geez, KenH, did peyote use also increase?

Overall drug use. You know better.

[robertpaulsen]

"those are the 3 highest recorded numbers since 1985"

That's what the chart indicates.

I say it's due to lax enforcement (marijuana arrests lowest priority), the move towards decriminalization, and the recent medical marijuana laws. All of these changes are lowering the perceived risk of marijuana, while the perceived risk of other drugs remain relatively flat.

You reap what you sow.

[highball]

You reap what you sow.

You appear to be talking about of both sides of your mouth.

Is marijuana use up or down?

[robertpaulsen]

"Is marijuana use up or down?"

I'm looking at the same graph you are, so you tell me.

Marijuana use declined rapidly and stayed flat for 15 years because of increased enforcement and a change in public attitude. Marijuana use is up slightly recently because of relaxed enforcement and relaxed public attitude. I gave examples.

[Ken H]

Arrests for heroin/cocaine from 1979-2004 increased by over 600%, while past-month heroin use shot up by 30%! Therefore, increased enforcement causes the use of heroin to rise... right?? BTW, notice that while arrests and demand for heroin have increased from 1979-2004, the price has dropped and the purity increased. Good gravy, they're doing a poor job of fighting heroin!

http://www.briancbennett.com/charts/fed-data/crime/intox-arrests.htmhttp://www.briancbennett.com/charts/fed-data/crime/intox-arrests.htm

[Ken H]

I say it's due to lax enforcement (marijuana arrests lowest priority), the move towards decriminalization, and the recent medical marijuana laws.

Look at these arrest stats for mj--

1970 - 187,000
1979 - 392,000
1991 - 288,000
2004 - 771,000

Let's compare that to past-month mj use.

1970-1979: Arrests double, while past-month usage reaches a peak.
1979-1991: Arrests decline by 25%, past-month usage declines to a multi-year low.
1991-2004: Arrests up over 150%, past-month usage up 40%!

http://www.briancbennett.com/charts/fed-data/crime/intox-arrests.htm

http://www.briancbennett.com/charts/nsduh/nsduh.htm

Therefore, stricter enforcement is assocated with higher past-month use!

[robertpaulsen]

"Arrests for heroin/cocaine from 1979-2004 increased by over 600%, while past-month heroin use shot up by 30%!"

You need to break that up into two pieces.

From 1980 to 1990, combined heroin/cocaine arrests, according to your charts, increased rapidly from 70K to 600K. During that same period, heroin use was flat but cocaine use dropped 65%.

Since 1990, arrests have been flat and cocaine/heroin use has also been flat.

All of these statistics are from your source. Where did you get this 30% heroin increase -- the source you cited said heroin use has been flat for over 10 years at about .1%. Did it jump from .1% to .13% without us noticing?

"BTW, notice that while arrests and demand for heroin have increased from 1979-2004, the price has dropped and the purity increased"

Again, according to your source, arrests and demand for heroin have been flat since 1990. Purity has been flat since 1990, but the price has dropped. Well, with little demand, that's what happens in a free market.

[308MBR]

Singapore "won" the war on drugs, I guess. However, they have lost all vestiges of a free society besides very limited property rights.

[Ken H]

Where did you get this 30% heroin increase --

NSDUH past-month heroin use:

1979 - 128,000
2004 - 166,000

http://www.briancbennett.com/charts/nsduh/past-month.htm

[robertpaulsen]

My statement was that "past month" marijuana use has been up recently (ie., the last couple of years). I said that rise was due to a number of factors that have been building up over the years -- lax enforcement (marijuana arrests lowest priority), the move towards decriminalization, and the recent medical marijuana laws. These factors lead to a lower perceived risk.

You wish to focus on just one those factors -- arrests. Fine. For the last 10 years, the number of marijuana arrests has been flat. As a percentage of the population, therefore, it's actually gone down. As a percentage of marijuana smokers, it's gone down even more.

[mugs99]

ONDCP was created in 1988. Everything on the charts prior to 1988 are meaningless. ONDCP has not met its goal of reducing drug use. The War On Drugs is a failure by ONDCP's own standards and mission statement.

[Ken H]

Singapore "won" the war on drugs, I guess.

Singapore has not been winning:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1651454/posts?page=64#64

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1651454/posts?page=206#206

Joe-- do you have some evidence to show otherwise?

[robertpaulsen]

"1979 - 128,000
2004 - 166,000"

You took two endpoints 25 years apart and claim use "shot up" 30%!? You're a worse weasel than MrLeRoy ... and that says something!

Fine. How about we just go ahead and illustrate it this way, shall we:

1979 - 128,000
1982 - 162,000
2004 - 166,000

That OK with you? Oh, by the way. These numbers are so ridiculously small in a nation of 300,000,000 citizens, arguing about some supposed 30% increase from .07% to .09%, and why that happened, is a waste of time. I hope you agree.

[dirtboy]

Executing people for possession is the only solution I see to winning the War on Drugs.

Hey, Saudi Arabia does that already. Move there.

[Ken H]

For the last 10 years, the number of marijuana arrests has been flat.

Marijuana arrests/past-month use:

1994 - 481,000/10,000,000
2004 - 771,000/14,500,000

Rio Linda summary for 1994-2004: Arrests up by almost 60%, past-month use up over 40%!

[robertpaulsen]

The ONDCP is nothing more than a coordinating agency, a roomful of bureaucrats shuffling money around. They don't arrest, incarcerate, patrol, interdict, or educate.

The "War on Drugs" was coined by President Nixon in 1971. The DEA has been around since 1973.

Start there.