Running Around in Circles

I may not have my laptop back until next week, so I'm violating my no-posting-from-the-office rule pretty blatantly this week. Pasted below are three emails I sent in an exchange with someone who criticized those of us who fight to reform drug policy (she was specifically upset about Pete Guither's spoofed Vigil for Lost Promise site which was made to look just like the DEA-supported version). It can be hard to explain to some people why I think it's so important to reform our drug laws, and even harder to convince people that I don't have alterior motives for doing so. But it gets to be at its hardest when you're discussing with someone, like this person, who has lost a child to drug addiction. If you think you know who this person is, please do not post it anywhere, I would like her to remain anonymous. Her emails are in blockquote-italics within each of my emails as I responded directly to nearly everything she said.

Email #1

"Do you honestly think that having addicts as children we don't know about the prisons being full of people who's only crime was getting high in the privacy of their own homes? Do you think that we have no clue that the treatment available for addicts is useless in most cases, and only making people rich while our kids are still dying."

If you know all this, then why are you fighting the people who are trying to change it? We're for more effective drug treatment and we're against the prisons being full of people who've done nothing more than decide to get high in their own home.

"There isn't anything you can tell me that I don't know better than you or this Pete! The problem is that you guys, in attacking the fight we do everyday to get the real word out, have wiped out the message we are killing ourselves to get out there to the young people. Just look at the ridiculous statements young people are posting on your sites because they are buying the partial truth you guys are putting out there."

What partial truth are you talking about? Our message to young people is no different from yours. We believe that kids should not take mind-altering drugs. Period.

"If ever anyone will stand a chance at making a change it will be us, the parents who have lived the nightmare of courts and jails and rehabs and kids dying. What hijacking the web site and our struggle to make the government aware of the real issues does is make it harder for us to reach those people out there who don't know enough about the real facts."

What real facts are you talking about? If your motivation is to get the government to start dealing with drugs in a more responsible way in order to lower the prevalence of drug addiction and teenage drug use, then your motivation is the same as mine, except that you're doing it in a way that strengthens the people who keep making this problem worse.

"I read the comments on the blogs and sites, and you guys have made these people believe that www.thevigilforlostpromise.com stole the idea from you guys!"

Where do you see that? Pete's site was put up as a response to the original one. He's never said otherwise, nor would he have any reason to.

"You don't bother to post the correct facts like it was you guys who hijacked the site and copied it! You post lies and plant thoughts in young people who don't know any better."

Really? You think we do that? Find one lie that Pete has posted and send me the link. Good luck.

"If you want to make your own ideas and not steal from ours to make your case than by all means please do. But don't make it sound like you are squeaky clean and don't use underhanded tactics. Tell the truth about the vigil! Tell them you chose to copy the web site and that it was not your ideas but instead your poking fun at something that we fought long and hard to get the government to recognize and work with us on in our efforts to save lives not further our own agendas."

Here's the original post about Pete's vigil site that explains how he chose to copy the web site. If you think this is underhanded and poking fun at the original site, you're deeply mistaken. The point we're trying to make is that a lot of people are being killed by the drug war as well as being killed by drug addiction. It's irresponsible not to place any value on those other lives when you talk about how best to deal with the problem of drug abuse in our society. The DEA sees all the victims on Pete's page as collateral damage, but when you learn the realities of what works and what doesn't when battling drug abuse, you realize that those deaths were unnecessary.

"Until I and the other parents who grieve everyday not just for our own children who are no longer with us but for all the children (and I mean from 8 yrs old to 60 yrs because they were all someones child) who's lives are being destroyed because the truth about the disease is not being told, can see you guys telling the truth instead of just advocating legalization of all drugs, we will never support your efforts. You need us and instead you demean us and our efforts."

Where are we not telling the truth? You keep saying that folks like Pete are lying, but you don't have any examples. However, you've lied in this email about how Pete went about setting up his Vigil site and about how we are supposedly trying to encourage children to take drugs. We would love to have your support in our efforts to keep kids off of drugs, but it requires that you start dealing with facts rather than just letting emotion dictate your logic.

"The D.A.R.E. program is a joke! Money is wasted on crapp like that instead of prevention and education. The little guys are going to jail and the big time dealers are just getting rich. We aren't stupid. We know that putting our children in jail makes it look like the government is doing something about it."

If you understand the fact that putting people in jail does nothing to fix the problem, then why are you so afraid of people who talk about legalization? That's essentially what you seem to advocate. Treating drug addiction as a health issue rather than a criminal one. That's the whole point. Legalization and regulation is not an endorsement of drug use, it's a recognition that adults should have the ability to make their own decisions, but that we also have to provide effective programs for those who lose the ability to help themselves.

"There is nothing you can tell us because we lived it! But who better than us to be working with the DEA and other government agents? Who should they be listening to - teenagers who post ill informed comments on sites, those of you trying to defeat what we are trying to accomplish because we better than anyone had more at stake in this issue?"

One thing that's actually funny is that you think that Pete and the people who comment at Drug WarRant are teenagers. I'm 30, and I'm one of the younger ones of the people who I discuss these issues with. We're not kids, we're drug policy experts who've been studying this issue for years. Just because you lost your son does not make you an expert on drug policy. It obviously gives you an emotional stake in the issue, but if you think that the DEA is your ally in keeping other parents from experiencing your loss, you're kidding yourself. The DEA is the root of this problem, and this Vigil was just another way for them to continue to sweep the real dangers of prohibition under the rug.

"We don't need you to "feel sorry for those of us who lost children", we need you to recognize our efforts. Why do you think that the government should work with you and only your method of thinking?"

Because it's the only method that works. The DEA strategy for fighting drug addiction makes the problem of drug addiction worse. More people die of drug overdoses here than in other countries with more liberal drug laws. There are a lot of reasons for this. Some I've already explained. Another one is that when drugs are controlled by the black market, it's very, very difficult to know exactly what it is you're taking. People who have a 'bad trip' are usually people who've taken a drug laced with something else. If drugs are regulated by the government, this safety net can exist, and people like your son might not have taken something that gave him a result he wasn't expecting. I absolutely recognize your efforts and I sympathize with what you've gone through. The problem is that I also recognize that your efforts can be part of the problem as well, and I believe that what you're doing will ensure that a higher number of mothers will go through what you've gone through in the future as a result.

"So far, I have yet to receive a single email I find intelligent. I don't need you or Pete to set me straight about anything. There isn't one damn thing you can tell me because I am the one who had guns pointed at my child's head. I am the one who had the FBI kicking in our doors and harassing my child till the day he died. I am the one who had to make the decision to remove life support and let my son die. I am the one who paid the lawyers, the rehabs who didn't give a damn if my child lived or died but only cared about collecting the money. I am the one who has buried countless numbers of young men who lost their lives because of drugs. Boys I loved, boys I gave a place to live because no one else gave a damn about them. I am tired of buring my son's friends. I am tired of the funerals, the heartbreak, the trauma, and tragedies."

If you're tired of it, then do something about it! The DEA thinks that all those things are necessary to stop drug abuse in this country. If you think the DEA is wrong, and you think we're wrong, then what's your solution to all of this? What winning strategy are we all missing?

"You guys still don't get it. You think you need to educate me? Excuse me if I find that arrogant and ridiculous. How dare you tell me that you hope one day I will figure it out! It is all well and good to sit there on your high horse and think you know more than I do about this issue that I HAVE LIVED AND PAID THE PRICE FOR!!!!"

But you're supporting it! Why on earth are you supporting a policy that resulted in the death of your son? I'm sorry if I come across as arrogant, but I'm also not the one who thinks that the counterargument is just being pushed along by a bunch of kids. We know what we're talking about. We have the same goals. We just want folks like you to understand that and to know what you're getting into when you work with someone like Karen Tandy.

"You only prove my point about you and your ill thought out, underhanded efforts. You can't tell me a damn thing about the system or the numbers. You just keep showing your lack of knowledge."

Then go ahead and prove me wrong. If my position is based upon a lack of knowledge, then show me what knowledge you have. The thing is, I still have no idea what your point is. Holding vigils is not going to solve the problems that led to your son's death. How do you succeed at it? What's your strategy? You claim incarceration is wrong, that treatment doesn't work, that D.A.R.E. is a failure, and that legalization is scary. What else is there? Do we all just shake our fists at it and hope it goes away? Because from all I can tell, that's all your strategy is.

Email #2

"There will always be drug dealers, there will always be addicts murdered by "friends" or gangs. You can't apply what works in a country that has no poverty, no gangs, and no guns, no crime so stop telling me about Switzerland. It is about lives being destroyed and wasted."

Well, then let me tell you about the United States then. In the early 1900s, the United States outlawed alcohol. As a result, alcohol began to be manufactured by gangs and criminals. In a short amount of time, these gangs and criminals (you've heard of Al Capone I'm sure) began to become wealthy enough so that they were able to bribe law enforcement. This era gave rise to all kinds of organized crime and corruption and launched criminal enterprises that still exist today. You keep thinking that the gangs, the guns, the poverty, and all these problems are caused by drug use. They're not. They're caused by the fact that the drugs are illegal, and therefore the supply is controlled by criminals. This is the whole point you're missing. The reason that Switzerland doesn't have poverty, gangs, and guns is because they've learned not to criminalize consensual adult behavior and therefore give these criminal gangs the revenue streams they need to survive. So when you say "There will always be drug dealers," you're wrong. If the government controls the supply and regulates the sale of dangerous substances, then there will be no drug dealers. Do you see anyone standing out on the street corner selling bottles of whiskey today? No, because the government controls the supply and sales. But during prohibition there were drug dealers selling whiskey. And also during prohibition, it was easier for kids to find alcohol and in fact, it was the rage among teenagers during prohibition to have hip flasks full of moonshine, which was much more dangerous than the kind of alcohol kids can get today.

"You will not face the real problem. It is not about going to jail. If my child had been in jail he would be alive!"

You don't know that at all. It is easy to get drugs in prison and it is far from a safe place for any drug addict. I'm not the one who can't face the real problem here. Jail is not a solution. If your son had gone to jail, he would have come out of there with less opportunity and less hope than before. If jail is a weapon in the fight against drug addiction, then how come the United States has the highest prison population in the world, but it never has any effect on the amount of people overdosing?

"I can't agree with handing them access to drugs that kill and then telling them "well, we can put you in treatment if you are killing yourself.""

Why not? We already know that they're going to have access to drugs either way, so what difference does it make? Your position here is nothing more than having a strong desire to believe in something that's impossible. People are going to have access to drugs as long as there are large numbers of people who want to take those drugs recreationally. And when it comes to opiates, amphetamines, and other drugs, many people do take those drugs recreationally, and not all of them kill themselves. That's why there's a market. It's very difficult to solve a problem when you're not willing to consider all the strategies.

"It doesn't matter where the drugs come from!!!!!! The issue is that they kill!"

No, they don't. People die from using drugs. Drugs don't kill people. They are inanimate objects. Beyond that, what about marijuana then? No one has ever died just from using marijuana. If the issue is the fact that they kill, then why is marijuana illegal? And why is it such a high priority for the DEA?

"I will put my money on prevention and fight for better treatment. I want to save lives, not give children access to unlimited kinds of drugs."

No you don't. You do want to give children access to unlimited amounts of drugs. That's exactly the plan you're arguing for. Under the current system of prohibition, drugs are controlled by criminals. Criminals have no incentive to make a person show ID when they want to buy something. With alcohol, a kid cannot walk into a store and buy a bottle of vodka. But that same kid can go into an alley and buy cocaine or meth or heroin with no problem. This is the system you're fighting for!! As I've said before, my main objective in wanting to change the drug laws is to protect children. I've studied the issue, the history of drug abuse, and how other countries have handled it. Legalizing and regulating the market is simply the best approach for protecting children.

Email #3

"Look , you and I will never agree because you have not paid the ultimate price for drug use."

No, we won't agree because you've had a traumatic experience in your past that's preventing you from approaching this logically.

"I know you think you are right and you have every right to do your thing. I use to state everything you state but that was in the beforetimes. I live in the aftertimes now and I see how wrong I was to think substance abuse could be safe."

Abuse or use? Abuse is never safe. Abuse is when you take a drug even when it is causing harm. However, moderate use of most drugs is not abuse. Taking an painkiller while recovering from an operation is not abuse. Having a glass of wine with dinner is not drug abuse. We all should have the right to do our thing as long as it doesn't affect others. That's the ideal that our country is based on.

"I want less sentences for drug arrests that involve only possession for personal use and not to distribute. But that is a far cry from make it all legal."

Not really. It's the same thing. If you tolerate personal use, it's essentially legal. The only question beyond that is how do you regulate the market? I want the government to be involved in regulating the market so that it's difficult for children to get drugs. You want criminals to control the market so that it's easier for children to get drugs. As I've explained in every email so far, you're the one fighting for kids to have easy access to drugs.

"What you did was wrong and you didn't even talk to any of us to find out how the whole thing came about. You didn't do any research so how can you state lies and they were lies. You did nothing to researach the vigil and give correct information so why should I believe anything you guys say."

Too bad. When you start caring about children and start caring about how the DEA is making it easier for kids in this country to become drug addicts then we'll take your vigils a little more seriously. Until then, you'll have to forgive the cynicism. We've seen all this crap before and we're tired of it. If you wanted to have a meaningful vigil to honor the victims of drug addiction, you should have thought twice before holding it at the DEA headquarters. They're not your ally. They're making the problem worse.

"Unlike you guys we can go to the table with real experience about the disease that they are willing to listen to and begin to work with those in prevention, education, and rehabilitation. That is what we have fought for and we are not dupes and resent your statements that we are."

Do you really think we know nothing about drug addiction? Do you have any idea how many nurses organizations are on our side pushing for things like needle-exchange sites and other forms of legalization? Are you gonna tell me that you have more experience with drug addiction than them??

"If my child broke the law and got caught then I expected him, and he was prepared to face the consequences. He was not willing to rat out others but was willing to take his punishment. The only reason he didn't get eight years in jail was because the LSD he was busted with once tested by his lawyers motion, turned out to be nothing but blank paper. He had been set up by what he thought was his best friend who did it to get out of trouble himself. That is your world of drug users legal or not."

No, it's not. If drugs are legal, much less of that happens. In your son's case, he doesn't get set up because he's able to register as an addict and do drugs in a controlled medical environment where he'd still be alive. He doesn't have to rely on dangerous people to feed his addiction. As I've already explained, other countries like Australia, Germany, and Canada already do this for some forms of addiction, and in each of those places, it has reduced the number of people dying from a drug addiction. But when the idea of doing this in the United States comes up, the DEA will scream and yell.

"If you think by legalizing it all the crime, murders, robberies, and deaths will stop you are wishing for something that will never happen and you lose all credibility."

There will never be a utopian society where nothing bad ever happens, but it is very easy to study this. Look at the places where certain drugs have been legalized and study what happens. The Czech Republic has some of the most liberal drug laws anywhere and their crime is much smaller than ours, even though they're still a somewhat poor eastern European post-Communist state.

"We are a society of lawless people, greedy people, evil people, and cruel people. It is not going to change. The USA is made up of a melting pot of races and cultures. Too many people want no rules, no laws, no responsibility for the carnage they administer. The fact that people want to do whatever they want and not be liable or responsible for it is why we are here where we are. The fact that people want to do whatever they want and not be liable or responsible for it is why we are here where we are. I was a child of the 60's and 70's and I protested, I smoked pot, took LSD, tried cocaine, speed, ecstacy in the 80's."

But you're still exhibiting the same mindset. The fact that you're advocating an irresponsible drug policy means nothing to you simply because you're angry and it feels right to do what you're doing. You're just as irrational and irresponsible now as you were when you were younger and doing drugs. Both then and now, you've decided to believe things because you want to believe them, not because there's any factual basis to them. The facts are clear, and they've been clear for a while. The best way to deal with drugs is to take a public health approach, not a criminal one. But you're not, you're as hopelessly loss in this flawed crusade as you were when you were protesting things by doing drugs.

"All I am asking is that you respect my rights to try and change things and make sure my child did not live and die in vain. We can meet in the middle but you won't get me to say that anything other than pot should be legal. I don't believe that because I have sat rehab on weekends to participate in therapy with all the addicts. The things I saw and heard broke my heart from all of these kids. But allowing them to do all the drugs they want with no consequences is not the answer."

I certainly respect your rights although I'm not shy about challenging you to really understand what's going on here. For one, I'm still not sure what your strategy is for changing anything. Do you think that the DEA is able to get rid of drugs, but just isn't trying hard enough? Do you think that there's some great plan that no one's thought of that will work to eliminate drug addiction? As you said above, people need to learn to be responsible. Making laws to protect people from themselves is not a good way to do that.

"To tell you the truth it is hard to not get a little miffed when you don't know or understand what we parents KNOW AS FACT."

What is it? That drug addiction is bad? I know that. That kids shouldn't do drugs? I know that, too. There's nothing that you know that I don't also know.

"It is sad to know that you still don't get our point or our message. It is even sadder to think that someone who doesn't understand is trying to pass laws that will kill children and destroy families. I keep wanting to hear you say something that makes sense but like most people who push drug use your sense of reality is distorted and you can't see the real world and probably never will until your child dies."

First of all, I'm not pushing drug use, I'm defending it. Second, the main reason I don't get your point is because you keep talking about how you're interested in protecting children and families, yet you're pushing a strategy to fight drug addiction that will be more dangerous to children and families. So no, I don't get your point at all.

"What world do you live in that you would believe that just because the government would control substances there would be no drug dealers? The government can't handle any issue or oversee ANY programs and you want it to be distributing drugs?"

Do you understand how alcohol is sold in this country? In all states, alcohol is sold in places that must comply with age restriction requirements. Therefore a 17 year old cannot walk into a liquor store and buy a bottle of whiskey. Do you think the government hasn't been capable of overseeing that rule? In fact, they've been able to maintain that rule really, really, well. But for other drugs, kids don't need ID to buy potentially dangerous substances like cocaine and heroin. And you're fighting to keep it that way.

"You know nothing about addicts and those who prey on them! Dealers will always invent and sell more potent and deadly drugs and according to you they shouldn't go to jail for it. I don't know why I waste my time writing you because you are there in pretend land fantasizing about nirvana!"

No, no, no. You're still totally missing the point. If the government controls the supply and distribution of the drugs, THE DEALERS WHO INVENT DEADLY DRUGS WILL HAVE NO MARKET AND THEY WILL GO BROKE!!!! Can you please take a step back from the keyboard and think about that for a minute? You keep running around in the same circle of illogic over and over and over again. People don't do deadly drugs because they like the danger, they do deadly drugs because they're addicted and can't stop. We will have less overdoses and less crime if those people can get their fixes in a clinic with nurses and doctors.

"I and only I have the right to decide what is best for my children. As a democratic sociey we pass legislation the is for the greater good and that is what a democratic society is about. Addiction is not for the greater good and neither is legalizing the use of all drugs. You guys are angry because the rest of the world doesn't want drugs sold in candy stores."

My god, will you stop putting words in my mouth! I don't want drugs sold in candy stores. When did I say that? I think that pot should be treated the same way as alcohol and that no state can allow its sale to anyone under the age of 18. I believe that you should have to register as a user to buy cocaine, meth, ecstasy, or opiates in a pharmacy. I also think that you should be able to register as an addict, you can get those drugs for free, but then you can only use them under a doctor's supervision and can no longer buy in a pharmacy. Does that sound like selling drugs in a candy store to you?!?

"How old are you? Do you sell drugs? Have you got a crimial record? I have told you my history so share yours with me. Have you held a person you loved and looked at half his head missing because his "buddies" shot him execution style? Have you had to make a life or death choice for someone you loved more than life itself? How many loved ones have you buried because they died from substance abuse? What qualifies you to make decisions for our children?"

I just turned 31 yesterday. I've never sold drugs before, and I have no criminal record. I've done drugs before but I'm not a heavy user. I grew up in the suburbs of the east coast and I saw the other half of the drug world from what you see on the news. I saw kids in multi-million dollar homes doing all the cocaine they wanted. But I rarely ventured to the inner city and saw the problems caused by the poorer folks fighting over all the money that the Paris Hilton set gives them in order to live like rock stars. As I got older, I began to understand the unfairness of the whole system as young minorities with no other options tried to make whatever money they can by selling drugs to the rich spoiled kids of wealthy suburbia, while their wealthy parents then demand that the drug dealers go to jail for doing something driven by their own kids.

As someone who's had a good amount of opportunity in life, it would be easy for me to just sit back and enjoy the double-standard, but I can't do that. We've created a situation where minorities have become a criminal class that supplies the wealthier class of kids with their taboos of choice. And our inability to address this inequity comes from our lack of responsibility. It's just easier to fill the jails with black people. What qualifies me to fix this problem is that I've studied it. I understand it inside and out, and I take great pains to keep emotion out of the equation. You can't fix problems by just being a slave to your emotions. You have to use logic. You have to be analytical, and you have to be focused on results and open-minded about what you encounter. You can't just decide that you're angry and assume that your anger is pointing you in the right direction.

"By the way alcohol was made legal and in 2000 more rhan 60,000 died and you want to claim that as a success story? That is just the ones who died, not those who were raped, assaulted, beaten by sposes or loved ones, etc. What the hell makes you think legalizing alcohol is a great example to quote. How many people are you willing to sacrifice? What is the "acceptable" number of deaths and crimes from drugs and alcohol for you people? Every twenty minutes someone dies from substance abuse. No number is acceptable to me!"

Are you telling me that you think that ending alcohol prohibition was a mistake?? Are you crazy? Have you actually studied what happened during prohibition? When they made alcohol illegal, it took maybe a year or two for people to replace the supply with speakeasies, homebrews, and moonshine. There was no quality control for any of this alcohol, so people were dying and going blind left and right from drinking the stuff. By the end of the 1920s, kids across the country were drinking alcohol out of flasks that was being manufactured by criminals. And, of course, in 1929, after a decade of organized crime groups getting absurdly wealthy from bootlegging and buying off local authorities and threatening local governments, the whole economy of the U.S. crashed. I can't even imagine the amount of damage there would be today if alcohol wasn't legalized again. Yes, people die from alcohol related issues. People die in car accidents to. Should we make cars illegal? What about airplanes? People die in airplanes, let's make them illegal? I think I saw on the news that some guy accidentally killed himself with a nail gun. Let's ban those too!!! Everyone into the crib!!

"It is you who don't know a damn thing about what drugs do to society or is it that you just don't care. You just don't want to go to jail for using or selling drugs. It is all about you guys, not about our kids."

I'm not worried about going to jail for using drugs. Sadly, only a certain class of our society has to worry about that. Paris Hilton can do all the cocaine and ecstasy she wants and she's never going to jail. But a poor person caught with meth or crack could go to jail for a long time. This is only one part of how drugs are destroying our society. Addiction is an even smaller part. The biggest reason that our society is being negatively impacted by the world of drugs is because the supply is being controlled by organized crime. Whenever you see a drug-related shooting on the news, it's the result of the fact that drugs are illegal, not just the fact that drugs are addictive. Please take the time to figure this out. My wife and I are going to have kids soon, and I don't want them growing up as I did where they can buy dangerous drugs from criminals. That's the system that killed your son and it's one that I'm fighting against every day.