Brainstorming Solutions to Idaho’s Prison Problem
If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to the newsletter or RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!
Idaho is facing a major prison problem, and which appears it will reach a crisis point. I fear that Idaho’s prison population is now or will soon grow faster than our resident population does. This will lead to an inevitable disaster as a dwindling population of hard working Idaho residents are forced to pay higher taxes for an increasing prison population. The math is not headed in the right direction for Idaho in this respect. Do we want to pay $60,000 a year per person to lock them up, or would we rather steer them to being contributing society members?
This discussion is intended to brainstorm solutions to Idaho’s prison problem, and evaluate the potential effectiveness of those proposed solutions. Nothing should be off the table, because radical solutions are probably needed. If you think an idea will not work, please state objectively why you think that rather than just dismissing it as “stupid”.
One band-aid solution has been the drug treatment center that Representative JoAnn Wood got passed last year. It is a great first step in philosophy and practicality, but it is a drop in the bucket at this point. I think what is really needed is for some legislators to start a campaign to reverse this trend, and the campaign will involve multiple attacks.
One idea is to start early prevention. We reap what we sow, right? Idaho is sowing clear factors that lead to reaping larger prison populations later. BYU researchers are saying that early childhood education can help reduce later behaviors which lead a person to prison. How about a set of education initiatives aimed at reducing later prison populations? Initiatives likely to reduce later prison populations include mandating Kindergarten, funding preschool, and regulating daycares statewide. Can our legislators recognize the value of these investments where we will not see returns for at least fifteen years?
A radical idea is to require welfare recipients to undergo random daytime drug tests while they collect welfare checks. I saw this idea in an email the other day, and it makes so much sense that I cannot believe we do not already do it. The folks working hard and paying for others’ welfare benefits often have to undergo workplace drug testing to keep their jobs. However if those same workers get fired for doing drugs, they can then receive public welfare without submitting to urinalyses. Does this make any sense?
Another radical idea is to comprehensively address illegal drug policy. I read articles all the time that say marijuana users account for a huge portion of prison populations, despite that the nonviolent nature of their crimes. I do not imagine that marijuana or other drugs will be decriminalized anytime soon, but perhaps Idaho could reform our sentencing guidelines to direct marijuana users to community service instead of prison? I would rather see marijuana users mowing our park lawns, picking up trash, and shoveling the walks in front of senior centers. Reforming marijuana sentencing to punish with community service instead of prison time should provide immediate relief in our prisons.
I fear that in 10 years, Idaho will regret not making changes now. What do you think of these ideas, and what other ideas do you have for fixing Idaho’s prison problem?
If you enjoyed this post, please consider to leave a comment or subscribe to the feed and get future articles delivered to your feed reader.
Comments
Vote:
0 
0 Most of the people doing any significant time on drug charges in Idaho are methamphetamine related crimes. There are very few doing any sort of prison time for marijuana and those are your traffickers and high level dealers. The number one problem with our society is methamphetamine. It is the underlying cause to most of our burglaries, robberies, thefts, and violent crime. If you could magically make every last bit of methamphetamine disappear we would have non-crowded prisons full of sex offenders and the people that really need to be in there.
Vote:
0 0 The above poster is absolutely correct that meth is driving the prison population. And while certainly some meth addicts commit violent crimes, most meth related crime that lands people in prison is either simple possession or property crimes to buy meth.
Clearly any realistic solution to the prison explosion must therefore involve meth prevention and rehabilitation.
And anyone suggesting ridiculous solutions like taking away TV’s needs to educate themselves because that doesn’t fix the overcrowding problem, it means the prisoners will be more likely to riot.
Vote:
0 0 I tried to find statistics for how many inmates in Idaho prisons are there for drug related crimes, but after a long search, I realized that I really didn’t know how to find them, so what I am going to say next is based strictly on what I have heard and I don’t have any firm data to back it up.
I have heard that more than 1/2 of the prison population are there for drug related crimes. And that one of the best places to get drugs is in prison itself. A member of my extended family was sent to prison for marijuana and cocaine use (a repeat offender). He learned a lot of new tricks while in prison. Such as how to make lethal weapons (and how to use them) out of available items. Plus he also got new drug connections while in there. When he got out of prison, he was scary. He spent most of his time working out on weights until he was quite “buff”. He even won several competitions in prison for his prowness. After four years of spending all of this time lifting weights, exercising, etc., imagine how he must have built up. Anyway when he came out, he played the game of being clean for about 2 months. Then it became apparent that he was just as addicted as ever — if not more so. He got in fights and sent most of his opponents to the hospital. He also found religion (this looks good when going before the parole board), but he lost this religion when he hit the streets. Another prison term. This time when he got out, he didn’t even play the game and try to act clean, but by now he had graduated to meth. Now he is homeless, mean, addicted, and will probably end up dead in an alley some night.
This is the only case that I have first hand knowledge of, hopefully there are some happier endings out there, but in my opinion, prison did not accomplish anything except to get him off the streets for a few years. He was worse off when he came out than when he went in.
Before his first prison term, he was in a couple of treatment programs, but they only lasted about 30 days. It was not long enough. The second time, he left on his own after one week. Plus these treatment programs are extremely expensive, the average family cannot afford to send someone there without spending most of their cash reserve and borrowing a lot. I don’t know what the answer is, but I do know from this one example that it isn’t prison.
Vote:
0 0 I think it would be important and informative for us to find out what percentage are marijuana vs. meth prisoners. The meth heads I dare say are more prone to violence than average marijuana users. Treatment is a much better option for both than prison, but I think the meth heads need more work to get them clean. So we need to find that information.
Vote:
0 0 In my opinion some hard work and being productive will do more for rehabilitation then almost any treatment. Let’s bring back “chain gangs” and the like and make sure that the prisoners know they are contributing to the improvement of their society. Create opportunities to continue doing the skill they learned on the “chain gang”
Vote:
0 0 I totally agree with the chain gang thing. I remember back in the day you used to see them all the time on the side of the road, cleaning up debris, cutting the grass, picking up trash etc…. great idea and a good way to keep our highways and communities clean.
Vote:
0 0 I agree wholeheartedly with the “make prison horrible” philosophy, but in this discussion I was hoping to hear more ideas about what we can do to prevent people from going into prison at all.
The drug treatment center is a good idea. Hopefully JoAnn Wood’s pilot project is successful and replicated around the state.
I think an emphasis on early childhood education would help Idaho eventually reduce prison populations, in addition to other benefits.
What ideas do you think will reduce prison populations?
Vote:
0 0 This believe this issue came up in different post a couple months ago, in regards to having our middle & high school kids go visit the prisons and county jails in and around Idaho to give them an idea just how terrible a place it is. Have some of the inmates speak with these students to inform them their actions have consequences and prison is not a place you want to end up. If I recall correctly, there were quite a few posters who were against this idea for whatever reasons. I think this would ge a great way to inform and to teach our kids to “think twice” before committing a crime that may land them in jail or prison.
Vote:
0 0 There are problems with community based treatment initiatives. For instance, treatment for meth addicts vs. marijuana addicts needs to be very different. It is not. Enforcing sobriety is a must for meth addicts. Before treatment can really take hold the meth addict needs to be placed in an inpatient setting for at least 4 months. Attempting cognitive restructuring treatment on a meth addict that is not clean is a waste of time and money. It may be more effective for a pot user but not for the “hard” street drugs. Presently, Idaho uses the same model for all it’s drug treatment. This is why it is not effective and we are seeing too much recidivism.
The treatment center is a step in the right direction, but it will take more resources and half-way house placements with strict drug testing measures to make treatment take hold. For example, Idaho Falls has the ARA center as the lone inpatient center. There are not many inpatient centers in Idaho. ARA is also one of the few half-way houses in the area as well. It’s rules are lax and occupants come and go without quality oversight–too lax in my book to be effective at keeping out drugs and maintaining sobriety.
As a private contractor, they have a vested interest in keeping clients there to receive a check. They often don’t report violations and the clients skate.
Idaho needs to use the concept of Day Reporting Centers and the current concept of Community Work Centers (like the one on Bombardier Street) to combat prison commitments. Structured living assignments, coupled with work during the day and treatment at night is the way to go. It would require more staff and space; however, it saves the state money in the long run because inmates pay 25% of their work checks to the State for room and board.
I am a firm believer that if you give someone something for free they will either abuse it or not truly appreciate it. Presently, Idaho uses a 3rd party to screen and assess drug users and places them on a waiting list for treatment. The financial screening often affirms the obvious: drug users are poor and can’t afford to pay for their treatment. So, the State subsidizes them anywhere from 5 to 95% of the cost. I will note that several persons involved in this process tell me that the norm is 95% coverage. Inmates don’t take their treatment seriously because they have to pay for it. I have been told of several studies that support the fact that inmates that have to pay for the majority of their treatment take it more seriously and internalize what they are learning than if it is just handed to them. Criminals find the resources to buy drugs, beer, and party it up….surely they can be made to pay more than $4 or $5 a treatment session. I believe that as we force them to be more financially involved in their treatment costs that this will have a more positive effect on the results.
Additionally, the State pays large sums of money to the 3rd party to screen and assess referrals. I don’t believe this company is local or even in Idaho. These services could and should be localized. In fact, one well placed employee in say the Department of Corrections, Vocational Rehab, etc. in each judicial district could administer the program at significant cost savings to the state….and allow that money to flow into treatment vs. administrative costs.
The bottom line is that longer periods of in-house and monitored rehab is necessary for meth addicts. Assuming a meth addict stays sober, it can take upto 6 months for the brain chemistry to return to normal. This is why extended periods of habilitation are necessary…..and because of this hole in the treatment structure, we are not seeing results from community based treatment that we all want and expect. Thus, more prison commitments occur due to an inability to address the true needs of effective treatment modalities.
Vote:
0 0 I read an interesting article that says the U.S. prison population is equal to being the 4th largest American city, bigger than Houston (currently #4):
http://hearmythunder.org/cgi-bin/index.cgi?action=viewnews&id=202
The author seemed to indicate that as many as 48% of our prison population is composed of non-violent offenders. He questions if our nation is truly “free” anymore?
I think I read a statistic some years back saying like 1/3 of all blacks have been involved in the wrong side of our criminal justice system.
We talked earlier about the drug user problem. Most addicts are not inherently dangerous, but when taken to extremes they commit violent acts to support their addictions (especially meth-heads).
I think if a person is busted with even meth, they should not go to prison but into treatment, however hard-core that requires. If the meth-head is busted with a lab in their home, that crosses into a violent crime because of the danger there.
What do you think of that article, or any of this?
Vote:
0 0 People don’t realize how many freedoms we have lost because they’ve been lost slowly over time. Things that were legal 25 years ago, will now get you 10-20 years in prison. We have nobody to blame but ourselves though.
We need to get rid of this “war on drugs” and incarcerating every single person holding a joint or some pills. It’s costing our state over 60 million dollars a year to house drug users. That’s a staggering cost and it’s only going to get worse if we don’t make some changes. And until we start voting in leaders who are willing to make changes to the system, we’re going to continue to loose our freedoms until you can’t spit on the sidewalk without getting 5 years in prison.
We need to start with reforming the war on drugs, and then the patriot act.
Vote:
0 0 Here are US Dept. of Justice Statistics for incarceration rates.
Prison Statistics
Summary findings | BJS publications | Selected statistics |
Also by BJS staff | Related sites
——————————————————————————–
Summary findings
On June 30, 2006–
– 2,245,189 prisoners were held in Federal or State prisons or in local jails — an increase of 2.8% from midyear 2005, less than the average annual growth of 3.4% since yearend 1995.
– there were an estimated 497 prison inmates per 100,000 U.S. residents — up from 411 at yearend 1995.
– the number of women under the jurisdiction of State or Federal prison authorities increased 4.8% from midyear 2005, reaching 111,403 and the number of men rose 2.7%, totaling 1,445,115.
At yearend 2005 there were 3,145 black male sentenced prison inmates per 100,000 black males in the United States, compared to 1,244 Hispanic male inmates per 100,000 Hispanic males and 471 white male inmates per 100,000 white males.
In 2003 there were an estimated 650,400 State prisoners serving time for a violent offense. State prisons also held an estimated 262,000 property offenders and 250,900 drug offenders.
Click on the chart to view full sized version.
Most serious offense Percent of sentenced
State inmates
——————————————————————————–
1995 2003
——————————————————————————–
Total 100 % 100 %
Violent 47% 52%
Property 23% 21%
Drug 22% 20%
Public-order 9% 7%
These stats tell us that the amount of drug offenders incarcerated actually went down 2%. This challenges the myth that we are incarcerating pot smokers and other minor drug offenders on the first strike.
Idaho routinely does not incarcerate first time offenders, even second and third time offenders. They get probation out of the gate….and many chances to quit their destructive behavior before incarceration. If you look at the sizeable amount of offenders on probation vs. incarceration in Idaho this plays out as judges granting probation over and over again vs. dropping the hammer on possession cases. So, for all the myth about the war on drugs imprisoning first time offenders and filling the prisons up with no room for violent offenders, it just isn’t true.
I was glad to see a recognition by posters on this site about the dangers posed by meth. Meth induces changes in the brain and actually eats brain tissue that does not regnerate. This causes mental problems such as schitzophrenia, paranoia, and violence. It is also worthwhile to keep in mind that present day marijuana has much higher levels of THC than those of 2 decades ago. I think it would be interesting to know if there are any studies about the effects of higher THC content on addiction and impairment of judgment.
In answer to Joe’s question: Are we really free anymore? How do we get to this question when what we are really talking about is the behavior of people that break the law. People are responsible for their actions. If someone violates the law, there are consequences. If more people choose to break the laws what does that have to do with our freedom. Does it equate that our freedom is dependent on the number of people locked up in prison? I think it argues the opposite: the more law breakers locked up enhances our freedom–freedom from being robbed, raped, burglarized, or being run into by intoxicated or stoned drivers.
Vote:
0 0 The History channel has been showing a documentary about “Illegal Drugs & How They Got That Way” this past week and I would encourage EVERYBODY to tune in and watch it. It talks about how all these drugs used to be legal and there wasn’t an “epidemic” or problem with drug use, the way our government and media has made it out to be. They explained why drugs were made illegal and why our government over the years has over emphasized their effects. The government, law enforcement and the media have all told us over the years (drilled it into everyones head rather) that if you try meth even once, you’re going to get “hooked”. This simply is not the case. The same goes for many other drugs. Drugs are just like alcohol in the respect that they must be used in moderation. However, some people don’t know how to use in moderation, which is why we have alcoholics, drug addicts, etc.
The fact is, the so called “war on drugs” is not working and it has never worked. The only way to get rid of the “drug problem” is to decriminalize them. All you need to do is look at the Netherlands and see how it was before and after they decriminalized drugs. Their drug “problem” was just like ours in it’s heyday. Since they’ve decriiminalized drugs, they haven’t had NEAR the problems they had when drugs were illegal.
People like Mike will have you think that since the THC levels in pot has risen over the years, that that has made pot more addictive and made people more “out of it” or stoned if you will. This just isn’t the case. It merely makes it so where you used to need a joint to give you a buzz, now you only need a couple of drags.
Changes need to be made and they need to be made soon. 60 million dollars a year to house drug offenders in Idaho alone is too much.
Vote:
0 0 Yeah, and lead paint used to be legal too. The people that you talk to that wish meth never existed are the people that are hooked on it. They aren’t complaining about their legal problems either. It completely rules their life and they cannot stop. I’ve seen a few people make some good hearted attempts to quit but it wasn’t until a lengthy term in jail forced the issue and got them clean. Follow up with probation to ensure they stay that way. Works pretty good for some people and most of the time they were not doing time for drug charges. Most of the time they actually get sent on repeated property crimes like burglary, forgery,check and credit card fraud. That costs us all. I’m sure all the drug related property and fraud crimes more than surpass the mentioned 60 million dollars mentioned above.
Vote:
0 0 I don’t know where some of you are coming from. There are no people serving prison time in Idaho for having a joint.
Vote:
0 0 Correct on possession of a joint. That is a misdemeanor. Felony levels are 28 grams or more for trafficking (with a mandatory 3 yr. prison term), manufacturing controlled substances, or delivery of controlled substances. Simply possessing a joint will not send you to state prison.
I see guest 007 is at it again making the case to use drugs in moderation: “Drugs are just like alcohol in the respect that they must be used in moderation. However, some people don’t know how to use in moderation, which is why we have alcoholics, drug addicts, etc.”
I suppose if Larry Craig used drugs in moderation it would be okay too because we are all human and make mistakes? I appreciated the comments from “my opinion”–you can’t use harder drugs without serious health consequences and legal problems, let alone that drugs like meth DESTROY brain tissue. How can anyone in their right mind support moderate use of meth, heroin, cocaine, oxycontin, or any other drugs that impair judgment. Using alcohol (which is legal) to bolster reasons to allow use of drugs is laughable and sad. It doesn’t make it right, nor does it mean that it is an acceptable idea for public policy.
Vote:
0 0 I didn’t mean to suggest people are in prison for possesing one joint, but people DO get “arrested” all the time for it. I know, it happened to me in my college days and I had to spend the weekend in county. So don’t tell me people don’t get arrested for possesion of small amounts of drugs. It happens every single day in this country. And THAT costs us money and clogs up our court rooms.
You people and your “statistics” who have never touched a drug in your life, have no clue what you’re talking about. You go by what government officials tell you, the same ones that are supporting the “war on drugs”.
And Mike you’re way off on the Alcohol statement you made. Alcohol severely impairs your judgement, a lot worse than many other drugs. [edited for derogatory comment]
What about Guest007’s comment on the decriminalization in the Netherlands? Seems like nobody wanted to touch that one. That’s because it WORKS!
Guest007: I too saw the documentary you spoke of on the History Channel and I suggest everyone check it out before spouting off their theorys on this issue. It shows over the years how the government has drilled it into our heads and over-emphasized the dangers related to drugs.
Sure, meth is a bad drug and it ruins peoples lives. But so does Alcohol. I’ve known quite a few people over the years that tried meth, coke, acid and a dozen other drugs and they didn’t get hooked and their lives weren’t ruined.
Mike, you dismiss MY opinions, but I’m supposed to accept YOUR opinions on this issue. I know from first hand experience. You may have witnessed such problems, but you really have no clue. You don’t hear about the millions of people over the years that have used in moderation or occasionally and live normal productive lives. It happens every single day Mike. But some of you will only believe that ANYONE that try’s ANY drug is going to get hooked and ruin their lives and become a thief and a criminal. That’s just preposterous and that is exactly what the government has been drilling into peoples heads for the past 2+ decades.
I’m not saying meth and other harder drugs should be sold in the local market. It is a bad and addictive drug for some. The point is our prisons are full of “users” that haven’t committed a crime or harmed another person. All I’m saying is we need to re-think our stance on drugs in our soceity. Sure, continue to prosecute those people that are strung out on meth and do a home invasion. I’m all for that. But look at other countries and how they handle the situation and see how much better it works, than our “war on drugs” plan that hasn’t worked from the getgo.
Vote:
0 0 I have news for Mike and my opinion:
There ARE people in prison for a joint. Or even less. Many of the people in prison are there because of probation violations. Even small violations, such as having a dirty urinalysis, with no drugs even found. But the decision on what is and what isn’t a serious violation is very arbitrary.
Some probation officers are out to get certain people any way they can. I know that some of you will take exception to that statement but I have seen it happen with my own family members. I have seen them sent to prison for ONE dirty UA. And get this, the relapse was admitted to the officer in advance by the probationer when there otherwise would have been no suspicion. I have seen instances where others who have multiple violations are left on the streets. It’s not even really a judge’s decision most of the time, whatever the PO recommends is usually what happens.
It’s kind of an odd situation, the probation/parole officers and the prison system are all part of the same state agency. I think there is a culture of keeping people under the jurisdiction of the Department of Correction as long as possible after their referral. When an officer recommends that someone have their probation revoked and have them sent to prison, it is just more job security and budget security for the Department of Correction. I really believe that. As long as they can keep people in the system they need the bigger staffs and bigger budgets. Who knows, if there were other treatment options and more emphasis on really helping people, maybe a lot of the DOC employees would find themselves without jobs. That could be a good thing.
One more point, the low percentage of inmates incarcerated for drug charges is very misleading. As another poster pointed out, many of the other crimes would not have been committed if the criminal didn’t also have a drug problem. Even with that being said, I agree with 007 that the war on drugs is not working. I don’t know if legalization or decriminalization is the answer. But there are a lot of lives being wasted in prisons that shouldn’t have to be.
Vote:
0 0 There are alot of “opinions” floating around on this subject. But some here have actually experienced either first hand, or through friends or family members, the fact that the war on drugs is not working. I tend to believe those that have actual experience and/or know people that have actually been through the system and know first hand. People can give their statistics and opinions all day long on this issue. But from what I’ve experienced over the years myself and friends and family, is more in line with what 007 and some others have noted. I too saw the History channel documentary and former DEA agents sit in front of the camera and tell you about how the government has drilled into peoples heads how evil drugs are and how it’s ruining society and this country. It’s all about money and control over the people.
Guest11, you make some good points as well. I’ve known many with the same experiences.
I was say I’m not so much for legalization, but decriminalization.
Vote:
0 0 I’m conflicted on the “one mess up” issue. I heard a cop describe the situation well how people get themselves tripped up in our criminal justice system. They earn a violation and have to do some court dates and other requirements. The problem is they miss a court date or are late meeting a requirement, and our justice system does not have time to deal with people who cannot toe the line. If they let one thing go, they have to let others go, and soon the whole environment is dealing with excuses of why requirements were not met. If you get in trouble, you have to know that you need to toe the line until you work your way out of the system. Perhaps this should be explained more clearly when people are arrested or ticketed? I don’t think the explanation should be a Miranda-rights requirement, but if cops take it on themselves to explain this “toe the line” concept for a couple minutes whenever they arrest someone, it might help some people work out of the system easier. Does that make sense?
Different people keep talking about writing a dedicated ‘war on drugs’ discussion article, but I’m not sure if it will get done.
I really believe we should legalize ALL drugs, and my logic may be flawed but here it is. Take meth, if it were decriminalized, then it could be commercially manufactured and sold to adults over 21. If it is commercially available, we will see a drop off in home meth labs. Boom, took care of a huge problem right there.
If drugs were legalized and commercially available, they could be taxed like cigarettes, and those extra taxes could be funneled right into treatment programs. I think we would be able to deal with drug addictions on the same level as alcoholism, getting people more treatment options than jail time. In the process we would also inject more business opportunities into our economy.
Vote:
0 0 Joe, the thing I’ve noticed about the “one mess-up” issue is that it is not applied consistently. I wish I could remember who it was, but Just in the past few weeks in the news I recall hearing about how someone was arrested and reportedly had something like six probation violations in the past year or two. And they were still out on the streets. Others are sent to prison for one violation. And it’s the probation officers making these decisions, not judges. Since when does having a personality conflict with a P.O. justify going to prison? It happens in Idaho.
Vote:
0 0 And then we have the famed “three stikes law” in states like California. We’ve got people spending life in prison because their so called “3rd strike” was public intox or disorderely conduct charge. This too is a waste of taxpayer money and prison space. Major reform needs to be enacted in both our prison system and the laws concerning drug use/possession, etc.
Vote:
0 0 Probation Officers are not deciding whether a guy goes to prison or not. It is an independent judge that decides that issue. Goto the local probation office and talk to them. They will show you that the concept of intermediate sanctions is utilized as a means of policy. Additionally, supervisors of officers don’t sign off on violation reports unless intermediate steps are taken first, i.e. treatment, brief local jail time, cognitive behavioral treatment, curfew, electronic monitoring, etc.
As for keeping people in the system, look at the discharge rate of persons from suspervision: the numbers are high. Many offenders are getting discahrged once they reach 1/2 their time. For example, a guy who gets busted for possession is sentenced to 4 years probation. Once he reaches 2 years he is eligible for consideration for early release. The only guys that have to stick out full time are sex offenders and violent types.
As for being able and told how to negotiate their way out of the system, offenders are given explicit rules of conduct from the court order (and given copies) of what they are allowed to do, and what they can’t do. It’s not an arbitrary game that is unfair to the offender. They know what the expectations are going into their probation period. There are no suprises waiting for them. If the chose to use drugs after being caught and catch a violation for it I suppose we want to blame the Court or the PO? How about placing the blame on the offender? Or is it more convenient to blame the government for the behavior of persons that engage in hedonistic, unproductive, and destructive behaviors? Answer–take no responsibility and blame it on the war on drugs.
As for legalizing all drugs that is absurd. If the government got involved in manufacturing this garbage you can bet drug users would turn around, sue, and win because the government put a harmful product out there and supported it’s existence. Guess who pays for that stunt? You and I would get stuck paying out. If you don’t think it would happen just look at the baloney people sue for–and win, right now. Anytime the government is involved in something and it goes wrong you can bet money hungry lawyers will be there to sue and feed at the public trough. This is another unintended consequence of legalization.
As for those of you who bring up Holland’s 1976 drug experiment check out this story. It addresses the Dutch experiment with drugs that is always touted as being successful. After more than 30 years in existence, the real results are being seen in the new generations of drug addicts, proliferation of drug trafficking, and movement from “softer” drugs into “hard” drugs such as ecstasy, and amphetamine types of drugs.
Vote:
0 0 If the government got involved in manufacturing this garbage
Well actually I don’t think the government would be involved in manufacture any more than they are involved in the manufacture of alcohol or cigarettes. I think it should be legalized so commerce can do the job. The proposal is just for government to get out of the way, a solid conservative principle, right?
Vote:
0 0 I know what they need to do to empty our jails and prisons. They need to get rid of stupid laws that get good people busted for doing nothing. And they need to make it a fair system in court. Everyone should be able to defend themselves not only the rich. And they need to let everyone out that was convicted of something totaly stupid. they need to get rid of most of the laws that let police charge anyone they want. The laws are to strict. That is why the jails are full. And they need to make drug treatment a #1 priority and give drug dealers death sentences and just kill everyone thats on death row thats guilty with out doubt. Our laws need to be reduced by atleast 80% of them.
Vote:
0 0 Who’s going to decide which laws are “stupid”? Which laws do you think are “stupid”? What stupid laws get good people busted for doing nothing? I hope you see my point. Everyone is going to have a different opinion.
Vote:
0 0 Mike, Do you actually belief that pharmecueticals are “safe”? Drug companies get sued all the time for deaths due to drugs they’ve manufacturered. Not to mention the side effects! Most of the time, the side effects are worse than what you’re actually trying to treat. Pot has no side effects, if taken responsibly. (unless you call raiding your fridge for munchies a side effect)
Many other “illegal” drugs have less side effects than what pharmecuetical companies are giving to us. You’re one of those people that has been duped into thinking that drugs are evil no matter what. If taken in moderation, which millions of Americans do everyday, they can be enjoyed and their shouldn’t be laws against personal possesion and consumption. It makes no sense to have tobacco and alcohol legal, and less addictive and less harmful drugs illegal. Tobacco is the most addictive drug on this planet and causes more deaths each year than meth. So why is it still avaiable to the public? Because, they regulated it and taxed it and our government and big business could care less who dies from it. So why isn’t it that way with all drugs? There are lots of people out there that are only casual smokers. Just like there are plenty of people that only have a drink on occasion. Caffeine is another drug. I’ve known people that get up in the morning and if they don’t have their coffee or pop, they literally start going into withdrawls.
This is the problem with our government. They’ve tried to pick and choose what we should or should not consume and THAT in itself took away freedoms we once had.
Vote:
0 0 I disagree with a few of Mike’s comments about probation officers. I am quite sure and it has been my experience that many judges will almost always go along with whatever a P.O. recommends, so whether a person is incarcerated often really is up to the P.O. as much as the “independent” judge.
I also have firsthand experience of a family member being sent to prison for a violation. There were absolutely no “intermediate steps” taken first, i.e. treatment, brief local jail time, cognitive behavioral treatment, curfew, electronic monitoring, etc. In my family member’s experience, it was go to jail, go directly to jail. So I guess the comment that supervisors won’t sign off on such a thing depends on whether or not they like the probationer. They can pretty much do whatever they want once they get a person in the system.
And I also figured that if I brought up the fact that some P.O.’s discriminate against some of the people on their caseload, someone would point out that the probationer is still the one who broke the law and got into trouble. I concede that, but my point is that different probationers have the rules applied differently, and different P.O.’s also apply the rules differently. I have seen it done many times.
Probation officers can say whatever they want regarding their policies, etc. But actions speak louder than words.
Vote:
0 0 Cigarettes, Mtn. Dew and Coffee don’t cause brain damage and make people violent like meth does. Go over to ARA Treatment Center and ask the counselors if drug legalization would be best…ask the addicts themselves. The answer you will get is that it should not be legal because it destroys lives.
Joe, your post clarifies that the government wouldn’t be involved. However, who in their right mind would open a business to manufacture this garbage….and be able to survive the lawsuits that would inevitable come with it….think about it, why are pharmaceutical prices through the roof? Lawsuits is one main reason. Drug companies pass the costs of litigation onto consumers. They don’t absorb the costs. If they did, they would have been out of business by now. The conservative principle here is that government has the duty to protect it’s citizens first and foremost.
Legalizing drugs is the wrong approach and sends children a message that we don’t care what they really do….no worries, go smoke a bowl, and raid Slim’s fridge. Many people think drug use is some harmless act and personal use is okay. They have not had their homes burglarized or car crashed into by a high driver. The idea that no one will get hurt over a joint or two misses the point, drug use like alcohol use is not an answer to personal problems. Many people use to escape crappy lives and numb their pain. Do we help those people by saying legalize dope and just take more or do we have mechanisms to force–yes force–people to seek treatment and counseling to stamp out addictive and destructive behaviors. I don’t see most people lining up to get treatment unless forced to do so by an outside entity and/or family members that do an intervention.
IMO, legalization is a bumper sticker solution to a more complex problem. Many have a knee jerk reaction to the war on drugs and the immediate response is to legalize them…problem solved and move onto the next issue. It doesn’t work that easy or that well. This is an important public policy matter that deserves better than intellectually lazy solutions that contribute to destruction of the individual and society itself. Ask yourself the question: Would I want my children to be able to freely access drugs whenever they wanted? How about their friends? How about your neighbors? Do we really want our society to be so permissive that nothing is off limits. How about legalizing child pornography next? If the parents say it is okay to film children and nobody gets hurt it’s okay, right? Maybe we can also discuss legalizing gambling for underage kids too. Nobody gets hurt there either…a little harmless fun for the kids (to distract them from drugs no doubt). Let’s start letting young kids smoke cigarettes in elementary school as well. They should also be able to knock back a can of Coors as soon as they can reach in the fridge. As you can see the legalization approach is frought with landmines and other unintended consequences. A society with no limits ceases to be a society. It becomes a loose association of selfish individuals looking out only for their own interests and we all suffer because of it. Another poster wants to get rid of “stupid laws”….sounds like anarchy to me.
Vote:
0 0 there he goes again with the ridiculous comparisons! C’mon Mike, lets be realistic here! Stop comparing apples to oranges ALL the time! You have obviously never tried anything harder than tylenol nor had a family member involved with drugs. What you fail to realize is MOST people do NOT use drugs and alcohol to “escape their crappy lives” or “numb their pain”, it’s about having a good time being free to feel the way you want without the government telling you no, you can’t. Just like people have a couple beers after work to wind down, or have a couple glasses of wine with dinner, or some margaritas and go out dancing.
Nobody is talking about child pornography here Mike. Nobody wants to give children cigarettes Mike. Stop blowing everything out of proportion like you always do and stick to the topic at hand.
You have no clue because you’ve never been there personally. I have and you’re way off base.
Vote:
0 0 That’s pretty funny about the violence and meth thing mentioned. That’s a common misconception. Sure it may happen to SOME people, just like SOME people get violent when they drink. Some people are real happy on meth or blow or pot, just like some people are real happy on alcohol. You really have no clue Mike. All you have is your government studies and statistics. Don’t believe everything you read. Sure meth hurts some people and they get all wacked out from it…..JUST like alcohol affects SOME people the exact same way! Alcohol is just as dangerous. It affects the brain when you drink too much for too many years. It eats up your liver and kidneys and ruins you life. Same with cigarettes. but I guess those are ok.
I agree….some with the absurd comparisons.
Vote:
0 0 …who in their right mind would open a business to manufacture this garbage…
Looking at the numbers of drug addicts, heck even at the numbers of Americans who have tried them even once, I’d predict lots of people would get in this business and the market would be flooded soon after legalization.
That’s like asking who in their right mind would manufacture alcohol or cigarettes? Well, lots of people do!
why are pharmaceutical prices through the roof
I encourage you to look at the average posted profits for big pharma companies the last 20 years. The prices are through the roof because they rob us every day, not because of lawsuits.
I think the disconnect is that you see drugs much differently than alcohol, but most Americans view them on the same level.
Vote:
0 0 Wow….seems our prison problem post has turned into a drug war leglize it or not protest type debate! I like it! Gotta side with guest11 and slim and their views. government propaganda regarding drugs has been going on for decades and the whold war on drugs bit hasn’t worked from the very start. I say decriminalize. And where do some of you get off trying to say….”I guess we should legalize child porn?” That one blew my mind!
Vote:
0 0 Slim obviously has used drugs with no problems. Good for Slim. How about the other folks that use them and commit crimes to pay for their habits? Slim infers that because I haven’t tried anything harder than Tylenol that I just don’t understand. IMO, Slim and other folks that claim to successfully use dope with no problem don’t understand addicts and what they do. So, if we Slim wants to use his positive use of drugs as a basis to support legalization then maybe a trip to the jail and treatment centers talking to addicts and users of controlled substances who have messed up their lives would be a wake up call. I have been there and done that and it is not pretty.
The debate about prison reform and even drug legalization takes a turn for the worse when people take their own limited experiences as a guide of how everyone should act and what laws should be in place. The broader picture of drugs in America is a picture of despair, hopelessness, crime, and violence. Kids lose their parents to drugs and then to death or jail as a result of the drug use. Parents lose their kids to unfettered access to dope. Employers lose potentially good employees and lost productivity results.
Living in society requires boundaries to be upheld and respected. It would seem that many of you want to gamble with the future by legalizing drugs and making it easy for anybody to get their hands on dope. Wouldn’t it be nice if drug users could be cool like Slim and hang out in peace and eat munchies all day long at no cost to the rest of us. What a great life people could lead sitting around smoking a bowl and relaxing talking about the real meaning of life. Reality is much different than this. Even in little ol Idaho Falls. People steal from their own families to support their habits. They commit rape and murder under the influence. They steal from businesses and others. It’s not some big party where everyone can kick back. It may have worked for many of you posting on this site, but how about looking at the experiences of persons other than yourselves. Understand that this debate is larger than your individual experiences and effects millions of people. Is that too much to handle? Is it too hard to look outside of yourselves and see the real damage drugs cause on the population and ask yourself: If I had to give up my drugs for a better society would I be willing to do it? If I had to give up drinking alcohol for a better society would I do it? What part of yourself would you be willing to sacrfice for a better community? Or do we just fold and let everyone start smoking, snorting, and shooting up to their hearts content. Ever seen a heroin or meth user after they shot up all the veins on their arms and legs? Maybe if you had it would make your drug use truly pale in comparison to the seriousness of this topic.
Vote:
0 0 Mike, I HAVE witnessed the abuse of drugs first hand. My grandmother was an alcoholic, my brother was a drug addict and lost everything, his business, his wife, his daughter, got thrown in jail for 18 months etc. I’ve known friends that have gotten hooked on meth and I’ve known alcoholics. I’ve known people addicted to cigerattes. I’ve known people addicted to food. I’ve known people addicted to adrenaline, money, pills, sex, and the list goes on and on. It’s called having an “addictive personality”. Some people get hooked on drugs, some get hooked on food, some get hooked on sex. Maybe I’ll use your analogy. Perhaps we should ban food because there are so many people that are obese. Perhaps we should ban people from sky diving because they sometimes die and it’s dangerous and they shouldn’t be allowed that adrenaline rush you get from sky diving. Why not ban cigerattes? We all know they kill more people each year than all illegal drugs combined.
Your arguement just doesn’t hold up Mike, because if you have an addictive personality, you can be addicted to anything. Not just drugs. Drugs like the ones we’ve been discussing, used to be legal. And the problems didn’t start to arise until prohibition and the Harrison Anti Narcotic Act. Robert A Schless is noted as saying ” I believe that most drug addiction is due directly to the Harrison act. The Harrison Act made the drug peddler, the drug peddler made drug addicts.”
More people die each year from alcohol, tobacco and even asprin, then they do from cocaine, meth or heroine. in 1985 the General Accounting Office at the Pentagon reports that the military’s efforts have had no discernible impact on the flow of drugs. Which means, the war on drugs is not working and is not the answer.
Here is a timeline of the history of drugs from 5000BC to 1986.
http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/HISTORY/histsum.htm
Putting users in prison is not and has not been the answer.
I would also urge you to check out this website. It’s quite informative. Part of their mission statement is as follows: “We believe that prohibition is a system which unleashes powerful forces, most notably the illegal drug markets, that inevitably make the underlying drug problem worse while adding a series of costly unintended side effects, including damage to the very values upon which free nations have been founded. We believe that a public well informed about the death, disease and social blight produced by current US drug policy must inevitably seek to reform it.” I urge everyone to read the “who we are” and “information” links on this site. http://www.drugsense.org/html/
Maybe you’ll learn something other than the garbage you’ve been fed all these years.
Vote:
0 0 Vote:
0 0 Post 37: that’s another misconception. That if you try it once you’re doomed to addiction. That simply is not true. I’ve known literally dozens of people that have tried it once, twice, even 4 or 5 times and that was it. It wasn’t something they could see themselves doing all the time and they never did it again. I’m not saying everybody go out and try it, I’m just saying the government and media drill lies into America’s heads that you will get addicted to this if you try it just once.
not true.
Vote:
0 0 I will grant that there are addictive personalities present in many factions. I will also grant that there are some folks that can use certain drugs and not get hooked. However, if you look at the people that do use and get hooked….what type of activities are they engaged in? Their lifestyles are laden with destruction. If it were only themselves they were hurting I would have less of a problem granting them the ability to use until they killed themselves. However, this is not the case. They end up hurting more people than themselves. If they have kids, the kids suffer. If they held a job and lost it, now they draw unemployment benefits or welfare. If they can’t get the drug with their own money they steal. They drive cars on the open road with your family and mine on the road with them. When they get high it is usually dragging others into their usage. This can lead to sexual assaults or other poor judgment that harms people. I will not be convinced that drugs like meth, LSD, ecstasy, heroin, even oxycotin and hydrocodone are not addictive and destructive. I don’t need to be fed a “line of garbage” to understand that these substances are indeed garbage and serve no purpose other than to destroy the user and the community.
We will probably never agree on this but I firmly believe that if we had unfettered access to these substances Idaho Falls and other communities would be much different places than they are today (and not for the better). Thanks for your comments Slim. Just keep in mind that drug use doesn’t meet every other persons needs, desires and aspirations to be a better person and live a happy life without using drugs as a crutch. You can choose to believe or not believe government studies as you put it. However, one does not need to read a government study to understand that legalized drugs are harmful. Indeed, they are no where close in the same category as food or cigarettes. Your families experiences certainly demonstrate that you are aware of the pitfalls of addiction. Certainly if you look at the Gorski model for treating addiction, there is also another step that takes place–denial of a problem. Good luck Slim. I hope your drug use meets your needs over time.
Vote:
This article provides interesting details about Alabama’s struggles with overcrowded prisons:
http://www.decaturdaily.com/decaturdaily/news/050206/prison.shtml
Half of their prisoners were nonviolent property and drug offenders. Prison facilities wear out faster (incurring more frequent replacement costs) with being overcrowded.
The article ended by noting that one of their problems was also an apathetic public. Idahoans sure care about paying taxes, so we should care just as much about finding cheaper alternatives to our prison problems.