Illegal narcotics are the greatest motivators of crime in the Australian community. Drug-related crime is currently running at over 90% and addicts are dying like flies. Drug money is used to finance other forms of crime and nobody in Australia is untouched by this scourge.
I have my own theories of how to deal with the drug problem, however they may fly in the face of mainstream philosophy. An application of plain thinking and logic should open the minds of those who do not suffer the blinkered view that everything must be politically correct. This article is concerned with hard addictive drugs such as heroin, cocaine, crack, ice and other highly addictive derivatives, not non-addictive recreational drugs.
The best way to deal with any problem is to firstly identify its cause. It is easy to figure out what drives the addictive drug business. Contrary to the propaganda emanating from governments, law enforcement agencies and the politically correct do-gooders, it is drug users who create the continuing demand for illegal addictive drugs. Virtually all addicts start their drug habits from choice, as nobody is really held at gunpoint and forced to use narcotics until they are hooked. Unfortunately our society has become used to blaming the entire drug problem onto drug dealers while claiming that addicts are victims and this is wrong.
The media is very guilty in propagating this myth when reporting drug related deaths. Far too often there are headlines such as "Drug Victim Dies At Rave Party" and invariably, deceased drug users such as Anna Wood are portrayed as victims or martyrs, when the simple truth is that they willingly purchased and took drugs. However, what such stories often fail to report is that people like Anna Wood died from dehydration, not from the ecstasy that she consumed. If the media was really bound by public obligation, it would highlight the stupidity and danger of hard addictive drugs and report the truth about people such as Anna Wood, who bought and used a non-addictive recreational drug and died because she failed to drink some water.
The truth is that addictive drug addicts are only victims of their own stupidity, nothing more. From primary school age, children are taught that illegal drugs are lethal, highly addictive and expensive. By the time they are teenagers, they know full well the problems and the illegality of using narcotics, therefore they have absolutely no excuse whatsoever for using and becoming addicted to hard drugs.
The most important thing to understand is that the law of supply and demand is universal and also operates in the drug business. The supply of narcotics is fuelled entirely by the demand for them by addicts. If people stopped buying imported sardines, all sardine importers would be out of business literally overnight. Ask yourself this - who would import sardines if nobody buys them? And who would import illegal narcotics if nobody buys them? The answer is very obvious - nobody.
The inescapable logic of this simple premise is the long-term solution to the drug problem. Stop the demand for drugs and you will stop their supply overnight. Nobody in their right mind is going to outlay a fortune, not to mention the risk involved in importing illegal narcotics if nobody is going to buy them.
However, as long as addicts are prepared to buy drugs for incredibly high amounts of money, there will always be drug dealers willing to take the risk in supplying them. There are ten people willing to take the place of any dealer arrested, because of the vast amounts of money that can be made from the sale of illegal narcotics. It is obvious that even mandatory death penalties in some countries do not deter drug smugglers, so another way must be found to remove the demand for drugs. The only other way, which is painfully logical, is to remove the demand.
So the next problem is - how does society deal with addicts to eradicate their addiction and thus kill the demand for addictive drugs? Current methods of treating addicts as victims, treating them as if their addiction was a medical disease and supplying them with methadone or other addictive drugs as well as free syringes is a huge mistake and just does not work, therefore there are only two possible paths to take.
The first path is to legalise all addictive narcotics. This may eradicate the drug dealers and a lot of the crime associated with drugs, however society will comprise of an ever-increasing core of drug addicts and all the medical and societal problems they cause, as well as the funding required to support their habits. This is totally unacceptable.
The other path is to recognise and face the truth, then deal with the reality of the situation, which is that addicts are the cause of the problem. They have to be compelled to eliminate hard addictive drugs from their life, thus eliminating the demand for narcotics from drug dealers. These people are not victims but criminals, therefore they can be legally forced into a position where they can be detoxified. Once they have been detoxed, they can be threatened by strict laws that will incarcerate them every single time they are caught using or in possession of narcotics. While incarcerated, they will NOT be given any drugs whatsoever and will literally have to "cold turkey" it every time until they are totally over their addiction. They would also be put on a drug user register and have to submit to being tested frequently for drug usage.
Made to endure a few nasty episodes of "cold turkey", even the most hardened addicts will think twice about resuming their drug habits when they have already broken the craving. If the prospect of the punishment was so unpalatable and so horrifying that addicts would rather stay off drugs than suffer the horrendous withdrawal symptoms every time they were caught, in a short time they would realise that it was better to break the habit than suffer like that.
On the other side of the coin, the current penalties for drug dealing are quite minuscule and provide little if any deterrent, compared with the vast amounts of money that can be made. At the same time as instituting a zero-tolerance policy towards addicts, drug dealers and importers must be punished to such an extent that once caught dealing addictive hard drugs, they would never be given the opportunity to re-offend. Drug dealing is a totally premeditated crime so there can be no mitigating circumstances.
A mandatory death penalty for any importer or dealer of hard addictive drugs whose guilt was absolutely proven would be a reasonable position. Singapore, Malaysia and Thailand have the right idea in dealing with narcotics peddlers and smugglers. The case of Australian Van Nguyen who was executed in Singapore for smuggling heroin will certainly make a lot of potential drug smugglers think twice about putting their own lives on the line in that country.
The issue here is concerned with heroin, cocaine, derivatives such as crack, ice and other highly addictive narcotics. However, it is a different story with drugs that are not addictive, such as marijuana, ecstasy, LSD and a few others. The main reason for their illegality is one of revenue. Simply put, the government has not found a palatable way to make these drugs legal and tax them. In any case, it is hard to tax marijuana when people can grow this plant in their gardens for free.
Hard statistics show that marijuana is used extensively, however not one death has been attributed to it. The same goes for ecstasy, although a couple of people have died from dehydration because they failed to drink water when under its influence. According to all descriptions, ecstasy merely stimulates the endorphins in the brain and makes users feel loving and happy. So it is rather strange to see a non-addictive drug made illegal, when cigarettes that kill over 20,000 people every year in Australia and alcohol, which kills at least 4,000 people each year are legally available.
People do not need any recreational drugs to live their lives happily. But the hypocrisy of the government to keep tobacco and alcohol legal and reap billions of dollars revenue from the deaths of around 25,000 people every year is disgusting, when that same government cannot give one valid reason for banning recreational drugs such as marijuana and ecstasy that have not directly killed one person.
In conclusion, while society and governments treat addicts as victims, supply them with free syringes and drugs such as methadone and establish shooting galleries complete with exclusion zones where drug dealers can sell highly addictive narcotics with impunity, the drug problem will only escalate. It is obvious that nothing will eradicate the hard drug menace except the logical application of cause and effect and the understanding of the universal law of supply and demand, which is to eliminate the demand for addictive hard narcotics and thus eliminate the supply and the crime that it causes.