The American war on drugs has resulted in the 2nd largest prison population per capita in the world and not much else.

The drug problem in the US seems to be far in excess of what it is in Canada, and BC, despite the effort of the American authorities to literally wage "war on drugs". Why is this the case?

Certainly we could treat those who are addicted, if they want to be treated. And move to remove the source of supply for all by taking much more draconian action against the suppliers, but does this do anything towards understanding 'why' the addicted were drawn into drug use in the first place? And then what?

Obviously, like liquor to the alcoholic, it's some form of "escape". But just what is it in their daily lives are most of them trying to escape from? Is the "reality" they're faced with so terrible when it comes to their own day to day life that they've given up hope of ever improving their lot in it?

Or is it that they actually "can't" improve their lot in it?

What is becoming more and more obvious, when the USA declares war on anything, they are not likely to win anymore. The war on drugs is one of those.

They have a large population behind bars because of drugs. The interesting thing is, of course, that they are still doing drugs there.

And the use outside of jails continues.

Here is an article about the situation in the City of New York,
----------------------

The size of New York City's addicted population and the current costs of treatment are staggering. Newsday noted that "The goal, drug treatment experts said, is for more doctors to be able to prescribe buprenorphine and for patients to be able to pick it up at the pharmacy. Potentially, thousands of people could benefit from the drug. The CITY SPENDS $50 MILLION ANNUALLY ON TREATMENT of AN ESTIMATED 200,000 HEROIN ADDICTS and 200,000 OTHERS ADDICTED TO PRESCRIPTION PAINKILLERS like Vicodin, Percocet and OxyContin.

http://www.csdp.org/news/news/handmmt.htm

Further along on the web site linked above it states:

“HEROIN ADDICTION AFFLICTS AN ESTIMATED 60 TO 90,000 CANADIANS and the costs associated with it--in terms of human misery, public health, social problems and crime--are staggering,' said Dr. Alan Bernstein, President of CIHR. 'Canada, and many other countries, therefore, need studies such as NAOMI to investigate new approaches to reducing the harm caused by heroin addiction."
------------------------
As far as people from outside looking at Vancouver in 2010, many have been doing so for some time since it is consistently ranked up there as one of the best places to live in the world and a great tourist centre.

Those same people who can afford to go to Vancouver at that time, or are there due to being sent on their company's dime will not find too much unusual there compared to their own country.

The problem is a world wide one. It is relatively well documented in the industrialized nations of the world. The method of dealing with the problem is also amazingly similar accross the world. The relative lack of results is also a common outcome.

So, another history lesson from old man Craig with an unknown purpose to the lesson, other than that those people from outside of Vancouver will be judgmental when looking at the City.

As they say, people who live in glass houses should not be throwing stones.

Maybe, and then again, maybe not. There is no baseline from which to compare the success of the war on drugs to. You have to wonder what the US drug problem would be under a lenient system like our own. We cant compare them to us in this case anymore than we can with gun crime or tax law or medicare They are a different people down there, a different society with far different problems and history, thus international comparisons are invalid (as they are in most cases in my opinion).
What has the war on drugs accomplished? No one really knows. Can we speculate, certainly. of course the speculation will almost certainly fit the speculators personal bias or agenda.
I for one, do not want vancouvers drug problem (i use the word advisedly) in my town. For all the complaints about PG I have yet to feel threated when waling my son around town. The last time I was down in Van i walked one block outside of china town and my son was treated to the spectacal of his first aggeressive lunatic, his first drug dealer soliciting his dad, his first prostitute, his first AIDS person (self described and outwardly visible), his first public lewd act (to put it mildly), filthy streets, you name it. Thank god he was still too young to really know what the hell was going on. His dad, on the other hand, learned a lesson about drug culture he wont ever forget. I have always leaned towards the legalization of pot,, but I cant really justify it with any logic stronger than 'why not, booze is worse'. Not really compelling. I will never support then enabling of drug addiction. This isnt being compassionate, it is the opposite. I would not raise my kids to think being a junkie was ok, or just an accident, and i would not want the state to provide them with excuses and facilities in which to completely destroy themselves. In a way, we treat junkies like animals. We say its not their fault, we try to make them safe and comfortable maybe, but we dont tell them to shape up. Funny though, when we learn about people who are professionals, etc. who develope a drug problem, we EXPECT them to go into rehab and shape up. Why the double standard?

"But just what is it in their daily lives are most of them trying to escape from?"

Read Marshall Smith's story and some of the comments below it.

http://www.theprovince.com/news/From+achiever+addict+back+again+Marshall+Smith+story/1717451/story.html

Nothing much there, is there? A psychologist/psychiatrist might be able to put some sense to it. Certainly not the "Craigs" of this world.

The other thing to remember, tht many people have addictions/obsessions which take away from what most will call a productive life. Drugs are not the only addictions.

Caranmacil wrote:
"when we learn about people who are professionals, etc. who develope a drug problem, we EXPECT them to go into rehab and shape up. Why the double standard?"

I think we generally set a higher standard for some people than for others. I do not believe we are all created equal, and we most certainly do not all develop in an equal fashion as we mature.

Hey Gus dont be so hard on "old Craig". Remember he's got you ducking with his stones.

One of the things that did not come up is how many of the drug users are mentaly challenged? Is it a factor?

I did find "old Craigs" information on the history of drug use in the big apple interesting. And it is amazing the number of addictions that we have in todays society and how difficult is it to migrate from one to the other?

So do we have answeres or are we raising more questions?
Cheers

"One of the things that did not come up is how many of the drug users are mentaly challenged? Is it a factor?"

Here is a study (1981) which states that the rate of alcohol abuse in those who are mentally retarded is about the same as in the general population and the rate of illicit drug use is somewhat less.

However, the method of treatment has to be adjusted.

http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=1532108

The other information that is out there is that the "problem" is not well studied. That tells me there is not a great need to do so. The causal factor is not MR. Thus the bulk of the problems are caused for other reasons and are of much more interest and even importance to study since there are limited resources to do so.

I think the answers may be simpler than we think. I think the answers in many cases have their roots in how people were raised. Both parents working. Give the kids everything they want out of guilt. No guidance into active recreation and sports. and on and on.

I think it has something to do with people having no real interest, being relatively idle, not participating in anything meaningful to them. They have a roof over their heads, food, entertainment, all for the asking.

In other words, they have that sense of entitlement built right in from their parents. They then move out into the world with that as their foundation.

Some will adjust to the real world to become so-called productive members. Others will continue life the way they have grown up to understand it.

The WASP work ethic has been under attack.

Still left is the work ethic of the Northern Europeans and much of the Asian community, although the former is also somewhat under attack and, as more pressure to improve the greater good of the society takes its toll, the Asians too will see the growth of complacency.

It all comes down to expectations. That one word describes it all IMO.

Drug users for the most part have failed expectations either of their own, or of society in general and escape with drugs. Thats what it boils down to at the genus of drug addiction... and so managing addiction comes down not to managing the intake of a drug, but rather managing the expectations of the soul (once addicted its almost a lost cause). Justice Graig doesn't get that part of the equation, and so is more a part of the problem than a part of the solution.

Is it the consumer society, is it the 'reality television', is it the keeping up with the Jone's expectation, or is it a personal calling that seems impossible because of lack of real opportunity of a multitude of fundamental expectations one has in their lives... or is it simply the expectation that doing drugs will bring a person belonging where they have none through a shared experience with their fellow drug addicts? All of those reasons boil down to the expectations of the mind and how those expectations are managed from the perspective of hopelessness, opportunity, disappointments, and belonging.

I think if we can educate at a young age the reasoned ability to match expectations with reality, and teach to create our own opportunities and build win-win situations out of losing circumstances in a way that builds greater understanding of the virtues of courage and dignity, then we will have a more socially able individual to coop with the challenges of life and deal positively with life's guaranteed let downs.

Drug addiction is a symptom of disease in society at the root cause of the disease in the individuals.

Proud, courageous, and dignified people that have a sense of belonging and future opportunities almost never do drugs. That is the greatest difference in the drug rates in America as opposed to other places in the world....

whoah there horsey! I didnt have a problem with the above post until the last sentence. Is there eveidence that levels of drug use/addiction are higher in the US than in Canada and other so called 'enlightened' countries? I mean, drug crime stats are useless since they are subject to differing laws and the degree of enforcement. So what is the story? Are there more addicts in the US (due to their terrible society, blah blah)or is it they are just reported than they are here? For example, how would you know how many people in BC use drugs since they dont generally arrest you for it unless they are trying to get you off the street for some other reason? Perhaps they use surveys...of course then you would be relying on special interest groups and you would get the whole definition/dilligence/corruption farce again (acorn anyone).
While i agree with gus and others that the problems of addiction are probably rooted in peoples sense of entitlement and upbringing. I would also add that the whole culture of victimhood has a lot to do with it. I grew up around drugs. I was an extremely unhappy person. I never got into hard drugs because i knew there was no excuse for it. The generation before me had had a much more difficult time than i had, and had survived without turning into addicts or welfare cases. I could do no less and still hold my head up. Maybe thats the problem right there...people arent taught that being able to hold their heads up high is something they have to earn. You cant get it from drugs or state handouts. Now before you all jump on me for being insensitive to abused children and such, i am talking specifically about the other people. You know, the ones who had a pretty good upbringing. The ones who are swelling the ranks of the drug addicts/criminals. Thus, Mr Craig need not be assumed to be ignorant of the factors others have mentioned here. It is likely that an attitude of acceptance towards drug use will enable some folks to fall into drug use (most users still claim they didnt think they would get hooked). I know the fear of being caught and jailed affected my decisions at various times in my life. As well, an addict i knew once told me that downtown vancouver was the worst place to try to kick drugs, because they are in your face everywhere, all the time.
While you might disagree with Mr Craig, i do wish folks would stop addressing people in contemptuous or overly familiar terms. I think it was better when folks first asked permission to address others by their first name. Now we get a slew of 'gordos' and 'old man craig'. I dont think it does anything for ones argument, or for reasoned discussion.

The less responsible you are for yourself, be content that you will always be looked after. Warm bed at the shelter, clean socks donated, and food kitchens. Do gooders? Kill 'em with kindness.