 |
 |
||
|
|
|||
 |
|||
|
|
|||
|
Drug Choices, Bad Choices Americans are apparently addicted to everything. Addiction used to have a real definition. It was a medical term that meant an individual was physically dependent on something, usually tobacco, alcohol or a drug of some kind. Everybody understood the use of the word, but recently the President told Americans they are addicted to oil. He might as well have said they’re addicted to driving cars or plastic.
What I found just as astounding was the estimated number of addicts. Ten thousand is a lot of people using heroin and may not even include others smoking a joint of marijuana, snorting cocaine, getting a hit of LSD, ecstasy or using amphetamines. By coincidence, I was reading a new book by Dr. Theodore Dalrymple, "Romancing Opiates: Pharmacological Lies and the Addiction Bureaucracy" ($21.95, Encounter Books). The author has spent sixteen years in the British health and penal systems treating heroin addicts. Like many of my generation, I became aware of the problem of illegal drugs during the early 1960s. I was a journalist at the time and, along with everyone else, subjected to the idiocy surrounding the "Beatniks" who spawned literature celebrating "the drug culture." The most famed was the addict, William Burroughs, a parasitic lowlife with a gift for making drug addiction sound like the gateway to intellectual achievement and deep personal insight. Another hero of the time was Dr. Timothy Leary who championed the use of LSD. He coined the phrase, "Drop out, turn on, and tune in," a literal call to a life of useless self-indulgence with a pretense to insights that, in reality, never accede the need to know where to obtain the next fix. Today we have "rappers" who likewise glamorize "the street" or "the ghetto" or whatever passes for poverty and criminality. In the 1800’s there were men like the poet Samuel Taylor Coleridge or Thomas De Quincy, the author of "Confessions of an Opium-Eater." Both were pretentious poseurs. The last time I checked, the sale and use of illegal drugs in America had passed the $44 billion mark and, if anything, those using them would be better understood if we called it more correctly an addiction to stupidity, but let’s be kind and call it making bad choices. By 2001, according to a White House commission on drug policy, drug offenders accounted for 21% (236,000) of the state prison population in 1998, up from 6% in 1980, and 59% (55,984) of the federal prison population in 1998, up from 25% (4,749) in 1980. As the 1990s ended, there were 1,532,200 drug arrests that accounted for 10.9% of all arrests. The cost to society for the incarceration of those with drug and/or alcohol violations was $38 billion and rising. Drawing on his long experience, Dr. Dalrymple relates that, "When I ask heroin addicts why they started taking heroin, the great majority of them reply with one of two answers. These are: ‘I fell in with the wrong crowd,’ and ‘Heroin’s everywhere.’" The addict never acknowledges that he or she knowingly and consciously decided to take the drug. They are always the victim. "Actually, you have to work quite hard to become a bona fide heroin addict," says Dr. Dalrymple. Moreover, one can stop taking heroin with relative ease. There are no painful withdrawal symptoms unless the addict is taking other substances as well. Even the loathsome William Burroughs wrote, "You don’t wake up one morning and decide to be a drug addict. It takes at least three months’ shooting twice a day to get any habit at all." In England and America the heroin addict is treated as if he or she had a medical condition. No, they have a stupidity condition. Around this group of stupid people, however, have grown vast bureaucracies to "treat" them to "overcome" their addiction. Those who are incarcerated overcome it in a few days. The rest are treated in out-patient centers where they can get methadone and other substitutes for their original condition of stupidity. By 2005, New Jersey was spending more than $250 million a year to imprison drug offenders. Even low-level offending miscreants were costing $34,218 to incarcerate for each year of his/her sentence as compared to a mere $19,800 to send them to drug court, including a residential substance abuse treatment, for one year. Generally, the former was likely to be rearrested just over half the time and the latter having only an eight percent chance. In both cases, if it even matters to these morons, they could have been financed to attend a community college or vocational school where they could learn to be that which they apparently deplore, productive members of society. "That withdrawal from opiates is not a serious medical condition is a truth universally acknowledged by doctors; but it is also a truth universally ignored…" says Dr. Dalrymple. At this point, someone is sure to point out that drugs and criminality go hand-in-hand. It is drugs, we’re told, that drive the addict to steal. In all likelihood the vast bulk of lower economic class addicts would find another reason to steal, primarily as a way to avoid holding any kind of a job. These are frequently the same people who dropped out of school to avoid acquiring any useful knowledge and skills.
Why do people take drugs? Drink to excess? I have no idea. I am appalled that the people who do cost the rest of who don’t so much money. If the widespread knowledge of a batch of lethally bad drugs in the Philadelphia area is not sufficient to stop users, one suspects that no amount of "treatment" or incarceration is going to make much difference. When I met Judge Andrew P. Napolitano, the judicial analyst for the Fox News Channel, he literally gripped me in a bear hug and, I think, lifted me off the ground. He is a jolly soul right up to the minute you mention the United States Constitution. On that subject he is increasingly unhappy. The judge greeted me effusively because I had said some nice things about his previous book, Constitutional Chaos in my monthly report on new books of merit, Bookviews.com. Among other things, I have been a book reviewer for over four decades. I like to read, but his latest book, "The Constitution in Exile", was a trial; no pun intended. This is not an easy book despite the fact the judge has a felicitous writing style. The book deals with some of the most important and complex issues involving the Constitution and they are not necessarily easy to understand once you begin to delve into the twisted conclusions of various Supreme Court decisions or the way successive Congresses have found ways to likewise redefine the intent of the Founding Fathers to grow government beyond the limitations of the Constitution. The problem is in understanding the way the Supreme Court and Congress has taken the rather straightforward language of the Constitution and squeezed new meanings out of it. Understanding these circumlocutions is a distressing trip back in history combined with the realization that the intent of the Founding Fathers has been totally defeated by succeeding generations of legislators and presidents. One literally has to read to the end of the book to get to the most frightening message. Not that an education in the way many of our nation’s greatest heroes managed to mangle or just dismiss the Constitution. Lincoln suspended habeas corpus during the Civil War in the name of preserving constitutional government. This "is a judicial order that directs prison officials to facilitate an inmate’s appearance at a judicial proceeding wherein a judge will determine whether the prisoner has been lawfully imprisoned or whether he should be released." In short, Lincoln wanted to throw people in jail for any reason he deemed necessary. Guess who else wants to do that and now has the power? President Franklin D. Roosevelt imposed socialism on the nation. Under George W. Bush the U.S. Patriot Act, voted upon by members of Congress who never even read it, grants the presidency and the government such broad powers of investigation, arrest, and imprisonment that the whole reason for the Revolutionary War and the Civil War has been jettisoned. The U.S. Patriot eviscerates the Fourth Amendment that previously protected "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probably cause, supported by Oath and affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the person or things to be seized." As we say in New Jersey, "Forgetaboutit!" As Judge Napolitano notes, "The federal judges who have published opinions on the challenges to it (the U.S. Patriot Act) have all found it constitutionally flawed", adding "There is simply no real demonstrable evidence that our American-value-driven-constitutional-privacy-protection-system is in need of such a radical change." Plainly said, we now live in an era when anyone in various designated federal government agencies can literally write their own warrant without submitting it to judicial review, break into your home, secure access to your private papers from virtually any and every source available, require anyone contacted in this pursuit to not inform you, arrest you, put you in jail, deny you access to an attorney, and lots more really awful things that more resemble the practice of justice under Saddam Hussein or any other despot than that of a nation with a Constitution that prohibits such behavior. More than anything else, the Founding Fathers wanted to put a neutral judge between the government and you. The entire Constitution and the protection you thought it afforded you has been turned on its head. It has been done so aggressively by the Bush administration and it has been so over the past 90 years by a Congress hungry to tax and spend without restraint. The United States has passed through previous eras in which the Constitution and the rights it extends to all citizens have been similarly abused. We should have learned to avoid doing that, but we have not. Our lives, our property, and importantly, our privacy now exist at the whim of the government. We live in dangerous times. Dangers from a fanatical religion’s quest to dominate the world. Dangers from an unrestrained government, free of the limitations and enumerations of the Constitution. Warning Signs seeks to bring these issues to you every week and, if you think we’re doing a good job, please consider making a donation to the Center. If you prefer, you can send a check to The Caruba Organization, 28 West Third Street, Suite 1321, South Orange, NJ 07079. Thank you.
©
2006 Alan Caruba. |
||||||||||||||||||||
Recently, I read an Associated Press article, "Addicts say killer heroin is hard to resist." It dealt with a problem faced by an estimated 10,000 addicts in the Philadelphia and South Jersey area. "A bad batch" of drugs had killed at least nine heroin users and the real issue facing the others was where could they get their hands on this really powerful heroin so they could take it as well!