Diary: Some Cheap Advice

Diary: I have been very quiet at writing on the personal front lately due to my new treatment. I also thought more people would be interested in 'news' so I tried to keep that as the focus of my posts. Amazingly, I have had heaps of 2 emails asking me for personal experiences. No idea why as I am sure they have enough problems of their own to deal with. 

I mentioned last week that I am now on morphine instead of methadone and it is really taking it's toll. Man, the depression is killing me. At least on methadone, my mornings were good but morphine just keeps flat all day. I have no idea how anyone gets high on this stuff because I feel nothing ... not a thing. It holds me like methadone but there's certainly no so called 'euphoria'. Lately though I have started to get more of a balance and hopefully I will have it sorted over the next week. I have picked up a few tips to feel better. I have never relied on anything but medication before to get me through so this is new to me as well. 

Sleeping: When I start to feel flat - I go to bed. Yep 10 - 30 minutes does wonders. 

Walking: I try to walk my dogs every night now and since it's March, the weather is spectacular(Australia anyway). I have started to walk mornings as well. Just 10 minutes does it and it's a good start to the day. 

Coffee: A cheap legal 'pick me up'. 

Heroin: When all else fails. 

Before my current treatment, I planned my usage to act like a reward. I would set a certain day I could use and if I started to falter, I would talk myself around it knowing that the day was coming that I could use. I started at once weekly and got to once every six weeks. This worked well and I got my methadone to a fairly low dose. Unfortunately the depression set in and everything changed. If I wasn't predisposed to opiates and I had no depression, I might have been clean by now. It's also a great way to save or put money away for when the day comes.

Equality Wins in Spain / Americanazim in Australia

The Socialist Party in Spain has won another term in office and are to introduce important social reforms. The reforms are new laws for gender equality, new procedures to speed up divorce and the introduction of same sex marriages.

The key election promises to be introduced are major wins for equality and of course fiercely opposed by conservatives and the Roman Catholic Church.

This also renews hopes for the successful heroin trials to be extended throughout the country that had been stifled by pressure from the conservatives.

Americanazim in Australia

Right wing hate blog, A Western Heart has a serious problem. They can't spell. Sure they have spell checkers but they seem to have them set to US English.

"And the public adulation Obama receives is eerily reminiscent of how Hitler was received by vast numbers of Germans. But you have to know history to realize that."

"When you mix Leftist Ideology and Socialized Medicine"

AWH is a an Australian right wing hate blog authored & managed by 'Staff Writers'  which is made up of mainly Christian extremists, ultra right wing conservatives and Dr. Tingtong, president of the local model railway club. The common theme of the contributors is the hard leaning to Right-wing Authoritarianism.

AWH has an infatuation with American conservative ideals, especially those associated to the GW Bush administration. Links to their main contributors personal blogs are usually adorned with the American flag or have links to Israeli political issues.This hybrid of Australian politics and American conservative culture often includes references to American issues like gun rights, war glorification, GW Bush admiration, evangelistic ideals, pro Israeli aggression and other neocon ideology. 

Most articles have familiar themes and attract like minded individuals.* These themes include racism, Christian extremism, anti feminism, crime reporting and anti left wing opinions. All very much part of the Ackerman, Bolt & Blair type politics and social commentary. AWH does have some non political articles including pictures of cars, girls and guns that they will never own or touch.**

*Elijah is still learning

** Spud guns and popguns may be still be available by mail order

Why Christopher Pyne is Dangerous / R18+ Games - Opinion Beats Evidence Again

In a somewhat biased report from the ABC's 7:30 Report a few years back, the comments from Christopher Pyne show exactly why research based polices need to be implemented. Pyne dictates policies based on his own moral beliefs along with misgivings that marijuana is evil but alcohol is somehow OK . Dr. Alex Wodak who has spent his life dealing with drug and alcohol addiction has the qualifications needed to give genuine advice. Christopher Pyne on the other hand, is as thick as a piece of 4"2 redwood pine who's only term of reference is the flawed zero tolerance strategy. The statement below would have to go down as the most hypocritical gaff I have ever read.

ALEX WODAK: 

"Under the current system, of course, all the most vulnerable people in the country can roll up to any criminal and corrupt policeman that they know of and buy the drug and no questions asked about age or are you pregnant, or do you have a mental illness or whatever. If we had a taxed and regulated system, not only would we be able to have warnings on the packages, but we'd also be able to regulate the people who obtain cannabis from the regulated outlets". 

CHRISTOPHER PYNE:

"I don't accept that. I don't think you should regulate poison because it would be easier to manage it if you did. This is a poison and it's destroying our young people. It's affecting their mental health and the idea that governments should somehow get involved in it, regulate it, tax it, control the strength of it and then spend that money that's raised in taxation as though it was any other kind of revenue raising tool, I think, is an abomination".

Isn't this how the government treats alcohol regulation now? Incredible!

R18+ Games - Opinion Beat Evidence Again

First of all, I am not a gamer. I am though, an adult. This gives me the right to watch and do what I please within the law and when someone decides for me what I can't watch or do, I need a reason. It seems so often now the reason is because someone with the power doesn't think it's appropriate because of their opinion ... facts, evidence and research de damned.

South Australian Attorney-General Michael Atkinson is opposed to R18+ ratings for games because he wants to 

"protect children from harmful material". 

Amazingly his opinion is not wavering even though research has found that the average age of Australian gamers is 28 and over 50 per cent of gamers are over 18. Also in 2005, a survey found 88 per cent of Australians supported an R18+ classification for games.

I am sure even the tonks from the right would agree considering they hate governments telling them what they can & can't do and that violence is such a part of their ideology.

News.Com Forums Attracts The Loonies

An article on news.com about the Bali 9 and how three of them had their death sentence dropped to life imprisonment, brought out the loonies once again. I cannot fathom how easily these readers rattle off such violent and cruel comments. 28 of 69 comments wanted the Bali 9 hanged or shot dead for their crimes.

"The 9 are HUMAN garbage,parasites,bullies+PUS. tHE kind of weak thugs who laugh at people smaller,or alone,in Maccas! Put them on the express elevator to hell! Corby may have been innocent+ was not into the ppoison of herion.Keep some BALANCE."

Posted by: scullcracka - Comment 66 of 69

The hate is astounding but maybe they don't have the capacity to think through information properly because of insufficient brainpower. Maybe they are just sub-level humans and need a new category - Homo arsefaceions to separate them from the general population. From reading through them, a pattern emerges of cowardly self important egomaniacs sitting behind a PC for protection trying to get heard because no one else will listen to them. I just can't imagine living with one ... brrrrr - scary.

"they knew what they were doing.Shoot the Bali bombers then the drug traffickers .Then the story ends.No prisoner exchange"

Posted by: mark from brisbane of Brisbane - Comment 65 of 69

The constant mixing up of topics is reflective of their basic primary school level of thought. Connecting drug mules to killing thousands of Australians is common. Confusing inappropriate sentencing with 'they knew what they were doing'. I posted several posts which none got published. It seemed the moderators were hand picking controversial pro death penalty comments sprinkled with a few normal reactions but throwing in fluffy religious fodder which promptly got ripped apart.  

"actually corrine, if you are cuaght for murder in bali and are indonesian. you get presented to a firing squad and shot dead. just because its not on the tv or in the papers don't be an idiot and judge. its only because these people are australian that the media plays. Trust me, a lot of indonesian people get killed in indoneisian jails for murder. so in future, get your facts right before you open your gob. In my opionon them and the idiot corby should've been killed already. WHy should they get an appeal when they knew what they were doing. Why should corby only get 20 years for saying she didnt know there was a 4kg of pot in bodyboard bag. what an idiot, i'm pretty sure i;d know the weight difference between 4kilos and body board. they should all be shot. Regardless of the families at home, what about the drugs that we just going to destroy opther peoples lives. I bet their parents don't think about that."

Posted by: null of sydney - Comment 40 of 69

The standard of grammar seems to be particularly low for most of the comments. Does this suggest that the commentators are too young and not qualified to make such profound statements or they are simpletons who know how to type? I especially love the above comments from - 'null of sydney' (The name sort of sums it up ... 'null'):

"...so in future, get your facts right before you open your gob..."

Then there are the funny comments, not because they were well written or the author was being witty. You must read on, it is well worth it.

"This story reminds me of vegetarians, they are vegetarian because they don't want to eat animals but if they were just 2 inches tall the animals would have no problem eating the vegetarians.... My point is that the bali 9 are in a bad situation however if it was somebody else they would probably be laughing and wouldn't have a care in the world as they would be out on the streets dealing drugs and robbing people or beating people up however we are in no place to judge them for good or bad, just let the legal system do its thing and get on with your lives."

Posted by: Adam of Melbourne - Comment 43 of 69

"I can't understand how people in Australia can have such mild attitude towards drug trafficking. If someone kills somebody by other means everyone cries how brutal that is. But how many people one can kill in his/her life time? 1, 2, 5, 15? Even being a world record serial killer, you'll have a countable number. How many people and families are destroyed by drugs? Can any of you wuss give me a number? Not mentioning other social problems associated with it. Drug trafficking and distributing is as serious as any kind of crimes one can ever commit. Do we really need to collect a pile of corpse to make you people realize it is a deadly bloody crime and these traffickers deserve nothing less than death row?!"

Posted by: wzz of brighton - Comment 59 of 69

Finally we have the reader who separates them self from the rest of society. The pretentious notion that they would not lower themselves to be as human as others ... even if it meant disowning their family.

"My loved ones wouldnt be that stupid, and if they were I would disown them cause I have no tollerance for people like that. dont you "compassionate" people know that because of your SOFT veiws that we are all going to suffer with generations to come turning to crime cause the risk outways the punishment!!!!!!!!!!!!"

Posted by: steve of Melbourne - Comment 24 of 69

Marijuana & Reality / The Nutters from the INCB

Headline: Cannabis remains most abused drug: report

A recent international report from UN International Narcotics Control Board (INCB) shows that marijuana continues to be the most used drug in Australia. The INCB report found that 11 per cent of Australians over the age of 14 years old regularly use marijuana. It is estimated that over 60% of Australians between 14 - 50 years old have used marijuana previously. Recently the Federal Treasurer, Wayne Swann and Queensland Premier, Anna Bligh even admitted to smoking marijuana when they were younger. Even with a recent batch of hysterical reports trying to link casual marijuana use to lung cancer, psychotic disorders and gum disease, the fact is marijuana is relatively harmless compared to alcohol and tobacco. Arguments about marijuana being stronger now than 30 years ago don't hold up either. There seems to be a persistent group of anti-drugs crusaders who will bend facts and research to back their moral objection to people 'getting high'. 

One of those strange anti-drugs crusaders is Brian Watters member of the INCB and Salvation Army Major.

Commenting on the report, Watters said:

"They're quite serious drugs of addiction so people have the wrong perception of how dangerous they are. Countries like Australia have all the resources necessary to turn these things around, provided they have the will"

Marijuana is not addictive. The perception he talks about is from years of research debunking bombastic anti-drugs crusaders like Watters.  He is wrong to make such silly comments but it reflects the corrupt organisation that is the INCB. The INCB are notorious for spreading propaganda and interfering with countries like Australia to push the US 'War on Drugs' policy. Watters is also infamous for chairing the Australian National Council on Drugs, the peak body for providing drug policy advice to the Government.

Funny enough, not many 'pro' marijuana reports get headlines in Australia. Our media is very conservative regarding drug use, especially the Murdoch newspapers. Below is an extract from an article(non Murdoch) on recent Swiss research:

A study published in the Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine was completed on 5,263 teenage students in Switzerland and is producing some hair raising results. In line with a lot of studies that have been released in 2007 and 2008, this study boldly claims that it has found that marijuana use does not produce the fearful symptoms spread by anti-drug groups. The study seems to make a case that teenagers who use only marijuana, opposed to students who use marijuana and cigarettes are more active in sports, have better grades, are more socially adept and have used less illegal drugs.

Drug laws will change eventually but until they do, reports like the latest INCB report will keep getting headlines. Most people know drug policy is flawed but whilst there are votes in it, the politicians will continue with their silly 'tough on drugs' rhetoric.  There are many arguments for marijuana law reform and we just need to ask some basic questions.

• Is casual marijuana use more harmful than alcohol?

• How many people have died from marijuana use?

• How many acts of violence has marijuana use caused?

• Is marijuana addictive?

• Has drug prohibition reduced marijuana use?

• Has drug prohibition put marijuana users at risk?

• Have current marijuana laws benefited society?

• Do we prefer criminals or a regulatory body to manage the sale of marijuana?

• Is the money spent on arresting users better spent treating those who do develop a problem?

• Does marijuana use really cause social decay?

• Where can I score?

I think we know the answers to most of these questions.

The Nutters from the INCB

From Wikipedia:

The International Narcotics Control Board (INCB) is the independent and quasi-judicial control organ for the implementation of the United Nations drug conventions. It plays an important role in monitoring enforcement of restrictions on narcotics and psychotropics and in deciding which precursors should be regulated.

NEWS.com.au yesterday reported on comments made by INCB member, Brian Watters. Ex Salvation Army Major, Waters, a well known anti-drugs pundit, surprised no one when he rattled off his familiar disgust of drug use in Australia. Using already biased information, he pushed blame on celebrities, courts, sports stars, the government, Australians and anyone else of the Homo sapiens species.

Brian Watters is not only stubborn and naive but also dangerous. His vision of a drug free world is unrealistic and even though nations like the US and Sweden support his zero tolerance strategy, they have worst drug problems than most other countries. Fuckwits like Watters do not care at all for addicts or their health but follow the lead of the religious right and their morals based ideology. They have no time for personal rights or medical facts but are focussed on zero tolerance. Blaming courts for not being tough on celebrities because it 'sends the wrong message' is straight out of the 1970s. Like Howard & Rudd who target sports stars, 'sending the wrong message' is much more important than results. Being a member of the INCB is the ultimate role for Brian Watters. Like minded nutters, paid to preach their ideals to the masses of us poor uninformed people.

An indication of Watters rhetoric is his ability to play along with AFP folklore. The AFP with government backing often claim success at making inroads into drug importation or hurting the illicit drug market. As the heroin surge died down in the early 2000s because of illegal drug manufacturers moving to amphetamine based drugs, the AFP and the government claimed they had beaten the 'heroin epidemic'. A fantasy at best.

Brian Watters bemusedly said:

"Australia had much more success controlling other drugs such as heroin and cocaine".

The INCB is supposed to control legal drug manufacturing and overlook illicit drug policy worldwide. Although it has power in the legal drug market, it doesn't have jurisdiction over individual countries for illicit drug policies. It likes to think it does though and the INCB is often criticised for overstepping their boundaries. The INCB is effectively controlled by the US via the UN and is how the US is able to enforce it's 'War on Drugs' policy. The Netherlands allow soft drugs like cannabis and psilocybin mushrooms to be tolerated but do not officially legalise them because the Dutch government wants to adhere to international treaties. Although their scientific and research based approach to drug use has proved extremely successful, they were still berated publicly by the INCB. That was backed up by a spate of lies and hysterical speeches from the US drug czar. The INCB was also partly responsible for the ACT heroin trials to be abandoned after a threat to 'revisit' Tasmania's approval to manufacture morphine putting their opium poppy industry in jeopardy. Not surprisingly, Brian Watters was the chairman of the Australian National Council on Drugs which was established after the heroin trials were vetoed by John Howard.

In April 2003, former United Nations Drug Control Programme Chief of Demand Reduction Cindy Fazey wrote a scathing review of the Board, accusing it of overstepping its bounds:

Unfortunately these individuals also see their role not only as the guardians of the conventions, but also the interpreters of them as well. In their annual report they have criticised many governments, such as Canada for permitting the medicinal use of cannabis, Australia for providing injecting rooms and the United Kingdom for proposing to downgrade the classification of cannabis, which would entail less serious penalties than at present. These criticisms go far beyond their remit, and indeed it is hubris to criticise the Canadian Supreme Court.

Luckily, the era of conservative governments and influence is swinging away to a more fact driven society. Eventually, obdurate moralists will make way for the inexorable rise of evidence based drug policies. With the continued interference into a sovereign countries affairs from the INCB and the massive damaged caused by the 'War on Drugs', societies worldwide will are becoming fed up and are demanding change. Barbaric government drug policies forced on their citizens is starting to take it's toll and out of touch crusaders like Watters will be pushed into the history books as some of the most dangerous ideologists ever.

Piers Does Drugs ... Not Feminism

Peirs Akarmen (aka Fatty Fatty Boom Boom) is a strong and robust reporter for the Daily Telegraph. A precise person who hates his name spelt wrong. A roly poly crusaders against drugs.  A man of steel, a real man. Last Sunday on ABC's Insiders, a heated discussion on whether the 2010 summit board had enough women, zeroed in on comments made by the head the Affirmative Action group, Catherine Harris. The discussion brought up the point that Catherine Harris thought the male to female ration was out of whack and more women should be on the board. 

Peers said: 

"This is not what Mrs Harris is aspiring to because she is looking for sheer numbers". 

Barrie Cassidy replied jokingly:

"I suspect she's Ms Harris". 

Pieres response was:

"Oh, she is married to David Harris".

Of course, we can't have those new age fem-fascists challenging tradition, can we Mr. Akamann?.

Out of curiosity, I googled the man brick. To my surprise, this self appointed crusader against drugs is or was a cocaine user. He was also one of the goofballs who influenced Howard on rejecting the call for a heroin trial in the late 1990s. One link I found was to a NSW parliament hearing where independent Richard Jones (1988-2003) ripped into Peres for being a drug addict and for sexually harassing co workers. Ha Ha Ha, Oh I laughed so long and loud. This fat cockhead who is so vocal in his disgust of drug users is himself a druggie. I have even had a run in with him about drug policy on his blog where he declared:

"zero tolerance is better than that idiotic policy of harm minimisation".

I suppose he could afford his cocaine and didn't need help so why should he care for those who can't.

Here is a snippet from that parliament hearing in 1997:

The joke is that Piers Akerman, when he lived in Albion Street in the 1970s, used LSD and marijuana regularly. He also used cocaine regularly when he was in the United States of America, in Los Angeles and Washington. I have spoken to someone who shared a number of cocaine lines with Piers Akerman. He was a drug addict. He also sexually harassed young female employees of News Limited in Washington and was sent back to the United Kingdom, where he tried to become the editor of the London Times but was denied that. He tried to get a job recently with the Sydney Morning Herald but was denied that, too. Here we have this hypocrite who is working hard to oppose what would have been a very useful reform in the drug fight in this country and now he is working against the interests of the community by torpedoing that. He himself was a drug addict and he still is a drug addict on legal drugs to this very day.

Feed The Hungry or Build A $7 Million Church?

Religion was an big part of my early life. Not because I was a believer but because my parents were. I always went to a catholic school and church was every Sunday without fail. Then I discovered that religion was not about god at all.

A nasty side effect of religion, extremism is prevalent today as the various sides do battle. All extremists are the hypocrites with the the likes of the right wing anti muslim league, the religious right and the fundamentalists. From memory, religion was about humility and helping those who are worse off than you. Hoarding money is the simple litmus test. No one claiming a religious conviction can rightfully be rich. That money needs to be donated to the less well off to be truly religious. So when I stumble across an article called A happy day for Brisbane on the blog, Australian Politics (the one with a picture of Ronald Reagan), I now see what makes socialised religion so appalling. Brisbane's St. John's Cathedral is an anglican church and a well known landmark. That's all fine and dandy but how much are they spending on this thing? 

More than $3.95 million had been raised for the facelift since 1989, with another $3million still needed. "There are some people who have given us more than a $1million of their own money and some who have given $10 because it's all they can afford,"

That's not for religion at all, that's for a corporate headquarters. The article is proudly displayed on Australian Politics by right wing pundit, Dr. Tingtong. He adds a little piece of himself:

I have often attended a Christmas service at St. John's. It is a truly magical place. The sermons are just fluff, though

Most interesting but less entertaining than Dr. Tingtong's profound commentary is is the opening line:

Brisbane's St. John's Cathedral is now 17m closer to heaven after two copper spires were lifted on to its roof.

Jesus H. Christ! ... 17m closer to heaven? Ha, I knew it ... these people still think you can but your way into heaven. Good luck.

Diary: Methadone vs Morphine Result

DIARY:

I did it. I am now on slow release oral morphine!

Technically I am not taking morphine to manage my addiction but for a pain issue. I now take enough morphine everyday that would kill over 5 people. Impressed? To prescribe this amount daily and to a known drug addict requires a permit from the Health Department. Under no circumstance is morphine allowed to be prescribed to manage an addiction so the emphasis is on the pain.

Even though I have fought for this for a long time, I am not sure if it is going to work for me. My diagnosis is Co-Occurring Disorders (COD). Drug addiction and depression which was being treated by methadone alone. This was hell for me because of the depression only dissipating in the mornings and resuming in full force for the rest of the day. The problem I am having is I feel depressed all day now. There is no doubt morphine manages addiction extremely well but methadone gave me a morning of well being or what you lay folk would call normality. I don't get this now and I am in panic mode again. The weekend was shocking for my depression and I used heroin to shake it off. I am ringing my doctor first thing after this post.

The results though could be good for others as there are some great benefits treating heroin addiction with morphine. Obviously treatment with heroin is ideal for those long term users but morphine offers some advantages over methadone. I no longer have to go to a chemist 3 times a week and pay $35 for my methadone. I now pick up my morphine once a week and but only pay $33.50 once a month with my script. I do have to see my doctor though every month instead of every 2-3 months. Morphine holds you from withdrawal much better than methadone and doesn't have as many side effects.

The down side though is diversion. It would be easy to divert for profit but as I always argue, if you sell your medication, you have to buy something else to replace it. You simply cannot go without it for even one day. Why would you sell it just to buy it back back on the street? Some might use the proceeds to buy heroin but if they were just given heroin to start with, most of these issues would disappear.

Govt. Get Tough On Drugs In Sport ... Again ... Again

Oh dear, here we go again. Drugs in sport was such a hot issue ... until Howard stopped raising it. Fortunately, he couldn't say anymore because he wasn't PM anymore and soon the issue disappeared. Not wanting to be beaten to the title as the 'Tough on Drugs' political party, the government has decided to stick it's head in the sand and blow hot air out of it's arse by declaring they are working on a new policy. Late last month, Federal Sport Minister Kate Ellis confessed to preparing a new anti-illicit drugs policy for sport aimed at enforcing tougher standards for all national sports. So it seems any hope for a sensible debate on drugs in sport is looking slim.

Federal Sport Minister Kate Ellis:

“We want to be very clear that our sporting role models aren't sending any mixed messages to the broader community as we try and make it clear that illicit drug use in unacceptable and dangerous...”

These deluded politicians are mixing up performance enhancing drugs with illicit drugs. I have no tolerance for drug cheats in sport either. It is a professional industry and based on competition. It needs a level playing field and taking performance enhancing drugs is cheating. If they weren't competing, then who cares but as we saw with Marion Jones, the effects it had on other competitors was devastating.

Recreational drug use is personal. They have no contract with the government or some moral overlord (like Dr. Who) to be a role model to kids. They are not obliged to resist drugs or alcohol just because they're sports stars. It's their business and no person or government has the right to make them separate from society because Australians are a 'sporty bunch' or that we still see ourselves as part of Howard's Australia, idolising sport. How moronic is it that other celebrities like musicians or actors are known for their liberal use of drugs but sports stars are too good for that because they are, well, basically they are good at catching or kicking a ball.

U.S. Jails 1 in 100

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States incarcerates more people than any other country in the world...

I am not a big fan of the US government as it has some of the most draconian policies on this planet. It's not a republican/democrat issue either but more to do with the huge ego of the leaders and their hypocritical moralistic attitudes. I don't really know Americans as a people but if there is one criticism, it is the misguided attitude of self importance. This is clearly reflected in their patriotism which can be rather sickly and is usually extremely overdone. Apart from this, they struggle with the ups and downs of daily life like most of the world. There is an exception though ... many of them will probably go to jail for actions that you and I would consider paltry.

The US policy that effects most of the world is not the 'War on Terror' we so often hear about but another war ... the 'War on Drugs'. This insidious policy started by Nixon in 1971 has grown into a massive problem for the US and the rest of the world. Each year as the problems caused by this policy grow, the more the US push their military like actions. Part of these actions is to muster up support from other countries by either bullying them to adhere to their standards or to blame them for supplying the drugs to an eager consumer market in the US.

One of major effects of the 'War on Drugs' is the massive prison population that appeared over the last 35 years. The drug enforcement agency (DEA) is so powerful now that is almost a military organisation. They have helicopters, heavy artillery, forensic units, soldiers, combat armoury, satellites and even tanks. The officers are dedicated and the prize is people in jail. Not just large drug barons but anyone connected to drugs ... small dealer-users, users, medical marijuana patients, growers, doctors etc. The endplan was simple once - to wipe out illicit drug use completely. Now that has been replaced with the aim to arrest as many people as possible, using any means available. As they often quote, one battle at a time. The problem is the war is never actually won, just lots of casualties. This approach is now taking it's toll with one in every 100 US citizens in jail. At the end of 2006, one in 32 were either in jail or on parole. That is over 2.2 millions incarcerated people. More than China and more than Russia. In fact more than any other nation on earth.

Sadly, over 50% of these prisoners are are drug related. This is a stunning revelation as the majority of drug arrests are for possession of marijuana, and most people in prison for a drug offense have no history of violence or high-level drug dealing. The number of prisoners held prior to sentencing is also rising. In 2006, 62% of prisoners were awaiting trial. Most were arrested on drug charges.

Although the US spend over $69 billion collectively per year on fighting drugs, the rate of drug use hasn't really changed since 1975 ... four years after the "War on Drugs" was launched. Stricter sentencing has steadily risen since then with such bizarre policies as "3 strikes and you're out" where on the 3rd conviction, a mandatory life imprisonment is imposed. For a drug addict, this could mean a life of jail for being caught using drugs. Many of these offenders though are just marijuana users and logic tells me there is something very wrong. Mandatory sentencing was imposed in the early 1980s to take away the discretion judges were showing on addicts and 'soft drug' users. This was followed by the "3 strikes and you're out" policy. Not to be beaten, some bright spark wasn't happy the prison population of drug felons had only doubled in 10 years. They came up with the idea of targeting buyers by posing as dealers. Waiting at well known drug dealing areas, the undercover police would wait for buyers to ask for drugs and they would then be arrested. It was such an easy way to increase the number of arrests it soon changed to where the undercover police would approach cars at traffic lights and ask a driver if they want some 'really cheap dope'. If the driver said yes, they were arrested. With tougher sentences and a higher risk of going to jail, maybe for life, some buyers started bring guns just to by marijuana. So not only did the prison population grow but the rate of drug deaths and violence.

The height of sentencing insanity was when Ronald Reagan reacted to the crack problem that peaked whilst he was in office. Cocaine was very much a rich white man's drug. It was expensive and used mainly by the affluent and predominately white America. It lacked the stigma of heroin and the socio-economic links to amphetamines and the lower classes. Crack cocaine though was much more addictive and inexpensive. It ripped through the 'other' America very quickly and drug crime grew even more than the 'War on Drugs' had already caused. In the wisdom of a typical zero tolerance government, a federal law was passed that sets a 100 to one sentencing disparity between the two forms of cocaine. This means that distribution of just five grams of crack cocaine (about a thimble full) yields a five year mandatory minimum sentence, while it takes 500 grams of powder cocaine to trigger the same five year sentence. Crack is the only drug for which there is a federal mandatory minimum sentence for mere possession.

The prison population in the US now costs nearly $50 billion dollars a year to maintain yet there is still over filling in the the jails. It seems America is doomed to have more criminals than non criminals if the trend continues. The additional consequences are also now starting to be felt. Masses of ex convicts unable to regain previous jobs and having to accept menial employment. The threat of a potential third strike causing some to shoot dead police to avoid life imprisonment even for petty crimes or minor drug possession charges. Some states are even spending more on prisons than education or core services have to be cut to fund them. It all seems very hypocritical for a country that boasts being the home of the free and fighters for liberty.