Looking down on addicts

dr0tcl(64)

Published in

#addiction

Words

1113

Reading

5 min

Listen

Play

As a society we are taught to look down on addicts, we are told if we see someone who looks like a drug addict we should stay away from them because they lie, cheat and steal, we look at them as a stain on society.

Drug addiction:

It seems counter intuitive to say but someone that is addicted to drugs doesn't make a drug addict. The term drug addict over the years has become more of a slang term, where rather than someone being called a drug addict because they have an addiction they are now called a drug addict if the substance controls, takes over and ruins someones life.

Over the years more and more darker connotations become attached to the term so for someone to be a drug addict they have to perpetuate the stereotypes of a drug addict. For example someone that drinks two cups of coffee a day without fail will not be considered a drug addict, even though they are clearly addicted to a substance that is a drug and it would hinder there performance if they were not to have it, they are reliant.

So even people that are clearly addicted to a drug, take it every day multiple times a day and would struggle without, are not considered drug addicts. The same goes for tobacco smokers, most people don't look at someone smoking a think they are a degenerate drug addict, they think it's just a smoker.

Yet if someone was to live a productive life yet be micro dosing cocaine throughout the day they would definitely be considered as a drug addict, and now it is more dangerous and you will be more intoxicated if you are taking cocaine but fundamentally is being addicted not being addicted?

What makes a drug addict:

Being addicted or even reliant on a drug is not enough to be considered as a fully fledged drug addict, so if it's not addiction or reliance then what is it?

From my experiences someone is considered a drug addict if they regularly take a drug that is highly illegal or very potent. This makes it a very subjective idea because it means you take into account legality and the strength of a drug over actually being addicted or reliant.

When areas are left this widely open to interpretation it makes a blatant mockery of the law. We grow up in a world where realistically in the UK and America the majority of the populations are addicted to some form of drugs, but because most people aren't taking illegal drugs they are better than someone taking illegal drugs.

I'm sure most of you grew up in a home where in the mornings someone in your family was always drinking a coffee and in the evening drinking a glass of wine or beer, which is seen as mostly harmless, but I feel it is vastly hypocritical to punish drug addicts when we live in societies where most people are addicts.

Legality and hypocrisy:

My main point is that you should not punish people for being a drug addict just because you stand against their drug of choice. For example does it not seem vastly hypocritical and really quite insane for a court room to sentence someone to jail time for possessing a drug, yet after the verdict the majority if the people in the court room including the judge will go home after and indulge in taking their drug of choice.

Worse than the blatant hypocrisy is the blatant corruption. Many people in government take drugs and have partaken in or still partake in consuming illegal drugs, though this is not the corruption I want to focus on.

A person in a powerful position can make a drug illegal to portray the users of said drug as bad people, they can ban a drug with a political agenda attached, which could be from shunning a certain group of people to make themselves look better or above. Or it could be so that they themselves can sell a different drug legally and make huge profit.

Drugs are just used as a bargaining chip for corruption on all levels, they distract people from more serious issues at hand. Decriminalizing drugs would lower corruption, likely lower drug use, save tax payers money and help to properly educate. It would also save uncountable amounts of money to put the quite frankly insane war on drugs to an end. To be honest it amazes me that the war on drugs is still ongoing because it was lost before it even started and everyone knows that.
If you look at why drugs are still so highly illegal the only conclusion I can come to is that they are deeply tied to government corruption.

Where I stand:

I am personally of the standpoint that drugs should be decriminalized across the board because I feel it would bring so many benefits. Firstly rather than arresting people for possession and then putting them in jail it would allow addicts that need help to actually be helped. Not only does it cost bast amounts to hold people in prison it is also shown to rarely help peoples addictions. People who have their lives detrimentally effected by addiction need to be helped and putting them in a dangerous place filled with other addicts and dealers is rarely going to help.

Decriminalizing drugs forces governments to be more transparent and governments don't like transparency. Power attracts people that want to use it, god or bad, so for every person in government using their power for good there is someone using their power for bad. Decriminalizing drugs would add transparency which would allow the governments and people to find some people that are blatantly misusing their position.

It is also widely available knowledge that the biggest dealers in history are governments and if you were to include legal drugs in there it would be insanity too see the amount of drugs sold by any given government.

So no matter your political stance, left or right, however far in either direction if you want the government to be more transparent, less corrupt and less prone to corruption you should support the decriminalization of drugs. After all we are all addicted to something.