There are a few interesting facts out today.
From the BBC
Restricting the availability of legal abortion does not appear to reduce the number of women trying to end unwanted pregnancies, a major report suggests.
That is certainly an interesting read. Get that crazy Repubs? Roe vs. Wade or no Roe vs. Wade- the number of abortions in the US should hover around the same value if global trends are anything to go by.
One of the first things I asked myself upon reading the above article was if there were similar trends for marijuana.
Sure enough, Marijuana Consumption Drops in U.K. Despite Liberalized Laws This report is from 2006.
Or this:
From the Cato Institute: Drug Decriminalization in Portugal: Lessons for Creating Fair and Successful Drug Policies
On July 1, 2001, a nationwide law in Portugal took effect that decriminalized all drugs, including cocaine and heroin. Under the new legal framework, all drugs were "decriminalized," not "legalized." Thus, drug possession for personal use and drug usage itself are still legally prohibited, but violations of those prohibitions are deemed to be exclusively administrative violations and are removed completely from the criminal realm. Drug trafficking continues to be prosecuted as a criminal offense.
The data show that, judged by virtually every metric, the Portuguese decriminalization framework has been a resounding success. Within this success lie self-evident lessons that should guide drug policy debates around the world.
Drawing an analogy: Norman Schwartzkopf once said in an interview (I'm quoting from memory) that it is impossible to win a war as long as the civilian population is against you. Of course, what he meant was it's impossible to do unless you're willing to obliterate an entire population (or force the remaining to live on reservations), though on second thought the term "we won!" is perhaps not at all appropriate for such cases.
The above is meant to exemplify two approaches to reducing drug use (or abortions or anything else for that matter). One approach sees drug use as a form of sickness (not to say that everyone who smokes a joint once in a while is somehow "sick") and the people using drugs therefore in need of help, treatment or maybe just a little love; the other "zero tolerance" policy is simply to try and get rid of, scare the shit out of, or threaten to ruin the life of anyone who does it. Both policies "work" in reducing drug use... I guess. However, the second policy has some serious side effects, such as turf wars, real wars and putting otherwise good people behind bars.
This is kind of what the US does, on one hand claiming to be the "Land of the Free" and on the other locking away more of its own citizens than the entire rest of the world. Put another way, your chances of going to jail for something are higher in America than anywhere else on Earth.
The US has historically taken the rode of "zero tolerance". Basically, it's decided to "obliterate" ("hide" would also be a good word here) a large portion of its own population, consisting to a large extent of the non-rich and famous, because (they can't afford the best lawyers and) it can't convince them otherwise. There is even a second level of irony here. Locking someone up for something they do to their own body because "it's bad for you" when at the same time everyone knows that going to jail and missing out seeing your family is about the worst thing you can do to destroy someone's future in life. Not just them, but the people who look up to them as well. As one social worker at Angola prison (Louisiana) once said in a documentary film "Locking someone's mommy or daddy up has yet to ever make anyone into a better person."
Here's one last article I found interesting...
Why Don´t More Colombians Take Drugs?
It is almost impossible to address the issue of drug consumption in Colombia without encountering a remarkable paradox. Any logical hypothesis would assume that the country would be a high consumer of drugs. Firstly, the country has a virtually unmatched supply of cheap and high quality drugs. A gram of cocaine can cost just 5 dollars, with 10 dollars for a gram of heroine. At a dollar a joint, marijuana is even cheaper than cigarettes, and cigarettes aren’t even taxed. These drugs are accessible to a majority of Colombians; narcotics consumption expert Augusto Perez estimates that in most Bogotá neighborhoods, they can be bought within a 200 meter radius of one’s given location. Needless to say, all these drugs are generally unadulterated and of the highest quality, as can no doubt be testified by the hordes of narcoturistas who regularly make their way to the country with the sole intention of consuming marijuana, cocaine, and other substances.