If you follow the conversation you will see I point out fairly clearly the difference between the fraudulent drug war and its failed policies, and the need for evidence based drug policy. One which DOES NOT, and I REPEAT, DOES NOT, seek to criminalize people who take drugs. I have said this several times now in posts I spent a significant amount of effort on writing.
You are speaking from a black and white perspective. One that only supports either being a good or bad person based on what side you are on, and not how valid your point is and whether it actually could be beneficial. If I seek to challenge the idea that there should be structure and that drugs are not safe nor harmless and they will, can and have harmed people since forever, then I am for prohibition? You are implying that if someone supports proper regulation it means punishment and criminalization. It does not. If I dont want needles in my community that kids could pick up and play with, just because I want there to be a lawful structure in place to protect others does not mean I want prohibition.
This super defensive "Dont take away our drugs! And if you support any sort of positive change then you are a threat to us" mentality is flawed and detrimental. The current drug policy needs to change but in its place wont be a policy that lets you do whatever you want. And if you think that, well, thats a very naive belief based on a world that doesnt exist nor ever will.
We shouldnt be demonizing people or drugs. We should be controlling them in the best possible ways, both people and drugs though. We need control. Our society is built upon hiearchies of control that for the most part, at least away from corrupting influences, works pretty well. I think some people have a really unrealistic and uninformed opinion about drugs that veers towards just blanket attacking anything or anyone that doesnt justify the destructions drugs can and will do. They seemingly want to live in a world where drugs are out of control and causing immeasurable harms to society but, hey, at least drugs are available. At least we can get high. Because thats the most important thing, right?
Obviously not. Society would crumble if we simply opened the taps and let go of seeking to hold up society. We wouldnt be a very caring and responsible society. There has to be a line drawn in the sand and I say that and I allow for A LOT of sh*t personally. I think I am extremely open minded and accepting but there is living in a romantic world where just letting people do what they want and we live happily ever after, and the reality. People will do harm to themselves and others. We will still have bucket loads of problems to deal with, lots of them. The crime, the economic damage, the social issues, mental, emotional, psychological etc. For all the freedom you give people, the fact is many will utilize that freedom to do the same things they did when those freedoms werent there. The question then becomes; what are the consequences? Its not rainbows and unicorns. You are dealing with the raw power and potential of drug use/abuse and its capability to either transform peoples lives or derail them completely.
You arent for prohibition if you see these REAL issues and want to find beneficial ways of tackling them WITHOUT, EMPHASIS AGAIN ON WITHOUT, criminalizing people and drugs.
I have studied psychotherapy (not actively a therapist, or anywhere near sufficiently qualified) and parts of addiction studies too. For all the positive reaffirming and nurturing environments established to accomodate peoples needs and their issues, there are also just as many boundaries, expectations and firm, sincere and well intentioned structures in place to ensure the client knows who owns responsibility for their core issues. For people perhaps not adequately trained in these lines of work, there can be a tendency sometimes to misinterpret and sometimes confuse the role of the authority figure in the relationship. And to assume it means to take on the baggage of others and be a scapegoat, a pin cushion, whipping post etc. To make excuses, be led down to the garden path, to not hold firm and address the issues and challenge them etc. No system we have in place, for and against the current drug policy supports such characteristics. People get help with their drug use/abuse but they are not considered exempt from their duty to recognize their issues and prevent them from affecting others. This is a form of shared responsibility in society. You talk about having volunteered for harm reduction organizations but you are not exposed to the dark realities of the underbelly of drug use/abuse, not as a volunteer. You can be a volunteer at a psych ward, doesnt infer you are treating the patients and know what is going on. You could be a volunteer at a football stadium but you arent playing with the professional A team. A volunteer is a pretty low level position, unless you volunteer as a trained/qualified professional. Its a little bit more complicated than the idealistic and restricted view into a vast world. A world that would scare the sh*t out of you if you were to step into the shoes of someone who is on the front line on a daily basis with some of the worst examples of abuse and addiction.
At the end of the day, your drug use/abuse is your responsibility. For all the support you can get, including better drug policies, there will never be a time when that responsibility doesnt belong to you. If you cant assume that responsibility then society will do instead. Again, that doesnt make me a prohibitionist.