In the past century, one of the single most insane injustices perpetrated by society against itself is the war on drugs, which has in no way and in no facet ever made the slightest bit of sense. Its tenets and goals are unproductive and unworkable, its foundations and positions are untrue and insupportable, its methods are dangerous and destructive and its operations are corrupt, hypocritical and inconsistent.

Let’s get some of this bullshit about drugs straight right off the bat. There is an endless string of misconceptions about drugs that need to be addressed. In each case, I will be using a direct line or position I have seen presented by multiple people who support the drug war. In each case, I will explain why this position is so full of shit that you drown in it.

Drug Myth #1 : "All drugs are bad".

The first and most idiotic claim which the bottom rung of the anti drug movement makes is that all drugs are alike. Of course, generalization is the tool of the ignorant, but in this case the behavior, in large part a result of out and out lies from government and religious groups mixed with a constant pressure to encourage absolutely no research into the subject matter, has resulted in a population so astoundingly ignorant of the matter they oppose that it makes it difficult to even converse with them.

Drugs run a gauntlet of types and effects, and a good portion of what you ingest is, or could be considered under certain circumstances, a drug. Some examples: nutmeg, in appropriate doses, constitutes a drug. Chocolate, likewise, isn’t just considered a drug at certain dosages, it is classified as a drug in pretty much any form or, more accurately, it contains a chemical that is a drug. Most medications are drugs, from aspirin to morphine. So this claim is, right at the heart, completely inane. Drugs are already used legally for a variety of functions, such as a mild tool like caffeine, used to prolong activity, to a moderate tool like valium which is used to reduce stress and promote rest and sleep, to extreme tools like morphine, used to ease the discomfort of extreme pain. They are already used legally for recreation, everything from chocolate for flavor enjoyment to alcohol, which is used to induce everything from amusing disorientation to outright euphoria.

But the issue goes beyond legal uses of drugs. The claim is wrong even if you were to make it regarding illegal drugs alone. All drugs are different, and have different effects at different levels. LSD is an illegal drug, and yet there is no known damage the drug does to the human body that has been verified by medical science or scientific study. At best, there is some questionable research that suggests that LSD can cause short term damage to the chromosomes of male sperm, but your damned underwear can do that. Second hand smoke does that, and with more notable effects than LSD.

Even among the drugs that do have a distinct and verifiable negative effect, it’s unrealistic, untrue and detrimental to mass associate them. There are drugs like THC, which are effectively harmless, although they can show moderate detrimental effects if used excessively. There are drugs like straight cocaine, which can be dangerous if misused and deadly if abused, and can tend to encourage both behaviors in the user. There are drugs like heroine which can be extremely detrimental to the health of the user, even after the user stops taking the drug in some instances. Of course, all three of these chemicals have nothing in common saving two things. They are drugs, and they can all also be used, in some circumstances, without any long term detrimental effects at all.

So to say ‘all drugs’ are anything beyond their dictionary definition is nothing more than a statement of ignorance. It makes no true or valid point from any objective standpoint. To say they are all bad is a statement of the most profound ignorance, or an outright lie, take your pick.

Drug Myth #2 : "Drugs damage the body."

This falls into pretty much the same category as the first myth. Still, there are details that need to be addressed. First of all, anyone that takes three seconds to think about it realizes that this can’t be true. After all, drugs include the realm of pharmaceuticals, which are used, in fact, to help heal and protect the body, as opposed to damaging it. So the statement is clearly wrong. But further, as I stated, this statement doesn’t even hold true to merely ‘illegal drugs’.

Both acid and marijuana have been shown to do, in the case of pot, negligible, and in the case of acid, none whatsoever, damage to the body. Most drugs, if used in moderation don’t do any damage that your body can’t have undone in a matter of days. Technically, exercise damages the body, as you tear up your muscles and wait for them to rebuild, stronger. Moderate pot does less damage than that.

The most important thing to remember about a majority of drugs is that they don’t actually do any ‘damage’ to the body. What they actually do is tweak the way chemicals are used within the body. Once the drug is purged from the body, bodily operations generally just return to normal. And this is where the misconception lies. Many people literally live under the delusion that the ‘high’ caused by most recreational drugs is the result of out and out damage done to the body, when in fact it’s merely a short term, non-destructive variation of the body’s operations. In some cases, certain drugs can cause harm to the body. In some instances, that harm is irreparable. Of course, in these cases it is vital to make it clear which drugs carry this risk and which don’t. The alternative, lie about most drugs by claiming that they are all as bad as the most extreme, merely results in a populace which, once it learns that they have been misled in one instance, will be unable to work from a viable knowledge base. They can no longer trust the information they’ve received, and are likely to conclude that even truly dangerous drugs are safe or that all drugs are dangerous, two false notions.

Drug Myth #3 : "Drugs will ruin your life."

I think I’ve harped on long enough about generalizing drugs, so we’ll skip that part and assume that those who perpetrate this myth are referring to illegal recreational drugs. I will counter this point in the most simple fashion, namely consistent evidence.

I use drugs. I have used several different drugs. My life is not ruined. I can consistently demonstrate, through testing or application, my intelligence to be higher than that of the average citizen. I have a job that pays above the average for my current geographical location, and in fact is higher than the average in the United States. I am in above average physical condition, and enjoy a positive relationship with my friends, co-workers, neighbors and family. I have active goals and hobbies which I enjoy pursuing. I am happy with my life, and it appears to exceed the national standard. Finally, I’m far from unique in this.

Most intelligent, successful people I know have used illegal chemicals at least once. A majority of that group continues to do so, although most isolate their usage to one drug, generally marijuana. I have seen lives ruined by drugs, but these are in the vast minority. I have seen as many lives ruined by swimming, and more by driving. I’ve seen more lives ruined by religion, domestic violence, etc etc than drugs. In fact, among those whose lives I’d conclude are ‘ruined’ , or even close to ruined, drug use ranks as one of the least common causes of this ruination.

Further, this trend is consistent. A majority of citizens use recreational drugs, either illegal, nicotine or alcohol. Among these, the two most likely to ruin lives are the two that are legal, and even then, a majority of users manage these chemicals in a manner that is responsible and not detrimental to their lives.

The fact is, winners do use drugs. Looking through time, a variety of celebrated, important people have used illegal chemicals, from the revered George Washington to John Wayne to Robin Williams (although he might not be the best example). Even people who have gone to excess, take as an example Hunter S. Thompson, have lead exceptional, active and far from ruined lives (although he, too, might not be the best example).

Can drugs be abused? Can they ruin lives? Of course they can. Almost any tool can. The internet can be used to ruin lives. Right now a large population of anti-social, mentally unstable misfits abandons the external world to crawl into a virtual world that affects their mentality in severe and often negative ways. Drugs, on the other hand, are one of the least threatening things we face, or would be if there wasn’t the risk of long term incarceration looming over the heads of most users.

Drug Myth #4 : "Illegal Drugs are Useless"

First of all, let’s get something clear right now. Recreation, itself, isn’t useless. In fact, a good portion of human activity is geared towards that goal. So the very term ‘recreational drug’ makes one potential use quite clear. Essentially, when people make this claim, they are applying a false standard that few other activities are ever challenged with. The statement often appears in a second form, "I don’t understand why people do drugs." This ponderable is based on ignorance, but not merely ignorance of drugs, rather, it belies a complete ignorance of the basic human condition.

Some drugs create a direct and clear sense of euphoria. The reason people use drugs that do this is apparent. It makes them feel good, really good. (and we’ll address the whole ‘I don’t need drugs to feel good’ line as a separate ‘myth’ in and of itself.) Other drugs, like hallucinogenic drugs, allow the user a degree of exploration that is essentially unique. The human animal enjoys new and fascinating experiences. People like to explore. Drugs are often just an expression of this. In some cases, the usage is spiritual, as people attempt to contemplate the deeper notions of existence with a mind freed from the daily grind by a good psychotropic. Sound silly to you? Look objectively at the act of spending hours on end each day, on your knees, head bowed, hoping that some unseen higher force will see fit to toss you a crumb of insight. Drug use for spiritual insight is no more or less silly than pretty much anything else done to gain that same insight.

There are people who use drugs because prior use has left them with a physical or mental addiction, a need, either actual or imagined, to continue using the drugs or suffer. Some people use drugs as an alternative to reality, essentially escapism, like video games, movies, or sleeping too much. In essence, drugs are used for the same reasons that most other types of recreation are.

Of course, the fact is that even beyond recreation, drugs are far from useless. Ether and morphine have both enjoyed practical medical usage. Marijuana could occupy a center stage among drugs useful for a variety of long term medical treatments were it not for an excessively ignorant and hostile society. So, again, the myth is clearly shown to have no merit whatsoever.

You could also just ask yourself,"Why does something that's completely useless make so many people so much money every year?"

Drug Myth #5 : "I don’t need drugs to "

Let’s tackle this beauty, the very essence of debating on crack. I don’t need drugs to enjoy myself. I don’t need drugs to write poetry. I don’t need drugs to dance all night, etc. The key message of import here is "I’m better than any drug user because I don’t use drugs to do these things." The word ‘need’ is misused here. It implies that somehow the drug user has chosen to do drugs out of some form of weakness or inability, and if only the drug user were as accomplished as the person making this claim, then they would stop using drugs.

Need refers to something that is required absolutely to attain the goal. While there are some addicts, especially among smokers, who claim to ‘need’ the drug to attain some effect or another, the truth of the matter is that most drug users never ‘needed’ the drug. They don’t need the drug now. They simply choose to use the drug.

The statement "I don’t need drugs to " is on par with someone who cooks at home looking with utter contempt at someone who has chosen to, for that evening, eat out, and saying, "I don’t need some fancy restaurant to enjoy food." Sure, they don’t need a restaurant to enjoy food. Probably neither does the person eating out. They may, themselves, be an excellent cook. They have merely chosen to eat out for that night. Perhaps they don’t feel like cooking. Perhaps they wish to dine with friends in a social environment. Perhaps they want to experience some new taste experience. Most drug users are no different.

There is no need, merely a desire for experience and exploration. Drugs provide both of these, allowing a person to be entertained as well as briefly experience reality from a unique standpoint. It need fulfill no role other than this (although it can), and can be easily categorized in with any other form of recreation, from climbing to reading to going to the movies. You don’t need to go to the movies to enjoy yourself, either, but surely you can comprehend why other people do it. If you can’t, then as I said, you are fundamentally ignorant of the human condition, and any issues you have with drugs are merely a symptom of your overall issues with humanity.

As for creativity, I want to make this very clear. Artistic creation, while I won’t say ‘relies on’ (although there are plenty of people who would), definitely often results from two things, namely experience and emotion. Drug indulges both of these to an extreme, therefor it only stands to reason that drug use could significantly influence artistic direction. Is it needed? Definitely not. Is it somehow better or worse than any other muse? Definitely not. It’s just another (once again) means of self exploration.

Drug Myth # 6 : "I don’t want to poison my body with drugs."

drug Pronunciation Key (dr g)n.

1. A substance used in the diagnosis, treatment, or prevention of a disease or as a component of a medication.
2. Such a substance as recognized or defined by the U.S. Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.
3. A chemical substance, such as a narcotic or hallucinogen, that affects the central nervous system, causing changes in behavior and often addiction.

poi·son Pronunciation Key (poi z n)n.

1. A substance that causes injury, illness, or death, especially by chemical means.
2. Something destructive or fatal.

And that’s all she wrote. This is, once again, another use of what amounts to a subtly placed lie in order to undermine the subject being maligned. Drugs are not poison. In face, the first definition of ‘drug’ is fundamentally opposed to the definition of poison. Even in instances where you have recreational drugs that can cause injury, illness or death, they do not, through their use, necessarily cause these things. Cyanide is a poison, because if you take any appreciable amount, it will permanently damage you or even kill you. Salt is not a poison because, although in large doses it can kill you by chemical means, it can still be used in appreciable amounts without doing you any harm. Drugs are the same way. They only become poisons when used to excess, which is the case for most things, excepting, of course, things which are actually labeled as poisons, which are chemically harmful by nature. And, of course, we’ve already talked about how harmful most recreational drugs are, which is to say, ranging from potentially dangerous to not harmful at all. In most accurate terms, there is a toxicity level which can be assigned to pretty much any and all chemicals which denotes the point, or amount at which that chemical kills over 50% of the members of a species who suffer internal exposure (generally ingestion) to the chemical. At that stage, it becomes a poison. Water has such a level. Salt has such a level. So do all drugs, both helpful and recreational. Most recreational drugs, in the dosages sold and used, don’t come anywhere close.

This trend, by now, should have become clearly illustrated, from the use of the word ‘need’ to describe the desire to use a drug, to the use of the word ‘damage’ to depict the effects of drugs on the body, to the use of the word ‘poison’ to describe drugs. This is nothing more than a well known logical fallacy, the use of misapplied words within a foundation statement to maintain an insupportable negative idea. This naturally leads us into...

Drug Myth # 7 : "Drugs are just a form of escapism."

This is a similar type of argument used to malign those who use drugs directly. By declaring, universally, that all people who use drugs are doing it merely because they ‘can’t hack reality’ again is merely a manner of slandering drug users to make the anti-drug user seem more competent, and unjustly so.

There are those who undoubtedly do use drugs as a form of escapism. There are people who go to online chat rooms as a form of escapism. There are people who read trash literature as a form of escapism. The fact is, they’re living in a world where they risk persecution, attack, arrest and slander merely because they have chosen to ingest a chemical that no one can actually demonstrate hurts them or anyone else in any way. No wonder they want to escape from it for awhile.

But that’s a cheap shot. The truth is that many recreational drug users aren’t attempting any sort of escape. Once again, and as per their title, these drugs are primarily recreational. Now, I suppose you could claim that all recreation is a form of escapism, but in that case you are maligning ‘all who recreate’ and once again, it stops being an argument about drugs and starts being an argument about leisure, and your personal issues with leisure. Regardless, most drug users are no more or less happy or comfortable with their environment, social or otherwise, than non-drug users. They are no more or less fit to operate within that environment, and are no more or less likely to have a sudden, extreme reaction to it.

Drug Myth #8 : "Drug users turn into useless slackers."

A recent government funded study showed that regular and semi-regular pot smokers were, in fact, some of the most consistent and hard working members of our workforce. Pot is the drug most associated with hard core slacking. What more need I say?

Well, I’m going to say more. You see all those people out there busting their asses, crunching numbers, flipping burgers, managing companies, shelving books, etc etc etc? Most of them drink and smoke. Many of them have tried illegal drugs. Many of them still use illegal drugs. The dark truth is that, despite their illegal nature, the drug users are all around us. Look around you. There they are, maintaining the industrial infrastructure. Once again, the myth can be debunked merely with a quick glance at the world around you. The reality contradicts the claim.

I’m a drug user. I’m an IT professional. Of my friends who use illegal drugs, I can list a book clerk, a waitress schooling in law, an architect graduate from MIT, a business researcher for a major trucking company, a construction worker with a degree in history, a freelance programmer, a network security specialist, a micro-biologist, blah blah blah blah blah. This list could go on for a long time. They use drugs. They also keep our society functioning. They are one and the same people.

Drug Myth #9 : "I don’t want to see the streets flooded with a bunch of junkies."

Anyone that tosses this one out has just committed several errors and needs a good beating, but let’s start with the most obvious, as per the myth immediately prior to this one. You don’t want to see junkies wandering around everywhere? Too late! Too late! They already ARE! Probably the single most relevant and obvious demonstration of the failure of the drug war is that the junkies haven’t gone away. They’re all still out there, getting as trashed as ever and wandering around the streets. Hell, I’m out and about drunk, stoned and/or high once every week or two, and I know I’m not alone. So your complaint is unfounded in that you are supporting the drug war because you hope it will prevent a situation that, sorry, it failed to prevent thirty years ago. You want a world you’ve never had, but are acting like you’re trying to maintain it.

The second error in this phrase is, once again, the misuse of terms. A junkie is someone who is an addict, someone who requires the drug for normal function. Most drug users, with the odd exception of legal drugs like caffeine, alcohol and tobacco, are not junkies. LSD is considered 100% non-addictive. Pot is little better, only offering a minor psychological addiction to its proponents. So to label every drug user on the streets as a junkie is, once again, intentional misrepresentation.

Finally, just supposing you actually mean you don’t want a bunch of high people wandering around gawking at people and making stupid statements that are supposed to be profound, I have this one thing to say to you. TOO FUCKING BAD, you horrible judgmental whiner. I personally don’t care for a bunch of freaks standing around holding signs up that say ‘Alcohol kills, turn to Jesus’. I’m not the biggest fan of drunk frat boys getting into fights in parking lots or ignorant drop outs moping around bemoaning their miserable life, but you know what? Land of the free, baby, and I endure them because it’s their right to be different than me and behave like it. It’s not my place to force them off the street. It’s their street, too, and if I don’t like their behavior, well, ultimately it’s because I have issues of my own to deal with. The same goes for you. If you have such trouble dealing with stumbling goof balls or eyes-wide stoners that you think there needs to be a law, then I think it’s time for you to go get an appointment with the nearest head doctor.

Drug Myth #10 : "Drugs will ruin society."

Drugs were legal for decades in the United States. They still are legal in several other nations. Hmmm, they just don’t seem as effective at destroying a society as, oh, say, wars against them. Prohibition against alcohol dealt the United States several solid blows, and the war on drugs is dishing out more. Drugs don’t ruin society, drug wars do. Why is this? It’s simple. You can’t have a drug war unless the citizenry are using drugs. This means that a war on drugs MUST BE, by definition, a war on the citizenry. And that’s what it boils down to, a series of unreasoned, uninformed attacks by the ignorant and irrational against their fellow citizens regarding an activity that is essentially victimless.

Now, let’s be very clear about something here. Drugs can be dangerous. I personally knew people who have died from the results of drug use. I also know people who, due to drug addiction, fucked up their lives pretty badly, either through physical damage to self or alienation from their society. But these cases are the minority. I know more people that have been harmed through recreation like swimming. Well, why? We don’t need to swim, do we? Shouldn’t we ban that shit?

There is no justification in panicking and punishing literally millions of responsible drug users because of the self inflicted damage of a few, or even the societal damage caused by them, damage which is largely the result of ignorance brought on by the lies and hostility sponsored by the current establishment. So long as this attitude prevails, what we’ll see is a nation divided, and the inevitable results of this, namely crime, violence and unhappiness.

Through legalization of drugs, it should be obvious to most that, just as was the case regarding alcohol prohibition, we will see a drop in crime, both violent and non-violent, we’ll see a sudden population shortage in our prisons, we will see a happier, more adjusted population, we will see a serious decline in the use of definitely harmful drugs, as people find drugs like LSD and pot more accessible, and we’ll see a rise in the standard of living for people suffering from a variety of ailments. Do you doubt? It’s already being done in many places, and the results are just as predicted here.

Hello. My name is Michael Brendan Heaney. I use illegal recreational drugs and have for many years. Odds are that my mind, body and life are in better shape than yours. Please stop persecuting me through ignorance.