Controlled Drugs and Substance Act
Formerly The Narcotic Control Act of 1956
http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/agency/csa.htm

http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/History/whiteb1.htm
"The Harrison Act applied to opium, morphine and its various derivatives, and the derivatives of the coca leaf like cocaine. No mention anywhere there of amphetamines, barbiturates, marijuana, hashish, hallucinogenic drugs of any kind. The Harrison Act applied only to opium, morphine and its various derivatives and derivatives of the coca leaf like cocaine."

http://www.addictiondoctor.com/pages/NixonsWar.htm
It was the Nixon White House and the Controlled Drugs and Substance Act that began this fallacious "war on drugs" which gained so much popularity under Reagan.

Heck, alcohol and cocaine/opiate abuse is what prompted the Prohibitionists.
During the 19th century, early 20th century, hard liquor was *the* alcoholic beverage of choice and people were putting opiates in *EVERYTHING*.

Why do you think the mob sold "bathtub gin" and not beer during Prohibition?
Imagine if Joe Sixpack was Joe 5th, instead and every venue that sold beer only sold hard liquor only...
Those ballgames and parties would get ugly real quick.

Criminalizing drugs creates an opportunity to profit by manufactoring and selling drugs at huge profits on the 'black market'. This artificially created profit incentive serves to increase the amount of illicit drugs available to any junior high school student and helps to create the drug crisis.
Yes, this is what is in effect *now*.
But it wasn't what began all of the moves to criminalization and illegalization.

Politicians and law enforcement agencies certainly DO benefit from this situation.
Absolutely.
This country has chosen to pursue an ineffective "policing" route to deal with the problem rather than the more effective "counseling" route.
How can you prop up all of those law enforcement budgets if you don't have a "crisis"?
Heck, this is why those confiscation laws were created as well.

I'm not claiming this was a conscious decision on their part, only that they do reap the rewards and cannot help but respond to that fact.
And I disagree, I think it is a *very* conscious decision based directly in that hardline, conservative, lock 'em up and throw away the key mentality.

Isn't it something like 10-20% of our prison population comes from non-violent drug offences and another 30 or 40 from violent ones?
(don't quote me on the figures)

I thought this was all quite obvious back in the early 90's when it came out that heroin was the drug of choice for all of the up and coming rock bands and aging metal bands of the 80's.
Large portions of the Grunge scene were heroin addicts as were "new-metal" bands like Guns N Roses.

In the 15+ years of Reagans "war on drugs"(hell, 30+ if you count it from Nixon), not once has any significant drug use trend been positive.
There are more people using, there is more available and they're using at younger ages.

How long will we let this charade continue?