Yes, occasionally overzealous officials trample over Fourth Amendment rights in the pursuit of drugs.

But drugs still are illegal, and thus, the pursuit of getting them off the street allows for a little massaging of the Fourth Amendment. Busting a distributor and confiscating the drugs so he or she never can affect anyone is worth it.

Following the spirit of the law, not the letter of the law, preserves the health and safety of communities. The war on drugs is a fight for the health and safety of those who have to live around addicts willing to commit crimes to fuel their addiction.

Yes, drugs are keeping families apart through the incarceration of nonviolent criminals.
But there are a host of societal factors that lead to the incarceration of nonviolent individuals that can’t be traced back to drugs of any kind. Drug use is not a prerequisite for crime, and crime isn’t a prerequisite for drug use.

Not every nonviolent criminal sells or abuses drugs, but that doesn’t excuse the ones who do. You commit a crime, you do something illegal in this country, you get punished. And drug possession is illegal.

As for the cost of fighting the war on drugs, there always is a high cost when you’re fighting a war. If we didn’t do everything that was costly, we wouldn’t have federal health care. Or federal jails. Or a national defense program. There is a price to be paid to ensure our health doesn’t wane.

And if we don’t fight the war on drugs, if we eliminate our costs, nothing changes. Legalizing heroin or cocaine wouldn’t make them any less deadly or less addictive. It’s not as if lifting the restrictions on drugs stops their influx from other countries or the production of drugs in our own country.

And just because the monetary cost of doing something is mounting, that doesn’t mean it needs to be eliminated immediately. We don’t fight drug use because it’s the most cost-effective way to eliminate drugs from America. We fight drug use because it has negative effects on the well-being of American citizens. But that’s not to say that the war on drugs is perfect.

Perhaps we can look at closing the disparities in sentencing for different types of drugs. The Fair Sentencing Act recently reduced the sentencing disparity between powder cocaine and crack cocaine from 100:1 to 18:1, which still seems excessive when it’s essentially the same drug.

Perhaps if we consider the motives of individuals who use drugs, we stand a better chance of permanently rehabilitating them. Treating drug abuse as a mental issue rather than a criminal one, such as alcohol or sexual abuse, hopefully will help addicts reach beyond the limits of their addiction.

Also, easing punishments on cases of simple possession, while increasing sentencing for producers and distributors, would place the importance on catching distributors — cutting off the supply of drugs at its source instead of over-punishing addicts who aren’t key to winning the war on drugs.

But shrugging our societal shoulders at hardcore drug use because marijuana use is more culturally accepted than it previously was doesn’t help addicts or society. In order to help both groups, we need to fight the production and distribution of drugs while simultaneously caring for those who already are addicted.

If that sounds difficult, that’s because it is. But nothing worth doing is easy. No war is perfect. Fighting the war on drugs might be a losing battle, but it’s a worthy one.

Lazarus Jackson is the State News opinion writer. Reach him at jacks920@msu.edu.