DEBATE: Drug abuse: Who is to blame; the seller or the consumer?

Let’s learn to take responsibility Someone somewhere must have just read the subject of our debate today and immediately wondered; how can someone even ask such a question? He or she must be thinking that this is a no brainer because any market, legal or not, is ultimately consumer-driven. At least that’s the little that I remember from my economics class years ago. If everybody decided not to buy, the market would probably crash and the world would be free of drugs. I wish it was that simple but unfortunately it isn’t. Let us forget the wishful thinking and be practical about this. Who really is to blame for drug use? Let us first establish that we are human beings and not robots so we actually do have a choice and free will. You can choose to say no but if you decide to say yes, no one should be blamed except yourself because seriously, no one held a gun to your head and forced you to take that destructive path. You have choices in life and the ones you make decide whether there will be a reward or a consequence. By the time one is around 12 years old, most people pretty much know right from wrong. A drug dealer simply supplies drugs, the same way McDonald’s sells burgers. A dealer supplies drugs the way a brewery supplies beer. If you don’t want to be an alcoholic, then don’t buy the alcohol. If you choose to stay fit and healthy, then don’t eat the burgers. You do not want to be an addict or die because of an overdose? Then don’t go to the drug dealer. It is all that simple. Current research says that addiction is a disease, that genetics plays a role in addiction and that some people are more at risk of becoming addicted than others. Do these facts mean that external factors are fully to blame for addiction? The answer is no. While we know all this, why do we still put ourselves on the path to dependence? Don’t take the first drink if there is alcoholism in your family or don’t take that hit. The problem with human beings is that we refuse to take responsibility for our actions and would rather blame someone, or circumstances, for making decisions that in the end destroy us or/and our loved ones. Playing the blame game never leads to real change. We are better off confronting the challenge head on than trying to avoid the situation. If we overcome all this, then healing and probably eradication of the vice itself can eventually happen. nash.bishumba@gmail.com Temptation is sometimes hard to ignore A few months ago, I was reading Malcom Gladwell’s best seller – Tipping Point - in this book, he talks about different arguments and theories, one of which is the ‘broken windows’ theory. An academic theory proposed in 1982 that used ‘broken windows’ as a metaphor for disorder within neighbourhoods. This theory links disorder and incivility within a community to subsequent occurrences of serious crime and goes ahead to argue that crime is contagious. In the case of my point of discussion, ‘broken windows’ represents the drug dealers that induce crime as stated in the theory. Many drug addicts that abuse different drugs in our region have never abused cocaine because it doesn’t exist in the region. If it does, it is in very limited supply and that reduces or eliminates the rate at which it is consumed. Addiction to drugs is a vice that an individual can try to get away with given the right environment like rehabilitation centres, and for many, it has worked quite well for them.While others have fallen in the same traps right after they get back into the outside world, and have access to their suppliers again. Sellers of drugs, just like any other sellers, always want their merchandise to sell-out. This causes them to sell lies to clients on the right and standard consumption amounts that end up being dangerous for users and causing high dependence that wouldn’t have otherwise become the case. For the sellers, addiction does make business sense for them because it creates continuous market for their supply while they ignore the fact that they are placing someone’s life in danger. In a few cases of death, the seller of the drug should be fully charged with manslaughter after selling a product that they very well knew would be harmful to a user. It isn’t an intentional act but it is part of the series of events that caused someone to lose their precious life. In conclusion, the user is as fully responsible for the act as the criminal that sold these goods to him and holds a lot of blame for using a product that they know isn’t good for their health and is also illegal. That said, the dealer is also highly accountable for the act of selling illegal drugs and plays a key role in creating an environment of drug abusers that can spread like a wildfire if not fought hard by the authorities. At the end of the day, as long as there is supply of illegal substance, demand will soon rise up. patrick.buchana@newtimes.co.rw

Lifestyle

DEBATE: Drug abuse: Who is to blame; the seller or the consumer?