s had done some sixty years before. Neither of these groups needed to do any fundamental thinking on their own, the government provided fuel for everyone's fire.III. Evidence To correct the problems of misdirected and over-exaggerated attention to the "war on drugs," Reinarman and Levine suggest that we take a certain amount of responsibility for the actions of society and remove blame from the individual. They offer that the ails of society not be blamed by today's youth on the drugs that surround them- but instead on their true causal factors which in many case would continue to exist even if crack-cocaine did not. Daniel Perrine (1994) sees a pathway for effectively accomplishing what Reinarman and Levine only suggest : Describing the drug situation in Holland, Perrine offers for the medical model- that we should mimic that country's "success" in battling drugs by treating it not as a criminal problem- but rather as a medical problem-- which from a sociomedical perspective is all it actually is. Through this treatment, drugs such as crack cocaine will not perceived as a such a widespread cultural threat whose proponents should be demonized- but rather as a legitimate ailment whose sick victims are in desperate need of medical attention and sincere social services. And even if treated as health problem, drugs should still not be treated as an epidemic health problem. Reinarman and Levine discussed how throughout our nation's history, various "drug scares" have been instigated by the need for various economic controls. According to them, laws against drugs have traditionally been created to suppress various groups whose activities were counterproductive to the government. And yet today, Ed D'Angelo (1994) still points out that the chiefly publicized reason for anti-drug laws is "to protect public health and safety." So why then are drugs not treated as a public health problem as Perrine suggests they should? D'Ang...
