Amazon.com Widgets

Should D.A.R.E. programs be funded by taxpayers (yes) or private donations (no)?

  • Both should fund the program

    I believe that both taxpayers and private donations should fund the D.A.R.E program. The program benefits everyone. Children and young adults are the future of this world. If all of them are drug addicts then we may have a serious problem in the future. It is a good program and should be promoted at any cost

  • Yes, I think D.A.R.E programs should be funded by taxpayers.

    I believe the D.A.R.E program has demonstrated enough effectiveness to be funded through taxpayers, I believe the program carries a relatively low cost and has high benefits since it teaches children of the dangers of using drugs and overall it will save our justice system money if it turns kids off from starting on drugs.

  • Drug Education in Some Form Should be Taxpayer Funded

    The D.A.R.E. anti-drug program may be antiquated in its means and methods, but there is still a public health benefit in attempting to convince children to avoid using drugs. In other words, all taxpayers benefit from not having a society rife with drug addicts, justifying some sort of taxpayer-funded anti-drug campaign.

  • Not Terribly Effective

    DARE does get police officers into schools doing positive things and that is an advantage to the program. But as for actually preventing drug abuse, that is open to debate. It not a terrible effective program for this purpose. Tax dollars are precious and rare these days and they need to be spent on programs that have a proven track record. Therefore it's better to have DARE funded through private donations.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.