LEGALIZATION IS BEST DEFENSE AGAINST RAVAGES OF DRUGS

With the war on drugs raging and drug wars between rival gangs killing our
youth, solutions to our drug problems have been in high demand.

Proper solutions, however, always have been a scarce commodity. From the
bloodletting of the sick to brain surgery for the mentally ill, the help of
good-hearted people has, at times, backfired.

This seems to be the case with our drug problems. Traditional responses
often have called for stricter sentencing or a greater police presence, but
these have neither stopped the drug dealers nor quelled the bloodshed on
the street.

Sometimes the unorthodox solution can be the best. Though it may seem to
increase our problems, the legalization of drugs in reality would lessen
them by reducing the consumption of drugs, the number of gang-related
deaths and the occurrence of drug-related crimes.

How does legalizing drugs benefit us in these ways? The immediate advantage
in legalizing drugs is the reduction of crime. The crime of selling or
using drugs would no longer exist. Its legalization would allow other
crimes to be enforced by the police. Users harm their own bodies and minds
but a person must always be held accountable for their actions. Should
someone under the influence of drugs break the law, charge them for the
crime itself, not for the drugs. The police are supposed to be here to
serve and protect, not to enforce a victimless crime.

Drugs may not directly harm people but their high cost results in many
other crimes. Gangs get involved in drugs and compete for territory to sell
them. When conflict arises, innocent people sometimes get caught in the
crossfire. Prostitutes work street corners to pay for their drug
addictions. Homes are burglarized and stores are robbed to supply the money
needed to feed a user's addiction. Making drugs illegal causes their value
to soar.

The law of supply and demand explains why when you make drugs illegal --
limiting the supply -- the value and demand for it increases. The
legalization of drugs, however, makes drug sales profitable. With no profit
to be made, drug dealers would be put out of business. With cheap drugs and
high availability, many other drug-related crimes would diminish. Crack
addicts need not sell themselves on the street to feed their habits and
heroin addicts can afford fixes without burglarizing or holding up liquor
stores. Traditional methods of combating the drug problem, and the crimes
related to it, only feeds its growth. Drug busts only decrease the supply
of drugs and guns on the black market and increase their value. It's simple
economics.

Victimless crimes

The costs of these popular approaches and their failure in the fight on
drugs can be seen in our overcrowded jails and high crime rates. Reports
from the U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Prisons said the
percentage of inmates sentenced to federal prison for drug offenses
increased from 16.3% in 1970 to 58.9% in 1998. California alone holds more
than 43,000 drug felons, according to California's Department of
Corrections. The cost in taxpayers' money to house these offenders is
overwhelming. Those inmates held on drug charges are there for victimless
crimes and taxpayers are paying for their meals, housing, lawyers and
guards, and all they are doing is filling up the jails, making it hard to
keep real offenders in them. The money would be better spent on drug
prevention and self-help programs.

Police support the traditional approaches because they provide increased
staffing and money through seizures of property. This is just an easy
alternative to seeking out the real criminals in Fresno.

Money can be made in other ways once we legalize drugs and clear the jails
of needless prisoners. The government could sell and tax drugs to provide
money for government programs. A whole new industry would need to be formed
and jobs would be made. Profits from this new industry and the redirection
of funds spent to convict, and imprison drug offenders, would help the
economy to flourish.

Drug use may not be something we can stop, but we can reduce the incentive.
Without the pushers on the street selling the drugs, some kids may be saved
from drug use altogether.

Do we really want to fool ourselves into believing that there is only one
way to solve our problems, or are we ready to try a different approach? If
you were the patient being told the only way to get better was to bleed it
out, you'd want a second opinion, too.

Derek Springer is a resident of Laton.