EITHER LEGALIZE DRUGS OR CRACK DOWN HARD

The Sun-Times did its readers a great service by presenting the
divergent views of Arianna Huffington and Barry McCaffrey on the drug
war [columns, March 15]. Unfortunately, Huffington's emphasis on
treatment and McCaffrey's insistence on continuing the eradication
programs in Colombia represent milquetoast, middle-ground approaches
that ultimately will fail.

If we are going to end the drug war, we have to choose between two
opposite approaches. Approach One would be full legalization: Any drug
would be made legal and its distribution minimally regulated at either
the federal or state level.

Legalization would take the trade out of the hands of illegal elements
and put it into the hands of legitimate businesses.

Legalization might, however, lead to increased drug use. But maybe
not. Note the precipitous drop in the use of cigarettes over the last
40 years as their use has been deglamorized and stigmatized while they
remain perfectly legal.

Approach Two would be an all-out war on drugs--a World War II,
total-victory approach instead of the Vietnam War approach in which we
are engaged. This would involve a crackdown not only on distributors,
but also on users. As long as there is a demand for illegal drugs,
there will be someone willing to supply them. And publicly putting
away a few yuppies for doing drugs would go a long way toward drying
up the demand for illegal drugs.

Our half-hearted war against drugs has been a failure. If we are
serious about eliminating the drug trade and making progress toward
ending the use of illicit drugs, we have two choices: legalization or
real and serious criminalization.

Mark M. Quinn
Naperville