DRUG PROHIBITION HASN'T WORKED

As a regular reader of Dr. Gifford-Jones' columns on health and an admirer
of his common-sensical approach, his column, Canada And The U.S. Are Not
Healthy Nations (Jan. 10-12) is the first one with which I find myself in
(partial) disagreement.

The disagreement stems from his views on the illegal drug problem. He feels
we have "soft laws" on drugs and yet remarks, "everyone bears the cost of
stolen cars and home break-ins to purchase illegal drugs."

The issue is complex, but obviously prohibition hasn't worked. The fact
drugs cannot be obtained legally by the wretched addicts is what causes the
car thefts and break- ins, since they can only obtain supplies from
criminals, at a high price.

Last month The Financial Post ran a guest column by a Fraser Institute
writer suggesting we need a public debate on this situation. A few years
ago the head of Interpol expressed himself as being in favor of
decriminalizing drug possession by users, but not in favor of legalization.
He regarded drug use as a social and health issue rather than a police
problem.

In August, FP ran an article by Martin Wolf, a Financial Times
correspondent, making a good case for legalization, which he remarked would
remove an estimated US$400 billion annually from the criminal organizations
who control the market.

Wolf's concluding comment seems to me to make a lot of sense: "What is
needed is for mature societies to recognize that some vices must be
tolerated, because the alternative is still worse."

Dec Dunne, Calgary.