IT'S TIME TO REVISIT WAR ON DRUGS

Albert Einstein is credited with making the observation that "Insanity
is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different
results."

That's what the government appears to be doing with the War on Drugs
as the nation's drug problem worsens. The war was launched by U.S.
President Nixon in 1971, and after 37 years of increasingly draconian
punishment and confiscatory laws, we don't seem to be any closer to
winning. If anything, the problem has gotten worse, much worse.

The Drug War Clock (www.drugsense.org) notes the following
facts:

The U.S. federal government spent more than $19 billion dollars in
2003 on the War on Drugs, at a rate of about $600 per second . State
and local governments spent at least another $30 billion.

Arrests for drug violations in 2008 are expected to exceed the
1,889,810 arrests of 2006. Law enforcement made more arrests for drug
law violations in 2006 (13.1 percent of the total number of arrests)
than for any other offense.

Police arrested an estimated 829,625 persons for cannabis violations
in 2006, the highest annual total ever recorded in the United States,
according to statistics compiled by the Federal Bureau of
Investigation. Of those charged with cannabis violations,
approximately 89 percent, 738,915 Americans were charged with
possession only. An American is now arrested for violating cannabis
laws every 38 seconds.

Since Dec. 31, 1995, the U.S. prison population has grown an average
of 43,266 inmates per year. About 25 percent are sentenced for drug
law violations.

Nearly 4,000 new HIV infections can be prevented before the year 2009
if the federal ban on needle exchange funding is lifted this year.

Property has often been confiscated and sold even though the owner was
not involved in any way. They did not even have to be accused or
charged with a crime. The police have been able to go to court and,
without a trial, obtain a court order to confiscate and sell the
property of someone who was suspected of a drug crime. The mere fact
that the property was allegedly involved in some way has been sufficient.

The theory that makes forfeiture possible is based on a technicality
in the law that allows the government to claim that it is suing only
the item of property, not the property's owner.

Congressman Henry Hyde noted in June 1993 that "eighty percent of the
people whose property (was) seized by the federal government under
drug laws (were) never formally charged with any crime." Research
literature on the subject is replete with examples of American
citizens whose property has been confiscated and sold by law
enforcement officials at every level of government, federal, state and
local, often without having been convicted of any crime, and between
1980 and 1985, incarceration for drug-law violations in the U.S. grew
tenfold.

Dealing with America's drug problem is complicated, involving such
considerations as mandatory sentencing laws that incarcerate people
for many years for nothing more than "possession" to dealing with
those who abuse destructive drugs, such as cocaine, crack, ecstasy,
heroin, methamphetamines or morphine.

After the British relaxed the penalties for the possession of cannabis
in January 2004, within three years the use of marijuana dropped to a
10-year low.

One of the consequences of keeping drugs illegal has been an increase
in illegal production and distribution around the world, from the
opium growers and processors in Afghanistan to the drug warlords in
Mexico and Latin America, who corrupt governments and authorities, as
happened in Columbia.

Perhaps it's time to recognize that what we have been doing hasn't
worked and consider a new approach. People go ballistic when the idea
of making drugs legal and taxing the products is broached, but it may
have merit.

I know there are arguments that drug use is a slippery slope and
opening the door will lead to using the really bad stuff, but why not
give it a try?

At least the tax dollars generated could be used to treat users and
pay the cost of policing, to say nothing of huge savings in the costs
of incarcerating thousands of people whose only crime was simple possession.

Furthermore, we could change the U.S. farming industry in a major way
by allowing farmers to grow and sell hemp, which our drug laws
currently prevent because of the mistaken belief that it contains an
ingredient that can be readily used as cannabis.

Alcohol use remains legal, in spite of the fact that abusing it often
results in injury or death. It's generally recognized as a health
problem and treated accordingly. So, why not do the same with drugs?

But, that's just my opinion.