DRUG ABUSE IS BAD, BUT THE DRUG WAR IS WORSE

Regarding your Dec. 18 editorial, the work of the Bay Area Drug
Enforcement Team is no doubt well-intended, but ultimately
counterproductive. Attempts to limit the supply of illegal drugs
while demand remains constant only increase the profitability of drug
trafficking. For addictive drugs like heroin, a spike in street
prices leads desperate addicts to increase criminal activity to feed
desperate habits. The drug war doesn't fight crime, it fuels crime.

With alcohol prohibition repealed, liquor bootleggers no longer gun
each other down in drive-by shootings, nor do consumers go blind
drinking unregulated bathtub gin. While U.S. politicians ignore the
drug war's historical precedent, European countries are embracing
harm reduction, a public health alternative based on the principle
that both drug abuse and prohibition have the potential to cause harm.

Examples of harm reduction include needle exchange programs to stop
the spread of HIV, marijuana regulation aimed at separating the hard
and soft drug markets, and treatment alternatives that do not require
incarceration as a prerequisite. Unfortunately, fear of appearing
"soft on crime" compels many U.S. politicians to support a failed
drug war that ultimately subsidizes organized crime. Drug abuse is
bad, but the drug war is worse.

Robert Sharpe, policy analyst, Common Sense for Drug Policy, Arlington, Va.