DRUG WAR FUELS CRIME

Nation's Failed Policy Subsidizes Criminals, Boosts 'Gateway' To Use

From Robert Sharpe, policy analyst for the nonprofit organization Common
Sense for Drug Policy in Washington, D.C.:

How should North Carolina respond to the growing use of methamphetamine?
During the crack epidemic of the '80s, New York City chose the zero
tolerance approach, opting to arrest and prosecute as many offenders as
possible. Meanwhile, Washington, D.C., Mayor Marion Barry was smoking crack
and America's capital had the highest per capita murder rate in the
country. Yet crack use declined in both cities simultaneously.

The decline was not due to a government anti-drug campaign or the passage
of mandatory minimum sentencing laws. Simply put, the younger generation
saw firsthand what crack was doing to their older brothers and sisters and
decided for themselves that crack was bad news.

This is not to say nothing can be done about meth. Access to drug treatment
is critical for the current generation of users. A study conducted by the
RAND Corporation found that every additional dollar invested in substance
abuse treatment saves taxpayers $7.48 in societal costs. Diverting
resources away from prisons and into treatment would save both tax dollars
and lives. In order to protect future generations from drugs like meth,
politicians are going to have to come up with a common sense drug policy
that doesn't involve subsidizing organized crime.

Right now we're throwing good money after bad. Attempts to limit the supply
of illegal drugs while demand remains constant only increase the
profitability of trafficking. For addictive drugs like meth, 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.

Don't expect a radical drug policy rethink anytime soon. Tough-on-drugs
politicians have built careers on confusing drug prohibition's collateral
damage with drugs themselves. Hazardous meth labs are reminiscent of the
exploding liquor stills that sprang up during alcohol prohibition. Drug
policies modeled after alcohol prohibition have given rise to a
youth-oriented black market. Drug dealers don't ID for age, but they do
recruit minors immune to adult sentences. So much for protecting the children.

Taxing and regulating marijuana, the most popular illicit drug, is a
cost-effective alternative to never-ending drug war. As long as marijuana
distribution remains in the hands of organized crime, consumers will
continue to come into contact with addictive drugs like meth. This
"gateway" is the direct result of a fundamentally flawed policy.

Given that marijuana is arguably safer than legal alcohol -- the plant has
never been shown to cause an overdose death -- it makes no sense to waste
tax dollars on failed policies that finance organized crime and facilitate
hard drug use.

Drug policy reform may send the wrong message to children, but I like to
think the children are more important than the message.

- -- For The Record Offers Commentaries From Various Sources. The Views Are
The Writer's, And Not Necessarily Those Of The Observer Editorial Board. --