PROBLEMS WITH ANTI-SRO THEORY

To The Editor:

I cannot believe that anyone would advocate such convoluted reasons for not
putting resource officers in the high school as what I read from Robert Sharpe.

His major thrust is that a youthful indiscretion with drugs might keep some
promising politician out of office? I have several problems with his whole
theory.

1. We need resource officers to help keep drugs out of our schools, but we
also need them there for problems for our children that arise day-to-day
from many sources.

2. Youthful indiscretion with drugs doesn't guarantee a successful
politician or an honest one.

3. The complaint about more Americans going to prison or jail during the
Clinton administration just means that more criminals were off the streets
instead of trying to rob me or break into my house.

4. Has anyone ever heard of the word "Columbine" (not the movie)?

5. "Drug abuse is bad, but the drug war is worse?" I'd sure like someone to
explain this one.

6. The short-term health effects of marijuana are not inconsequential.
Permanent memory loss for the marijuana user is bad enough, but when an
automobile driver under the influence of marijuana kills someone in an
"accident", that's not a short-term effect. Statistics have shown that 90
percent of those hooked on hard narcotics and arrested for one or more
crimes started with marijuana.

If Mr. Sharpe is truly from Washington D. C., let him do all he wants to do
to keep the resource officers out of the Washington D. C. schools, but we
don't need his help here.