PROHIBITION, NOT DRUGS, ROOT OF CRIMINAL ACTS

Thank you for publishing my letter June 29. I'd like to respond to the
criticism from Andrew Gibson's July 7 letter.

In my letter I said: "It seems to me that adult citizens of a
so-called free country should be free to smoke, swallow, snort or
inject any substance they want, especially in the privacy of their own
home -- as long as they are personally responsible for the
consequences." Apparently Gibson didn't read the last part.

Drugs don't cause crime. Drug prohibition causes most of our crime.
When Coca-Cola contained cocaine instead of caffeine and sold for 5
cents a bottle, the term "drug-related crime" didn't exist. Neither
did drug lords, drug cartels or even drug dealers as we know them today.

When pure pharmaceutical grade Bayer heroin was legally sold in local
pharmacies for about the same price as Bayer aspirin, drug users
didn't have to rob, steal or commit acts of prostitution to obtain
their drugs of choice.

According to Mr. Gibson: "Being able to do what is right without
persecution is freedom."

Who decides what is right? Gibson? Me? The Holy Koran?

Kirk Muse

Mesa, Ariz.