LEGAL DOES NOT MEAN CONDONING

A. Bearsley (11/3) argues against the legalisation of drugs by stating
that alcohol and tobacco are currently legal, and cause an enormous
amount of harm. While that is true, no sensible person would argue
that alcohol and tobacco should be banned. The United States tried to
prohibit liquor in the first half of the 20th century and it was a
dismal failure, just as the current worldwide ban on drugs is a dismal
failure. There is a big difference between condoning drug use as
acceptable, and making drugs legal. We need to take a
harm-minimisation approach.

The current ban on drugs creates more harm than it does good, but
legalising drugs does not mean making them available on supermarket
shelves. Heroin, for example, would preferably only be made available
to registered addicts via a doctor's prescription. Drugs such as
ecstasy could be sold at a small number of government-controlled
outlets. Ideally, tobacco also would be taken out of corner shops and
its sale confined to specific-purpose, adult-entry outlets.

Claire Hill, Ringwood