LEGALIZATION WOULD HEAD OFF DRUG EPIDEMIC

Dear Editor: It's tragic that Americans don't consider the one thing that
would end or drastically reduce the problems with meth labs (Deaths show
danger of crystal meth usage," Wednesday, Jan. 28): ending the war on drugs
and legally regulating these substances. Why would we want to do that, you
ask? Two words: meth epidemic! Do you really think that these folks would
be manufacturing this toxic substance if they were allowed to obtain
amphetamines in a legally regulated environment? Amphetamines used to be
more easily prescribed by doctors. They were more strictly scheduled after
these pills started finding their way into the recreational market. So, I
have to ask, do we want a legally regulated environment with acceptable
risks or a meth epidemic where any man, woman or child can buy or sell
toxic crystal meth? The difference in a legal environment is that we have
some control over who gets these substances and an openness that fosters
honest education and offers help to those who need it. Right now, what
we're fostering is a criminal environment, a demonizing of users and a
police state where nobody comes out a winner. Why do you think heroin
maintenance programs work so well at reducing the crime, corruption, death
and disease associated with heroin prohibition? We should criminalize
alcohol and tobacco or end the drug war fraud and allow our law enforcement
and government to gain back some respect and credibility which has been
damaged almost beyond repair. Chemical concoctions like crystal meth are
being manufactured because of the underground environment we've created
with prohibition. There is no excuse for prohibition. It didn't work in the
'20s, it won't work in the present and it won't work in the future. Today's
war on drugs is the same as alcohol prohibition. The only difference is the
substance. When are Americans going to realize this simple truth?

Scott Russ, Baton Rouge, La.