PROHIBITION HELPS FUND TERRORISM

To the editor:

Your May 13 editorial was right on target ("Rethinking Colombia: U.S.
should reconsider its war on drugs").

Drug prohibition funds organized crime at home and terrorism abroad.
The drug czar's sensationalist drug-terror ad campaign would have the
public believe that's good reason to throw more money at the problem.

Afghanistan profits from heroin trafficking because of drug
prohibition, not in spite of it. Here in the U.S., the drug war's
distortion of immutable laws of supply and demand make an easily grown
weed like marijuana literally worth its weight in gold.

The various armed factions waging civil war in Colombia are
financially dependent on America's drug war.

With alcohol prohibition repealed, liquor bootleggers no longer gun
each other down in drive-by shootings, nor do consumers go blind
drinking unregulated bathtub gin. While U.S. politicians ignore the
drug war's historical precedent, European countries are embracing harm
reduction, a public health alternative based on the principle that
both drug abuse and prohibition have the potential to cause harm.

Examples of harm reduction include needle-exchange programs to stop
the spread of HIV, marijuana regulation aimed at separating the hard
and soft drug markets, and treatment alternatives that do not require
incarceration as a prerequisite.

Unfortunately, fear of appearing "soft on crime" compels U.S.
politicians to support a failed drug war that ultimately subsidizes
organized crime. Drug abuse is bad, but the drug war is worse.

Robert Sharpe,

Drug Policy Alliance,

Washington, D.C.