MARIJUANA: HISTORY REVISED

Dear Editor,

Frank G. Sterle Jr. appears to be engaging in revisionist history
[Prohibition cuts consumption, April 25 Letters to the Editor, Langley
Advance News]. Perhaps we should refer to the scholarly evidence, versus
his faulty reading of the statistics:

While consumption of alcohol decreased in the first two to three years
following the implementation of prohibition, it rose every year thereafter,
attaining the same levels as pre-prohibition consumption.

The key fact is that more distilled preparations, i.e. hard booze, was
being consumed, versus the softer products like beer and wine.

If you are a bootlegger, you wish to maximize your profits while minimizing
the bulk of your shipment. It simply took a few years for the black market
apparatus to become established.

In addition, alcoholism amongst children was quite rare before prohibition.
After prohibition, and the attendant anti-alcohol campaigns that went with
it, alcoholism amongst children skyrocketed.

Also, alcohol became unregulated in terms of production, such that you had
impure products of unknown quality being sold. This led to a great many
deleterious health outcomes for consumers, such as metals poisoning.

Lastly, enforcement of the law was disorganized and ineffective, with a
turnover in employees of 50 per cent in a few years, with an estimated 10
per cent of officers being discharged in any given year for being involved
in corrupt practices in enforcing the prohibition laws.

Sterle was right about one thing: Alcohol Prohibition was not a failure.
Alcohol Prohibition was a counterproductive fraud, as is marijuana prohibition.

Matthew Hulett Brick, N.J., USA