MARRIOT'S SSDP ATTACKS OFF-BASE

TO THE EDITOR:

I am one of the founders of the Drug Reform Coordination Network, the
organization that spawned Students for a Sensible Drug Policy. I also
established the DRCNet Online Library of Drug Policy, the world's largest
online collection of research on drug policy at http://www.druglibrary.org
. I cannot comment on any issues with SSDP and its chapters but I have
taught more people how to debate this subject than anyone else, so I can
comment on Alexander Marriott's arguments.

Alexander misunderstands the argument about alcohol prohibition. The
argument is not "one bad thing is legal, therefore other bad things should
be legal." The argument is that prohibition only makes matters worse. Just
because something is bad doesn't mean that prohibition is the best approach
to the problem. In fact, prohibition only drives the problem underground
where there are no controls. Alcohol prohibition is the best example. Among
other things, it caused the biggest teen drinking epidemic our nation has
ever seen.

Alexander's argument that people have a right to control what they put into
their own body fails for a number of reasons. Even the people who wrote the
original drug laws agreed with that idea, but it did not make any
difference. That's why they wrote the laws as "tax acts" rather than
outright criminal prohibitions. That argument has never been a significant
legal issue at any time in the history of these laws.

In addition to being legally irrelevant, it doesn't persuade anyone who was
not already persuaded to support reform. It is sad to say but most
Americans really don't care about the Bill of Rights. Lots of them will
tell you that "free speech" and similar protections only apply to "approved
speech".

Another problem with the argument is simple perception. Lots of people
interpret that argument as "I have a right to get loaded and do anything I
want." That's not the argument being made, of course, but that's what other
people hear. What people hear is not necessarily what you said, especially
with the general hysteria surrounding drugs. They don't care that you want
to get high and they really view it as selfish so no such argument will
ever change their opinion.

Over the years I have debated literally thousands of people on this
subject. To date, I have never seen any person who was persuaded to support
drug law reform by the argument that someone has a right to use drugs.

Alexander can find references for all of the above facts, and discussions
of his arguments at http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer

CLIFF SCHAFFER, Director, DRCNet Online Library of Drug Policy,
http://www.druglibrary.org