WAR ON DRUGS A WASTE OF TIME, ENERGY AND MONEY

There has long been a call to legalize marijuana. Quite noticeably, the
effort has been spearheaded by "potheads" more concerned with their next
high than social justice. This has led to a tendency for polarization in the
debate. That's why I, the author of last year's article, "A Straight Edge
Manifesto," have decided to enter the ring. But I won't stop at marijuana
like those sissy "potheads." I say legalize all drugs.

There is no doubt in my mind that using drugs is a bad idea. But just
because something is a bad idea, does not mean it should be against the law.
The litmus test for government intervention should be, "harm to others." If
an action harms others, the authorities should act. If it stands to harm no
one but the individual acting, then the authorities should stand aside. The
government should concern itself with dangerous felons: murderers, rapists,
vandals, arsonists, thieves and the like. Any effort directed at victimless
crimes draws our energy away from confronting real dangers. It would be more
efficient and more worthwhile to concentrate focus just on real threats.

Drug dealers are currently a threat; yes. That's because they're already
looking at jail time, so why not add a few counts of murder? We should learn
from Prohibition. Prohibition created the very circumstances that allowed Al
Capone to become a violent offender. With alcohol legal, Budweiser and
Heineken aren't waging a street war. If we legalized drugs, drug dealers
might still be scum, but at least not the kind of scum that shoot people.

Drug users are a threat to no one but themselves. There's no need to punish
them because they're already punishing themselves with the natural
consequences of their actions. If destroying their minds isn't enough to
stop them, then no amount of prison time will. Besides, it's better to
associate reasons to "just say no" with the real reasons to avoid it. If
people think only of artificial sanctions that we impose, then they aren't
thinking about the real dangers of drug use. And then, do we really want to
waste our time hunting down anyone who took "a hit," only to decide they
didn't like it? Or even a habitual "pothead" who stays in his or her
basement, bothering no one?

As a matter of fact, I believe that legalizing drugs will actually reduce
drug use. Without a sense of "forbidden fruit," many people just won't feel
the need to try drugs. Habitual drug users will act as examples to others.
Mothers can point to the middle-aged stoner and say, "See, Johnny, do you
want to end up like him?" When a man dies of a heroin overdose, anyone with
half a brain should think, "Gee, maybe heroin is a bad idea." Plus, with no
possible legal repercussions for admitting to drug use, addicts can look for
help quitting that much easier.

Still, some regulation may be necessary. The FDA can print Surgeon General's
Warnings on "dime-bags" to make sure people are making an educated decision.

Those substances that are smoked - tobacco, marijuana and crack - will have
to be banned in public, because the second hand smoke forces others to smoke
with them. Thus, smokers can be allowed their habit in their homes or in
restaurants or bars that condone them, but will be fined heavily for smoking
anywhere else.

But here's the crux: if anyone gets behind a wheel or commits a violent
crime while under the influence, he or she will be held completely and
utterly responsible for his or her own actions and prosecuted as if he
committed the crime while sober. Think that's harsh? Well, so is killing
someone while driving drunk or almost beating someone to death because you
weren't in control of your own faculties. These people chose to get drunk or
high knowing full well that it would change their behavior. It shouldn't be
an excuse. That way, we can oppose those who become violent and ignore those
who don't. Even if the figure is outrageously high, something like 70
percent of drug users becoming violent offenders, then that's 30 percent of
our original effort that we've saved.

Ending the War on Drugs saves time, money and effort originally spent on a
lost cause. Letting things happen as they will happen will also decrease
drug use much more effectively than direct opposition.