DRUG-TEST RECIPIENTS

Reference "Bullets vs. baby food," by Kaaryn Gustafson (Outlook, Nov.
24).

First, she opposes drug-testing welfare recipients on the basis of a
study that concludes the poor pose no particular public safety threat
when compared to more wealthy folk.

This conclusion can be reached because the study counts apples when it
should be counting bullets.

There is ample evidence that poor fatherless black males pose a much
greater risk of committing violent crime. And much of this is
associated with drug use and drug dealing. Simply counting how many
poor and how many wealthy use drugs is not relevant.

Second, even if there were no greater risk, the question she does not
take up is "whose money is it?" If the poor were spending their own
money on drugs, that would be their right, of course.

But it is our money, the money of the productive in society, whose
money is given to them, and having given that money, we have the right
to ask that it be spent wisely.

Drug-testing of welfare recipients should be implemented everywhere,
not just Michigan.

Third, the U.S. Constitution, which many leftists prefer to ignore,
says the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be
infringed. Just what part of "shall not be infringed" does Gustafson
not understand? Does she think it says, "can be infringed as much as I
want?"

Gustafson would prefer to allow welfare money to be spent on drugs and
then to try to control the end result, the bullet coming out of the
barrel. This makes no sense at all.

Wouldn't it be much smarter to try to prevent the fatherless homes,
the drug use, the "root causes" of the violence? Whatever happened to
the liberal mantra about "root causes?"

Brooks A. Mick

Newport News