LET'S INJECT DRUGGIES WITH HOPE

Is rehabilitation better than jail for a nonviolent drug user? A
neighboring state may let its citizens decide in a few months.
Pennsylvanians also should have the right to choose, even though the best
option is legalization.

Why some souls want or feel the need to consume legal or illegal drugs is
unfathomable. They should be pitied - not punished.

The Ohio Campaign for New Drug Policies supports a ballot proposal that
removes the option of prison time and imposes treatment for first- and
second-time offenders who have not been convicted of more serious crimes.
Upon completion of a treatment program of 12 or 18 months, the offender can
have the conviction removed from court records. The state is reviewing the
validity of the petition signatures. Supporters and opponents believe it
will be on the November ballot.

That's not soon enough, but it will have to do.

Why should our prisons be overflowing with nonviolent adults whose only
crime was possessing, delivering or using an illegal substance? Even if a
marijuana cigarette is harmful, the only one harmed is the user. It's no
different than smoking any other cigarette. The smoker harms only himself.

Is it any different for any other drug? No matter what substance is
ingested, the nonviolent user is not harming others. Do we arrest beer
drinkers because consuming alcohol could affect the liver and mind? If the
drinker does not bother others, society leaves him alone.

Can you imagine how overburdened our courts and prisons would be if we
arrested nonviolent adults who drank the liquid drug we call alcohol? Yet
that is just what we are doing when someone is arrested for having other drugs.

The underlying premise in this utterly hopeless and insane war on drugs -
which really is a war on our own people - is that the nanny state knows best.

Many conservatives rightly believe the government should not be fussing
over us. Free citizens should be left alone. Yet most of those
conservatives, with the best of intentions, love the nanny state when it
comes to controlling what substances other free citizens choose to consume.
Then, almost no penalty is too severe.

If some fool in Pennsylvania possesses 2 grams of cocaine - about the size
of two sweetener packets - and either delivers them to someone or just
attempts to, the state mandatory penalty is one year in prison.

The first sentence in the rant du jour is a false choice. It implies you
have just two options. That would be like asking if you wanted three scoops
of vanilla or chocolate on your banana split, when in fact you could get
strawberry or 28 other flavors.

Rehab certainly is better than prison for nonviolent users. And rehab is
much less expensive. But why should taxpayers even pay for that? If someone
has a drug problem, there are thousands of self-help groups and charitable
organizations that freely offer hope and help.

If someone drinks too much or is hooked on painkillers, but harms no one
else, his recovery is none of your business. It should be no different for
other controlled substances.

Since the longest journey begins with the first step, let's hope the
neighbors to our left approve the ballot proposal. And then maybe
Pennsylvania will follow.

Even if it did, the nanny state would continue punishing citizens who make
poor choices, but at least the punishment would fit the crime. And then
maybe someday, there will be no punishment because it will not be a crime.