CHANGE DRUG POLICY TO PROTECT CHILDREN

To the Editor:

Former police officer Jack Cole, in Sean Kirst's June 7 Post-Standard
column, described the drug war as an "abject failure." He's absolutely
right. Not only is so-called drug-related crime in reality
prohibition-related, but drug policies modeled after alcohol prohibition
have given rise to a youth-oriented black market.

Illegal drug dealers don't ID for age, but they do recruit minors immune to
adult sentences. So much for protecting the children.

Taxing and regulating marijuana, the most popular illicit drug, is a
cost-effective alternative to the never-ending drug war. There is a big
difference between condoning marijuana use and protecting children from
drugs. Decriminalization acknowledges the social reality of marijuana use
and frees users from the stigma of life-shattering criminal records.

What's really needed is a regulated market with age controls. Separating
the hard and soft drug markets is critical. Marijuana may be relatively
harmless compared to alcohol - pot has never been shown to cause an
overdose death - but marijuana prohibition is deadly. As long as marijuana
distribution remains in the hands of organized crime, consumers will
continue to come into contact with hard drugs like cocaine.

Drug policy reform may send the wrong message to children, but I like to
think the children themselves are more important than the message.

Robert Sharpe

Drug Policy Alliance, Washington, D.C.