THE 'WAR ON DRUGS' IS ACTUALLY A 'WAR ON PEOPLE'

America has for years been waging its "War on Drugs," an effort long on
rhetoric and cruelty and short on results. I would suggest that this
supposed "War on Drugs" should more accurately be called the "War on
People."

While the drug trade has continued to thrive worldwide, it's the people who
have been this war's victims. In dealing with social problems such as drug
usage, the federal and state governments have used extremely punitive
measures. As an example, in the state of New York, a woman who had three
young children was arrested for possessing approximately four ounces of
marijuana. She was convicted of drug possession and sent to prison for 15
years, the mandatory sentence in New York.

How does possession of marijuana translate into 15 years of imprisonment and
the loss of parenting for her children? This is our legal system gone amok
and should be termed, "cruel and unusual punishment" which is
unconstitutional.

As another example, a person who is stopped for a traffic offense and who is
found to be in possession of marijuana or other drugs may have his car
confiscated. The car then becomes the property of the police. This is done
without the due process that our Constitution requires.

It is interesting to note that 80 percent of the individuals whose assets
are seized are never charged with a crime. But this is a "war," and thus our
expected protections are swept aside by standards more typical of a police
state.

This "war" has inflicted loss of civil liberties in our schools as well.
School boards are thumbing their noses at the civil liberties of school
children when, in looking for drug usage, they require student urine tests.

This is not the role of the schools. Parents are the caretakers of their
children and the ones to deal with drug usage. Making children urinate in a
cup in order that they might participate in school activities violates
personal space. Unfortunately, children are not organized as a power bloc
and, of course, they can't vote, so they are easily manipulated.

The tragedies continue to mount. The Supreme Court recently, on March 26,
agreed with the policy of the U. S. Housing and Urban Development of
evicting whole families from public housing if anyone, even a guest, uses
drugs in their space. In their decision, they said that this was clearly the
intent of the Congress. Where is the sense of caring for those who are least
powerful in our country?

College students who admit using drugs even once will no longer be eligible
for any federal assistance or publicly financed college loans.

Our prisons are being glutted with persons convicted of drug offenses. As of
September 1998, 58 percent of all federal prisoners were serving time for
drug offenses. In 1997, state and local law enforcement agencies reported
692,201 marijuana arrests. Eighty-seven percent of these were for possession
only.

We are putting persons in prison for non-violent "crimes" in which there is
no victim. Furthermore, in states in which three convictions for even minor
crimes results in life sentences, the same would apply for mere possession
of marijuana.

Color profilingmakes this situation more tragic. In 1995, 33 percent of
black men in their 20s were ensnared in the criminal justice system for drug
offenses contrasted with 7 percent of white males.

California voters have recognized the medicinal qualities of cannabis and,
through a referendum, have authorized its use. Use of marijuana and its
active ingredient, tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), reduces nausea and vomiting
associated with chemotherapy, reduces the intraocular pressure associated
with glaucoma, increases the appetites of HIV patients and reduces muscle
spasms among quadriplegics and paraplegics.

If drugs were made legal, we would immediately take the profit out of
dealing; drug dealers would be out of business. We could retroactively
release hundreds of thousands of prisoners from our state and federal
prisons. The money saved could be used to provide treatment for those
persons who are addicted.

A 1994 Rand Corporation study found that drug treatment is seven times more
cost-effective than domestic law enforcement, 11 times more cost-effective
than our attempts to interdict illicit drugs, and 23 times more effective
than our drug-eradication and crop substitution programs overseas.

Legalization of drugs would provide federal control by the Federal Drug
Administration of these chemicals. Thus, we would have some quality control
over these substances where we now have none. Also, persons would get a
substance of known potency and thereby avoid overdosing.

Just as prohibition against alcohol was a failure and resulted in increased
crime, it is well known that interdiction efforts to halt the importation
and sale of drugs has also been a total failure.

There is inertia to legalizing drugs. It would result in a reduction of jobs
in prisons and in law enforcement. In addition, politicians who consider
legalization a "third rail" politically are not eager to support it. Despite
this inertia, legalization of drugs along with accessibility to drug
treatment is the kind of humane response that is critically needed in
today's troubled world.