THIS MEANS WAR!

Teacher's fret: I was fortunate enough to take a class in law school taught
by the Honorable John Kane (Stuart Steers's "Disorder in the Court,"
November 22). He was, by far, the most interesting, compelling and erudite
teacher I had.

Not only are his views on this country's ill-advised drug policy astute,
but his assessment of the constitutionality (or lack thereof) of mandatory
sentences is right on. But for a Reagan/Bush-packed Supreme Court, whose
leader makes Rush Limbaugh look liberal, the separation-of-powers theory
would not allow the legislature to hogtie the judiciary's ability to hand
out just sentences for drug cases. Not mentioned, but just as egregious, is
the fact that in Colorado, a person faces a possible twelve years in prison
for possessing cocaine residue if it can be analyzed by the state. If that
person hands this residue to a friend, he faces up to 32 years.

How this country allows the alcohol and tobacco industries to legally
dispense drugs, which are arguably as harmful as illegal drugs, if not more
so, is incredible. Incredible, but certain to remain in place,
unfortunately. One reason for this is that an attempt to present a logical
alternative would be political suicide. Kane has immunity from this fate
only because he is a retired judge in a system that, due to partisan
politics (see: Allard, Wayne, and his knee-jerk rejection of all Clinton
judicial nominees) is in desperate need of jurists.

Our government is ignoring an opportunity to gain a huge revenue stream
while reducing the need for drastic acts -- i.e., violence perpetrated by
dealers trying to protect their interests. These additional monies could be
used to ease the Social Security problem and, dare I say it, to infuse
money into an educational system that sorely needs it.

Thank you for having the courage to present this view, for which I'm sure
you will be vilified.

Daniel M. Murphy

Denver

A PUBLIC SERVICE

In the article on the "shifting drug war," Christie Donner is quoted as
saying, "The public doesn't feel it's effective to put drug addicts in
prison." It is very difficult for me to believe she speaks for "the
public." Is she speaking for the population of Colorado? For the majority
of Colorado? The governor disagrees with her, and he was elected by a
majority of Colorado voters. Is she referring to the majority polled by
Ridder/ Braden consultants? I would hope Ridder/ Braden is clever enough to
word the questions and poll in the right areas to provide the answer it was
paid for.

If Donner really is perceptive of what "the public" thinks and wants, I
would hope she doesn't squander that talent in local politics.

Mike Lyons

Lamar

LAW AND ODOR

Many thanks to Stuart Steers for writing the informative and inspiring
article about federal judge John Kane. As a citizen who does not use drugs
and abhors the use of drugs, I have found the War on Drugs disturbing at
best. The war is a travesty of justice, because it persecutes citizens
unjustly and because the mandatory sentences attached to drug laws violate
the Constitution.

Lawmakers should either condone a citizen's right to ingest insidious
products such as alcohol, tobacco, marijuana, cocaine, etc., or make all of
these products illegal. Why is it socially and legally acceptable for
citizens to ingest alcohol and tobacco but not cocaine and marijuana? The
answer is that politicians do not pass laws based on what makes sense or
what is morally right or just. They pass laws based on the desires of the
special-interest groups that fund their campaigns and keep them in power.

Although adults use illegal drugs, the War on Drugs has been a war aimed at
the American youth, because it is primarily young people who experiment
with, and misuse, drugs. Young people will always do what they are not
supposed to do, because that is the nature of being young. The politicians
who have passed these harsh laws engaged in the same behavior when they
were young, and so do their own children. The majority of young people who
have been victimized by this war would have outgrown the allure of the drug
culture and gone on to live productive lives. Instead, many of them have
had their lives ruined by "crimes" such as selling a hit of acid to an
undercover cop.

I think it's time that the enormous resources being wasted on this
hypocritical war be reallocated more appropriately. Our tax dollars would
be better spent to improve education, fund child-care programs for the poor
or subsidize prescription drugs for the elderly.

Laws that require mandatory sentences violate the Constitution, because the
legislative branch encroaches on the role of the judicial branch, and
lawmakers not only pass the laws, they then dole out the sentences. Let's
stop the War on Drugs. It's a hypocritical war and a waste of taxpayer
money. Then let's restore the power of our judicial branch and let the
judges do the judging!

Karen Stephano

Littleton