Pubdate: Thu, 8 Jun 2000 Source: Daily Bruin (CA) Copyright: 2000, ASUCLA Student Media Contact: 118 Kerckhoff Hall, 308 Westwood Plaza, Los Angeles, CA 90024 Fax: (310) 206-0906 Website: http://www.dailybruin.ucla.edu/ Author: Andrew Jones LEGALIZATION WILL NOT STOP PROBLEMS ADDICTION CAUSE It seems that after the heyday of the anti-drug Reagan and Bush administrations, America is starting to rebel against the War on Drugs. The change, if real, has been influenced in no small part by our own "free love, free pot" president, who, when asked by an MTV audience member in 1992, "If you had to do it over again, would you inhale?" replied boastfully, "Sure, if I could. I tried before." ("Choose or Lose Special," MTV, June 16, 1992). This supposed discontent is summed up by one pundit's sound bite, "We're not in a war against drugs, we're in a war against our own people!" Unfortunately, as is the case with most revisionist thought, such an idea is a gross simplification. The main objection to our current drug laws is the large amount of "non-violent" prisoners who clog our court and penal system. One statistic bandied about is that one out of every three black men in America is currently in some stage of the correctional system -- the presumption being that "unjust" drug laws put most of them there. True or not, details of the crimes that place "one out of three" in the penal system are never presented in this argument. Apparently, everyone has forgotten just why drug offenders are in prison -- and moreover, why we as a society choose to make drugs illegal. Look behind most serious, violent offenses, and guess what cause turns up time and again, like the proverbial bad penny? Yes, those pesky, "non-violent" drugs seem to be the cause for many a stabbing, shooting, robbery and child abuse case. But why let that sort of realization cloud your indignation of America's "war on its people?" Ponder the issue a while and you'll realize that we have gone to war against drug users because drugs have gone to war on our people. In all likelihood, our justice system does send minorities to prison for drug offenses more often and for longer terms. It's inequality at its worst. But here's the solution: Don't use drugs. Yes, it's as simple as that! The Man won't have any cause to lock you up. But perhaps that's too simple for "community activists" ? they'd rather spend time tilting at windmills, trying to legalize drugs and pursuing other hare-brained schemes. If a community feels it is being targeted by drug laws, the one sure way to avoid being mistreated by our "unjust" criminal system is to obey the law. Drug laws don't require you to do anything. They simply require that you not do something. Tough-on-crime laws would no longer be a problem if minority communities chose to avoid drugs and the violence that comes with them. But that's a difficult idea for activists, because it requires thinking of people as independent beings, capable of avoiding what a higher power has deemed illegal. There is an especially damaging counterpoint to this simplification: many people who are in prison for drug offenses are in fact innocent. The police corruption which leads to such undeserved imprisonment is the real "war on our people." There is no punishment too harsh for corrupt police officers. But if being shot in the leg and stripped naked was considered appropriate punishment for Sierra Leone rebel leader Johnny Paul Koroma, then it's a good start for officers who abuse their privilege. Not only have allegedly corrupt officers in Los Angeles tainted themselves, their city and civilized society with their actions, but their actions have given every social critic license to question the very foundations of our society. Perhaps it's social utopianism to imagine honest police forces, but trustworthy cops seem much more plausible than winning the war on poverty or creating total social equity. Moreover, a drug-free society will by nature create greater social equity than any other change within our means. But the question still remains: Why do we as a society choose to fight drugs? We do so not only because they are so often the cause of violent crime, but because their effect on all humans, not just users, is documented in voluminous detail. Drugs really do have serious mental and physical effects. No, we're not talking about marijuana here -- we're talking about speed, coke and heroin. These are not harmless substances that provide a temporary high; they are a debilitating force on users and the user's community alike. One rhetorical question posed about drugs is that high-fat foods contribute to more deaths than all drugs combined, yet we don't outlaw high-fat foods. It is a tantalizing question, tailored to those who don't think. The crucial difference between drugs and fatty foods is that fatty foods only affect the consumer of Twinkies and Ho-Hos. But can you say with a straight face that crack cocaine is a "personal lifestyle choice" that affects nobody else? We've seen the images of pestilent inner-city apartments holding neglected children abandoned by their drug-addled mothers (or, less often, their parents). The effects are felt nationwide, in all social classes -- the crank epidemic currently devastating Native American reservations is just one example. Such cases are not wild aberrations; they are textbook examples of just how quickly and completely drugs destroy any semblance of normal life, and how they eat away at the foundations of a community. A good deal of drug use, mostly marijuana, does occur in private, with no real effects on anyone else. But our law enforcement for the most part turns a blind eye to such innocuous consumption. Most police officers, off the record, will acknowledge that when they discover a small baggie of pot in a car, they will simply dump it out and give its owner a stern lecture. When was the last time you heard of someone being sentenced to hard time for marijuana possession? Even if a person does have the hard luck to be given a prison sentence for simple possession, sympathy for them is misplaced. We as a society have been warned, and those who choose to disobey must stand ready to face the consequences, unlikely as they may be. In truth, marijuana enjoys this special status in law enforcement because it is generally acknowledged to be benign. Smoke it long enough and you'll become an idiot, as well as experience the same negative consequences that tobacco users do, only quicker and in greater force. But on balance, marijuana will only decrease your quality of life, instead of taking it altogether. The logistics of a drug-legalized America are mind-boggling. Only the Netherlands currently runs such a system, and those who know acknowledge that the system there is deeply flawed. Visualizing just how hard drugs would be distributed to Americans is rather creepy. It's bizarre enough to see tobacco companies grudgingly running anti-youth-smoking commercials. But the reality of this "legalized paradise" is a neighborhood pharmacist dispensing a vial of cocaine to a beaming 21-year-old. Drugs are a problem, no doubt, but pie-in-the-sky legalization is not the answer. - --- MAP posted-by: Richard Lake