Pubdate: Mon, 27 Aug 2001
Source: Amarillo Globe-News (TX)
Copyright: 2001 Amarillo Globe-News
Contact:  http://amarillonet.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/13
Author: BUFORD C. TERRELL

I'm sure I can speak for all of FOJ when I say Thanks! Buford!

OPPOSING PROHIBITION WITHOUT FAVORING LEGALIZATION IS OK

In response to Dr. Gordon W. Scott's Aug. 15 column, our current drug laws 
are a form of prohibition, and like the earlier prohibition of alcohol, 
carry with them severe social problems - official corruption, deaths from 
impure products, billions to support a ruthless underworld, and deaths and 
injuries to innocent bystanders.

One can oppose prohibition without favoring drug legalization.

Some options include medical models, like those in England and Switzerland, 
where doctors prescribe drugs for addicts; enforced therapy for drug users, 
like the new methods in Arizona and California; and removing criminal 
penalties for possession of small quantities of drugs, like 11 U.S. states, 
the Netherlands, most of Western Europe, and some Australian provinces have 
done with marijuana.

The evils of prohibition can be ended without opening the floodgates of 
all-out legalization.

Removing criminal penalties for drugs would signal the end for drug 
dealers, not encourage them.

While some Americans with ties to alcohol smuggling, like Joe Kennedy Sr., 
and some Canadian companies like Seagram's, with similar ties, became major 
legal alcohol distributors, the bootleggers had to look for new work. Lucky 
Lucciano and Meyer Lansky had to move into other rackets like gambling, 
prostitution, labor racketeering - and drugs.

Prohibition provided the capital that fueled the Mafia for 70 years after 
it was chased out of alcohol.

We have now provided much more money to a new breed of outlaws. The sooner 
we cut off that cash line, the sooner they can be eliminated.

Buford C. Terrell

Professor of Law

South Texas College of Law

Houston
- ---
MAP posted-by: Keith Brilhart