Pubdate: Fri, 02 Nov 2001
Source: Payson Roundup, The (AZ)
Copyright: 2001 The Payson Roundup
Contact:  http://www.paysonroundup.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/1523
Author: Christopher M. O'Donnell
Referenced: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v01/n1825/a03.html

DRUG ADDICTION IS A MEDICAL PROBLEM

In Officer Les Barr's recent guest comment in support of the war on drugs, 
he uses terms such as "deeply disturbed" and "mindboggling" when describing 
the letter he so vehemently criticizes.

As a litigation attorney, whenever my adversary uses such terms at a 
hearing, I immediately know that I have struck a nerve and that my 
opponent's argument is in serious trouble. When he suggests that the war on 
drugs is "just as important as the war on terrorism," my suspicions are 
confirmed.

Quite frankly, there is a rapidly growing segment of our society which is 
very much opposed to the war on drugs for a variety of good reasons and do 
not consider it heretical to do so. Voices calling for legalization are 
often well-respected conservatives and include former Secretary of State 
George Shultz and columnist William F. Buckley, Jr. The reasoning behind 
the opposition is both economic and medical in nature, and most often 
involves just good common sense.

First, one cannot deny that it is the war on drugs which makes the 250 
pounds of seized marijuana worth hundreds of thousands of dollars, as 
opposed to its true economic worth of about $100, the cost of transporting 
it in the absence of drug laws against trafficking and use. This creates a 
black market which causes drug dealers to become incredibly wealthy and 
willing to use deadly force to protect their turf.

It is undeniable that the dramatic rise in street gangs and youth violence 
correlates directly to the war on drugs. The parallels to prohibition are 
quite obvious. Also consider the tragic loss of American wealth to foreign 
nations, and the increased taxes the war on drugs necessitates.

Second, we will never be successful treating drug use and addiction as a 
police problem. It is first and last a medical problem and as a number of 
European nations such as Switzerland have shown, we can be much more 
successful in protecting our children if we treat it as such. Youths who 
stumble into drug use can be rehabilitated much more effectively, and 
alienated much less, if they are not stigmatized by a criminal record which 
can destroy their lives long after they have quit using drugs.

Moreover, the destruction caused by the war on drugs is often times greater 
than the drugs could ever cause. Consider the example of an 11-year-old 
girl who was raped by her foster parent after turning in her parents for 
smoking marijuana, thereby causing her and her siblings to be removed from 
their own loving home. Just why the alcoholic is tolerated as a sick person 
while a drug addict is persecuted as a criminal is hard to understand.

Finally, if you really believe that legalization, or decriminalization, 
sends the wrong message to our children, you have forgotten that they are 
children. Advocates for legalization advocate legalizing use for adults, 
not for children. Just as with alcohol, children must be taught by their 
parents that they will some day be old enough to decide for themselves 
whether to take drugs. Laws won't ever change that since most drugs seem to 
be readily available even though they are illegal. Should Officer Barr's 
children ever stumble into drug use, I'm quite sure he will prefer to 
resort to discipline and health care as a solution, as opposed to the 
police and the courts.

Perhaps then, the shoe will be on the other foot.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Rebel