Pubdate: Fri, 02 Feb 2001
Source: Springfield News-Leader (MO)
Copyright: 2001 The Springfield News-Leader
Contact:  651 Boonville, Springfield MO 65806
Feedback: http://www.springfieldnews-leader.com/opinions/
Website: http://www.springfieldnews-leader.com/
Author: Robert Sharpe
Note: Mr. Sharpe is the Program Officer, The Lindesmith Center-Drug Policy 
Foundation, Washington,D.C.
Referenced: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v01/n176/a08.html

DRUG WAR

Zero-Tolerance Not An Effective Stance

According to the Jan. 30 article, "Drugs take big bite of state budget," 
annual state spending on America's drug problem is a whopping $30.7 
billion. Missouri spends roughly $254 per person.

There are cost-effective alternatives to the zero-tolerance approach. The 
Netherlands spends far less per capita on drug abuse, yet Dutch marijuana 
use is roughly half that of the U.S. and hard drug use is even less. How 
did the Netherlands accomplish this?

By separating the hard and soft drug markets and establishing controls for 
age. The U.S. could learn from the Dutch experience. Replacing marijuana 
prohibition with regulation would ultimately do a better job protecting 
American children from drugs than the failed drug war.

Marijuana is the most popular illicit drug. Compared to legal alcohol, 
marijuana is relatively harmless. Yet marijuana prohibition is deadly. 
Although there is nothing inherent in marijuana that compels users to try 
hard drugs, its black market status puts users in contact with criminals 
who push them. Current drug policy is effectively a gateway policy. With no 
controls for age, the thriving black market is very much youth-oriented.

Sensible regulation is desperately needed to undermine the black market and 
restrict access to drugs. Unfortunately for Americans, our leaders are more 
prone to counterproductive preaching than cost-effective pragmatism.

Robert Sharpe
- ---
MAP posted-by: Keith Brilhart