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