Pubdate: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 Source: Oregonian, The (OR) Copyright: 2001 The Oregonian Contact: http://www.oregonlive.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/324 Author: G.P. Franck-Weiby TREATMENT, NOT PROHIBITION Why Are We Punitive About Drug Use At All? The Oregonian's editorial "Treatment, not incarceration -- Why are we so punitive about drug relapses?" demonstrates that the prohibitionist editorial board of The Oregonian still doesn't "get it". While it is praiseworthy to advocate treating an addict instead of imprisoning him -- because he is sick and not a criminal -- The Oregonian ignores the greater national moral turpitude of punishing people who are neither sick nor criminal. The reality is that the majority of all users of illegal drugs are adult users of Cannabis who do not use any other illegal drugs, who do not violate any person's rights, and who are not addicted according to the medical definition of repetitive excessive use with harmful effects. The ostensive purpose of prohibiting any and all use of a given drug is to prevent the sickness of addiction -- in fact suffered only by a minority of the users of each drug. In each case of the approximately 700,000 Americans arrested each year for "marijuana offenses" (85% for possession alone), where there is no sickness to be cured by treatment or prevented by punishment, what then is the purpose of punishment? There are a number of motivations for prohibition, none of them legitimate, and none of them the rationales publicly offered by prohibitionists. Of the two primary reasons, one is defensive and the other offensive. The defensive persecution of non-sick, non-criminal illegal drug users is a response to recognition that the reality of their lives threatens the credibility of prohibitionists and their control of public opinion on the issue. The offensive motivation goes to the heart of moral turpitude. The most dangerous, harmful, addictive "drug" known to humanity is the drug of power. The strongest dose of the drug of power is dictating other people's states of consciousness, the means of altering them, and the contents of people's blood streams. The strongest form of the drug of power is the abuse of the coercive power of government. Such power abuse is satisfying only if the power junkie can be certain that peoples' behavior is a response to the threat of punishment, rather than their own independent judgement about the desirability of the target behavior. Consequently, the means of power abuse has to be a criminal law which is arbitrary, irrational, and unjust. The purpose of prohibition is an endless test of obedience to authority for the sake of authority. It is also a test of the degree of prohibitionist control of perception of the issue. The editorial suggests that it is inappropriate to treat a "medical ailment" as a "moral weakness", because the addict can't control his behavior. Since the editorial does not condemn punishing the user who is not sick because he does control his behavior, then the only possible rationale for the punishment is a "moral" condemnation of the end to which that behavior is a means. Yet I've never seen The Oregonian condemn the non-abusive use of alcohol for the same purposes -- and with the same effects -- as the non-abusive use of Cannabis by the majority of its users. That prohibition punishes possessors of substances without regard to whether any individual prosecuted is addicted and without regard to whether any particular defendant has violated any person's rights results in violation of the rights of people who have not violated anyone's rights -- and without any supposed medical justification. That is not the result of unavoidable difficulties in enforcing a law responding to a difficult problem. It is the malicious purpose of prohibition that distinguishes it from all legitimate criminal laws. That is the essence of injustice. That is immoral. That is the moral turpitude sold to this nation by prohibitionist news media. - --- MAP posted-by: Beth