Pubdate: Sun, 20 Jan 2002
Source: Scotsman (UK)
Copyright: The Scotsman Publications Ltd 2002
Contact:  http://www.scotsman.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/406

PROOF THAT ANTI-DRUGS CAMPAIGNS DO NOT WORK

Why does the government give the impression that it is content with the 
status quo regarding illegal drugs? JG Wishart (Letters, 14 January) is 
right to raise the issue of drug-related crime, and the fact that many 
people live in fear of becoming victims of such crime.

The news that Prince Harry has experimented with soft drugs should surprise 
no-one. It is surely further proof, if any were needed, that anti-drugs 
campaigns simply do not work. The decision of his father to send him to a 
drugs clinic to meet heroin addicts can only be described as using a 
sledgehammer to crack a nut.

As an under-age drinker, supping his cherry brandy, did Prince Charles 
become an alcoholic, downing a bottle of brandy a day? Of course not. So, 
why assume that someone who tries cannabis will end up as a heroin addict? 
Such reasoning is laughable.

COLIN BERTRAM
The Stackyard
Kingsbarns, Fife

- -------------------------------------------------------

Kevin Williamson's article (Opinion, 9 January), in support of Dutch- style 
cannabis cafes, was right on target. There is a big difference between 
condoning cannabis use, and protecting children from drugs.

Decriminalisation acknowledges the social reality of cannabis use, and 
frees users from the stigma of life-shattering criminal records. What is 
really needed is a regulated market with enforceable age controls.

At the moment, children have an easier time buying cannabis than beer. 
Separating the hard and soft drug markets is especially critical.

As long as distribution of the most popular illicit drug remains in the 
hands of organised crime, consumers will continue to come into contact with 
sellers of hard drugs like cocaine.

ROBERT SHARPE
Wisconsin Avenue
Washington, DC, USA
- ---
MAP posted-by: Keith Brilhart