The answer to Zeenice Roja's question about why a drug as dangerous as alcohol is legal is very simple. ("Alcohol vs. marijuana," Letters, May 26) We tried alcohol prohibition and it was a disaster. People like Al Capone and Lucky Luciano took over alcohol distribution and caused a 13-year crime wave filled with bombings and gun battles. Prohibition caused far more trouble than the alcohol did. The same situation to a lesser degree holds true for marijuana, but without the effects of alcoholism. The lesson we need to learn is that prohibition never works. It always turns the market over to career criminals who use violence as a business method. Ralph Givens, Daly City, Calif. [end]
Re: "A growing problem with marijuana," May 25. During alcohol Prohibition, illicit stills proliferated in homes and residential areas much like grow houses today, only with many more fires, explosions and deaths due to alcohol fumes. Both cases show that suppressing a popular drug is impossible. However, we can rest assured that after America's ill-conceived marijuana laws are repealed, grow houses will vanish the same way bathtub gin disappeared. Ralph Givens Daly City, CA. [end]
Will Ozier is right about marijuana ("Time to abandon policy," May 17), until he gets to the point about keeping "laws designed to assure that our children are protected" on the books. The plain fact is that prohibition laws make children more vulnerable to drugs because outlaw dealers do not check for age. During alcohol Prohibition, the United States had the worst epidemic of teen alcoholism before or since. Kids as young as 12 were served in speakeasies. Every high school had its own in-house bootlegger to keep the kiddies supplied with rotgut booze. Every year during alcohol Prohibition, thousands of teens suffered brain damage, blindness, paralysis, permanent liver damage, kidney failure and death caused by rotgut liquor. [continues 52 words]
Re "Tracking smugglers, the old-fashioned way," Column One, May 12 Accounts of Border Patrol agents pretending to be Daniel Boone on a bear hunt convince me that their efforts to interdict drugs are a complete waste of time. The agents in the article brag about stopping $30 million in drugs, but it is well known that the drug cartels are moving many times that amount into the United States every year. It's time to end an expensive, counter-productive game that benefits drug cartels more than anyone else. Ralph Givens Daly City [end]
Editor: Regard the editorial Tuesday in the Sun-Star, "It's time to talk pot." The Sun-Star cannot seem to help adding a reefer madness element to a report on marijuana. To wit: the statement that "(alcohol) certainly is a factor in more deaths each year (than marijuana)" is misleading because alcohol causes more than 100,000 deaths every year while medical science has not yet discovered a fatality caused by ingesting marijuana. We cannot have an honest debate about marijuana with biased reporting. Daly City [end]
If Gwinnett County Sheriff Butch Conway really wants to get rid of outlaw drug dealers ("Drug sweep hits 11 metro houses," Metro, April 30), he better remember the lessons of alcohol Prohibition -- particularly the fact that Eliot Ness and the Prohibition agents never put the bootleggers out of business. Repeal and a regulated market for adult alcohol use ended the reign of the booze barons. The simple truth that history teaches is that prohibiting a substance with a market share only helps career criminals who dominate the drug black market created by lunatic drug laws. [continues 89 words]
It is a misconception that the DEA must approve marijuana before it can be legally used for medical purposes under federal law. Removing marijuana from Schedule I status only requires recognition that the drug has "currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States." Fourteen states with hundreds of physicians and thousands of patients using marijuana provides the "currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States" needed to remove cannabis from Schedule I so it can be legally prescribed in the United States. [continues 118 words]
Re: Candidates quizzed on pot, Observer, April 29. One question about marijuana determines whether candidates should hold office. Will they govern marijuana based on modern science or continue with a policy founded on racist fictions? The pot laws many politicians hold in such high regard are based on racism and outrageous lies: "...persons using this narcotic smoke the dry leaves of the plant [marijuana], which has the effect of driving them completely insane. The addict loses all sense of moral responsibility. Addicts to this drug, while under its influence, are immune to pain. [continues 206 words]
There will be no solution to the drug cartel violence in Mexico so long as the United States maintains a brain-dead drug prohibition policy that has failed for more than 90 years. It is time to relearn the lesson of alcohol prohibition - namely that it is impossible to prevent people from using drugs that they like. The results of alcohol prohibition were violent bootlegger activity, corruption of police and public officials and a breakdown in law and order while utterly failing to reduce alcohol use one iota. They had more speakeasies at the end of alcohol prohibition than there had been saloons when they began. [continues 63 words]
Before accepting the notion that drug prohibitionists are rational people, we should remember that these are the individuals who have been throwing people in prison for decades because of laws based on racist fictions. In 1934 Hearst newspapers nationwide wrote that "marihuana influences Negroes to look at white people in the eye, step on white men's shadows and look at a white woman twice." In 1937, politician Harry Anslinger convinced Congress to make marijuana illegal, saying, "There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the U.S., and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos and entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz and swing, result from marijuana use. This marijuana can cause white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers and any others." Federal Bureau of Narcotics Director Harry J. Anslinger issued a slew of racist condemnations of marijuana in the 1920s and 1930s. He said that "the primary reason to outlaw marijuana is its effect on the degenerate races," and "Reefer makes darkies think they're as good as white men." There is nothing reasonable and nothing honorable about enforcing a policy based on racial lies. Ralph Givens Former Waukegan resident [end]
John J. Coleman is correct that "Decriminalizing Marijuana Won't Help Society," but not for the reason he thinks. Decriminalization keeps control of marijuana in the hands of outlaws and prevents the regulation that would lower teen use. So long as growing and selling marijuana is illegal, there can be no civil control of the cannabis market. The notion that marijuana prohibition is stopping anyone who wants pot from getting it is a bigger delusion than any drug-induced hallucination. Legalizing marijuana for adult use will end the "drug crime" associated with cannabis and save the country more than $14 billion in reduced enforcement, court and incarceration expenses and increased tax revenues. After more than 70 straight years of reefer madness failure it's time to end the lunatic war against pot. Ralph Givens/Daly City, Calif. [end]
Re: "Catch and release" (cover story, by Janelle Weiner, CN&R, April 16): The story of how Julius Johnson and other addicts were treated by the criminal-justice system shows the bone-deep immorality and mental corruption involved in promoting drug prohibition. The lies begin with a repetition of the notion that people can be "saved from themselves" by a jail term. Needless to say, this theory has utterly failed for more than 90 years. Punishing where no injury to another has been done goes against the biblical admonition commanding that criminal punishment must equal the injury done and no more ("life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise"). [continues 79 words]
Here's a prediction about the outcome of Georgia's Meth Project. There will be more crime, more addiction and more new criminals doing hard time. No one believes drug warriors after years of ranting about marijuana, so there will be no reduction in meth use unless users decide for themselves that the drug is harmful. So much for the drug crusader habit of exaggerating the dangers of marijuana. Ralph Givens Daly City, CA [end]
If the same principles Vision Vancouver councillor Kerry Jang cites for licensing a business were applied to marijuana prohibition, marijuana would be legalized immediately ["Prince of Pot vows to defend his HQ", April 9-16]. No one can deny that disrupting people's lives for no good reason is lawless, and there is no question that marijuana prohibition has an undue impact on every neighbourhood in Canada. Lastly, Marc Emery's Cannabis Culture Headquarters costs no more to police than any other retail store in Vancouver. Keeping marijuana illegal is an assault on the rights of every citizen in Canada. Ralph Givens Daly City, Calif. [end]
People who support drug prohibition usually have little knowledge of the disastrous effects of America's drug crusade. Most people who favor drug laws have no idea that all of our current "drug problems" come from a lunatic drug war that has continuously failed for more than 90 years. History clearly shows that there was no such thing as "drug crime," "drug gangs" or "criminal drug cartels" before drug prohibition. All of the crime, death, disease and murder associated with drugs began after the drugs were outlawed. [continues 127 words]
To The Editor: It is curious that Susan Lane never considers the one thing that would really solve the drug problem in Mexico - legalization. Decriminalization is a dead end street because it reduces penalties for drug users while leaving the drug business in the hands of outlaws. The decriminalization model being discussed is identical to the way alcohol prohibition worked - when Eliot Ness raided a speakeasy, the operators went to jail and the customers went home. This system enabled Al Capone and his ilk to violently control the bootleg booze market, the same way decriminalizing drugs will leave the drug cartels in control. The solution is to follow the pattern set after alcohol prohibition had proved to be a disaster - repeal and regulation. Repeal put the bootleggers out of business and we haven't had a bombing or a shoot out over a beer route since 1933. Ralph Givens Daly City, Calif. [end]
I've been involved with drug reform for more than 12 years and I've never heard anyone on our side claim that legalizing marijuana would eliminate all crime (Argument gone to pot, South Delta Leader, March 20, 2009). What has been said is that all the crime connected to marijuana prohibition will end with legalization. Those who oppose legalizing marijuana evidently favor leaving criminals in charge of a highly profitable marijuana market with all of the crime that entails. Repealing Alcohol Prohibition did not end ALL gang crime, but ending the war on booze did cut the United States's murder rate by more than 50 per cent for several decades. [continues 59 words]
To the Editor: Letter writer Dennis Scoles displays ignorance when he tries to cite the Bible to support drug prohibition. Nowhere in the scriptures is there any authorization to punish someone for consuming a plant made by Almighty God (1 Timothy 4:1-5). Scoles' allusion to alcohol being forbidden by the Bible is just plain wrong. Jesus was a lifelong wine drinker. His first miracle was making more than 40 gallons of wine for a wedding party in Cana. Jesus passed wine around to his disciples during the Last Supper. So where's Scoles' proof that alcohol should be banned? (As though Alcohol Prohibition was not a societal disaster.) [continues 129 words]
Re: "Legalization won't stop Mexico's drug wars" (March 11):, Jay Ambrose needs to study some economics. The law of supply and demand in particular. The only reason marijuana sells for more than its weight in gold is that it is illegal. In a legal market, marijuana would sell for the same price as corn flakes or tofu. Likewise for heroin and cocaine. Plant-based drugs are easy and cheap to produce and without prohibition it would be impossible to make billions trafficking them. The mark up on heroin is thousands to one. For a few pennies outlaws can reap many dollars. In a legal market those huge profits will vanish. [continues 154 words]
(Re: "When cops are thieves," Uncensored, March 5.) One unintended effect of drug prohibition has been the criminalization of law-enforcement agencies. Police are often found planting evidence, "testilying," outright drug dealing, accepting bribes and even committing murder because of the money to be made in an outlaw drug market. The depth of corruption among these bandits with badges is seen when these poltroons divide up confiscated property for their own private, personal use. How can such thievery be allowed in a just society? Cops should never be allowed to confiscate property on their own "testilying" word. Ralph Givens Daly City, Calif. [end]
Considering the fact that ending marijuana prohibition will save the state of California several hundred million dollars in enforcement, court and prison expenses, Kevin A. Sabet's claim (Opinion, March 9) that we cannot "afford" to change a reefer madness policy is dimwitted, to say the least. When Sabet regurgitates Harry Anslinger's unproven claim that "Marijuana is an addictive drug which produces in its users insanity, criminality and death," we know that science has been thrown out the window. And, just for the record, the Netherlands has lower marijuana use in every category than the United States. Ralph Givens Daly City [end]
Few people realize what a colossal failure drug prohibition is. People being misled by government officials do not know that the United States never had a "drug problem" until drug crusaders enacted prohibition laws. Before we had drug laws, there was no such thing as "drug crime." No one was robbing, whoring and murdering over drugs when addicts could buy all of the morphine, heroin, cocaine and anything else they wanted cheaply and legally at the corner pharmacy. There were no drug gangs, no criminal drug cartels and no drug problem. A legal heroin habit cost less than tobacco addiction - 50 cents per week in 1914 - and "drug crime" was unknown. Search the historic archives in vain trying to find a robbery, burglary, or assault associated with drug addiction when drugs were legal. The term "drug crime" is an invention of prohibitionists trying to cover the effects of their failed drug policy. [continues 82 words]
Drug warriors who punish victimless "crimes" like marijuana use owe the world an explanation because the very idea of punishing people when there is no injury to their fellow man is contrary to the Bible; Exodus 21:23: "life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise." (Also see Leviticus 24:20, Deuteronomy 19:21.) With a "marijuana crime," no eyes have been gouged out, there are no broken teeth, no maiming and no victims at all. According to the Scriptures, using marijuana is not a sin nor a crime. Marijuana smokers harm no one, while drug crusaders on the other hand have the blood of hundreds of thousands of victims of their drug prohibition policy to account for. Ralph Givens Daly City, Calif. [end]
Michael Phelps owes no apology to anyone for taking a toke. The people who owe the world an explanation are drug crusaders who punish victimless "crimes." The very idea of punishing people when there is no injury to their fellow man is contrary to the Bible - Exodus 21:23: "life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25 burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise" (Also see Leviticus 24:20, Deuteronomy 19:21). [continues 82 words]
Ed Watson may be a "veteran British Columbia journalist," but his credentials don't support the notion of a boycott putting the drug gangs out of business. For one thing, few marijuana users will cooperate. A far more effective way of ending drug gangs is simply to repeal the drug laws that make their drug dealing so incredibly profitable. It's worth remembering that Eliot Ness never put the bootleggers out of business. Repeal and a regulated market for adult alcohol use did that in short order. Keep in mind that we haven't had a bombing or a shootout over beer routes since 1933. Ralph Givens Daly City, Calif. [end]
It is becoming more clear every day that America's drug crusade has budget-busting costs without providing the slightest benefit. Providing security for Thomason Hospital is only a tiny fraction of the money being wasted on a long-failed drug prohibition approach. The counterproductive nature of America's drug war goes back to the beginning of this destructive policy. Before we had drug laws, there was no such thing as "drug crime." There were no drug gangs, no criminal drug cartels and no such thing as a societal "drug problem." [continues 99 words]
Dear Alibi, [Re: Neverending Stories, "Local Nurse Brings the Medicinal Cannabis Fight to the Feds," Jan. 15-21] The continuing denial of marijuana as a medicine exposes the utter fraud of drug prohibition. No sane person who does not make a living enforcing drug laws can deny that marijuana has "accepted medical use." Thousands of people with recommendations from doctors in 12 states is all the proof needed to put the lie to the drug crusader myth that "marijuana has no medical value." [continues 77 words]
It's good to see some sensible thinking about America's long-failed drug crusade. Drug prohibition has never worked and can never work, so we should listen to former U.S. Border Patrol and U.S. Customs Service agent Terry Nelson when he recommends legalizing and regulating drugs. Repealing alcohol prohibition and regulation of alcohol for adults' use put the bootleggers out of business. Regulation will end the drug cartels and street gangs who profit from an ill-conceived drug war. It's worth remembering that there hasn't been a bombing or a shootout over beer routes since 1933. After more than 90 years of failure, it is time to end America's dysfunctional drug policies. Ralph Givens Daly City, Calif. [end]
A futile drug crusade is currently wrecking Mexico without reducing the flow of drugs one iota. America's drug prohibition policy is the sole reason that Mexico is fighting a losing battle with the drug cartels ("Keep Valley's federal crime team intact," Opinion 2, Dec. 14). The drug war cannot be won because putting more effort into stopping drugs only makes the drug business more profitable for the drug dealers. Making drug dealing ever more profitable makes it impossible to ever stop or even slow the flow of illegal drugs. [continues 101 words]
Deputy chief of police William G. Brooks III begins singing dirges before evidence of any harm emerges. Brooks chants the reefer madness theme with the nerve of a burglar but offers no logical reason to believe what he says. It is sad to hear a fellow who made a career of invading pot smoker's privacy appeal to the desire to be left alone as an alibi for continuing a lunatic policy. Most cannabis users prefer not having a criminal record caused by a sadistic law. I suspect that Brooks real complaint is the loss of easy money cops make enforcing marijuana laws. Appearing in court, etc., earns police officers mega-buck rewards in overtime pay. That's why they lie about marijuana. Within a few months, the public will be irrevocably convinced that marijuana poses very little danger. If deputy chief Brooks wants a new mission, he can lead a crusade against teen drinking. Ralph Givens Daly City, Calif. [end]
Before seeking to expand a long-failed drug crusade with a new salvia divonorum ban, people like state Rep. Charles "Doc" Anderson, R-Waco, should consider the results that America's war on drugs has produced in the last 94 years. When drug prohibition began, there was no such thing as a "drug crime." Addicts could buy morphine, heroin, cocaine and anything else they wanted cheaply and legally at the corner pharmacy. There was no need to rob, whore and murder to satisfy addictions. [continues 157 words]
Ned McCray has the wrong take on the way the drug war works (Fence Post, Aug. 4). Drug prohibition provides the money gangs use to buy guns. Drug money is the fuel that keeps gangs in power. Taking away their drug money by legalizing and regulating drugs for adult use will strike a blow at crime at every level. It's worth remembering that Eliot Ness never put the bootleggers out of business. Repeal and a regulated market for adult alcohol use did that in short order. There hasn't been a shootout over beer routes since 1933. Ralph Givens Daly City, Calif. [end]
To the editor: In response to the article titled "Beyond Ecstasy - and scary," law enforcement officers are spreading scare stories about a new super Ecstasy (#64 DOC). Before believing anything these drug prohibitionists say, we should remember the absurd racist fictions they used to outlaw marijuana - "Marihuana influences Negroes to look at white people in the eye, step on white men's shadows and look at a white woman twice." (Hearst newspapers nationwide, 1934) "There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the U.S., and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos and entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz and swing, result from marijuana use. [continues 205 words]
Former Drug Enforcement Administration special agent Daniel J. Addario should study some history before declaring the war on drugs a success ("Dissing the DEA," Letters, July 25 and PghTrib.com). Before drug prohibition began in 1914, there were no drug gangs, no criminal drug cartels and no such thing as "drug crime." When addicts could buy all of the heroin, morphine, cocaine and anything else they wanted cheaply and legally, no one was robbing, whoring and murdering to get their drugs. When drugs were legal, addicts worked regular jobs, raised decent families and were indistinguishable from teetotalers. [continues 165 words]
To the editor: Federal Health Minister Tony Clement's desire for the "plain truth," if it were fulfilled, would only lead to the end of drug prohibition. No other policy causes so much damage to the public. Ralph Givens [end]
Columnist Dick Dorworth dances around the true reason LSD was outlawed. Authorities were more than a little fearful of being exposed for the lying frauds they are. They knew for a fact that an LSD trip could undermine years of propaganda and opinion molding. Back in the 1960s when LSD was still legal, trippers saw Washington bigwigs thumping for the Vietnam War and instantly and without exception responded, "They're lying!" LSD enabled trippers to "see" the lies flashing out of McNamara et al like overamped strobe lights. [continues 162 words]
Re: 'Prosecuting stoned drivers is a necessity' (Your Letters, Daily News, June 23). Being "stoned" on marijuana does not automatically make someone a danger on the highway. Marijuana use has not been found to be a cause of highway collisions. On-road driving studies funded by the U.S. Department of Transportation proved that marijuana smokers were safer drivers than teetotalers. Other than hysterics from drug crusaders, there is no evidence that marijuana use is increasing the number of highway fatalities. Marijuana smokers tend to drive more slowly, more politely and more safely than others. This is a plus on the highways where aggressive drivers cause fatal accidents. [continues 77 words]
It is amazing how ridiculous lies, propaganda and political opportunism still affect attitudes about marijuana. The pot laws were passed based on the most absurd racist fictions: "Marihuana influences Negroes to look at white people in the eye, step on white men's shadows and look at a white woman twice." (Hearst newspapers nationwide, 1934.) "There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the U.S., and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos and entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz and swing, result from marijuana use. This marijuana can cause white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers and any others." [continues 173 words]
Dear editor, Concerning the letter Drug problem cannot be ignored. Concerned parents like Connie Rufus-Alfred need to learn the harsh lesson taught by U.S. alcohol prohibition in the U.S. The prohibitionists promised that outlawing alcohol would protect their children from the evils of demon rum, but what they delivered was the worst epidemic of teen alcoholism before or since. Every high school soon had an in-house bootlegger ready to keep the kiddies hip flasks filled with rotgut booze. Since bootleggers often sold liquor to children as young as 10 to 11 years old, the illusion of saving the kiddies quickly vanished. [continues 144 words]
Editor: Re: Our drug strategy is not working Mary Hartman is certainly correct that drug prohibition is not working. The plain truth is prohibition of drugs or anything else with a market demand has never succeeded. The true depth of the failure of the drug crusade is seen by the fact that everything connected to banned drugs is far worse than they were beforehand. Before we had drug laws, there was no such thing as "drug crimes." No one was robbing, whoring and murdering over drugs when addicts could buy anything they wanted cheaply and legally at the corner pharmacy. There were no drug gangs and no drug cartels before prohibition made drug dealing the most profitable commodity on earth. [continues 123 words]
Re: "Harper's Tough on Crime Stance" Besides serving illiterate Conservative notions about crime and punishment, there is a bigger reason Stephen Harper supports greatly increasing Canada's incarceration rate. Every prisoner is a cash cow for the prison industry. People make more money building prisons than schools because every steel--barred "room" costs hundreds of thousands of dollars to construct. Hugely profitable businesses exploit the prison system to the tune of billions of dollars a year here in the U.S. In fact, prison industries are one of the fastest growing segments of the economy. Everyone from prison guards to political impostors profits from a huge prison system. It looks like Harper intends to import this policy into Canada. The people who do not benefit are school children who see funding for books, computers, teachers' salaries, etc. sacrificed for a brain dead crusade against drugs. More prisoners are serving hard time for victimless drug crimes than for rape, assault, armed robbery, child molesting, kidnapping and murder put together. Every prisoner costs more than $30,000/year. Multiply that by a few hundred thousand and we're talking about some real money. It's obvious that Harper's pals will make millions with a mandatory sentencing scheme. Ralph Givens Daly City, CA [end]
What argument do the drug warriors make to impose mandatory minimum sentences for "marijuana crimes?" Where is the justification for harsh penalties for using a substance that has never caused a single death and has no connection to violence? Where are the assaults, thefts, murders and social chaos from marijuana to justify sending someone to prison? Apparently drug crusading cretins still believe the racist fictions used to outlaw marijuana in the first place. "...persons using this narcotic smoke the dry leaves of the plant, which has the effect of driving them completely insane. The addict loses all sense of moral responsibility. Addicts to this drug, while under its influence, are immune to pain. While in this condition they become raving maniacs and are liable to kill or indulge in any forms of violence to other persons, using the most savage methods of cruelty without, as said before, any sense of moral responsibility."-Mrs. Emily Murphy writing under the pen name of "Janey Canuck." There is no evidence that marijuana poses any danger except to the deluded minds of drug warriors like "Janey Canuck" who have lost all connection with reality. Ralph Givens, Daly City, California [end]
Re: your April 30 editorial, "Pot costs man shot at a liver": The treatment of patients like Timothy Garon, who was denied a transplant because of his marijuana use, shows how perverted American drug policy really is. The drug warriors have been meddling with medical practice for more than 90 years, to the detriment of patient care. Before the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Health Care Organizations issued standards for hospital care requiring maximum pain relief, the Drug Enforcement Administration had no compunction about interfering with pain relief. Patients were routinely denied adequate morphine because of drug warriors who never attended a day of medical school. Every hospital must meet JCAHCO's standard to operate legally, so the drug prohibitionists are no longer allowed to meddle. Unfortunately, drug laws based on lies are used to deny all sorts of medical care to people. It's long past time to end a drug crusade that has failed for 94 straight years. - -- Ralph Givens, Daly City [end]
Maintaining expensive reefer madness drug laws by sacrificing public education shows that drugs can cause real insanity. The madness is in legislators, not drug users. The very idea of cutting education funds while one dollar is spent on a useless drug crusade that has failed for 94 straight years is true lunacy. Claiming to "protect" children while destroying their futures shows how devastatingly stupid drug prohibition really is. Ralph Givens Daly City [end]
The problem with marijuana prohibition is that it is based on known lies. Drug Task Force officer Chuck Hearn's claim that "Marijuana is kind of a gateway drug" is an example. The 1997 U.S. government sponsored Institute of Medicine (IOM) study on Medical Marijuana debunked the notion that marijuana use leads to heroin addiction with this pointed conclusion- "Whereas the stepping stone hypothesis presumes a predominantly physiological component to drug progression, the gateway theory is a social theory." The latter does not suggest that the pharmacological qualities of marijuana make it a risk factor for progression to other drug use. Instead it is the legal status of marijuana that makes it a gateway drug." (The IOM report is online at: http://www.drugsense.org/iom_report/ ) In other words, any gateway phenomena is caused by the drug laws that officer Chuck Hearn promotes and enforces. Legalizing and regulating marijuana for adult use will close the gateway. Ralph Givens [end]
One point should be added to letter writer Paul Armentano's insightful comments about drug prohibition ("Start with the war on drugs," April 2). There was no such thing as a "drug problem" before the drug laws went on the books in 1914. Search old newspaper archives in vain seeking an addiction-related robbery, theft, embezzlement, assault or murder when drugs were legal. When addicts could buy all of the heroin, morphine, cocaine and anything else they wanted cheaply and legally, there was no such thing as "drug crime." Nowadays, our prisons are filled with drug users whose crime is being addicted to a drug. The term "drug crime" is an alibi for a failed drug crusade. [continues 66 words]
Clarence Page altered a critical part of "The Wire's" article opposing drug prohibition. People who want to nullify drug laws should not "let the lawyers and judges know up front that you're not going to send nonviolent drug offenders to jail." Those who do will be excluded from jury duty and will not be able to "nullify" anything. The creators of "The Wire" never advised anyone to warn the court of their intentions because they know such people will be kicked out of the jury pool. The idea is to get on drug juries and make it impossible to get convictions the same way jurors refused to uphold the Fugitive Slave Act before the War Between The States. The drug war is morally wrong and citizens should do their part in stopping it. Ralph Givens Daly City, Calif. [end]
