Ted Nugent rates himself the perfect candidate for drug czar because "hippies, dopeheads, corrupt politicos and various forms of human debris hate me." ["We could be winning the war on drugs," June 14.] The reason Nugent won't be made drug czar is because his detractors also include regular folks who don't suffer fools gladly. Mett Ausley Jr. Lake Waccamaw, N.C. [end]
A March 26 article ["Seized assets do pay off"] indicates that proceeds from seized drug trade assets are returned to the law enforcement agencies making the seizures. It was reported that in 2005, about $6 million of seized assets went to Virginia criminal justice entities. Most states have similar policies. By cutting itself in on the profit stream from illicit drugs, law enforcement effectively joins the narcotics racket. When the criminal justice sector is allowed to enrich itself by skimming illegal drug profits, it is provided incentives to ensure that the drug trade flourishes, and it resists public-policy initiatives that might curb drug use or reduce the profits therefrom. [continues 56 words]
In her March 23 letter, SBI Director Robin Pendergraft is correct that restricting sales of over-the-counter decongestants, particularly pseudoephedrine, helps curtail the small "mom and pop" methamphetamine labs now afflicting western Noth Carolina. Pendergraft provides evidence from Oklahoma where recently enacted restrictions caused a sharp, sustained decline in meth lab seizures. Other states are following suit. Truthfulness compels the entire story be told, though unfavorable to the criminal justice agenda. Oklahoma's step was less inspiration than a desperation measure to relieve worsening fiscal pressure caused by meth offenders crowding state prisons. [continues 90 words]
To the Editor: If DeWayne Wickham's opposition to "mandatory minimum" drug penalties indicates "idiocy" as you allege (in Editor Tom Mayer's July 23 column), this ordinary shortcoming pales beside your editorial's wanton liberties with truthfulness and reasoning. Give Wickham credit for forthrightly admitting his interest in helping a "jailhouse scribe" inmate acquaintance. Absent your own disclosure, I'm left wondering what of your overstated outrage is sincere, and what merely reflects an eagerness to sell advertisements and subscriptions by pandering to your readers' familiar prejudices; toadying to justice functionaries vending the "news" you stream before your audience in voyeuristic fashion. [continues 97 words]
EDITOR: If legislators Jerome Cochran and Rusty Crowe believe TennCare shouldn't pay for methadone treatment, they should be expected to provide good reasons, such as evidence that methadone treatment for addiction is medically unsound or not cost-effective (Lawmakers want to stop payments for methadone, March 9). Their work's cut out for them: The benefits of methadone substitution are validated by decades of clinical experience and numerous published research studies. While acknowledging it isn't a panacea, the National Institutes of Health and the American Society of Addiction Medicine each have issued consensus statements endorsing methadone treatment. [continues 160 words]
In response to "Officials push for tougher drug laws" (Dec. 5):Methamphetamine's addictiveness and harm are proven, and the danger to children exposed to amateur "meth labs" is unquestionable. Attorney General Roy Cooper proposes tougher punishments. Do harsher penalties really reduce overall public harm from this drug? Meth labs' decades-long transcontinental march against vigorous enforcement provides a wealth of data and experience to guide policy. Let's better deploy our finite resources than ritualistically feeding a bloated criminal justice apparatus. A cursory look shows meth lab activity in Oklahoma and Alabama unabated despite harsh anti-drug measures contributing to overloaded prisons and fiscal peril. We should expect Mr. Cooper to cogently explain why his plan will succeed this time. Lake Waccamaw [end]
Decrying the crime and decay visited upon Huntington's once-pleasant Artisan Avenue by rampant crack dealing, The Herald-Dispatch gratuitously upbraids those who purportedly view drugs as a "victimless crime." (I refer to your editorial of Sept. 15, "More police are needed to fight crack epidemic.") This wrongly stereotypes those who question the doctrinaire and expensive drug policy that was by now to have delivered the promised nirvana of a drug-free society. Absent is any evidence that feckless libertines and legalizers were responsible for the police layoffs and abandoned drug enforcement that precipitated the crisis. Scolding dissidents seems but a ploy to divert attention away from the implicit official incompetence and policy failure. Those who made this bed should have to lie in it. [continues 87 words]
The clandestine methamphetamine labs described in your Sept. 2 article "Rural country is meth central" unquestionably jeopardize public safety. Deaths and injuries from fires and noxious vapors are well-documented, environmental contamination is a concern and the impact upon children is real. This hardly has escaped public notice as homemade methamphetamine has gradually migrated toward our locale. Considering that neighboring Tennessee has been heavily afflicted, any assertion that local officials have been blindsided is implausible; in fact area law enforcement agencies have long anticipated its arrival. [continues 180 words]
The Gazette's editorial on synthetic drugs (Drug Task Force Steps Up Activity, Aug. 10) warns of a supposed "wildfire" of amphetamine and ecstasy abuse approaching from the west without documenting or explaining this peculiar geographic progression. Granted, drug use varies with locale and demographics, but common sense dictates that drugs follow the same routes and timetables as people, not the winds or Earth's rotation. I suspect these drugs have been here for some time; the imagery of an impending "epidemic" is little more than the usual overheated propaganda. [continues 105 words]
Politicians Exploit Drug Problem To Own Advantage. Editor, Commonwealth: I agree with Charles T. Chapin that making intoxicating drugs readily available by legalizing them likely would raise the prevalence of addiction ("Legalizing drugs will only add to problem," Aug. 13). But Chapin maunders aimlessly in his criticism of Anita Mayfield's letter ("Decriminalize drugs and nation will be crime-free," Aug. 8). She argued only that legalizing drugs would reduce black market crime and made no conjecture about addiction rates. Whatever the effect on addiction, a strong case can be made that legalization would curtail the monstrous wave of property crime and violence attending illegal drug commerce. Chapin seems to disagree, but offers as his solution the profundity that parents should be less permissive and people should exercise more self-discipline. Well, if pigs had wings, they'd fly. [continues 167 words]
EDITOR: Mocking Canada's proposal to decriminalize marijuana possession (Make it all legal, June 2), Steven Lusk suggests reforming drug laws is tantamount to legalizing murder, robbery and rape, facetiously proposing that systematically licensing such crimes would benefit society and create new career opportunities. Lusk's comments spotlight his own potential for a new occupation: clown. His silly remarks aren't really argument, just frivolous distraction. It's easy to imagine yesteryear's simpletons indulging in similar theatrics when alcohol prohibition was questioned. Anyone can see murder and rape, plain evils universally sanctioned, differ fundamentally from the regulatory minutiae of controlled substances. [continues 127 words]
Contrary to June Vetter's misrepresentation, "harm minimization" isn't predicated upon permissiveness or "mantras" ("More Help Is Needed in Moore County's War on Drugs," The Pilot, May 28), rather the forthright recognition that humans will persist in using drugs despite taboos and sanctions. This compels efficient policy that strives to minimize human suffering and costs. The realism of this approach compares favorably with that of official doctrine, which holds that the nirvana of a drug-free society can be attained through absolute prohibition, zealous enforcement and merciless punishment. Drugs' stubborn persistence after decades of escalating efforts offers compelling evidence that this theory is unsound, and taxpayers footing the bill for this expensive undertaking deserve accountability. [continues 160 words]
Editor, the Tribune: Proposition 1's sponsors reasonably expected little official opposition to their modest proposal. Paradoxically, marijuana's widespread popularity ensures that official interests will fight every inch of reform. Drug enforcement is a wellspring of largesse for the criminal justice sector, and marijuana violations dwarf all other drug offenses combined. This massively inflates the apparent magnitude of the "drug problem" and swells enforcement funding accordingly. When marijuana arrests pay for jails, prosecutors, training and other goodies, it's not surprising to find officials opposed to any relaxation. [continues 184 words]
The local physicians convicted of prescription fraud were despicably unprofessional and offer little in mitigation except incredible naivete in believing their actions would go unnoticed. The Sun News correctly notes that "ordinary" pushers receive stiff sentences ("Clinic Doctors No Better Than Pushers," Feb. 26), but decades-long imprisonment for such drug offenses merits no more respect as justice than do these doctors as healers. Today's drug policy barely maintains linkage to reality, much less social hygiene or law and order. Instead, it is a gravy train driven by arrogant bureaucrats and opportunistic politicians who gull unsophisticated voters into handing them ever more authority and largesse. Addressing failure by redoubling it perpetuates this cycle to their advantage. Reform hasn't penetrated this racket since inception. [continues 126 words]
Your Dec. 24 editorial "Help police stem violence" describes a scenario as familiar as a tired rerun: Authorities crack down on drug-dealing hooligans, and the neighborhood enjoys temporary peace. Soon the dealers and violence are back, and residents resign themselves to the futility of reporting drug activity, as you note in your call for their cooperation in helping police "put the drug dealers out of business." These residents know firsthand what more of us are beginning to recognize: Insatiable consumer demand for illegal intoxicants combined with adamant prohibition create irresistible profit potential for criminals and ensure an intractable, permanently entrenched black market. Like fire ants, the drug dealers can be briefly suppressed or relocated, but not eliminated. Among the many evils of this situation is violence, with innocents frequently caught in the cross fire. [continues 147 words]
To The Editor: Your urgent call for our state's lawmakers to outlaw the sale of urine ("State should outlaw urine kits," Thursday), is devoid of evidence or reasoning to support the necessity, practicality or effectiveness of such a measure. Monkey-see monkey-do imitation of our neighbor and a local policeman's off-handed opinion hardly justify plunging further into this sort of legislative dadaism. We're not talking about banning the sale of heroin to schoolchildren here. This is truly world-class idiocy, even to a public whose senses have been narcotized by the unceasing procession of loopy laws, asinine acts, silly statutes and ridiculous regulations characterizing the unsurprisingly unsuccessful war on drugs. [continues 86 words]
