Kudos to Robert Sharpe from Drug Policy Alliance for his excellent letter about misguided marijuana laws. Alcohol prohibition was one one of the greatest public policy failures in U.S. history, yet the government continues to wage an identical prohibition on marijuana that has been consistently failing for more than 60 years. While terrorist organizations are devising ways to attack our country, the government is putting huge sums of money and resources into this policy that destroys the lives of peaceful citizens and turns terminally ill patients into criminals. [continues 133 words]
TO THE EDITOR: I was disappointed with the July 31 editorial, `Legalizing Marijuana is a Dopey Idea.' The only argument presented against legalization is this: even though marijuana may be less harmful than alcohol, it would be `adding another vice to the list of legally-tolerated drugs we'd be better off without.' This statement is nothing more than ill-logic and hypocrisy. It is disgusting to think that government can righteously discriminate against some drugs users (marijuana and other drug users) while not only tolerating, but condoning other drug users (alcohol and tobacco users). [continues 176 words]
Re "Hash profits to terrorists: Cops," (July 15): The recent claim by the RCMP that hashish is supporting terrorism is misguided. It may be true that hashish supports terrorism, but there's a very specific reason for it -- because it is illegal. Hashish, a concentrated form of marijuana, is only as expensive as it is because it is illegal. Black market factors drive up the price of illegal drugs thousands of percent so that the profits made by selling it are far more than for any legitimate business. On the other hand, if a country were to regulate hashish, the profits from selling it would plummet so that it would be no more lucrative than selling potatoes. Then, the nation would have enough control over the drug trade to boycott Afghan hash. [continues 114 words]
In his Dec. 24 letter, "The Drug-Terror Connection," Marc Grossman pointed out that the United States has pumped billions of dollars into the drug war, destroyed enormous amounts of drugs and shut down hundreds of drug laboratories. What Mr. Grossman did not mention, however, is that with all this time and money, we've barely made a dent in the drug problem. We arrest users and dealers, and drugs are still prevalent on the streets, circulating through schools and prisons like water. We've been doing this for 30 years with the same lack of results. All we have now is the highest incarceration rate in the world, with no reduction in the amount of drugs. [continues 103 words]
Doug Clark makes the argument that legalizing drugs would not work ("We'll never make drugs legal," Oct. 23). I beg to differ. I could go on for hours about why drugs need to be legal, but Clark seems to acknowledge the existence of these reasons, so I will go on to his main concern - how drugs would be legal. First, I would like to answer the concern about how some drugs would have to remain illegal. This is not the case. Legalization acknowledges that, no matter how damaging a drug is, prohibiting it will make it more dangerous and engender violence and crime around its unregulated market. Legal distributors provide safer and purer drugs than black market dealers, and they don't gun down competition, either. Less violence, less crime, less overdoses, less bad drugs and less death. Therefore, if there is demand for the drug, there would be some form of regulation. [continues 1294 words]
Dear Editor: I am writing concerning the August 8 article, "World War." I wanted to supplement Mr. Simon's reference to the Dutch drug policy by providing some statistics on their country's drug status. The Netherlands has safe injecting rooms for heroin addicts, and marijuana has been sold in hundreds of coffee shops for almost 30 years. Where has it gotten them? (Sidenote: This data comes directly from the Netherlands Central Bureau of Statistics; it cannot be debated) Percent of High School Seniors Who Used Marijuana in Past 30 Days: U.S . - 23%; Netherlands 18.1% [continues 142 words]
Editor, Times-Dispatch: I am writing this letter in response to the August 1 article, "Heroin, Ecstasy Drug Use on Rise." I would point out important facts very few people realize. I want to describe two examples of how much easier the drug problem would be with legalization. The first is the purity of heroin. The article states, "Heroin is now also more lethal." The purity of heroin has nothing to do with how lethal it is. What makes it lethal is a teen-ager who is getting 70 percent pure heroin thinking it is 35 percent and taking twice as much as he intended. If heroin could be bought at a pharmacy as a prescription, users would know exactly how much they are ingesting. No one wants to overdose. This also would ensure that there are no other harmful chemicals, either. [continues 110 words]
I am writing this in response to the July 12 letter called "We need harsher penalties for those who do drugs." Mr. Wells seems to have a very close-minded opinion of drugs, and uses this personal opinion to promote harsher laws on drug users. It's depressing to think of all the people who are arrested every day because they decided to smoke a joint, or drop some acid. It's not necessarily good for them, but neither is it any of our business to tell them what to ingest. [continues 201 words]
