💾 Archived View for gemini.spam.works › mirrors › textfiles › politics › eslf0002.txt captured on 2020-10-31 at 15:12:26.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
...START DOKS
^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^
^THE WAR ON DRUGS HAS BEEN LOST.^
^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^
_________________________________________________________________________
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Despite decades of interdiction and enforcement efforts that have cost
illions of dollars, there are more drugs and more blood on the streets than
ver before. Our courts and prisons are crowded beyond capacity, corruption is
ampant at home, and governments abroad are under siege.
With all the hysteria and hypocrisy surrounding the issue of drugs, we
ave ignored the clear lessons of history. Prohibition financed the rise of
rganized crime and failed miserably as effective legal and social policy.
ikewise, the war on drugs has created new, highly financed criminal
onspiracies.
The latest round of antidrug hysteria has created a climate akin to the
nti-Communist witch hunts of the McCarthy era. Judge Douglas Ginsburg, a
onservative legal scholar from Harvard University, was forced to withdraw from
onsideration for the Supreme Court after admitting he had smoked marijuana.
he constitutional guarantee against unreasonable search and seizure is being
outinely breached by judges across the country who uphold questionable
earches. Those courts, says University of Indiana law professor Craig Bradley,
Come on... Ain't Got All Day!! are influenced by the drug scare in much the same way courts were influenced
y the Red scare." And Bush's drug czar, William Bennet, has encouraged school
hildren who turn in friends and family suspected of taking drugs.
A society cannot long afford to have its laws widely and openly broken.
he urge to use some form of mind-altering substance is deeply ingrained in
uman nature. Attempting to legislate it out of existence can only lead us to
rant government the kind of power it should not have in a free society.
U.S. drugs laws are outdated and need total revamping. The arguments
gainst legalization are tired and invalid. Legalization does 'not' imply
overnment approval of drug use. It would not increase availability or result
n a massive wave of new addicts. Legalization 'would' eliminate inner-city
iolence associated with competitive drug dealing and allow billions of dollars
o be rechanneled for treatment, antidrug education and economic assistance for
ob training, day care and better schools.
Despite Richard Nixon's attempts to eradicate marijuana production in his
ountry, some 6O million Americans have smoked pot, and 21 million now smoke it
egularly. Eleven states have decrimminalized personal use, and not a single
eath has been attributed to a marijuana overdose. Yet as late as 1988, an
stimated $986 million in federal funds was used for anti-marijuana
nforcement. That same year, 391,6OO people were arrested for marijuana
ffenses, according to the FBI.
Attempts to control cocaine in the 198Os have likewise failed. In a
extbook case of innovative marketing, cocaine -- once considered a drug of the
lite -- trickled down to the poor in the form of crack, a cheap, potent high
nd a profitable, easily transportable product for the young entrepreneur. Even
hough cocaine prices fell throughout the Eighties, consumption increased so
reatly that crack profits made the drug barons of Latin America among the
ichest men in the history of the world.
The primary argument against legalization is that if drugs were suddenly
egalized, the result would be a significant increase in new addicts. With
rack, this arguments is simply irrelevant. Crack is abhorred by society at
arge, and its ready availability would not result in a meaningful increase in
ts use. In the areas where a large market exists, legalization would not
Come on... Ain't Got All Day!! ncrease availability in the least. The absurdity of this argument is apparent
o anyone who has seen the street-side dealing in the twenty-four hour,
pen-air drug bazaars in the major urban centers.
If the legalization of drugs results in a slight increase in the number of
busers, let us accept the consequences. Most middle-class Americans have
ccess to a social safety net that includes family, employers and social
ervices, as well as health insurance, education and treatment facilities.
In the ghettos, where the drug war is being wages, things are far more
esperate. The residents of inner cities are faced with harsh realities. Realm
ages for poor black men dropped fifty percent during the 197Os. Approximately
ne-third of black men from poor areas are arrested on drug charges bu the age
f thirty. Nearly one in four black males between the ages of twenty and
wenty-nine is in prison, on probation or parole, or awaiting trial.
Increasingly, the residents of our inner cities are losing hope. The
isintegration of the family structure, the poor job outlook, inadequate
ducation and government abandonment have left these citizens with few
lternatives. While middle-class white communities possess most of the things
hat the urban poor are lacking, while lawmakers have been slow to assist
inorities in achieving a kind of social parity. And this abandonment is
reating a permanent underclass of unemployable ghetto youths whose lives
ecome hopelessly interwoven with drug crime and who in turn are becoming
arents to another generation of seriously dysfunctional children.
The government's response to the plight of the poor has been far from
inisterial. Bush and Bennett's national drug strategy calls for an increase in
aw-enforcement officers and a massive increase in prison space. Indeed, the
99O drug-war budget of $9.5 billion allots $1.5 billion for prisons -- a 1OO
ercent increase -- and $876 million for the military's involvement.
Come on... Ain't Got All Day!! It is time for the government to offer more than punitive assistance to
his segment of society. The residents of inner cities don't need more police
fficers to help them obey the law or prison space to house them when they fail
o do so. They need opportunity and equality. Spend the billions that will
esult from a drug-peace dividend on education, job assistance, child care and
conomic redevelopment.
Legalizing drugs would also eliminate the bloodshed associated with all
evels of drug dealing and smuggling. Federal judges would find some 15,OOO
ewer cases a year on their dockets -- which is a small fraction of the burden
hat would be lifted from state and local courts. And since nearly fifty
ercent of all federal prisoners are now serving time for drug-related
ffenses, the national prison crisis would be forestalled. In addition, the
isk of death by overdose, hepatitis, AIDS and other illnesses resulting from
he use of street drugs would ne greatly reduced. Eliminating the black market
n illegal drugs would dry up the estimated $5O to $6O billion a year in
rofits for organized crime.
_________________________________________________________________________ |
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
In seventy-five years of trying, the government has failed to control
rugs through prohibition. For the traffickers and barons, each successive wave
f hysteria has only increased their profits and power. Legalization can take
hese away and dethrone the dealer in his neighborhood. Let's strip away the
ypocrisy implicit in laws that are only enforced against the poor and
inorities.
Come on... Ain't Got All Day!! At the beginning of the Reagan administration, the United States spent $1
illion to enforce laws against all drugs. Next year, Bush's drug war will cost
ver into an escalating, hopeless war, perhaps the history lessons can begin:
Like Vietnam, this is a quagmire. We are in a war that is tearing apart
he fabric of our country. There is no light at the end of the tunnel. And it
s time to admit we are wrong. And perhaps we can behave as a kinder, gentler
nd more mature society.
-Jann S. Wenner
An ASCII copy of a Rolling Stone editorial, June 199O.
Typed by ROM [onstruct, for the ESLF.
4:51 pm (June 24, 199O)
...END DOKS
[23] Tfiles: (1-36,?,Q) :