Dazed & Confused

Published 12:00 am Wednesday, January 10, 2001

Lee Dresselhaus

Let’s face it, folks. The present system for ridding American streets of illegal drugs just doesn’t work. Right now the United States spends tens of billions of dollars a year to fight drugs. And that doesn’t include the cost of incarcerating individuals who now go to jail in record numbers because of the “zero tolerance” policies set by politicians with their fingers ready to punch any hot button issue that will get them attention and votes. Despite the fact that the United States imprisons a larger percentage of its population, a huge portion of which are there for drug charges, than any other Western nation, and maybe any other nation, period, the drug issue just won’t seem to go away. Take a look around. Drugs are more pervasive, more ubiquitous in our society right now than ever before, even though the penalties for that form of recreation n or addiction n are more severe than ever. So, why would anyone continue to want drugs in whatever form if they know there are people out there just waiting to pounce on them and haul them away if they get caught?

Drugs, legal and illegal, are an ingrained part of the human consciousness. From the earliest times, mankind has been seeking n and finding n various ways to chemically alter our conscious state. Our most available and most legal drug, alcohol, has been around since somebody figured out, probably by accident, that leaving a particular fruit to rot under certain conditions would cause it to do strange things to you. I don’t have any idea who that could have been, no one does of course, but you can bet he became a very popular guy with all his friends after he shared his little discovery. The same could probably be said of the guys who discovered that piling a certain kind of weed on the fire at night to help keep the wolves at bay had rather pleasant side effects if you inhaled enough of the smoke. I have no doubt they became the life of the party and that their campfires became very popular places. So what’s my point in all that? Well, as Dennis Miller, the acerbic and observant comedian, said, if you were to suddenly, magically, take away all drugs, people would go out into their yards and spin around and around until they fell down and saw God. People want to alter their consciousness from time to time, and no amount of governmental control short of locking everybody up 24 hours a day, seven days a week, will change that.

Am I advocating legalizing drugs? No. Of course not. But the fact is that the “war on drugs” has been about as effective as Ralph Nader’s run for president. And maybe it’s time to start considering some alternatives to the “let’s lock em all up for life” mentality. One alternative is decriminalizing certain drugs, marijuana for instance, and controlling others. Highly addictive drugs such as heroin could be bought n with clean needles n at controlled locations and by prescription. That could help lower the crime rate attached to that particular drug because people wouldn’t have to steal and rob to get it. It would also slow the spread of HIV and hepatitis and other fun stuff junkies spread among themselves and others. Holland and Switzerland both use those methods. I don’t know just what their degree of success is, but I do know that their crime rates are lower than ours, and so is the percentage of their population who are in jail.

Of course, those alternatives wouldn’t be popular with politicians. Proposing those things would get you booted from office faster that you could say Richard Nixon. So, as another alternative, one that is extremely effective but a bit more rigid, should be considered. And that’s the China method. Shoot the offender in the back of the head and send the bill for the bullet to his family. That also lowers the crime rate, but it would probably bring certain Constitutional questions into play over here. But, hey, it’s an alternative.

So what’s the answer? I don’t know. But there has to be one because the one they’re using now sure isn’t working. I guess we’ll just leave it to whoever is appointed the next drug czar.

With a title like that, I’m sure he’ll have all the answers.

LEE DRESSELHAUS writes this column every Wednesday for L’Observateur.