Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: TUESDAY, January 11, 1994 TAG: 9401120010
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A4 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: SYDNEY B. SELF JR.
DATELINE: LENGTH: Medium
If someone attempts to steal property or to extort money from a legally run business, the owner can seek protection from the criminal-law division of our judicial system. If such a business has a dispute with an individual or another business, it can seek adjudication of the matter through civil-law procedures. A business that operates outside of the law cannot use either of these remedies. Instead, it must solve its own problems using whatever means are available to it. Thus, murder and other forms of violence are perfectly natural activities to those who operate outside the law. What other recourse is available to them when they have to protect themselves against physical violence or when they think that others are taking advantage of them?
Society has reacted by attempting to fight the problem on the enemy's turf. We've tried to meet force with force. We pass laws prohibiting certain forms of behavior. When people don't obey the laws, we pass more laws. We hire police to enforce these laws and when they're unsuccessful, we hire more police. It hasn't and won't work unless we're willing to bankrupt the nation and to subvert personal rights to the point that we no longer have a democracy.
Restrictive laws haven't worked in the past. (Remember Prohibition?) Won't we ever learn that passing an unenforceable law has nothing but bad effects? One bad effect is that the behavior the law is intended to regulate goes underground where it can no longer be controlled at all. Another is that it encourages disrespect of laws in general. Any psychologist can tell you that one can achieve much better results by encouraging beneficial behavior than by trying to punish undesirable behavior.
We're not going to reduce the continuing growth of crime in our society until we have the moral courage to face the causes of it directly. We have to recognize that, although it may be possible to control the use of drugs, we cannot possibly eliminate drug usage. In other words, what we need is a willingness to look at what's truly the source of the problem and the courage to make a forthright examination of what needs to be done to transform an unmanageable problem into a manageable one.
The basic reason that the illegal drug industry exists is very simple: There are a great many people who find it desirable and/or necessary to use drugs. These users are willing to pay substantial sums of money for the drugs they want and/or need. Many are addicted to the drugs they use and cannot casually stop using them. There are others who recognize the profits to be made from supplying the drugs and, because the profits are so large, are willing to take considerable risks to provide this supply. This shouldn't be surprising since our society encourages free enterprise.
In principle, the solutions are equally simple. First, we have to find new and better ways to discourage people from using drugs. Second, we have to legitimize the drug business that remains. We need to expose it to the light of day where it can be controlled, not force it into the darkness where it festers like a loathsome disease.
In addition, we can look at what has worked. Both alcohol and cigarettes can be defined as drugs in that they both modify behavior. Both can be addictive. It's perfectly true that we continue to have problems that arise from their use, or misuse, and that most people think that we should consume far less of them, but I don't think it can be denied that their use is causing far fewer problems in today's society than the use of drugs. The obvious implication is that we should legalize drugs in a controlled manner, even though I'm not in favor of everyone using drugs. This might mean that some of the more dangerous and addictive drugs, heroin for example, could be available on a prescription basis whereas others, such as marijuana, could be available only through licensed agencies, as is liquor in many states. Perfect solution? Of course not. Better than what we're doing now?
There's no reason to believe that legitimizing the illegal drug business in a controlled manner would result in an increase in the use of drugs. It would save immense amounts of money, not only directly in the reduction of crime-fighting efforts, but indirectly - in that crimes committed by those who need the money to buy drugs would be reduced. The quality of recreational drugs could be regulated, thus reducing deaths and serious injuries resulting from the use of drugs of unknown quality. And last but by no means least, very substantial increases in taxes could be derived from taxing the sale of recreational drugs, as cigarettes and alcohol are currently taxed.
\ Sydney B. Self Jr. of Bedford is a retired business-system analyst.
by CNB