LETTERS TO THE EDITOR: DRUG WAR IS NOT MORAL IMPERATIVE

To The Editor:

The Zero Tolerance in the Southeast Missourian has been misrepresented as investigative journalism, while it fits the spirit and letter of neither. It is no more than propaganda, obvious support for the dogma of the War on Drugs. The Southeast Missourian plays on fears and ignorance while discounting the facts and ignoring the arguments against the continuance of the Drug War.

The writers talked of the "scourge" of crack cocaine. Law enforcement officials call use of crack the "primary threat to civility" and our "biggest genocide". This alarming talk is in disproportion to the actual problem. Cocaine use decreased since the early 80s, now at 3 percent of the population, according to the New York Times. In contrast, there has been a steady increase in violent crimes in the U.S., and 99 percent of the population can expect to be a victim of theft at some point in their life. Less than 10,000 deaths a year can be directly attributed to illegal drug use while 400,000 will die from cigarettes, and 25,000 from homicide. These statistics suggest that law enforcement agencies should be concentrating their efforts on violent crimes and theft, rather than on low-level consensual drug offenses. The policy that is now pursued costs taxpayers billions per year and is more likely to be at the cause of violent crimes than the cure for substance abuse.

The Southeast Missourian obviously supports the objectives and methods of the War on Drugs, even though these are not productive and lend themselves to governmental abuse. Through the War on Drugs, the government wants to wipe out drug use. This objective is impossible to achieve, and necessitates that the right of the people to make decisions about their own lives is taken from them (or given away).

The rights of the average citizen are at risk while the Drug War is being waged. Michael Madness, of the Charleston Police, stated in your series that there are "no real rules" to the fight. The War on Drugs is a feeding frenzy for corrupt government employees, politicians and "rats". One area where the rights of the people are being eroded is in forfeitures and seizures. Since Reagan opened the floodgates on forfeitures in 1985, there has been an increase in drug arrests nothing short of phenomenal. This has resulted in dire prison overpopulation and early release for violent offenders. Federal law allows for federal law enforcement agencies to "adopt" local seizure cases, returning up to 85 percent of the money to local law enforcement authorities. This process has netted Missouri law enforcement authorities. This process has netted Missouri law enforcement more than 12 million dollars in the past 6 years, according to the St. Louis Post-Dispatch.

As our government becomes more intent on fighting this war, constitutional rights are discarded as mere nuisance. Other areas where abuse is common are in surveillance, records seizing, mandatory minimums and urine testing. The Fourth Amendment has been disabled by the War on Drugs. In the 1989 Supreme Court Case, Skinner v. Railway Labor Executives' Assoc., the Court ruled that the "special needs" of the War on Drugs took precedence over Fourth Amendment protections. Thurgood Marshall dissented, saying that the Court has permitted "special needs to displace constitutional text". He emphasized that there should be no drug exception to the Constitution.

What are they trying to achieve, and at what cost? Maness stated that law enforcement was attempting to "go after those who use it". This is a common tactic-the demonizing of the drugs themselves and the people who use them. What should be attacked is the social and emotional trauma that can turn recreational use by average, intelligent people into destructive abuse. Law enforcement is not the answer. In its January 31st editorial, the Southeast Missourian on the one hand lauds the success of drug control efforts then says they have not succeeded. What is the solution proposed? To continue that which has not met its intended goal. This is a common paradox in American policy making - it a policy does not succeed, keep trying it, but on a grander scale. This self-defeating line of thinking should end. It is time to question the efficiency and legitimacy of this obviously failed policy. Jobs, education, treatment, prevention, and the restoration of hope within our poor communities will do far more to solve this problem than a jail cell ever could.

A democracy should be supportive of the naturally derived right to adults to make decisions about the conduct of their lives (so long as these do not impede with the rights of others), without subjecting them to the threat of loss of liberty, employment, property, children and their entire future. Drug law reform and the movement to the decriminalize/legalize drugs are an attempt to return this right to the people. The Southeast Missourian doesn't even acknowledge the existence of these efforts, let alone objectively present their arguments. Instead, the Southeast Missourian employs fear and obvious conservative bias to produce a series that does not portray an objective review of the issue. Zero Tolerance wants you to join the War on Drugs, based on the premise that the drug users are the enemy and that they Drug war not only can be won, but should be fought as a matter of moral imperative. The message conveyed throughout the series should alarm those who value true investigative journalism, and the very tenets of democracy. We can begin to find a solution to the problem of substance abuse only once we have approached it with an open and informed mind, discarding hysteria and propaganda and replacing it with reason. This is the only route of investigation we should rightly take if we are to respect the basic liberties our Constitution sought to secure, rather than to build more levels on a sand castle as we frantically watch the tide come in.

Lakota Douglas,

Founder of Southeast Missouri's branch of Help End Marijuana Prohibition.