Sign the Resolution for a Federal
Commission on Drug Policy Sign the Resolution for a Federal
Commission on Drug Policy
Contents | Feedback | Search | DRCNet Home Page | Join DRCNet
DRCNet Library | Schaffer Library | The Drug Legalization Debate
ANTI-LEGALIZATION FORUM
DEA Statement The Facts
In August 1994, in an effort to
identify compelling arguments
against legalization, DEA
sponsored a twoday
AntiLegalization Forum at
Quantico, Virginia, for experts in
the field. Several police chiefs,
representatives from Government
agencies and private sector
authorities gave their time to
this important task. The
participants were asked to refine
the arguments that can be made
against legalization and evaluate
ways to address the legalization
issue in an effective and
meaningful way.
Three groups were formed to
discuss various aspects of the
legalization debate: Social/
Economic issues, Health Effects,
and Crime and Violence. All of the
arguments espoused by legalization
proponents impact on these three
areas, and many of the claims
outlined in this publication
crosscut the topics discussed by
the three groups. At the end of
the twoday session, group leaders
presented the recommendations of
each group.
While individual groups arrived at
specific conclusions, there were a
number of general concerns and
ideas raised by all participants:
· Those speaking against At one time, drug warriors were
legalization needed to be positive confident when they spoke about the
and confident about that position. drug war. They relied on
Legalization opponents must inflammatory rhetoric and horror
constantly ask just how many drug stories to get everyone to believe
addicts will be created under drugs were bad and, therefore, the
legalization, how the government best approach to the problem would
will support addicts' habits, and be to put massive numbers of people
who will pay for the social, in prison. Then, about 1989, the
criminal and other costs of tide began to turn.
legalization.
· Legalization opponents often This is an extraordinary statement
have a hard time being heard. considering the fact that they
Although only a small minority of parade every major drug bust before
academics, social scientists and the media. The DEA has always had
other public figures advocate almost a media monopoly when
legalization, the conference compared to the voices of reform.
participants felt that the
legalization advocates made better
use of the media in making their
opinions known than the far larger
group of legalization opponents. A
current climate of frustration
with crime, violence and drug
abuse is fueling the legalization
debate, and accomplishments in
controlling drugs do not get much
attention. The costs of the fight
against drugs are generally not
put in perspective, and the costs
of inaction are never discussed.
Nevertheless, conference
participants agreed that a
positive, proactive campaign
against legalization can be very
effective.
· Legalization proponents are Thank you.
formidable opponents. The group
acknowledged that proponents of The bit about public relations
legalization are generally firms is a flat out lie. Nobody in
wellprepared and credible people the drug reform movement has the
whose arguments, though money to afford it. The movement
compelling, are faulty. Proponents is made up almost entirely of
effectively use lawyers and public volunteers.
relations firms to espouse
liberalization of drug policies.
· Misperceptions drive the debate. The costs of solving the drug
The legalization debate is being problem are not too high. The
driven by the perception that the costs of solving the drug problem
costs of solving the drug problem are too high this way. Everyone
in America are far too high. The agrees that we should devote
group cited public mistrust of significant resources to address
government and a perception that the problem. We do not believe
federal agencies attacking the that the single most expensive and
problem are fragmented and have no least cost-effective approach --
consensus about direction as prison -- is the best approach.
reasons that the legalization
debate rings true with many The DEA, as it has on many other
people. There are also numerous occasions, is distorting the truth
misperceptions about the foreign and outright lying about many
experience relating to drug aspects of the drug issue in order
legalization and the system of to advance its own interests. The
prescription for heroin. Forum Dutch Government has already filed
participants stressed the need to an official protest against the
get the real story on the British, misstatements of the DEA in this
Dutch and Swiss experiments out booklet.
into the open.
· Americans are frustrated by the Judge James P. Gray likes to ask
drug problem. While an audiences how many people believe
overwhelming majority of the the current drug war is working.
American people are not convinced On average, he says, about one or
that legalization is a good two percent will raise their hands.
option, there is a sense of It is pretty clear to most people
frustration that we have spent so that this drug war causes more
much money on controlling drug problems than it solves.
trafficking and use, yet violence
and crime continue. The group
noted that most Americans
erroneously think that
legalization advocates are only
suggesting that marijuana be
legalized, and are generally
unaware of the dramatic impact
that legalizing cocaine and heroin
will have.
· The debate must not take place This is a curious statement. The
in the abstract. The debate on DEA is saying that more than
legalization must be brought down two-thirds of the people they want
from an abstract concept to a to prosecute are gainfully
common sense scenario. Audiences employed, tax-paying adults. One
need to understand that 70 percent would have to ask why the
of drug users are employed, and government would have any interest
that the school bus driver who in pursuing otherwise law-abiding
drives your children to school taxpayers.
could smoke marijuana; that the
surgeon who operates on you may As for people driving your bus, or
have cocaine in his system; and doing your surgery, there are laws
that the driver in back of you may and other sanctions in place
be on speed. The debate needs to against doing anything harmful to
demonstrate graphically how the others while intoxicated on
common man will be impacted by anything. These laws would not
drug legalization. change under any scenario.
Attempting to arrest everyone who
ever has a glass of wine is not an
effective approach to preventing
doctors from performing surgery
while drunk. This is also true of
other drugs.
WHAT MOTIVATES LEGALIZATION PROPONENTS?
DEA Statement The Facts
Some of the media, certain The more interesting study of
quarters in academia and some motives comes from analyzing the
frustrated Americans see motives of those who have supported
legalization as an option which these laws throughout history. It
should be discussed. The panel is apparent from the history of
discussed some of the factors these laws that they were based on
possibly motivating advocates of racism, ignorance, and the
legalization in order to promotion of special interests.
appreciate the complexity of the Everyone should read the history of
debate. The group noted that many these laws to understand how we
who advocate legalization are came to be where we are today.
attempting to "normalize" the
behavior of drugtaking and that
many are people who have tried
drugs without significant adverse
consequences.
Others see potential profit in And still others believe that
legalizing drugs and still others government should abandon policies
simply believe that individual which were based on ignorance,
rights to take drugs should be fraud, and racism from the very
protected. The group also beginning. It also appeals to
acknowledged that the legalization people who think that government
concept appeals to people who are should not undertake to do anything
looking for simple solutions to that is patently impossible.
the devastating problem of drug
abuse.
DEA Statement The Facts
There was consensus among the
participants at the
AntiLegalization Forum, too, on
the need to ask a number of
questions of those proposing
legalization. Too often, the
specifics of how to implement a
system for distribution and sale
of legalized drugs are never
discussed. Instead simplistic
rhetoric is used to deflect
serious consideration of the many
questions that must be thought
through before one can evaluate
the ramifications of their
proposals. This is the great
weakness of the prolegalization
position. Participants in the
Forum suggested that the following
questions be asked consistently in
order to illustrate the
shallowness of the legalization
concept.
Should all drugs be legalized ? The question is not whether any
drugs should be "legalized" because
the DEA itself states further down
in this book that there is no real
definition of "legalization." Is
alcohol legal? In some senses it
is, and in others it is not. The
same is true of many other drugs.
If the DEA is right, we will never
"legalize" any of these drugs, so
they miss the point to focus on
"legalization."
The real question is prison. Right
now we are embarked on a course
which will incarcerate millions of
people who, in the view of many of
the prison wardens in this country,
don't need to be in prison. We are
turning loose violent felons so we
can incarcerate more drug users.
With these laws, we have the
opportunity to imprison literally
millions of people. We must decide
how many millions of people we are
going to put in prison to make this
policy work.
As a personal matter, I don't much
like cigars. I think they are
addictive, dangerous, smelly, and
disgusting. I cannot understand why
anyone would want to walk around
with one of those things stuck in
their face, and I make my feelings
known to anyone who lights one up
in my presence. At the same time,
I don't want to put George Burns in
prison.
No matter what policy we may
devise, or what name we may call
it, it is an undeniable truth that
putting people in prison does no
good at all.
Who will determine which segments Who determines the access to drugs
of the population will have access now?
to legalized drugs? Under "legalization" it would be
the same people who do it for
alcohol and tobacco.
Will they be limited only to Are they limited to people over
people over eighteen ? eighteen now?
Every major proposal for reform
assumes that minors should not have
access to drugs. This is one of
the major reasons that many people
would like to see reform, because a
more sensible policy would do a
better job of keeping drugs away
from children.
Will cocaine, heroin, LSD and PCP Are they available now? As the DEA
be made available if people itself admits, their efforts have
request them? never had any major effect on
availability of drugs and it is
unlikely that they ever will affect
the drug market.
Who will sell drugs? The Who sells them now?
Government? Private companies ? You can't think of anyone who could
do a better job than the current
sellers?
And who is liable for damages The rules for liability should be
caused by drug use and the consistent for all drugs. If you
activities of those taking drugs? get hit by a drunk or stoned
driver, it doesn't matter to you
which chemical caused the problem.
The damage is done in either case,
and should be addressed the same
under law.
Who will collect the revenues Who collects them now?
generated by the drug sales? We have funded the richest criminal
organizations in the history of the
world with this policy. It is time
to take the money out of their
hands with a more sensible policy.
How will a black market for The same way it is controlled for
cheaper drugs be controlled ? alcohol and tobacco.
Who will bear the costs to society Under the current system the
of increased drug use? taxpayers bear the entire cost, and
this system uses the single most
expensive, least cost-effective
approach to the problem -- prison.
For the same money it takes to
catch, try, and convict one drug
offender and to hold them in prison
for five years, we can provide
treatment or education for more
than one hundred people. Which do
you think is the better deal?
How will absenteeism and loss of It should be addressed the same way
productivity be addressed by it is for alcohol, tobacco, or any
business? similar problem.
Will the local drug situation in a Who dictates where drugs are sold
community dictate which drugs are now?
sold where? The community itself should dictate
these matters, as they do with
liquor and tobacco outlets.
How will society care for and pay First, there is no real evidence
for the attendant social costs of that drug use would increase under
increased drug use, including a more sensible policy.
family disintegration and child Society is paying these costs
neglect? already. Reform would seek to
reduce those costs by using
approaches which are more
cost-effective than prison. Prison
does not do anything to address
these problems.
Will people still need This is a separate issue and,
prescriptions for currently whichever way it goes, will not
controlled medications, such as make much difference to the
antibiotics, if drugs are fundamental problems of our current
legalized ? drug policy. Antibiotics are an
entirely different class of drug
with an entirely different set of
uses and associated problems.
Therefore, it would be appropriate
to have a different policy for
them.
Will legal drugs require That depends on what you mean by
prescriptions? "legal". For example, both alcohol
and penicillin are "legal" but have
different requirements for
purchasing them.
Can anyone, regardless of physical Who can purchase them now?
or medical conditions purchase
drugs? Can anyone, regardless of physical
or medical conditions purchase
alcohol or tobacco? Alcohol and
tobacco are the big killers by a
wide margin. If we can manage to
find a workable policy for alcohol
and tobacco, then the other drugs
will be easy.
How can we deal with the influx of We won't have to. The rest of the
people to the United States who western world is going toward
are seeking legal drugs? "legalization" faster than we are.
Can we begin a legalization pilot Yes. As the New York City Bar
program in your neighborhood for Association recommended, we should
one year? allow states and communities to
determine their own approach to the
problem, as they do for alcohol, so
that we might have a number of
different programs from which to
draw ideas and information. The
one thing we should not do is to
stay locked in to a single national
policy which -- by definition --
cannot work.
Should the distribution outlets be Where are the distribution outlets
located in the already located now?
overburdened inner city?
Matters affecting the inner city
should be decided by the people in
the inner city.
Contents | Feedback | Search | DRCNet Home Page | Join DRCNet
DRCNet Library | Schaffer Library | The Drug Legalization Debate