This is further evidence that the real purpose of the Drug Czar’s office is to prevent marijuana legalization at all cost.)

DON'T LEGALIZE THOSE DRUGS
June 29, 1999
From The Washington Post
http://washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/edit/letters/letterform.htm
http://www.washingtonpost.com
By Barry R. McCaffrey, Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy.

Three-quarters of the U.S. population opposes the legalization of psychoactive drugs such as heroin, cocaine, LSD, methamphetamine, and marijuana.
See
Gallup Poll Shows 73% Favor Medical Marijuana;
29% Favor Outright "Legalization"!
So What Are The Politicians Really Afraid Of?

Therefore, the term "drug legalization" has rightfully acquired pejorative connotations.
(Marijuananews note: What does "drug legalization" mean?)
See
Drug Czar Returns To Party Line,
Opposes Including Ads Warning Kids About Alcohol and links
and
"Mom, Dad, What are Drugs?"

Many supporters of this position have adopted the label "harm reduction" to soften the impact of an unpopular proposal that, if passed, would encourage greater availability and use of drugs -- especially among children.

(Marijuananews note: As he must know, the marijuana legalization movement has never used the term "harm reduction." NORML predates the "harm reduction" movement by many years. Any real harm reduction will necessarily begin with getting rid of professional liars who set drugs policies today, and the first legal step will be the legalization of marijuana, but that does not mean that marijuana legalization is per se a part of the "harm reduction" movement. However, it suits the Czar's purposes to lump everything together.)

The euphemism of "harm reduction" implies that legalizing dangerous substances would reduce the harm these substances cause. In fact, condoning drugs would increase their use and hence their harm.
See
New Dutch Drug Use Data Show Success Of Policies of Truth And Tolerance
Full Text of Press Release And Tables With Data On All Drugs

Drug use imposes an unacceptable risk of harm on the user and others. The evidence supporting this viewpoint is chilling:
Substance abuse wrecks families. A survey of state child-welfare agencies found substance abuse to be one of the top two problems exhibited by 81 percent of families reported for child maltreatment. Researchers estimate that chemical dependence is present in at least half of the families involved in the child welfare system. One study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association revealed that non-drug users who live in households where drugs are used are 11 times more likely to be killed than individuals from drug-free households.
(Marijuananews note: Of course, insofar as illegal drugs are present, their illegality may play a large role in the violence. This is an argument against prohibition and for better treatment availability, if it means anything.)

Drug-dependent individuals are responsible for a disproportionate percentage of our nation's violent and income-generating crimes such as robbery, burglary or theft. National Institute of Justice surveys consistently find that between one-half and three-quarters of all arrestees have drugs in their system at the time of arrest. In 1997, a third of state prisoners and about one in five federal prisoners said they had committed the crimes that led to incarceration while under the influence of drugs.

Injection-drug users place themselves at great risk. A University of Pennsylvania study of Philadelphia injection-drug users found that four times as many addicts died from overdose, homicide, heart disease, renal failure and liver disease as did from causes associated with HIV disease.

Dr. James Curtis, director of addiction services at Harlem Hospital Center, explains: "It is false, misleading and unethical to give addicts the idea that they can be intravenous drug abusers without suffering serious self-injury."

Clearly, drugs themselves harm users. A significant percentage of all current drug users are addicted to illegal substances. Addiction is a brain disease that changes a person's neurochemistry. For 4 million chronically addicted people, drug use is not a choice and hence has little to do with personal liberty. Removing the threat of criminal sanctions would eliminate the possibility of forced treatment and condemn countless addicts to miserable lives.

One argument given for drug legalization by harm-reduction advocates is that the "war against drugs has been lost." Aside from the fact that this is not a war, much progress has been made.

This is not to say that drug policies cannot be improved. The 1999 National Drug Control Strategy is implementing important changes. The strategy's number one goal is prevention. In the past four years, the administration increased spending on prevention by 55 percent while spending on treatment rose 25 percent. The strategy calls for more treatment in the criminal justice system to break the cycle of drugs and crime.

At root, the debate over drug legalization boils down to a question of risk. Studies show that the more a product is available and legitimized, the greater will be its use. If drugs were legalized, the cost to the individual and society would grow astronomically. Removing the criminal status associated with drug use and sale would not make such activity less criminal when drug abuse wrecks young lives. It is criminal that more money is spent on illegal drugs than on art or higher education; it is criminal that crack babies are born addicted and in pain; it is criminal that thousands of adolescents lose their health and the freedom to create a bright future.

Harm-reduction advocates tolerate drug use because they consider it part of the human condition that will always be with us. Many other perennial problems such as racism, theft and aggression cannot be extinguished entirely, but we still resist their damage and criminalize the practices. No one argues that we should legalize these activities to make them more sanitary or provide tax revenues.
(Marijuananews note: Let me get this straight, the man who has advocated arresting the sick and dying, and even  doctors for helping their patients with medical marijuana, and who has presided of the racist war on marijuana users is equating marijuana use with "racism, theft and aggression?")
See
Drug Czar’s Office Endorses Arresting, Jailing Medical Marijuana Smokers;
Canada’s Parliament Resumes Historic Medical Marijuana Debate -- NORML Press Release
and
Is Racial Discrimination Sustained By The Drug War? By Cliff Thornton
"The culture of punishment has developed with and sustains the drug war."

On a judicial level, the question of drug legalization comes down to whether we should legalize destructive behavior. With respect to the individual, society at large and the environment, American jurisprudence has run in the opposite direction. Americans have decided that people do not have a right to ride motorcycles without wearing helmets, drive cars without using seat belts, pollute the environment at will, or endanger the self and others by refusing vaccination or similar life-saving health measures. In general, our laws indicate that self-destructive activity should not be permitted or condoned. Drug consumption damages the brain, which in turn produces other forms of destructive behavior.
See
American Journal Of Epidemiology Report That Long-Term Use Of Marijuana
Does Not Lead To A Decline In Mental Function Got Minimal Coverage,
Perhaps Because Scores Actually Fell More Among Non-Users Than Among Heavy Users!
and
Claim Four: "Marijuana Causes Long-Term Changes In The Brain Similar To Those Seen With Other Drugs Of Abuse."

U.S. law does not grant people the right to destroy themselves or others. Addictive drugs were criminalized because they are harmful; they are not harmful because they were criminalized.
(Marijuananews note: "Addictive drugs" are not illegal. Alcohol and tobacco remain legal. Marijuana and non-addictive psychedelics are illegal. Addictiveness and harmfulness clearly have nothing to do with legal status.)