In the 1970’s, legalizers pointed to Great Britain’s decriminalization of heroin as their successful alternative to "drug prohibition" in the United States. As heroin abuse and related problems, such as crime and death, skyrocketed, fewer legalizers showcased the British example. Today’s legalizers, including those in our Profiles section, trumpeted the Swiss experiment of giving out free heroin and free needles in Platzspitz Park. The Swiss were led to believe that by decriminalizing drugs and having a free supply of drugs and needles available - while offering free treatment and health care - that crime and drug abuse would drop. Just the opposite happened, and after crime increased and drug related deaths doubled, the Platzspitz Park experiment was ended.
(Ed. note: Needle Park had nothing to do with marijuana and nothing to do with "legalization." This was not trumpeted by anyone that I know.
The Swiss have now begun the distribution of heroin in a policy supported by 70% of the voters in a recent referendum. But again this has nothing to do with marijuana.)

The Netherlands, where laws against selling and using marijuana/hashish are not enforced in certain areas, is still cited by legalizers as an example of where drug decriminalization is working to cut crime and drug abuse. However, the facts show that the opposite is happening in that small country, as well. The following Hot Quotes help to illustrate this:

Hot Quotes:

"The number of marijuana smokers in the Netherlands didn’t immediately change in the 1970’s when police stopped enforcing laws against the drug. But when it was sold openly at coffee shops in the 1980’s, pot use almost tripled according to a new study.’ ‘...The percentage of 18-year- olds who have tried marijuana at some point in their lives was up to 44% and it had been about 15%,’ he (Robert MacCoun, University of California) said. The numbers started climbing, during a time when the numbers were not climbing in other European nations.’ By contrast, teen use in the United States was estimated in 1992 at about 12%." (Study: Commercializing of increases use. USA Today, Health, October 3, 1997
(Ed. note: This is really not what the McCoun study said. In any case the comparison is not correct. At every point in time, Dutch teen marijuana use has been below the US rate.)
See
Legalize Marijuana and Reduce Use?
New Survey Puts Estimate of Dutch Marijuana Use Even More Below DEAland

"...in a 1989 article ‘Why Not Decriminalize?’ coauthored by Arnold Trebach, president of the Drug Policy Foundation and Eddy Engelsmann, a ‘Dutch Drug Czar,’ Both praise efforts made to ignore the ‘soft drug’ trade - to legalize these drugs de facto. They cite statistics to show that this policy works, and has not led to increased abuse. More recent reports have suggested the opposite. These ‘soft drugs’ have opened the door to cocaine, heroin and other ‘hard drugs’ and the Dutch are growing tired of their beautiful country being turned into an international drug clearing house." (The Kingpins of Drug Legalization: Investigating their role in the culture war, Michael J. Ard, Culture Wars, August 1995)
(Ed. note: Except that the Dutch hard drug addiction rate is lower than its neighbors.)
See
Comparison of drug addiction levels in various European countries.

"Dutch Justice Minister Hirsch Ballin recently pointed to this failure and launched a policy of cracking down on the proliferating ‘coffee houses’ which Trebach and Englesmann praised as a pragmatic approach for distributing marijuana and hashish to ‘kids.’" (The Kingpins of Drug Legalization: Investigating their role in the culture war, Michael J. Ard, Culture Wars, August 1995)
(Ed. note: Hirsch Ballin was a prohibitionist and left office in disgrace following a bizarre scandal involving the loss of large amounts of hashish in a failed sting.)

The article "Drugs in Amsterdam: The Dutch Way" declares: "Unlike many American cities. Amsterdam has a well-funded and a more-than-adequate police department. Amsterdam’s police strength is 3,500, of which 2,900 are uniformed officers assigned to street beats. An estimated 400 of these officers, however, are assigned to the diminutive four-block area of the ‘red light district’ to contain the high rate of crime there. In contrast, the same number of officers (400) is adequate to serve the entire city of El Paso, Texas, a city of about 500,000." Four hundred Amsterdam officers for a four-block area, compared to 400 El Paso police officers for a 247 square mile area. Amsterdam’s population is 686,000, and the population of El Paso is 515,000. The national rate of police officers to 100,000 population is 236 officers. The rate in Amsterdam of officers per 100,000 citizens is more than double that in the United States, or 585. The figures for the United States came from the U.S. Department of Justice Bureau of Justice Statistics, "Census of State and Local Law Enforcement Agencies, 1992" (bulletin July 1993 NCJ-142972). If the United States could double the number of police officers (similar to the ratio in Amsterdam), the impact on drug abuse and crime would be significant. (The Myths of Drug Legalization, California Narcotic Officers Association In Cooperation With The California Attorney General’s Bureau of narcotic Enforcement, 1994)
(Ed. note: Exactly what this has to do with the marijuana prohibition versus coffee shops is not clear. If the US spent less on marijuana prohibition it could afford better law enforcement. Also, Amsterdam’s population is not exactly the best basis for the comparison. Seven million tourist pass through a very small area every year. It is also the administrative capital of the Netherlands with large consulates from all major countries and many other areas that require policing.)

Professors James Inciardi (University of Delaware) and Duane McBride (Andrews University) note that the advocates of drug legalization point to the "great" Dutch drug model. They ignore the reports from Amsterdam "...describing the demonstrations by local residents who object to their society becoming an international refuge and flop house for hard drug users. They object to being disenfranchised from their public parks and buildings, and from their streets and neighborhoods. (For example, see Madrid, Cambio, January 1, 1990: 140-143.) And, too, the legalizers continually disregard the fact that, like American addicts, Dutch addicts also commit crimes." (Inciardi, James A. and McBride, Duane C., The Case Against Legalization, as reported in "The Myths of Drug Legalization" by the California Narcotic Officers Association In Cooperation With The California Attorney General’s Bureau of narcotic Enforcement, 1994. Inciardi is a professor and director of the Division of Criminal Justice at the University of Delaware. McBride is a professor in the Department of Behavioral Sciences and School of Business at Andrews University in Michigan.)
(Ed. note: This is absurd, but irrelevant. There are far fewer hard drug addicts in Holland per capita than in the US or most other European countries. See
Comparison of drug addiction levels in various European countries.

Also, it has nothing to do with coffee shops and marijuana. This is about marijuana, remember.)

"The Netherlands spends $3.1 billion annually to combat "drug-related" crimes. That would be the equivalent to the U.S. spending $52 billion on "drug-related" crimes when actually we spend only approximately $76 billion fighting all crimes. Could it be that liberal drug laws lead to increased use as well as an increasing number of crimes committed by people under the influence of drugs?" (The Myths of Drug Legalization, by the California Narcotic Officers Association In Cooperation With The California Attorney General’s Bureau of narcotic Enforcement, 1994)