Marijuana News
 


The Original Marijuana Blog
MarijuanaNews.Com with Richard Cowan
Published 2008-05-09 16:20:00
 


User's Guide to Marijuana News

Top Stories


Help Support
Marijuana News


Sponsored Links

Head Shop

Drug Test
(Highest Quality Drug Test Kits and Cleansers)


How To Pass A Drug Test

Pass A Drug Test

Drug Testing Information

Home Remedies To Pass A Drug Test

Ways To Pass A Drug Test

Passing A Drug Test

 

The New York Times Publishes Five Letters Responding Rationally To Rosenthal’s Ranting

April 18, 1998

See
Former New York Times Managing Editor  Rosenthal Denounces "False Compassion" Of Medical Marijuana Proponents

(Ed. note: the fact that the Times would publish so many letters by known anti-prohibitionists in response to Rosenthal is very encouraging.)
From The New York Times
letters@nytimes.com

http://www.nytimes.com/

PROHIBITION WON’T WIN DRUG WAR

To the Editor:

A. M. Rosenthal’s attack on Dr. Ethan Nadelmann—for suggesting the right to "possess and consume" drugs responsibly may be better understood in the future—smacks of the fanaticism that has long marked America’s ill-chosen war on drugs (column, April 14). As a career police officer for 35 years (including terms as deputy inspector of the New York Police Department and as police chief of Kansas City, Mo., and San Jose, Calif.) I have seen the racism, violence, corruption and failure to curb drug abuse that stems from government policies.

Mr. Rosenthal fails to mention that before 1914 Americans had the right to possess and use drugs. Of course there were abuses, but there was no $400 million black market or widespread corruption and violence, nor was there the vastly disproportionate incarceration of non-whites, until the Harrison Act of 1914 criminalized drugs. Prohibition does not work; new approaches are needed.

JOSEPH D. MC NAMARA Stanford, Calif., April 15, 1998

The writer is a research fellow at the Hoover Institution.

..........

No ‘Backdoor’ Debate

To the Editor:

A.M. Rosenthal’s notion (column, April 14) of "backdoor legalization" of drugs is odd.

How could such a major change occur unnoticed? Ending prohibition would require votes taken in the halls of power or the ballot box—the front door.

Perhaps medical marijuana will spark a rethinking of drug policy. But open debate is the lifeblood of democracy, and should be welcomed, not feared or denounced.

DAVID BORDEN Executive Director, Drug Reform Coordination Network,

Washington, April 14, 1998

..........

 

Prisons Aren’t Answer

To the Editor:

A. M. Rosenthal (column, April 14) suggests that all opponents of United States drug policy are "legalizers." Many of us support decriminalization, not legalization—an important distinction. Legalization conjures up images of cocaine and heroin sold in liquor stores. Decriminalization and other forms involve moving addiction and drug problems away from the police and prisons and placing them in the hands of doctors and public health officials.

In recent years most Western countries have been reducing or eliminating arrests, prosecutions and prison sentences for possession of small quantities of illegal drugs. As Europe has shown, protecting public health doesn’t require imprisoning hundreds of thousands of impoverished drug addicts each year. Medical and other services are less expensive and more effective than prisons.

HARRY G. LEVINE New York, April 14, 1998

The writer is a professor of sociology at Queens College, CUNY.

..........

 

An Obvious Solution

To the Editor: I am encouraged by A. M. Rosenthal’s April 14 column, "Lean Back or Fight." Every time a vehemently pro-prohibition article is published in a major newspaper, more people are driven to ask the question, How do we control drug abuse?

How do we best control alcohol use? License sellers, enforce strict laws restricting access by minors, limit the locations where use is permitted, tax the billions spent on it each year.

How do we best control tobacco use? License sellers, enforce strict laws restricting access by minors, limit the locations where use is permitted, tax the billions spent on it each year.

So how do we best control drug use? The answer seems obvious, doesn’t it?

MARK MC NAMARA St. Louis, April 14, 1998

..........

 

More Education Needed

To the Editor:

Despite the suggestion to the contrary in A. M. Rosenthal’s April 14 column, the moral high ground has room for more than one position on drug legalization.

The statement that "legalizers use euphemisms and back doors" tars many individuals and organizations that are forthright and articulate about their stand.

I agree with Mr. Rosenthal that society must invest far more heavily in drug rehabilitation and therapy, in and outside of prison. Furthermore, money and effort must go into widespread education for children and adults -- honest, open education that acknowledges the need for a continuing search for answers.

JUDITH D. WALLACH New York, April 14, 1998

Copyright 1998 The New York Times Company

 
 

Supported
  NORML
RxMarijuana.com
Media Awareness Project
DRCnet.org
Students for a Sensible Drugs Policy

 
Topics
  Mon 12th 2008f May 2008
  General News
Medical Marijuana
Drug Testing
Important Cases
NORML News
Vaporizers
Analysis
Hemp
Marijuana Fun!
Uh Oh, Canada
Go Dutch!
Data
Cannabis Quotes
Media Criticism

 
Site Navigation
  Chronological Index
Search!
User's Guide to Marijuana News
F.A.Q's
Richard Cowan Bio
Contact Richard Cowan

 
Click here for all the news


 

This and all programming is Copyright material.
Request permission to reprint any portion of Marijuananews.Com