Pubdate: Sun, 10 Sep 2000
Source: New York Times (NY)
Copyright: 2000 The New York Times Company
Contact:  229 West 43rd Street, New York, NY 10036
Fax: (212) 556-3622
Website: http://www.nytimes.com/
Forum: http://forums.nytimes.com/comment/
Section: Letters
Authors: Emily Patch, Sandra Burlingame, kmitchell, rrs, clevernick,
rcvandy, philipz333, richard brooks
Note: There are 8 replies to an earlier article on Gov. Gary Johnson's 
position on the drug war, both for and against.

HE JUST SAID NO -- TO THE DRUG WAR

For me, Matthew Miller's article on New Mexico's governor, Gary Johnson 
(Aug. 20), both supplied a definition and raised a question. The definition 
is for "hubris." Surely this describes his bootstrap and willpower 
solutions for poverty and drug treatment, and especially his business 
philosophy. It would be nice to see him earn $100,000 a year cleaning 
houses. The question is: What's he smoking?

Emily Patch
Portland, Ore.

How refreshing! A politician who takes a public stand on an unpopular 
issue. Perhaps Gary Johnson's courage will provoke study of the results of 
legislation in countries that have decriminalized drugs and an open 
discussion of the ramifications of such legislation in our own country.

Sandra Burlingame
Portland, Ore.

(snip)

We asked online readers of Matthew Miller's article on Gov. Gary Johnson of 
New Mexico for their reactions to his positions on drugs. Here are some 
responses from Abuzz, a New York Times online knowledge network. Add your 
thoughts and see what other readers are saying in Abuzz.

I agree with Governor Johnson's stand for the legalization of marijuana. I 
personally do not use it, but I have tried it in the past. As far as I'm 
concerned, the biggest crime it causes is a need for snacks and for long 
periods of sleep. (kmitchell)

Johnson is right. Marijuana is less addictive than cigarettes and less 
harmful than alcohol. Let's spend the money on educating our kids and 
helping the undisciplined to become disciplined. (rrs)

Johnson is, for the most part, right on. Marijuana, heroin, cocaine, etc. 
should not be "legalized," that is, available for commercial exploitation. 
But their "social" use should be decriminalized. And the victims-abusers 
should have access to treatment, as with alcohol. (clevenick)

Why won't other politicians listen? Are they too addicted to the status 
quo? (rcvandy)

I once did a paper on the criminalization of drugs by the Harrison Act of 
1914. Before that, drug use was a medical matter between you and your 
physician. People seem to forget that organized crime really took off in 
this country during Prohibition. (philipz333)

Reassess our position on drugs? It's time to give the Boston Tea Party a 
whole new meaning. (richard brooks)
- ---
MAP posted-by: Keith Brilhart