The Death Penalty, Incarceration

and the War On Drugs

The Death Penalty

Over hundreds of years, the imposition of the death penalty for capital crimes has been debated by many societies.

Much of the basis for acts of retribution by society and the authorities stems from the Code (laws) of Hammurabi in the days of Mesopotamia, 1795-1750 BC. Hammurabi, a king of Babylon, combined astute diplomacy and military leadership. These laws were the first written code of laws in human history. Out of the hundreds of laws, one law stands out in everyday conversation, “An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.” This law is often referred to as Hammurabi’s Law. The specific text of this law is:

“If a man put out the eye of another man, his eye shall be put out.”

The law that followed that law is very similar in concept, “If he break another man’s bone, his bone shall be broken.” Many of these laws carried over into more modern laws including Hebrew law.

Down through the ages, man has attempted more devious forms of carrying out the death penalty generally used as a deterrent to perpetrators or to simply control the people. In the days of the Roman Empire, nailing men to a cross (crucifixion) was seen as an especially cruel form of punishment. It often took the accused 2 to 3 days to die. In the middle ages, under the watchful eye of the Inquisition, a Roman Catholic tribunal for the discovery and punishment of heresy, barbarous methods were employed, including drawing and quartering, the rack (which literally stretched the victim and popped all of the joints in the legs and arms) and burning at the stake. In later years in many countries, the authorities turned these events into circus-like events with thousands watching the festivities clutching picnic baskets.

Over the last few hundred years, sickened by the gore associated with these barbarous methods, various more humane methods of execution were attempted including hanging, then the guillotine, the electric chair, gassing, and finally lethal injection, supposedly the most pain-free method of execution. There are very strong opinions as to the merit of capital punishment, with many people fanatically opposed to any form of capital punishment. Even the Supreme Court ruled that it was in direct violation of the Constitution, supporting the argument that it was “cruel and unusual punishment.” However, since capital punishment was abolished in the 1970’s by this court action, many states have reinstated capital punishment by the will of the people.

Why Do We Punish Criminals?

The question must then be asked, “By punishing an individual, what message are we attempting to send to the populace?” Is the purpose of punishment to extract retribution from the accused, or is the purpose to act as a deterrent to other individuals who may be considering a similar crime? Criminologists have argued that very point for hundreds of years.

The anti-capital punishment advocates argue that especially heinous murderers should be locked up with no chance of parole. But how many times have we witnessed errors within the prison system where these very people have been released on parole after serving 10 to 20 years, whether by error or by the oft quoted “bleeding heart liberals” stating that he or she is a changed person? And there is ample documented evidence that these same people have murdered again. Many people want to know why their tax dollars should be used to provide housing, food and medical care for convicted murderers at an average cost of between $50 and $100 per day. If these people are executed within say a maximum of one year after their conviction, which should be ample time to hear any appeals, would not the people save the expense of their incarceration, instead of the 10 to 15 years it takes now to finally put the prisoner to death because of very expensive and laborious (and mostly empty) appeals year after year? The anti-capital punishment people have a gem of an answer for that one, too. According to most prison system authorities, it costs more than $1 million to execute a prisoner. Hence, it’s cheaper to keep the sorry excuse for a human being alive. Therein lies one of the many problems within the judicial system. How can it cost $1 million? Suppose we took an extreme view of capital punishment and adopted the method of capital punishment used in a number of Asian countries wherein the prisoner is shot in the back of the head the day after conviction. China, which executes more criminals than the rest of the world combined, has recently experimented with lethal injections no doubt to court world opinion. The precise number of people executed in China is not reported. Estimates range from 5,000 to 10,000 a year, many for murder, but they have also been killed for corruption and crimes as minor as pinching women.

Capital punishment detractors claim that capital punishment does not act as a deterrent, as interviews with many prisoners on death row have substantiated their claims that the penalty of death would not have stopped many murderers from perpetrating their acts of violence. In the last 20 years, there have been over 450,000 homicides in this country with about 750 inmate executions. With this proportion, how can anyone make a statement as to the effectiveness or ineffectiveness of the death penalty?

Since the death penalty was restored in California in 1978, death row has held 641 condemned inmates, with a miniscule total of 10 executions. During that period, 12 committed suicide, 3 were killed by other inmates, and 38 have died of other causes. The average length of time inmates are on death row is 16 years, 1 month. How can this possibly be construed as a deterrent? Something is drastically wrong with the entire legal mechanism.

I often wonder, however, how many people who might have considered murdering another human being changed their mind after recognizing what their own fate would be if they were caught and convicted? I can assure you no one has statistics on that possibility, and it may be significant.

Stanley “Tookie” Williams

The American Civil Liberties Union – Anti-Death Penalty

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has long been against the death penalty, and they offer some compelling evidence:

1. “Innocent people are being sentenced to death. In the past 30 years, 114 inmates were found to be innocent and released from death row. The most recent exonerated inmate is Gordon Randall Steidl who is the 18th person exonerated in Illinois since 1987.

2. Almost all people on death row could not afford to hire an attorney. The quality of legal representation is a better predictor of whether or not someone will be sentenced to death than the facts of the crime.

3. Race often plays a role in determining a capital sentence. Over 80% of capital cases involve white victims, even though nationally, only 50% of murder victims are white.

4. Where a death sentence is sought often determines whether a defendant is sentenced to death more than the circumstances of the crime.

5. Juvenile offenders (16 and 17 years old) are sentenced to death and executed in the U.S. even though kids are not given the same responsibilities of adults. They are not old enough to vote, serve in the military, get married, or buy cigarettes or alcohol, but they are old enough to be executed. The U.S. is one of three countries that still executes juvenile offenders.”

In defense of the ACLU’s position, a review of previous capital punishment cases over the last hundred years or so prove that minorities received the death penalty in a disproportionate percentage, as they were usually represented by some novice Public Defender fresh out of law school who was overburdened with volumes of cases. It has also been proven in recent years that wealthy accused murderers who can afford a “Dream Team” often “beat the rap” as in the murder case of O.J. Simpson even though the evidence for conviction was virtually undeniable. In a subsequent civil lawsuit, Simpson was convicted of violating the civil rights of the victims (via the murders) and ordered to pay restitution, the highest penalty that could be invoked in a civil case.

Recently, a number of capital punishment cases, which usually involved minorities, have been overturned by re-examination or by the introduction of DNA (Deoxyribonucleic Acid) evidence. DNA, which has revolutionized criminal prosecution, uniquely identifies an individual in much the same way as fingerprints, except DNA can be present in a human hair, saliva or even semen (in the case of a rape victim).

Now if you have strong religious convictions and adhere to the teachings of the Ten Commandments, you will follow the 6^Th Commandment, Verse 13 that states, “Thou Shalt Not Kill,” and likely be vehemently opposed to the death penalty.

I suspect that another major reason Americans have a problem with the death penalty, other than religious convictions, is the proof that too many innocent people have been condemned using faulty evidence. However, with the rapidly evolving ability to process DNA, some of the ACLU’s arguments become moot for future trials and convictions.

Lethal Injection May Not Be Painless

When many anti-capital punishment advocates are unable to convince the population of a state that capital punishment via lethal injection is barbaric, they turn to any means to try and halt future executions.

Take the case of one Edward L. Harper, who was executed in Kentucky in 1999. Based on the autopsy of Mr. Harper, advocates claim he was tortured to death. They allege that the drug “cocktail” of three drugs to first make him unconscious, then paralyze his muscles, then stop his heart, did not work properly.

I have a hard time feeling any degree of remorse for viscous murderers of his ilk. I don’t think I care if he suffered somewhat. Maybe that should be his penalty. Let us not forget that if they fire a bullet into the back of the murderer’s head, all of those “torture” issues go up in smoke. Why are the victims rarely mentioned in these cases? Many of these murders involved heinous acts of torture often for hours before the victim’s death. We have our priorities all screwed up. Why are we so worried about the poor inmate when we should be focusing on the victims suffering? I cannot believe that lawyer’s literally volunteer thousands of hours protecting the rights of rightfully convicted killers, when there are so many other victims of crime that we should be helping instead.

A Specific Case – Cruel and Unusual Punishment

As I pen this book, the Supreme Court justices sided with a convicted Alabama death row inmate, David Larry Nelson, whose lawyers claim his veins are so damaged from drug abuse that executioners might have to cut deeply into his flesh to administer the deadly drugs. In filings with the court by physician experts, justices were told that if done improperly, the procedure could cause Nelson to hemorrhage badly and suffer heart problems before the drug cocktail could kill him. Here is a prime case of the insanity gripping our nation. Am I supposed to feel great sorrow for this mass murderer? He might need an incision made in his skin – this is cruel and unusual punishment? In numerous states the people have spoken. They strongly believe in the death penalty whether they consider it as an act of retribution or as a warning to other potential killers.

There was no discussion about whom he killed or how gruesome the murders may have been in the justice’s opinion, so I looked it up. The following summarizes the case against this convicted killer.

“David Larry Nelson was convicted of killing James Dewey Cash and Wilson Thompson on …December 31, 1978. He was sentenced to die for a slaying during a New Year’s crime spree 25 years ago. Nelson was scheduled to die …at Holman Prison in Atmore. Court records show the 58-year-old Nelson was sentenced to die for the 1978 shooting death of Wilson W. Thompson in Kimberly. Thompson was fatally shot in the head…His girlfriend was also shot, but recovered from her injuries. Nelson was also convicted and sentenced to life in prison without parole for the fatal shooting the night before of …cab driver James Cash. Nelson, 58, had been sentenced to die for the shooting death of Wilson Thompson while Thompson was with Nelson’s girlfriend. …Nelson has been tried twice and had four sentencing hearings in what has been one of the longest death penalty appeals in Alabama. The Supreme Court said the stay will be lifted if the court later decides not to hear Nelson’s full appeal. Nelson once told a jury and a judge that he wanted to be executed. But when he was scheduled for execution in 1996, he received a stay because of a physician’s statement that he could be a kidney donor for a seriously ill brother. The operation did not take place.”

Note that Nelson committed the murders in 1978, over 25 years ago. Why is this man still languishing on death row enjoying three meals a day and healthcare that many of us would envy? This man does not deserve to breath the same air as law-abiding citizens.

Lawyers spend thousands of hours submitting petitions on behalf of many butchers, while 25,000 people die on the roads and hundreds die in the military due to “friendly fire” incidents or sheer incompetence. Why are you not exerting your efforts on behalf of road safety or prosecuting military superiors for incompetence and/or murder?

More Information on Capital Punishment

Additional information can be acquired both pro and con on capital punishment. Some of the Internet sites offering pertinent information are found below:

Pro-Death Penalty.com	http://www.prodeathpenalty.com/
American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)	http://www.aclu.org/DeathPenalty/

Who Have We Incarcerated?

As of June 2003, 2,078,570 people were incarcerated in Federal and state prisons or local jails. The number of women under the jurisdiction of state or Federal prison authorities reached 100,102.

Comparing the United States jailbird population with the rest of the civilized world is rather startling. According to the Drug War Chronicle (stopthedrugwar.com):

· There were an estimated 718 prison inmates per 100,000 U.S. residents.

· Russia’s rate (a country renowned for its violent history) has 584 per 100,000 population.

· England’s rate is 143, Canada’s rate is 116, Germany’s rate is 96, and Japan’s rate is 54 per 100,000 population.

Statistics on the ethnic makeup of prisoners are equally startling:

· There were 4,834 African-American male prisoners per 100,000 African-American males, 1,778 Hispanic male inmates per 100,000 Hispanic males, and 681 white male inmates per 100,000 male inmates in the United States in prison

· One-half of the 170,000 prisoners added to the system in 2003 were directly related to drug offenses

· Nine out of every ten inmates were adult males. However, the number of adult females in jail has increased faster than male adults

· African-Americans were two times more likely than Hispanics and five times more likely than whites to be in jail

· Between 1990 and 2003, the number of white and Hispanic jail inmates increased at the same average annual rate. The number of African-American inmates increased at a slower pace.

Considering the disproportionate number of African-Americans in jail in comparison to the number of whites, the question needs to be asked, “Are the police focusing on prosecuting the African-American population, or does the African-American culture somehow lend many of its people to a life of crime?” Depending on whom you talk to, it’s likely a combination of both factors.

Inmates Paying for Incarceration

In an effort to reduce the maintenance costs associated with housing, feeding and healthcare issues with their prison population, many local governments are now billing inmates for their stay. Billing rates vary from $8 to $55 per day depending on locale.

There are significant pros and cons on this issue. On the positive side, billing inmates helps defer the costs of housing; while on the negative side there are many arguments against this policy:

Officials are attempting to collect money from a portion of the population that is normally destitute, thereby aggravating their situation, and potentially causing more crime
When the officials are unable to collect, they will seize the inmate’s assets or send the inmate back to jail compounding the situation
Often, the costs to collect the fees exceed the actual fees themselves.

This approach obviously may not be the panacea it appears to be on the surface.

Justice Department Directives

One reason the prison population continues to climb is that in order to justify their budgets, police departments have tried to step up their arrests, and prosecutors justify their existence by demanding and getting longer prison sentences. In the summer of 2003, Attorney General John Ashcroft issued directives to U. S. Attorneys to make sure they charge defendants with the most serious crimes, to get the longest sentences possible, and to not negotiate plea bargains. He also ordered these same Attorneys to report local and state prosecutors who did not impose sentences in accordance with Federal guidelines.

The War on Drugs

Most government officials tout the party line about how they are winning the war on drugs, but according to Orange County, California Supreme Court Judge James Gray,

“What we’re doing has failed. In fact it’s hopeless. This is a failed system that we simply must change.”

Some statistics on the drug trade follow:

The international illegal drug trade generates as much as $400 billion per year, equivalent to the trade in textiles
Profits in illegal drugs are so inflated that three-quarters of all drug shipments would need to be intercepted to put a dent in the trade. The war on drugs by all countries intercepts about 13% of heroin shipments and approximately 28% to 40% of cocaine shipments
It costs about $8.6 billion to put drug offenders in prison
In 1969, the Nixon administration spent $65 million on the drug war; in 1982, the Reagan administration spent $1.65 billion; in 2000, the Clinton administration spent $17.9 billion; and in 2002 and 2003, the Bush administration spent more than $18.8 billion and $19.2 billion, respectively, with only $77 million allocated for treatment programs in prisons.

Alcohol Versus Recreational Drugs

In our close-minded society, we consider recreational drug use as a diabolical plan from Satan and yet the consumption of alcohol is far more pervasive and destructive. We are a society that grew up with alcohol and bars, so we don’t think about the ravages of alcohol, except when Mothers Against Drunk Drivers (MADD) launch intensive campaigns to alert the public to the dangers. Alcohol kills more people than all drugs combined and yet it’s perfectly legal. In many ways, because of careless doctors and pharmacists, there are more deaths attributed to adverse reactions to prescription drugs than deaths caused by recreational drugs. The chart below shows the deaths caused by various factors in the United States in the year 2000.

Cause of Death	Number of Deaths
Tobacco	435,000
Poor Diet and Physical Activity	400,000
Alcohol	100,000
Microbial Agents	75,000
Toxic Agents	55,000
Motor Vehicle Accidents	40,000
Adverse Reactions to Prescription Drugs	32,000 – 106,000
Suicide	30,662
Incidents Involving Firearms	29,000
Homicide	20,308
Sexual Behavior	20,000
All Illicit Drug Use, Direct and Indirect	17,000
Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs	7,600
Marijuana	0

Referring to the above chart, according to Canadian researchers, in the years 1982-1998, a range of between 32,000 and 106,000 people were killed because of adverse reactions to their prescribed medications.

Alcohol and Crime

According to the Household Survey, more than 48 million Americans use alcohol an average of one or more days of the year. This number is greater than the total that have tried cocaine, crack, heroin and marijuana. Out of 5.3 million convicted offenders nearly 40% of these offenders, or about 2 million, had been using alcohol at the time they committed the offense. Nearly 2 out of 3 inmates have previously been in an alcohol treatment plan. In 4 out of 10 murder cases, convicted murderers reported that alcohol was a factor in the crime, and nearly half of those convicted of assault reported that they had been drinking when they committed the crime.

Fighting Drug Use

There’s no dispute that drugs can be a terrible and debilitating scourge, but when the issues of “right and wrong” cross swords with the law of supply and demand, strange things happen in a society, no matter how closed or open that society may be. When people decide they want drugs, there is nothing a society or government can do about it, and throwing billions of dollars at the problem only forces the drug users to pay black market prices to support their habit. One of the byproducts of the war on drugs is the terrible violence that erupts in the ghettos in “turf wars” between gangs simply because drugs are illegal and very profitable.

The Europeans face reality much better than we do. Even in the Netherlands, where drugs are legal, the consumption of drugs in the Netherlands and all of Europe is far lower than the United States. Switzerland once tried to create a “Needle Park,” where drug users could congregate and consume their drugs with free needles, but that idea backfired when drug users from all over the world sought refuge in these havens.

Holland now has hundreds of coffee shops where clients can buy up to 5 marijuana cigarettes at a time, in the same way they might purchase a six pack of beer. The Dutch Minister of Health said that, “We have succeeded in making pot boring.” The Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) has played the official government party line about how legalizing pot (cannabis and hash) has been an unmitigated disaster. According to interviews with people on the streets of Holland, they point out that by selling the drug in coffee houses, it may actually deter young people from experimenting since it’s lost its luster.

When one American official, Dr. Joyce Elders, suggested in 1991 that legislating drug sales might reduce crime, calls went out for her scalp.

Women In Prison

The women in prison exceeded 100,000 for the first time in history. The number of women in prison has grown by 48% since 1995, while the male population has grown 29%. According to Marc Mauer, the assistant director of the Sentencing Project, in regard to the explosion of the women’s inmate population, “It coincides exactly with the inception of the war on drugs.” He also said that, “It represents a sort of vicious cycle of women engaged in drug abuse and often connected with financial or psychological dependence on a boyfriend.”

Contradictory Policies

On one hand, we fought the Taliban in Afghanistan because they would not surrender Osama Bin Laden. We then occupied the country until they had democratic elections. On the other hand, we have scores of Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) personnel stationed in Columbia in South America assisting the government to eradicate their drug crops. There is only one thing wrong with this picture. When the Taliban ruled Afghanistan, they outlawed the growing of Opium poppies as destructive to their people. Since we have vanquished the Taliban, Afghanistan has again become the number one provider of opium in the world.

The country of Columbia is a more bizarre story. We have been at war with the cocaine-growing peasants there for over 15 years by aerial spraying their crops. Since cocoa is their only source of income for many peasants, as soon as we eradicate one crop in Columbia, the farmers simply move into the Amazon rainforest and plant another crop on steep hillsides. We tried to convince the Columbian farmers to grow other crops, but that policy is sheer stupidity, as they make about 10 times as much money farming and selling cocaine. Not only is the aerial spraying not stopping the growth, we have been spraying a fungicide called fusarium oxysporum, and a pathogenic strain of the fungicide afflicts many other crops such as watermelons, muskmelons, basil and tomatoes. There is ample evidence that the fungicide has made peasants sick and there is ample proof that one 2-year old girl died from the spraying. Here we have shades of Agent Orange in Vietnam all over again. Do we ever learn our lesson?

Even worse, the deals we have struck with governments in the Andean mountains including Columbia provide their police and military with state-of-the-art equipment, wherein its purported purpose is to eradicate cocaine crops. Reality dictates that much of the equipment can be used equally as well against the guerillas, so we’re back to the days of supporting dictatorial regimes at any cost.

Medical Marijuana

Medical marijuana patients are under attack by the Bush Administration and the DEA, who treat sick and dying cancer and AIDS patients worse than dangerous criminals!

A few of the states have seen the light regarding the advantages of growing and distributing medical marijuana. The states where medical patients have access to marijuana are Alaska, California, Hawaii, Maine, Arizona, Colorado, Maryland, Nevada, Oregon, Vermont and Washington. I don’t believe I need to mention it, but the concept of legalization of medical marijuana will be impossible in the corrupt political bastions of the east coast, including New York and New Jersey.

Now the Justice Department doesn’t like it when these states ignore Federal law, so they have raided the yards of people who grow medical marijuana with state permission and confiscate the crop. This is another clear reminder of the loss of state’s rights to the overwhelming power of the Federal government. Federal agents even go after people often with incurable diseases and confiscate their self-grown crops.

The Institute of Medicine has determined that marijuana can alleviate the symptoms of nausea, appetite loss, pain and anxiety in the treatment of HIV/AIDS, Multiple Sclerosis (MS), epilepsy, and other diseases. There is ample evidence that medical marijuana can alleviate suffering that cannot be obtained from prescription drugs without the debilitating side effects.

Organizations that support legal access to medical marijuana include the American Academy of HIV Medicine, American Academy of Family Physicians, American Nurses Association, American Preventive Medical Association, American Public Health Association, the largest health maintenance organization, Kaiser Permamente, and the Wo/Men’s Alliance for Medical Marijuana.

In 2000, there were 1,579,566 drug arrests in the US. Of those, 46.5 percent -- 734,497 arrests—were for marijuana. There were 646,042 arrests for simple possession of marijuana in 2000.

The government has spent over $75 billion on the drug war, a losing proposition. The fundamental question that should be asked is, “Why are we prosecuting these people?” If we prosecute drug offenders (mostly petty drug peddlers and recreational drug users), why not prosecute chain smokers and alcoholics, two groups of people who are doing just as much harm to their bodies as drug users? In fact, governments are prosecuting smokers via the illegal taxes they add to the price of a pack of cigarettes, and as far as prosecuting alcoholics; it’s been tried before in the 1920s. Prohibition was enacted into law by the XVIII Amendment and subsequently repealed by the XXI Amendment as the people rebelled at the loss of their liquor. The XVIII Amendment indirectly vastly increased the power of organized crime as they supplied the booze to the thirsty population. Is not the attempt to eliminate booze analogous to the situation with recreational drugs today? And what has this campaign gained for us? The answer is nothing. Drugs on the street are more plentiful then ever.

Reducing the Jail Population

We are not going to stop the drug problem by using the Federal government to pass laws prohibiting its use; another Constitutional violation in which the government should not intervene. What would happen if we legalized drugs in much the same way as we legalized alcohol? Liquor is sold in liquor stores and bars. Drugs could also be sold in drug stores over-the-counter, and then provide checks to verify it isn’t sold to the under aged. Even with the age check, kids will still get their hands on recreational drugs in much the same way as kids get alcohol. Government will never be able to control the people’s vices regardless of what constraints you place on the substances. When Mikhail Gorbachev was in power in Russia, he tried to clean up that society by restricting the sales of Vodka and banning its consumption at official events. His efforts were a total waste of time. That approach had been tried before by the Czar in 1914, which was one of the significant events that lead to his downfall in 1917. In both cases, the people literally ignored the desires of the state.

By legalizing recreational drugs, not only would we significantly reduce the jail population, we would put a big bite on organized crime, one of the major benefactors of the monies made on these transactions.

Let’s see what California, the largest population state, spends on prisons. In the 2003-2004 budget, $5.2 billion was allocated for prison maintenance including $160 million for a new headquarters and $220 million for a new death row unit. $220 million – For that price, does the new death row unit have a grand ballroom? California has about 600 condemned prisoners on death row, so that means they are spending $1/3 million on each potential act of retribution. In comparison, community colleges were allocated $4.4 billion while health care was allocated $14 billion. Isn’t there something vitally wrong with this picture? In 1976, California, before pressing the drug war and enacting the “Three Strikes and You’re Out” law to commit three time offenders to life imprisonment, there were a total of under 20,000 inmates. The state now has over 160,000 prisoners, while the state’s population has doubled.

The stories of abuses in the “Three Strikes” law are legendary, whereby people have been incarcerated for life for very petty crimes so that government appears “tough on crime” to calm the populace. However, recognizing the error of their ways, Californians enacted sentencing reforms to try and reduce prison populations to focus on the “hard core’ criminal element, and yet the rate of incarceration grows out of control.

How Much Money Can Be Saved?

According to various sources, at the end of 2002 there were 250,000 people serving time for drug offenses. Assuming we eliminate laws on the use of drugs, what would the savings be in dollars?

California has approximately 30,000 people incarcerated for drug offenses out of a total population of 160,000 or about 20% of the total population. Since California has allocated $5.2 billion for prison maintenance, a savings should be accomplished in the neighborhood of $1 billion if drug laws were eliminated. Assuming that it costs about $35,000 per year to house, feed and clothe each prisoner, we can extend the costs savings to the Federal prison system, too. With 76,000 Federal prisoners at $35,000 per year, the savings in Federal costs would realize between $2-3 billion In total, eliminating these laws across the country should save about $13 billion in direct prison costs, not counting the labor costs incurred by the police departments and court systems to prosecute these people.

Conclusion

We must stop the war on drugs and legalize recreational drugs with controls that are in place for alcohol. Ceasing this senseless war will stop the expenditure of billions of dollars, starve the criminal empire that feeds off of the drug addicts, and greatly reduce the number of inmates in Federal, state and local prisons.