Page 2n"he Battalion/Wednesday, October 14, 1987
Opinion
Legalizing drugs won’t solve prison problem
C
a
When I saw the
item on our
budget of stories
from tiie
Associated Press,
my first reaction
was laughter. The
item read:
“The
Libertarian Party,
urging Texans to
vote against
proposals that
Sue
Krenek
would pay for new prisons, said Monday
the best way to reduce prison crowding
is to legalize drugs.”
Right, I thought. Then I thought
twice and went off to see if the full story
was in our computer files yet.
After reading it, I’m back to
laughing.
I’ve heard lots of arguments for
legalizing drugs, some of which have
been reasonable, and lots of theories on
prison overcrowding, many of which
haven’t been so reasonable. This is the
first time I’ve seen the two combined.
The Libertarians’ logic is that current
drug laws have forced drug prices up
unnaturally. This, they say, means drug
users often must turn to lives of crime to
get the money to pay for these
overpriced drugs. Many of them land in
prison, causing Texas’ current
overcrowding.
For the Libertarians, drug use is not a
moral problem but an economic and
practical problem. Even ignoring
questions about the morality or
immorality of drug use, however, the
Libertarians don’t make sense.
Their solution to prison
overcrowding is to legalize what they
call “victimless” crimes such as drug
possession. Once this is done, the street
prices of drugs will drop, and drug
users will quit committing all those nasty
crimes. The corresponding reduction in
prisoners would mean the state won’t
have to worry about releasing inmates
early to end overcrowding.
None of us (with the possible
exception of the criminals) are thrilled
with the state’s early release program,
but the Libertarians would have us
believe that rapists and murderers are
being released early while the guys who
happened to get caught with a joint stay
behind bars. Somehow I don’t believeit.
Our state officials were foolish enough
to ignore the growing prison population
until overcrowing had saddled us with a
court order, but they are bright enough
to release those doing time for minor
crimes before they let the mass
murderers loose on society. I hope so,
anyway.
My main problem with the
Libertarians’ stand is their
characterization of drug abuse as a
“victimless” crime. Gary Johnson, the
Libertarians’ Texas secretary, was
quoted in the Associated Press story as
saying the state should “stop locking up
peaceful citizens for harmless activities.”
The inference is that drug use doesn’t
cause anyone to lose out on anything.
The drug user, the Libertarians say,
affects only himself, and our legal
restrictions on drugs create a falsely
inflated market for them.
At first glance, it may seem to make
economic sense to legalize drugs. The
fact that they’re now illegal no doubt has
much to do with their high price, and
legalization would bring prices to a
more natural level.
The economic gain of legalizing
drugs, however, would be more than
offset by the economic loss caused by
loss of productivity. Drugs aren’t
“victimless” as long as there are drug
users whose ability to work is hindered
by their drug use. Just because you and
I didn’t have our lives or belongings
taken by these people doesn’t mean we
aren’t their victims. In effect, we
provide them with subsidies by
compensating for their lost
productivity.
Recreational drug use, like
recreational alcohol use, may not
present problems for most people,
drug addicts no more need easy access
to drugs than an alcoholic needs an
open bar. Our society allows alcohol
users legal access to their drug of choic
and the Libertarians say users of
marijuana, cocaine, LSD and heroin
should be treated in the same way.,Is
Johnson said, “Posession ofmarijuari
cocaine, LSD or heroin shouldbeas
legal as possession of a six-packoftier
But the bottom line is thatoursooe
has deemed drugs to be of greater
potential danger than alcohol,of
enough potential danger that theyn
illegal. Any argument thatchangesa
judgment will have to address theK
issues surrounding drug abuse.Wi
the Libertarians address only the
economic issues — well, it’s enough
make you laugh.
Sue Krenek is a senior journalism
major and opinion page editor[m^
Battalion.
Th
Orchi
Jamei
day e
rium
audie
sored
tee.
Thi
orche
States
Thi
That’s the ticket:
Pat Robertson,
Oral Roberts in ’88
I have decided
who I will vote for
in the next
presidential
election. I have
decided to back
that wonderful
man the Rev. —
Richard
Williams
Guest Columnist
If Pat and Brother Oral were in the
White House, we could start a war with
anyone we wanted. All Pat and Brother
Oral would have to say is that God told
them to do it. Who, I ask you, is going to
argue with God?
make that ex-Rev. — Pat Robertson.
Pat is the perfect candidate. He no
longer believes in pre-marital sex, so he
appeals to the moral majority. On the
other hand, he had pre-marital sex, so
he appeals to the not-so-moral majority.
Pat could also change the laws
regarding marriage. He could save us
lots of money by getting rid of those
expensive marriage licenses. He could
declare that anyone ’ who ' wanted to get
married only had to have sex. Think
about it: America would no longer have
any illegitimate children.
With Brother Oral as vice president,
we would never lose a war. Every time
the enemy shot one of our guys,
Brother Oral could heal him. The way
he heals uses no medicine, so it must be
cheaper than using regular doctors.
And with the mighty Brother Oral
healing our guys, we would never run
out of soldiers.
Think about it. This would mean that
only those die-hard commie-killers
would have to fight. Those who don’t
want to fight would not be forced to.
Pat served in the military. There have
been questions about his actual service
record, but with a good public relations
hack, Pat could make that work for him.
All he has to do is appeal to the military
majority with the fact he served in the
armed forces. He then can appeal to the
not-so-military majority with the fact he
wimped out of real combat and never
killed anyone.
This also would mean we could
declare a war on any non-Christian
nation and just call it a holy war. No one
could stop us then — with Pat and
Brother Oral leading us, the world
would know God is on our side. I’m sure
God would want us to nuke all those
heathen, un-American, flag-burning,
baby-killing, un-“safe sex”-practicing
foreigners anyway.
Like all really good candidates, Pat
could come down squarely and firmly
on both sides of the fence.
Pat has only one problem — his vice-
presidential choice. He needs to choose
a man who could help his campaign. He
needs someone who could make a
passionate plea for votes, a persistent
plea for funds, and someone who has a
large following.
Brother Oral coiild retire the national
debt in less than six months. If elected,
Pat and Brother Oral could get on their
new presidential press conference/fund
raising show, “Prez Prayers,” and make
a plea for funds. Brother Oral could say
God had threatened to “call him home”
if the funds weren’t raised in six
months.
I think his home is in Oklahoma, so
even if he was called home, no one
would go there to find him.
Pat should pick Brother Oral Roberts
as his vice-type guy now. What better
vice guy is there then Brother Oral?
Think about it. With Pat and Brother
Oral, America would never have to
suffer through another joke about
having a B-movie actor for president.
Instead of a man who co-starred with a
chimp, we could have two chumps in the
White House.
Once the funds were raised, Brother
Oral could do like all vice-presidential
types do and hide in the woodwork until
he decides to run for president himself.
Or he could declare the White House
his official home, and since God had
called him there, no one could ever
make him leave. After Pat left the White
House, Brother Oral could become
president for life. After all, God called
him to the White House, and who’s
going to argue with God?
There would be no way for Pat and
Brother Oral to lose. Behind in the
polls? Have Brother Oral bring back the
needed voters from the dead so they
could win. Brother Oral can do this; I
believe him because he said he could —I
think.
I urge all red-blooded, die-hard
Americans to write Pat and urge him to
tap Brother Oral — for the good of
America. Think about it.
Richard Williams is a junior
agricultural journalism major and a
makeup editor for the Battalion.
The Battalion
(USPS 045 360)
Member of
Texas Press Association
Southwest Journalism Conference
The Battalion Editorial Board
Sondra Pickard, Editor
John Jarvis, Managing Editor
Sue Krenek, Opinion Page Editor
Rodney Rather, City Editor
Robbyn Lister, News Editor
Loyd Brumfield, Sports Editor
Tracy Staton, Photo Editor
tAVyexv'gow'msag < ® v '
TTrVws tor &eto\\S
AAAftSWl
l ■
CON
‘STFC^-Z*’—
major
Berlin
and tl
ral la
States.
He
three
Frescc
by Bo
No. 2
Orche
and “5
gei Ra
The
was th
includ
by Bel
TSSc ’setovs.
Mail Call
Spam, Spam, Spam, Spam
EDITOR:
Wasn’t it Mark Nair who philosophized, “I’m pink;
therefore I’m Spam”? Just checking.
Mark Fisher
grad student
In closing, il you consider these jokes “insignificani
please drop them. My advice is to tell clean jokes. I’ve
heard Bill Cosby makes money at it.
Cody Blair ’91
accompanied by 20 signatures
'Grode' stories harm students
EDITOR:
Don't knock the cops
EDITOR:
In response to Mr. Martin’s letter of Oct. 8: I disagree
with your statements concerning “grode” stories and those
who protest them. Allow me to explain my point of view
with an analogy:
its ere
of cla;
States
Soviet
Th<
includ
gie H
severa
Seoul,
Th<
ties.
Cor
tor an
and v\
throu:
Conlo
Suppose that it is a tradition to smoke at yell practice.
So at every yell practice, cigarette smoke is piped into Kyle
Field for five minutes. In the smoker’s opinion it is
“insignificant,” “totally harmless” and fun. In the
meantime we, the “self-appointed saviors of Aggieland,”
must hold our breath or leave. Since our Aggie spirit
prevents us from doing the latter, we get cancer along with
everyone else. If we protest this smoking, we are accused
of “censorship” (which is “un-American”) and intolerance
and soundly rebuffed with words of wisdom from a
cartoon character. It is even hinted that we are not proud
of our school.
To you, the stories are “harmless,” but we believe they
are harmful to us. I also would like to comment on your
quote from Bloom County. It is hardly American to roll
over and quit trying because someone ; said something is
impossible.
We don’t know who the At Ease staff interviewedoi
surveyed, but it must not have been any of us. Itisasad
fact that most of the student body views the Universil'
Police only in the role of “enforcers.” And it is probaH'
very hard to keep a pleasant attitude when dealingwiil 1
students when officers are quite often complained to,
yelled at and taunted. The Schuhmacher Hall Council
staff have enjoyed a good working relationship withtlt'
University Police for the past two years. “Wiatt’swar#
have been involved in projects and programmingwi
Schuhmacher and support our charity work as well.
Unfortunately, the only contact people usually haverf
officers is during negative situations (waiting in line
getting a ticket). If people would take the time toasso®
with UPD in more positive situations as we have,]
that they aren’t such “bad” people after all.
Staff and council of Schuhmacher Hall
Letters to the editor should not exceed 300 words in length. The edilons -
serves the right to edit letters for style and length, but will make mt)
maintain the author’s intent. Each letter must be signed and mustmluk 1 "
sification, address and telephone number of the writer.
I
BLOOM COUNTY
by Berke Bread 1
Editorial Policy
The Battalion is a non-profit, self-supporting newspaper oper
ated as a community service to Texas A&M and Bryan-College Sta
tion.
Opinions expressed in The Battalion are those of the editorial
board or the author, and do not necessarily represent the opinions
of Texas A&M administrators, faculty or the Board of Regents.
The Battalion also serves as a laboratory newspaper for students
in reporting, editing and photography classes within the Depart
ment of Journalism.
The Battalion is published Monday through Friday during
Texas A&M regular semesters, except for holiday and examination
periods.
Mail subscriptions are $17.44 per semester, $34.62 per school
year and $36.44 per full year. Advertising rates furnished on re
quest.
Our address: The Battalion, 216 Reed McDonald, Texas A&M
University, College Station, TX 77843-4 111.
Secona class postage paid at College Station, TX 77843.
POSTMASTER: Send address changes to The Battalion, 216
Reed McDonald, Texas A&M University, CoUcge Station TX
77843-4111.
THING6 AREN'T
exfiCTLY f\s 'meYweze
eeFoxe/ /uyy /noxe
wexpecTEp chfiNees
anp i mr i/V5T
teTNWSeWd//
V
l&LL
n