Letters

By dig readers

del.ico.us | digg it! | reddit!

print | email | 0 Comments

Who invited common sense to the argument?

The members of the MDAA apparently suffer from the delusion that our current drug prohibition actually keeps people from using drugs ("Pot's Shot," 7.2.08). I have yet to see any evidence that drug prohibition keeps anybody from doing anything, though I have seen massive amounts evidence that prohibition exacerbates the harmful effects of drugs on people's lives and contributes greatly to the suffering drugs cause to individuals and to society as a whole.

Indeed, prohibition makes drugs MORE available, not less. The reason is not hard to see. Look at alcohol. To buy alcohol, one has to be of legal age and prove it. One can buy alcohol only at licensed, regulated locations. To buy an illegal drug, on the other hand, one goes to some guy on a street corner who will sell anything to anybody, any time. No wonder teens regularly report marijuana is easier to get than alcohol.

The DAs, in citing statistics of drug use, conveniently overlook the rates of marijuana use in the Netherlands, where its use is legal and the drug is readily available. Dutch teens have far lower rates of marijuana use than do American teens. Prohibition, or the lack of it, has little to do with a person deciding whether or not to use marijuana.

I also wonder where the DEA got its statistics about marijuana and car accidents. The reports I've seen have shown no such dramatic effect. In any case, it's irrelevant. Driving under the influence of any drug, be it alcohol, marijuana or sleeping pills, should quite properly be illegal and would remain so whether marijuana is decriminalized or not.

Steve Wellcome

Brunswick, ME

What's worse than Modern Guilt? Hipster guilt

I was overjoyed to read that David Day's opinion of Beck (CD Reviews, 7.9.08) is one of disgust. You see, I can relate. The life of a hipster who "doesn't appreciate" Beck is not an easy one, but then again, he is a scientologist. I didn't know that before the review, but he gets major retard-points for it. I'm waiting to use it as leverage in that inevitable music conversation (you know the one: For what it lacks in depth, it overcompensates in pompousness) that I'm imagining will go like this:

Pretentious Hipster: "Modern Guilt is a sick album, and Beck is my hero."

Me: "No. Beck is perpetual lamesauce, and he practices FUCKING SCIENTOLOGY, man."

Pretentious Hipster: "You are absolutely right and I see the error of my ways. Now may I bask in your awesomeness?"

Me: "Sure, get in line."

Carolyn Wells

Newton

PS I picked up the Dig in Harvard Square this week: "Hmmm," I thought, "that's funny, I think I just creamed myself ..." And then I realized: MATTE'S BACK, BITCH!

Errata

Our DVD review of 1932's The Mummy incorrectly identified Bela Lugosi for Boris Karloff. The writer was driven mad by his incompetence—or for having invoked the anger of the classic horror movie fan base at large.