Are We Winning the War on Drugs?
Price of Paradise · Hawaii Public Radio · aired 1995-07-23
Guests: Don Topping (Professor, University of Hawaii); Dan Bent (former U.S. Attorney)
Duration: 1:22:01

[00:00:00] Randall Roth: Good morning. This is Randy Roth, host of the Price of Paradise radio show. We're broadcast live each Sunday morning from 8:00 to 9:00 on KHPR 88.1 FM and KKUA 90.7 FM. And then rebroadcast each Sunday evening from 8:00 to 9:00 on KIFO 1380 AM. This radio show is entirely the product of volunteers, with a goal of generating lively and informed dialogue about the challenges confronting the people of Hawaii. We believe such public conversations are absolutely essential if we as a community hope to meet our challenges. Our topic this morning is the war on drugs. Should we legalize or decriminalize certain mind-altering and potentially at least addictive substances? Specifically, we're talking about cannabis, I guess that's marijuana, the coca plant, cocaine, for example, opium, that's morphine or heroin, some amphetamines, a number of of substances that currently are illegal.
[00:00:57] Randall Roth: We have in the studio with us two experts. Dan Bent is a partner in the Hawaii law firm of Carl Smith Ball, Wickman, Case and Achi. He is a former US attorney for Hawaii and is the author of the Drug Dealer Liability Act, a product liability act for illegal drugs. The Act became law in Hawaii on June 19th of this year and has been passed in other states. Bent was a recognized leader among US attorneys nationally in drug prevention and education in addition to enforcement. Don Topping has been with the University of Hawaii since 1962, wherein he was a professor of linguistics and since 1974 has been director of the Social Science Research Institute, where he has had occasion to address various social issues of Hawaii and the Pacific area.
[00:01:42] Randall Roth: He began studying American drug policy intensively about 3 years ago and formed the Hawaii Drug Policy Options Group, a town gown organization whose primary mission is to provide a a public forum for the discussion of drug policy options. Dr. Topping also serves as a member of the Hawaii Substance Abuse Task Force whose mission is to make recommendations to the 1996 legislature on better ways to deal with Hawaii's drug problems. Dan Bent, good morning. Good morning. And Don Topping, good morning to you. Good morning, Randy. Well, our topic is, uh, the war on drugs and, uh, I guess the first question I have is whether we seem to be winning it or not and to determine that, I guess I will ask, is drug use up or is it down? Uh, Dan Bent.
[00:02:27] Dan Bent: Well, the definitive research on this is the national household study done by the National Institute of Drug Abuse every year for the past about 20 years or so. And, uh, that if you read that, it's very clear that drug use has decreased significantly. 24 million users in 1979 and now it's 11.7 million in 1993, the last year for which I have data.
[00:02:52] Randall Roth: So, you would suggest that that we're winning the war as measured by statistics like those?
[00:02:58] Dan Bent: Well, yeah. Uh, you know, it's a very complex and difficult problem and and it's not going to be be, uh, I don't think it's ever going to be won. Bill Bennett said that. It's ever never going to be won. It's a question of whether or not we're going to tolerate the consequences of surrendering. And those consequences are just too great.
[00:03:14] Randall Roth: Okay. Don Topping, what do you think? About drug use whether it's up or down? Well, that depends I think you know about statistics what they say. There are statistics and then they're other kinds of statistics, so you can make pretty much what you want with statistics.
[00:03:27] Don Topping: These surveys, um, do show that drug use is overall down. However, this is not true of hardcore addicts, which the level has remained the same, and those are the people we're concerned about, not the casual users. Another comment on surveys, I mean, if you'll know the the dates that were given I believe by Mr. Bent, were 1979 and 1993 or something very recently. These were the years during which the terribly draconian drug laws were passed, which caused people, drug users, to retreat further and further back into the, uh, the hidden world. And I don't know, I haven't actually myself been asked, uh, "Sir, have you used any illegal drugs in the last 30 days?" and if I were asked that question, I'd have to ask myself, well, now what kind of answer would I give. I just don't think these survey. How about a truthful How about a truthful answer? Well, let me ask, Don. You're saying that you're skeptical as to whether drug use is down.
[00:04:22] Don Topping: I'm very skeptical. Not what I'm take that back. I uh, it is, I would accept the fact that casual recreational drug use is down from what it was in the 1970s. This could be a fad, this could be a result of of many, many factors.
[00:04:36] Randall Roth: But based on on your article in this morning's advertiser on page B4, my impression is that you would be for legalization, even if the war on drugs were quote winning in the sense that drug use was down?
[00:04:48] Don Topping: No, I'm not here to argue for legalization. Legalization is not really the issue. The issue is whether reform is needed, and that's what I'm prepared to argue for.
[00:04:56] Randall Roth: Okay. Tell tell me, what do you mean by reform?
[00:04:59] Don Topping: A change, a shift in focus from one of criminal justice, of criminalizing, of marginalizing, of punishing people who have an addiction, rather than trying to help them, rather than trying to reach them. Our policies now are pushing them further and further away from the margins of society where they cannot be reached, they cannot be helped, and they get into deeper and deeper trouble. That's what our policies are doing.
[00:05:22] Randall Roth: Dan Bent, what do you think? Oh, I think that's absurd. Uh, if you talk to recovered drug addicts, um, they will tell you, a very, very high percentage of them will tell you, and and numerous of them have told me that the luckiest day in their lives was the was the day they got busted.
[00:05:38] Dan Bent: You know, family pressure didn't work, uh, pressure from their uh, physicians didn't work, uh, their school, their workplaces, none of that worked until of course drug testing became a a prospect. Um, and that's what pushed them into treatment. I've had I've had current drug users tell me that they've even thought about getting busted so that they could get the the kind of coercion they feel like they need to compete with this very addictive problem they have.
[00:06:07] Don Topping: Uh, yeah, for every one that that makes this, um, confession or or maybe it's not the right word, this praising the arrest for having saved their lives, what about all those 80 to 90% of the recidivism rates of people who are thrown back in prison time after time for using drugs. I don't think they're going to tell you that being arrested was the luckiest day in their life. Now, I I will have to say that I have heard an occasional um, former drug user say that, and perhaps that's the only way they were able to get into treatment because treatment facilities are simply not available to those who need them and those who want them and those who request them. And as Dan has pointed out, often times getting arrested is the only way to get in.
[00:06:47] Dan Bent: Well, I I certainly don't think that's true. One of the things you find when they've studied that issue, whether or not enough treatment facilities were available, is that um, there are a lot of drug users who want crisis treatment. And because they they are going through a drug, severe drug psychosis, and they recognize they need some kind of help because they're in pain. But once the the uh, the insects are no longer crawling across their skin in their minds, I, of course, um, they don't want it anymore. So, they want to be out of treatment. So, you have a lot of those folks who want to use drugs, who want to quote, recreationally use drugs, but when it's a problem they want to demand treatment right away.
[00:07:23] Dan Bent: And if treatment means anything, it means means long term, get people off drugs. It means ultimate abstinence. Otherwise, it's not worth the effort.
[00:07:31] Don Topping: Treatment doesn't necessarily mean leading to abstinence. Treatment means getting people so that they can get on with their normal, regular lives.
[00:07:40] Randall Roth: Without drugs?
[00:07:41] Don Topping: With or without. There's no reason that and and there's certainly plenty of evidence to show that people can use substances, mind-altering substances all of their lives without ill consequences. It there are those who get into trouble with them.
[00:07:55] Randall Roth: So you're suggesting just as people who get in trouble with alcohol now have treatment available, you're suggesting the same approach be taken with some of these other mind-altering substances?
[00:08:04] Don Topping: Absolutely, and don't throw them in the jail because they happen to relapse.
[00:08:08] Dan Bent: Well, um, we um uh, Don earlier said that he's not for legalization. And then, of course, if you listen even moderately carefully, you find out he is. Well, are we talking about the difference between legalization and decriminalization because there's no distinction there.
[00:08:25] Don Topping: I mean, there's that's that's a phony uh phony distinction that that the proponents of drug decriminalization and legalization try to offer because legalization the public at large understands legalization is a dumb move.
[00:08:39] Randall Roth: Okay. Let me get Don's thoughts on that and then I know you had something else you wanted to say.
[00:08:43] Don Topping: I I would ask Dan to listen to me a little bit more closely. I said the issue here is not legalization. The issue is how many more people do we have to put in prison before we realize that we need to change our policies to reform them in some way or another. Now, when people throw out the term legalization automatically red lights go off and we see opium along and on the counter in Safeway or Longs drugstore right along the alcohol and the tobacco and the other addictive substances.
[00:09:11] Randall Roth: So, you're saying it it closes off the conversation. It closes off any kind of rational discussion.
[00:09:15] Don Topping: And and you don't want to close off the discussion.
[00:09:17] Dan Bent: Exactly. I want to open it up. I'd like to get truth out on the table, out into the public.
[00:09:21] Don Topping: Yeah, I agree and so let's let's engage that discussion. What reform would you consider appropriate, some specifics? You're for reform, but let me ask you what are you talking about reform? Is it would you not incarcerate someone who is dealing uh crack to your 12 year old child?
[00:09:41] Dan Bent: Well, now, you're taking an extreme example. Uh I might do that, and I might indeed do that. Not necessarily. A a reform I would begin with is shift our focus from law enforcement, the the 70% of our resources that go into arresting people to trying to stop drugs from entering the country, to trying to eradicate marijuana, chasing people down, setting up sting operations, informing on people, paying informers, all of that kind of money, putting them in jail. I would rather see that money go toward good education efforts and treatment efforts to help people who are in trouble with addictive substances. Let me point out that 90% of our population never touch any kind of drug, any any kind of illegal drug.
[00:10:23] Dan Bent: They made that choice because drugs are readily available everywhere. Of those, of those 10% who do try drugs, about 10% of those get into trouble with them. So, we're talking about a very small percentage of the overall population in the United States who have trouble with illegal drugs. And meanwhile, we've got vast armies out with spending billions and billions of dollars on a problem that is restricted to a relatively few people. So I say we focus our efforts on them. Where can we Where can we use our resources to provide the best help and to create the least harm?
[00:11:00] Randall Roth: So, does that mean that, uh, from what I hear you say, we don't want to spend all this money on drug enforcement, so we remove the laws?
[00:11:09] Don Topping: Well, well, it's inconsistent. So, what I'm asking is specifically, would you legalize drugs?
[00:11:16] Dan Bent: I'm not going to answer that question because that's not the issue. The issue is how many more people are we going to put in prison before we come to our senses and realize that it isn't working.
[00:11:24] Randall Roth: If you're not going to put them in prison, it means that you are going to change the current laws or the current rules by which people are put in prison. Those are called the criminal laws. Are you going to to legalize drugs or not? Let's let's come back to that question. I think probably that'd be a a good question to end our conversation with uh this morning, but I want to remind listeners that this is the Price of Paradise radio show. My name is Randy Roth. Our topic today is the war on drugs. With me in the studio are Don Topping, a professor of linguistics and director of Social Science Research Institute, and a member of the Hawaii Substance Abuse Task Force.
[00:11:58] Randall Roth: Also, Dan Bent, a former US attorney for Hawaii, which is uh Hawaii's top federal law enforcement officer, and currently he's a partner in the law firm of Carl Smith Ball, Wickman, Case and Achi. If you would like to ask a question or make a brief comment, just call us at 955-8821 and neighbor Islanders are always invited to call us collect. The number again is 955-8821, and we would appreciate it if you could think ahead of time of just what it is that you'd like to ask or say so that we can get to as many callers as possible. First waiting on the line, we have Dr. Portner from Honolulu. Good morning. Good morning.
[00:12:33] Speaker 1: Morning. Good morning, thank you for taking my call. I'm an MD practicing in Honolulu. And I lived through the 60s, coming into adulthood in the 60s where drugs were rampant. And I treated because I was in Detroit area uh, urban area, working in emergency rooms and in medicine. I treated um patients for the complications of drug use. Now, the term illegal drug use is a fallacious one. There is no real distinction between legal and illegal when it comes to medicine. And um, I'm a little worked up because I I have a lot to say. Let me calm down a second.
[00:13:12] Randall Roth: Take take a Okay, take a I'll try to make it brief, I understand. Well, just take a deep breath and tell us uh your primary point.
[00:13:19] Speaker 1: My primary point is what should be the primary point on the show and it's called what is the issue? And uh, so far we've asked is the issue um to make would you make drugs legal? Or is the issue on the other side, it was said, how many more people do we have to incarcerate? And and that's not the issue. Neither of those are the issue. The issue is what is the issue? The issue is why do we as a society choose to make choose to label some drugs legal and others not?
[00:13:55] Randall Roth: Okay. Well, let's you're you're touching on something that Don Topping's piece in this morning's advertiser, uh addressed as well, and so I'm going to ask him to say something about it and then we'll go to Dan Bent.
[00:14:05] Dan Bent: Yes, it's it's the such an obvious hypocrisy that as I say, does not go unnoticed by the youth. There we're proactively promoting the most lethal, the most addictive, the most harmful substance that we have in the western world, namely alcohol, which is accountable for at least 100,000 deaths per year directly and accountable for untold thousands more through accidents, through drunk driving, through violence. And there's the other addictive drug, even as addictive if not more so than heroin and that is nicotine, which we can attribute about 400,000 deaths per year And far more deadly I might add.
[00:14:44] Randall Roth: Okay, let's see what Dan Bent has to say about it.
[00:14:47] Dan Bent: Well, um seems that we're talking about three different things. One is pharmaceuticals, at least that's what I uh got from you, Dr. Portner. You were suggesting that there was a distinction between pharmaceuticals and illegal drugs.
[00:14:59] Speaker 1: No, I said there was no distinction.
[00:15:00] Dan Bent: No, no, no. I'm saying the law makes a distinction. The law makes a distinction. Yeah, and and what was the reason for that? And uh, Don Topping uh mentioned alcohol and tobacco. Let me go in reverse. Tobacco first of all, uh does take a lot of lives. I'm certainly not a tobacco proponent. I've been been uh against And Nor nor are we drug proponents. I think proponent is a is a is a kind of confrontational word. What Just because you're against the the the current system, it doesn't mean you're a proponent of drugs.
[00:15:30] Don Topping: There is a distinction, however, between tobacco use and say for example, cocaine use. Uh, and you as an ER doc, um in your previous uh uh experience, uh you might know that um when they studied 1,000 emergency room trauma cases, um in one of the hospitals studies, marijuana was implicated more than alcohol and yet marijuana is used significantly less than alcohol. So, the question to me is, is how much harm are we willing to tolerate? How many, how many child beatings are we willing to tolerate?
[00:16:05] Dan Bent: Okay. Can I just say one more thing Real real quickly. Mr. Bent, is that Sure. Yeah. I know that you're you've been an attorney general. I know that your position is firm on this. You've devoted your life to the drug enforcement uh issue. But uh try for a minute to sit down and say could I possibly run because you are dead wrong. It's true I am a MD, I am a uh, former working in the ER and in medicine. And in my mind, and I have more of a business saying this than you do. In my judgment, uh there is no uh lethal or or toxic difference between the illegal and legal legal drugs to make it a rational thing to do.
[00:16:42] Randall Roth: Okay. Let me ask, do you mean by that the harm is the same to society from The question is why do we make laws to protect people from themselves? That's the question, and if you do, why do you separate some drugs which are very harmful from others which also may be very harmful. How do I tell my children when they ask me, why is a cigarettes legal and alcohol legal and marijuana and these other ones? No. Are they that much worse? I'll give you the answer for your children and that is because the harm, overall harm to society is significantly greater. Dr. Portner, Dr. Portner, you've raised some some extremely provocative points. I really appreciate it.
[00:17:21] Speaker 1: Yeah, I don't mean to be a nuisance but the problem with our system is that we have people like Mr. Bent who are filled with false impressions and information.
[00:17:30] Randall Roth: Ask the doctors. It's not a passionate opinion. Ask the doctors about it, which is worse. I I appreciate and I hate to to move on, but our lines are are blinking uh like crazy.
[00:17:41] Dan Bent: If I can just add one general comment in the whole in the whole history of drug laws, the advice of physicians and the American Medical Association was consistently ignored. Never, not one of our drug laws was passed with any kind of intention of health or public safety and had no input from the scientific world. This is law enforcement.
[00:18:02] Randall Roth: Uh, we're gonna we're gonna try and move through these calls very quickly, so people who are on the line, if if you can be thinking about what specifically it is that you'd like to say your main message, because I'm going to have to keep us moving. Uh, next on the line is just from, uh, Kau on the Big Island.
[00:18:17] Speaker 2: Yeah, and I I can't hear your radio program. Before I get to the topic, I I just want to briefly put in a strong plea to, uh, simulcast this on the AM side so that those of us beyond your FM range, uh, can hear your program live rather than having to wait until evening.
[00:18:32] Randall Roth: I'll pass that on to uh Al Holsen.
[00:18:35] Speaker 2: Okay. Now, uh, a pox on both your houses. Uh, uh both positions are uh not working, or not going to work, uh, to keep uh these uh awful substances down to the hands of my uh teenage, uh, son and, uh, his peers. And, uh, uh, uh fortunately, he's, uh, taken heed of his parents and, um, uh, others and, and
[00:19:00] Speaker 3: And not uh been tempted by uh by these awful things so far, but obviously the present system doesn't work because all around him all over the world.
[00:19:10] Speaker 4: Just just what's your What's your primary message because I got seven people on the line. You're going to have to get to it right now.
[00:19:14] Speaker 3: Yeah uh so uh uh legalization isn't going to work to keep it out of his hands either. Uh I'm I'm asking for a program of uh recontrol and this is ironic because I don't really respect the medical profession, but that's they're the only ones who can handle it. But I I don't want to give it to them. We we need to have centers where uh all these substances are dispensed uh at cost and uh they they make uh counseling available and and only have it uh you know, open it up to to new uh uh addicts and new users just just to those that already are carrying it in their in their bloodstream and they won't have to pay exorbitant prices for it. But and these these can be private uh contract uh community sectors.
[00:20:02] Speaker 4: Okay. You've you've made your point. Let me get a reaction from Dan Bent and then we'll move to another caller. Hello. Thank you.
[00:20:07] Dan Bent: Well, first of all, um, my primary focus has not just been law enforcement. In the mid-eighties, I was asked to debate the issue and I started from scratch and looked at it. wrote a tremendous number of scientific papers about uh studies of illegal drugs. Um, you know, I'm I've been one who's wanted to experiment. For example, um, the legislation Randy commented on earlier, the drug dealer liability act is essentially a product's liability bill for illegal drugs, and what that does is impose civil consequences. I'm all for that. I believe that people if we're going to if we're going to have as as good a possible world, each person will get what they deserve and pay for the injuries they cause. I'd be willing, for example, to take a community, um, in in the United States, um, and one where we we had clear geographic boundaries, and you might get your your uh, fellow citizens of the Big Island to volunteer the Big Island to to try exactly what you're talking about.
[00:21:04] Dan Bent: Um, I'd be willing to do that, and then I'd watch. I've been in favor of legalizing drugs for a certain small segment of society, so the rest of society can watch and see see if that works. Now the one I have volunteered is convicted imprisoned drug dealers. I'd like to take their own drugs, put them in the middle of their prison cell, uh, floor, and just allow them to have unlimited access. And so we can see whether or not that is overall better for them, decreases the level of violence in prisons, and and the rest of that.
[00:21:32] Speaker 4: Okay. Well, we're going to move on to some more callers. Uh
[00:21:35] Dan Bent: Does If I can just add one word about control, the word control was used, and we have a what is called the Office of National Drug Control Policy. The problem is they're not controlling, drugs are totally out of control, and what I'm arguing for is some reform of the system that would bring them under control.
[00:21:52] Speaker 4: Okay. Um, all of you who are on the line, uh please be patient with us, and we're going to get to you. Next on the line is Si from Hawaii Kai. Good morning, Si.
[00:22:01] Speaker 5: Oh, hi. Okay. I just I'm just glad I finally got it on the air. But um, I've had a lot of experiences. I'm a graduate student and I'd like to point out something to Mr. Bent is that the reality of the problem is that do you know that I can't even get a job, okay, for the amount of money it would cost to keep me in prison, okay? And all the problems he's talking about the cost of society are all attributed to the illegality of drugs and the fact that they are so expensive that you can make people, I mean matter of fact, the getting the organized crime element out of it by decriminalizing or possibly legalizing like they do in Holland, okay? Well, you know, has been effective, it was effective in the 19th Century.
[00:22:40] Speaker 4: Let's let's ask let's ask Dan Bent to respond to that, because you've raised a real good point.
[00:22:43] Speaker 5: Well, in the 19th Century, prior, drugs were legal.
[00:22:46] Speaker 4: Si, we'll let uh Dan Bent respond to that.
[00:22:49] Dan Bent: Okay, go ahead. Uh you're right. In the 19th Century in America, drugs were legal, and because of the tremendous uh problem, social problems, the family uh destruction, and the other problem the health problems as a result of that, the Harrison Narcotics Act was passed in 1913. Drugs were legal, it didn't work. Um, so so all these drugs we're talking about were legal before 1913 in the United States. Heroin, cocaine for example, yeah. A lot of drugs that we're now dealing with now didn't exist then. Okay. The you know, they were uh synthetic drugs. Um, and you say that all your your your comment was all of the problems uh from drugs that we're experiencing are a result of the fact that they're illegal.
[00:23:31] Dan Bent: However, um uh let's just take marijuana which um which a lot of people favor legalizing. A study of truck drivers showed that more truck drivers who were killed in traffic accidents on the highways had marijuana in their system than alcohol. Uh there are injuries as a result of drug use and that have nothing to do with the fact that they're illegal. Um, when a uh parent um beats his infant to death as happened in Washington DC because he thought he was the devil, that wasn't because the the drugs that he had used were illegal, it was because they affected his brain function. Uh and the brain is the organ in the body that controls behavior, and it's the organ in the body that the drugs we're talking about impair.
[00:24:15] Speaker 4: And a point you made in your piece in this morning's advertiser that that I found interesting was that at least one study had indicated that I believe four times as many murders in a certain area were caused by drug psychosis as opposed to people trying to get money to satisfy their drug habits.
[00:24:29] Dan Bent: That's right. It was a study of 500 murders in New York City where they went behind the police reports and looked for the ultimate cause and that's what they found.
[00:24:36] Speaker 4: I'd just like to comment on a couple of things on the Harrison Narcotics Act. First place that was 1914, not 1913. The Harrison Narcotics Act was designed to put the control of the just the dispensation of narcotic drugs under the hands of physicians. Now what happened was that the law enforcement people interpreted it in a different way, and they said, "Okay, physicians can dispense narcotics in order to reduce pain, but they cannot dispense it to alleviate the pain of drug addicts." And so they started arresting physicians. And after a number of these arrests were made, well physicians, of course, withdrew immediately, and that was the beginning of driving the drug world underground because that was the only way that drug addicts were able to get their their drugs that they needed.
[00:25:21] Speaker 4: Uh with regard to the study of the marijuana truck drivers that Mr. Bent has referred to, I would refer him to a more recent Department of Transportation study that was conducted in the Netherlands of impairment under the influence of marijuana, and they found that it was negligible. Uh with regard to the report on the 500's um behind the police blotter study in New York that he refers to, I have seen no references to that. I would love to see it because I question it. If you look at the criminogenic quality qualities of drugs, alcohol is number one, it generates violence. That same claim cannot be made of other drugs with the possible exception of the amphetamines. People take take drugs to feel good, not to create violence.
[00:26:05] Speaker 4: Let's let's go to another caller and again, ask that uh that you keep your question or your comment as as short as possible. John in uh Makiki. Good morning, John.
[00:26:13] Speaker 6: It's Joe.
[00:26:14] Speaker 4: Oh, Joe. Um first thing, uh there there is a big difference between decriminalization and legalization.
[00:26:22] Speaker 7: Uh and that should be obvious to anyone. I mean, we don't want to put we don't want Benson and Hedges uh giving out um the drugs. Secondly, uh the the uh the the point about do we want to uh uh let people uh sell drugs to our children, that's ridiculous. We're not talking about decriminalizing dealing. We're talking about decriminalizing use. And uh say and then the third point is that money is the big thing. Everybody from the farmers in Bolivia on down will have less reason to go for drugs if there's no money in it.
[00:26:57] Speaker 4: Okay. Thank you, Joe. We really appreciate uh your comments. Um, Dan, one of the points that Joe just made that uh I know you could talk about for a long time but just real quickly, um, who would be hurt if if drugs these drugs that we're talking about were legalized, um because obviously the the drug kingpins in Colombia and organized crime would be hurt. Uh who else would be hurt? And and I think part of Don's article was to suggest that that the people who would be hurt by legalization, uh would be folks who would tend to fight it.
[00:27:34] Dan Bent: Well, uh the I think it relates to one of the comments by either the last caller or the one before about uh the fact that these these people there's a lot of violence derived from the fact that there's a black market. My question is, let's assume we legalize drugs tomorrow. Are the people who are willing to kill other people for economic gain within the drug culture? Are those people going to stop that uh simply because drugs are legalized? Are they going to turn their attention to legitimate businesses? Uh and um, you know, it's bad people are bad people. Bad people are bad people. Right. And and and they've uh uh you know, if they've committed murders for economic gain in the past, if they've stolen um things in the past, are they going to stop simply because the the drug market's not there and they don't have to steal drugs from each other anymore.
[00:28:05] Speaker 4: Okay. Just a reminder to listeners that this is the Price of Paradise Radio Show. My name is.
[00:47:00] Speaker 3: which a lot of people for legalizing which a lot of people for legalizing which a lot of people for legalizing which a lot of people for legalizing which a lot of people for legalizing which a lot of people for legalizing which a lot of people for legalizing which a lot of people for legalizing which a lot of people for legalizing which a lot of people for legalizing which a lot of people for legalizing which a lot of people for legalizing which a lot of people for legalizing which a lot of people for legalizing which a lot of people for legalizing which a lot of people for legalizing which a lot of people for legalizing which a lot of people for legalizing
[00:47:16] Speaker 3: which a lot of people for legalizing which a lot of people for legalizing which a lot of people for legalizing which a lot of people for legalizing which a lot of people for legalizing which a lot of people for legalizing which a lot of people for legalizing which a lot of people for legalizing which a lot of people for legalizing which a lot of people for legalizing which a lot of people for legalizing which a lot of people for legalizing which a lot of people for legalizing which a lot of people for legalizing which a lot of people for legalizing which a lot of people for legalizing which a lot of people for legalizing which a lot of people for legalizing
[00:47:34] Speaker 3: which a lot of people for legalizing which a lot of people for legalizing which a lot of people for legalizing which a lot of people for legalizing which a lot of people for legalizing which a lot of people for legalizing which a lot of people for legalizing which a lot of people for legalizing which a lot of people for legalizing which a lot of people for legalizing which a lot of people for legalizing which a lot of people for legalizing which a lot of people for legalizing which a lot of people for legalizing which a lot of people for legalizing which a lot of people for legalizing which a lot of people for legalizing which a lot of people for legalizing
[00:47:52] Speaker 3: the paradise for me. I have Dan Bent, a former US attorney for the state of Hawaii, currently uh a lawyer in private practice, and Don Topping who uh originally was at the University of Hawaii as a professor of linguistics and for the last 10 years or so, or I guess 20 years or so, has been the director of the Social Science Research Institute. Our topic is the war on drugs. We've got a number of people who have been on hold for a while. If you're having trouble get through, just keep trying and I'm going to try to do a better job of of moving along so that we can get to as many callers as possible. Let's go to Diana in uh Halu. Halu. Diana and Halua. Sorry. Yeah. Um, I have a question. Yeah, I used to support the English or the Danish system of kind of decriminalization and and um not legalization per se, but decriminalization, but I understand that really they've failed. And my question is I've heard that the Swedish system is zero tolerance and that it's working, and they actually are one of the few countries that are seeing a significant decline in drug usage. Do either of you know anything about it and what do they do?
[00:49:02] Speaker 4: Dan, let me first ask, because when you were saying that the approach in um in the Danish approach it failed. Dan Bent was was nodding that that he agreed with that. Don Topping, is that correct or do you agree with that?
[00:49:14] Speaker 3: I'm not sure whether we're talking about the Danish approach. I haven't really heard much talk about that or the approach in the Netherlands or Switzerland. Uh well, let's move on then to to the other question about what's going on in Sweden. are you familiar with it? I'm somewhat familiar with it. It is true they have very draconian laws in Sweden. They also have a very, very high rate of alcoholism and because they have high taxes on alcohol, there's a great deal of bootleg liquor being made and consumed in Sweden. So it's a war on drugs to the max. to the max. Okay. Dan Bent, you're Dan, almost as much, almost as much as in Singapore.
[00:49:48] Speaker 3: Dan Bent? Yeah. I'm a bit familiar with it, not with respect to alcohol so much, except I'm, you know, I have read about their uh laws against drunk driving and it's very they're very severe and apparently very effective. And, you know, people walk home from parties in in Sweden. But also with respect to the illegal drugs, uh that's certainly true that they've been very tough and very successful. And I noticed a a piece in the newspaper about a week or so ago. Newt Gingrich and some people like Newt, some people don't, but everyone, I think has to acknowledge that he's a a major player in terms of the national agenda right now. He was quoted as saying that we've got to quit playing games. Specifically, he said either legalize these drugs or get rid of their use completely. Quit playing games and enrich the evil, strengthen the violent, addict our children, make us look pathetic and helpless, etcetera. He was saying, let's have a plebiscite and go to either of the two extremes. Let's either legalize it or approach it with these draconian, you know, capital punishment type, um, Singapore-like penalties.
[00:51:04] Speaker 3: Some of which might be called decriminalization. Some of which might be called decriminalization. And I know there some would be called controlled availability. Some would be called a defederalization, etc. There are many options in between legalizing and criminalizing. Okay. Let's go to a That is exactly what I uh part of that was exactly the point that I would have made. I don't think it's a black and white issue. I think there's a broad array of things. Some of those things would be drug testing in the workplace which I suspect Professor Topping would object to. He would call that trampling on our constitutional rights. I think I read that this morning's uh piece. Well, let's move on to another caller because we do want to get to to everyone who has called in. Uh next, we have Rusty on Maui. Good morning, Rusty.
[00:51:48] Speaker 3: Good morning. Uh my question is, um with the obvious exception of uh introduction of a noxious weed that would affect another person's plants, um such as terror in weed, which was a capital punishment by the in Roman times. How does anyone construe that the group at large has the right to interfere with a human being's birthright which would be to uh to plant what he wants to plant. Okay, well let's ask Dan Bent and and maybe this touches on some people's accusation that the war on drugs really comes down to to moralizing, some people saying how other people should be living their lives. And I don't know if that's what Rusty was a part of Rusty's message, but what do you think of what Rusty said and and also the moralizing.
[00:52:40] Speaker 3: Well, I'm enough of a libertarian to uh to want a situation where individuals can do whatever they want to do with their own lives, good or bad, as long, but where I draw the line is where the impact on others exists. And uh the problem with the drugs we're talking about is the impact on others is severe. I would I would certainly agree with Dan. I'm glad to hear that he's a a libertarian and he's and he's quite willing to let people do to themselves what they want and I would also agree that we have we must draw a line when one's behavior begins to impinge on somebody else's well-being. The question is, does the ingestion of drugs of any kind create situations where others suffer from it? I would say in the case of alcohol, very definitely. In the case of nicotine, very definitely. In case of the amphetamines, probably. But there's a whole range of other substances which are currently illegal and I'm talking about the hallucinogens, I'm talking about the opiates, talking about the cannabis that do not have that effect. They are taken for people who are seeking pleasure or whatever and it has yet to be proved that these drugs have any kind of criminogenic properties in them, that is, properties that cause them to go and commit crimes.
[00:53:58] Speaker 3: Something that's uh timely in the sense that it's been in the newspaper in the last uh week or two, evidently there was a commentary in the Journal of the American Medical Association where a psychiatrist and an attorney were quoted as as saying among other things, quote, one of marijuana's greatest advantages as a medicine is its remarkable safety and they went on to chide uh other folks who stubbornly are committed to exaggerating its dangers when used for non-medical purposes. Dan Bent, you would just say uh disagree, you would perhaps cite other studies. Well, um Lester Grinspoon was the uh psychiatrist you referred to. Lester has been uh a uh very uh significant part of normal the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana laws for at least 20 years. So he has a personal agenda. He's got a personal agenda and everybody recognizes that. I've talked to other professors at Harvard in the medical school uh who consider him a joke. So Don, this is I don't take this seriously.
[00:55:07] Speaker 3: And that is why you don't want to be cornered into saying you're for legalization because then you're marginalized. Is that what we're Well, I I just don't want to get things put in black and white immediately, you know, and and both of you have said that, right. It sends up red flags. But let me let me make a quote from the uh Judge Francis Young from the Drug Enforcement Administration, which he made in 1988, where he says, I quote, marijuana in its natural form is one of the safest therapeutically active substances known to man. That is not Lester Grinspoon. Grinspoon, that is a judge from the Drug Enforcement Administration. Okay. Let's get Let me comment on that because there's some history to that. And that was an administrative law judge uh who was considering the issue of whether or not marijuana should be legalized for medical purposes. That um was that opinion was reversed by his superiors that was challenged in the uh DC US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. And the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia found that there was no sufficient factual or um opinion basis for that. That the uh ten or so experts that testified in favor of marijuana as medicine, uh nine of whom admitted on the record that they were testifying not on the basis of any studies but on the basis of their own personal point of view and their their uh experience from talking to drug users. Okay. People on the line, hang on. We're going to get to you but we've got a hot one here right now. Don Topping. just one comment. I I would like to refer Mr. Bent and any other doubters to the number of intensive thorough studies starting with the India Hemp Commission in 1893. They submitted a 3,000 page report looking at every aspect of the hemp plant, its uses. Or go to Abel's book, Marijuana The First 12,000 years. And there are numerous numerous studies, not one of which has made the conclusion that Mr. Bent is talking about here.
[00:57:00] Speaker 8: My, yeah, good morning, Lila.
[00:57:01] Don Topping: Good morning. I really haven't heard of anyone dying of marijuana use. On the other hand, uh, down in the Leewid area, we have enough crack babies to fill an elementary school.
[00:57:13] Speaker 8: Two weeks ago, a 23-year-old female was arrested for smoking, and she went in into jail overnight and she was released on her own recognizance. So, she's back in Chinatown, uh, selling her body to uphold her habit. You know, a comment on that. That's our current system.
[00:57:37] Don Topping: Okay. Let's hear from Dan Topping.
[00:57:39] Dan Bent: Well, this is very unfortunate and I would like to point out that I feel very strongly, as strongly as anybody in the world, that addiction is a, addiction to anything is a terrible problem. And people need help in coping with it. This could be addiction to coffee, to chocolate, to morphine, to biting your nails, or you name it. There are all kinds of addictions and people find them. Now, with regard to the woman that you're talking about, it's very unfortunate. She is one of those who has been marginalized. Had, if we had a system where she could be brought into a healthcare system, into a prenatal care system and a postnatal care system, which will work with that person on controlling or eliminating a drug intake. This is the kind of thing we need, not throwing in the jail or the threat of jail, which drives them back out on the streets again. This is terrible.
[00:58:29] Speaker 8: But she was jailed, and then she was released on her own recognizance, and that is what is happening. And I, totally agree with you.
[00:58:37] Don Topping: Lila, thank you for, thank you for your call. Um, Dan Bent, one of Lila's points was what some people call the revolving door, that there isn't room uh, for people who have been arrested and convicted of some sort of drug crime or something nonviolent related to drug crime. Um, how big of a problem is that, and what do you do about that? Does it take another, you know, zillion dollars or whatever?
[00:58:59] Dan Bent: Well, fortunately, Lila, uh, there there is an initiative in Hawaii that's been enacted in a law and uh, Judge Melks in the uh, circuit court is working on uh, working on establishing a drug court for Hawaii. And essentially, the notion is is that there are a lot of people in the criminal justice system because of non-drug crimes, because of their drug use, the effect of uh, drugs on their brain and therefore their behavior. And the purpose of the drug court is to impose um, limitations on them until they become abstinent. And it's designed just for people like the young woman you you described.
[00:59:38] Don Topping: Almost sounds like a form of decriminalization.
[00:59:40] Dan Bent: Well, I don't think so. It doesn't, it doesn't change the drug laws, what it does is it focus Well no there are there are consequences which which you might consider punishment, for those who do not become abstinent, and that's the focus. Now, they still have the other criminal justice problem. Um, but but the focus there is to impose sanctions if they don't quit using.
[01:00:01] Don Topping: Okay, quick comment from Don, then we move on. I'm all in favor of of the drug court. Anything to keep people out of jail. My only problem with it is still based upon the absolute prohibitionist policy, that once they take a drug, they're in jail. Okay. We have a caller from uh, Wailuku, Reverend Kimmel. Good morning, Reverend Kimmel.
[01:00:17] Speaker 9: Good morning.
[01:00:19] Don Topping: What can we uh, hear from you today?
[01:00:21] Speaker 9: Well, um a comment, back in 1953 when I studied civics in high school, we were taught that you shouldn't legislate morality in a democratic society. And yet this is exactly what we've done with all the drug laws. It's a legislation of morality having to do with control and regulation of people's conduct. So my question is uh, is this. It's like have the laws against murder, arson, robbery, rape, and all other kinds of mayhem, have have those laws resulted in the the cessation of those undesirable activities?
[01:01:00] Don Topping: The answer is obviously no. Does it are you, therefore, suggesting legalizing rape, murder, arson?
[01:01:06] Speaker 9: No, what I'm getting at is that laws don't have any effect on controlling people's behavior because God gave man free will choice and everything at base level, every issue of conduct is a matter of free will choice. So, the laws prohibit their freedom to choose, and therefore a lot of people don't know what the truth is. They don't know what the facts are. And they haven't been able to experiment or experience uh, different substances in order to know from firsthand experience what is the truth and what are the facts. Because
[01:01:35] Don Topping: Let's get a response from uh, Dan Bent and we have to move on.
[01:01:38] Dan Bent: Well, I two things, one, uh, the laws are an expression of morality. The laws against murder are and, um, it's morality in the sense that this is a, the level of behavior is a level of behavior that society is intolerant to. And it's I think we would all agree uh, or many of us would agree that we ought to have laws against murder and rape. Um, and so it's just a question of where you draw the line. And I think you determine where the line is is drawn based upon the overall harm to society from that kind of behavior.
[01:02:14] Don Topping: I want to uh, remind listeners that this is the Price of Paradise Radio Show. Our topic today is the war on drugs. In the studio is Don Topping, who is the director of the Social Science Research Institute and Dan Bent, who is a former US attorney for the state of Hawaii. If you tuned in late and would like to hear the show in its entirety, you can hear it this evening at 8 o'clock on KIFO 1380 AM. Uh, if you'd like to ask a question or make a brief comment, our number is 955-8821, but I caution you, I think we could have taken about 200 calls this morning if we had had the uh, capability to do so and we're going to use the last 10 or 15 minutes to run through as many calls as we possibly can. We go to Phil on Maui. Good morning, Phil.
[01:02:57] Speaker 10: Yeah, good morning, Randy. Um, the first thing I'd like to apologize for for even bringing this topic to the radio. I think it's terrific. And uh, it's nice to to see these kind of topics on the air. I just want to question a quick question for Dan Bent. Um, I'm just curious if uh, if drugs were legalized, how many of his friends or people he knows would uh, would use drugs? And if they did, how many would use them to the point that it they would uh, they would escape responsibilities and and sabotage their own lives.
[01:03:28] Don Topping: Well, that's an interesting question. Dan Bent, what do you say?
[01:03:32] Dan Bent: Well, actually, they've done studies of uh, whether or not people have not used drugs simply because they are illegal. And a significant number of people, and I don't remember what the percentages are, uh, report that that is a significant factor in their decision as to whether or not they're going to use drugs. And so But then what about your Well, it's just a second, wait just a second. Phil, we've got disagreement in the studio.
[01:03:54] Don Topping: I would have to contradict that. I read a number of ethnographic studies of heroin users and cocaine users and when asked was, was the illegality a deterrent to their use and the barely 1% would say, well, somewhat, but the great majority of them said no.
[01:04:08] Dan Bent: Well, but let me point out, Don Topping is talking about a study of users. I'm talking about a study of non-users, the people who were deterred. Many of them report that the fact that these drugs were illegal was a significant reason why they have never experimented with them. That's who you ought to be looking at.
[01:04:25] Don Topping: Phil, thank you for your call. I do have to move on, and I doubt that Dan knows specifically which of his friends would be, uh, would be using it, but I, if I could just point out, those are not the people we're worried about. We're worried about the people who have problems with drugs. Okay, thank you, Phil. We have Joanne on Maui. Good morning, Joanne.
[01:04:40] Speaker 11: Hi. I'd like to, um, make a comment that it seems to me that a good percentage of the people that are in prison are in there on drug charges. And if that if drugs were decriminalized, we would have far less people in there. It would cost the state and the federal government a lot less money.
[01:04:58] Don Topping: Okay. Let's And one other thing. It seems to me that the real people that are making the profit on drugs are the lawyers. Well, that's an interesting comment. Dan Bent, why don't you give us a response uh, to Joanne's two points?
[01:05:13] Dan Bent: Okay. With respect to uh, the costs of imprisoning people who deal drugs. Um, actually, when you look at the number of people in prisons, uh, a vast majority are there because of drugs. Um, it and it's not just dealing drugs, it's drug use as well. But my question is, would you imprison, Joanne, uh, the the neighbor of yours who uh, was giving crack to your child?
[01:05:42] Don Topping: You know, and Joanne, that's, that's a rhetorical question because we do have to move on. We do have to move on. Dan Bent, any thoughts on Joanne's comment that the lawyers are the ones who are really profiting from the current approach?
[01:05:53] Dan Bent: Um, there are a lot of people who specialize in the criminal defense of uh, drug laws. Uh, NORML, the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, has for years been doing seminars for these folks, and they, they have funded NORML. Uh, so they're making a lot of money, there's no question about that. But it's also curious that they're some of the major proponents of uh, legalizing drugs, too.
[01:06:17] Don Topping: Okay. Well, we're going to keep rolling and, and I noticed one of the, as soon as, uh, one of our lines freeze up, somebody calls in. We've just uh, had, been packed uh, all morning and, and we think that's, that's good. That's an indication it's a good topic. But somebody just called in, and the note says a friend of Dan's. I don't know if that responds to the earlier question as to which of your friends would try drugs or not. But we're going to take these in order. We've got Beverly from Nuuanu. Good morning, Beverly.
[01:06:41] Speaker 12: Yeah, good morning. Uh, I'll make it quick. Uh, first of all, I do not use drugs nor I have ever used drugs and but I don't object to other people using them for themselves. What I object to is the byproduct of their drug use, which is, uh, their looks all over the street of the the the homeless all over the street that are on drugs. So they sleep in doorways, they rob people. This this is hurting society. But I like the guy from Maui that called a couple times ago. If you make them legal, I'm going to run out and try them and then I'm going to get hooked on them and I'll bet you there's thousands of others like out there that you make it legal and I'll try it.
[01:07:18] Don Topping: Okay. If I can comment on that.
[01:07:20] Dan Bent: Now what would happen if if drugs were legalized? Well, we have some track records to look at. Let's look at the records of decriminalization of marijuana in the 12 states that decriminalized uh, during the 1970s. The rate of use of marijuana remained exactly the same as other states throughout the United States. There was no increase.
[01:07:42] Don Topping: Uh, if we look at the results of the end of prohibition, there was no massive rise in the consumption of alcohol. Um, again, referring to surveys and their their legion, but according to one that I have read recently, 1.7% of casual users say that they would use drugs uh, I'm sorry, that that they would change their behavior if drugs were legalized. 1.7%. Now, I I I don't believe that we're all going to rush out and start sucking up drugs if they were made available. Okay. The next caller is Cliff from Kailua. Good morning, Cliff.
[01:08:18] Speaker 13: Hi, Randy. Great show.
[01:08:19] Don Topping: Thank you.
[01:08:20] Speaker 13: Awesome show this morning. I got a real quick question, I'll hang up and listen to the answer. It's kind of like what Phil from uh, Maui asked a little earlier and that was for your two guests this morning. If either of you guys have ever inhaled, as it were, not unlike our esteemed uh, president. And if that experience, if any, has affected uh, your stand and where you are today.
[01:08:45] Don Topping: Let me ask my own question. Is that a fair question, Dan Bent? Cuz if it isn't a fair question, I I don't think I want to ask it. I mean, we're talking about a a criminal activity here.
[01:08:53] Dan Bent: It's fair to me. Uh, I I don't have any problems with it. But I, I didn't hear the guy from Maui, Rusty from Maui, mention that at all. So uh, it seems like Cliff uh, I think I know the answer for you, my friend.
[01:09:12] Don Topping: Okay. I think it's an irrelevant question. We're talking about an issue here and that's irrelevant. And if, if I, for example, were to say, well, yes, I did, then you would say, well, you have an agenda. And if I said, well, no, I never have, then you'd say, well, you don't know what you're talking about. So let's leave that question. Okay, let's go to Lawrence from Manoah. Good morning, Lawrence.
[01:09:30] Speaker 14: Good morning. How you guys doing? Great show.
[01:09:32] Don Topping: Excuse me, can I interrupt just for a second, Lawrence. I just have to say I'm willing to answer that question if Don is. I think the question is irrelevant. Okay, Lawrence from Manoah.
[01:09:41] Speaker 14: Hi. I just want to say that people I think are are brought up and raised with a certain set of moral values and when you get out in the world and you find a need to fulfill a certain, you know, you find that you, you, you need a certain itch needs to be scratched so to speak. People are going to feel that. They're going to scratch that itch any way they can. Now, the mafia, they want the money. People want to feel good. Uh, the government doesn't want us to, government wants control, that's their itch. Now, if the government would relax control a little bit, people would be able to scratch their itch and people would be happy and there wouldn't be violence, and if you take away the criminality in it, and make it legal, you know, just looking at hemp, it has thousands of uses already. Okay, I think he's on a cellular phone. I think he just went through the tunnel or something, Don Topping.
[01:11:25] Don Topping: The methadone programs are an anachronism. Here is a an addictive drug that we're saying, well, this one's okay. We're going to let doctors administer this to heroin addicts, in order to keep them off the streets, to keep them out of crime, so that they can maintain their lives, so that they can maintain their health. And that's okay. But we weren't going to do this with heroin. Now, this is what they're beginning to do in Switzerland because they tried different approaches. They tried the war on drugs, that didn't work. They tried setting apart aside needle park, that didn't work. So they've now entered into a heroin maintenance program, which the, the jury is still out, they just started it in recent months. Well, Dan, in my mind, heroin is evil and methadone isn't, and you're saying they're they're basically the same thing. They're basically the same. They're both addictive opiate drugs. Okay.
[01:12:10] Dan Bent: Yeah, uh, heroin's an interesting drug, um, because uh, from what I understand from the, from the studies of it, the pharmacological studies of it, it's a drug that does not have, uh, permanent brain dysfunction effects. And do it is heroin. It, I'm talking about heroin. Okay. Uh, and uh, but it is highly addictive. Um, and it is it is debilitating during the period of use and because it's it's highly addictive and when people are using it, they're dysfunctional. Uh, there are problems from it, but um, there are people who have function in society fairly well, using uh, heroin. And it's not your typical street user. But um, it's a very interesting drug. Unlike other drugs, like uh, cocaine for example, where they do brain scans of cocaine users and they find pockets of the brain where there's no brain function, and you certainly see that with chronic uh, cocaine users, just, you know, permanent impairment uh, of uh, brain function and therefore impairment of behavior. So it my point is it's a very complex thing and and you can't just say that uh, one drug is like another, you have to look at the the whole picture of it. I I don't want to argue that one drug is good or one drug is bad or one drug is better than the other, or worse than the other. But if you read the ethnographic studies, again, the cocaine users, the heavy cocaine users, they burn out after about six and a half years, that's the average period that cocaine addicts stay with that drug. They get tired of it. The first reason given by the great majority for quitting is that it was bad for their health. They quit because of health concerns, so it's not like you're trapped into something and condemned to death. It is possible to stop use. Um, I'll stop there. Well, you know, um, we've got time for one more caller, and and I want to apologize to everyone else who's called in, and everyone who tried to call in and didn't get through. I really think we could have taken hundreds of calls this morning if we had had time. We'll try one more. Allen from Hawaii Kai and in parentheses, it says friend of Dan. Alan, are you still there? I indeed am, and I want to say hello to Dan. Dan and I know each other because I had a teenage daughter who, unfortunately, was a victim of drug use. And, uh, in fact, Dan was a guest in her wedding not too long ago when she finally recovered. Her problem was that she got into drugs and couldn't get out. We physically had to capture her and send her into treatment, which ended up costing about $70,000. My point here is this, I I have not tried drugs for that very reason because I didn't, it was against the law as Dan mentioned earlier, but I've been a victim of that myself, and we have seen the damage that it does to a family. And so, contrary to what Dr. Topping says, it is damaging. It's permanent and must be undone. Let's get a reaction from Dan Topping. Well, you've you've made a very good point, that your daughter got into trouble in spite of prohibition and the many billions of dollars that were spending on the war on drugs. It still happened. And and that's one of your key points from your article and the papers we're spending billions of dollars, and it, and it isn't working. It is not working. It's time we had a second look. We've got one, one, Allen, thank you for your call, but we've got one minute, my wife is saying, wrap it up. Bring it on home, Randy, and I want to give Dan and Don each a quick opportunity to to make their, their last statement. On the, uh, costs of, uh, the, the quote War on Drugs. You know, the, the cost of, of the war on, uh, on racism, on environmental pollution, all those things are extremely high, and you know, we're never going to win them completely. But that doesn't mean we stop. And the key point you made this morning, I think, was we cannot give up. Cannot give up. You know, the, the, as I made the point I made in the advertiser was, in the last century,
[01:16:00] Speaker 3: for the civil war slavery was by chains of iron. Now it's chains of molecules we can't tolerate.
[01:16:06] Speaker 4: I would like to just quote close with a couple of statements. One, we're spending trillions and trillions and nobody can count the billions of dollars. We're incarcerating people by incredible rates. We now have the highest prison rate of any country in the world. I guess what I'd like to quote close with, you're rushing me now, is one quote from Ellen Goodman, where she says, 'What is needed is less and less of an assault mentality and more of a healthy one.' And that's what I'm standing for. Gentlemen, thank you. Callers, thank you. Listeners, thank you. I don't have time to tell you about Suzy Roth, Cassie Roth, Aaliyah Yap, John Roth and uh and Jeff Viti, all the people who make this possible. Thank you for listening, Aloha.