Do you believe the elasticity of illicit narcotics is inelastic and if legalized demand will not increase? Do you also believe that many of society's social ills associated with drugs will ease not only from the narcotics being legalized, but also from the taxes garnered from its legalization used to assist addicts? Or do you believe the elasticity of illicit drugs is elastic and if legalized the demand for these drugs will increase? Do you also believe that by legalizing illegal drugs will create addicts out of those who simply "dabble" in drugs thus putting a further strain on society, which the tax benefits gained from legalizing it cannot absorb?

Please explain the reason behind your viewpoint. Here are two varying viewpointsregarding illegal narcotics from the Financial Times,

Transcribed Image Text:

Legalisation is no solution on drugs By Antonio Costa Published: January 22 2005 02:00 | Last updated: January 22 2005 02:00 From Mr Antonio Maria Costa. Sir, Your editorial "The unwinnable war on drugs" (January 15) argues that, given an ongoing and abundant supply of cocaine and heroin on American and European streets, a new approach is needed to curb the spread of dangerous drugs. You sum up that new approach as "legalising narcotics", which "would break the grip of organised crime on the drugs trade". While the 2004 Afghanistan opium survey by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime corroborates your reference to dramatic increases in cultivation of opium poppies and a steady stream this year of high-grade heroin to Europe, central Asia and China, these same facts do not support a call for legalisation as a practical solution to drug abuse. These are not "the worst of times" in drug cultivation and addiction. Indeed, in 2005 we expect only a marginal increase in the supply of opium worldwide, the result of a significant decline in Burma and Laos. The statistics cited in your editorial pale in comparison with the amount of opium coming out of India and China at the start of the 20th century. While global opium production was negligible in the late 18th century, it rose in India and China to an astonishing 30,000 tones by 1907-08. In 2003, global production of opium amounted to some 5,000 tonnes. This decline did not occur by accident - it reflects an increased awareness among governments around the world about the seriousness of the problem. There are far fewer countries producing opium today than half a century ago. Legalising drugs will not eliminate organised crime. It did not disappear when Prohibition ended in the 1920s in the US - it simply embraced other criminal activities. The legalisation of drugs would result in a significant reduction of prices in consumer countries, and the consumption of ever-greater amounts of the drugs. Contrary to what you say, legalisation would not curb organised crime; it would cause a marked increase in the number of addicts worldwide. Antonio Maria Costa, Executive Director, United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, A 1400 Vienna, Austria Legalisation is no solution on drugs By Antonio Costa Published: January 22 2005 02:00 | Last updated: January 22 2005 02:00 From Mr Antonio Maria Costa. Sir, Your editorial "The unwinnable war on drugs" (January 15) argues that, given an ongoing and abundant supply of cocaine and heroin on American and European streets, a new approach is needed to curb the spread of dangerous drugs. You sum up that new approach as "legalising narcotics", which "would break the grip of organised crime on the drugs trade". While the 2004 Afghanistan opium survey by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime corroborates your reference to dramatic increases in cultivation of opium poppies and a steady stream this year of high-grade heroin to Europe, central Asia and China, these same facts do not support a call for legalisation as a practical solution to drug abuse. These are not "the worst of times" in drug cultivation and addiction. Indeed, in 2005 we expect only a marginal increase in the supply of opium worldwide, the result of a significant decline in Burma and Laos. The statistics cited in your editorial pale in comparison with the amount of opium coming out of India and China at the start of the 20th century. While global opium production was negligible in the late 18th century, it rose in India and China to an astonishing 30,000 tones by 1907-08. In 2003, global production of opium amounted to some 5,000 tonnes. This decline did not occur by accident - it reflects an increased awareness among governments around the world about the seriousness of the problem. There are far fewer countries producing opium today than half a century ago. Legalising drugs will not eliminate organised crime. It did not disappear when Prohibition ended in the 1920s in the US - it simply embraced other criminal activities. The legalisation of drugs would result in a significant reduction of prices in consumer countries, and the consumption of ever-greater amounts of the drugs. Contrary to what you say, legalisation would not curb organised crime; it would cause a marked increase in the number of addicts worldwide. Antonio Maria Costa, Executive Director, United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, A 1400 Vienna, Austria