ssues in society.This editorial, titled The Wire's War on the Drug War, written by the scribes of The Wire (some who are also extremely respected novelists) definitely falls into the latter category. As I mentioned in my previous post, our prisons are overcrowded with drug offenders and obviously something needs to be done. But I didn't (and still don't) have an answer to that question.
These esteemed writers suggest a rather controversial, though admittedly only partial, solution to that problem:
"If asked to serve on a jury deliberating a violation of state or federal drug laws, we will vote to acquit, regardless of the evidence presented. Save for a prosecution in which acts of violence or intended violence are alleged, we will — to borrow Justice Harry Blackmun's manifesto against the death penalty — no longer tinker with the machinery of the drug war. No longer can we collaborate with a government that uses nonviolent drug offenses to fill prisons with its poorest, most damaged and most desperate citizens."They're basically saying that they will vote to acquit if they ever serve on jury for a drug trial (which is unlikely after writing this editorial), no matter what the evidence is (though acts of violence are taken into account). They argue that other "people of conscience" should follow their example.
I personally think that they make an amazingly good case considering it is such a controversial "solution". I don't necessarily agree with it but it's certainly a thought provoking concept. It's almost as though "Hamsterdam" (for fans of the show) would become a reality...
