Communities have every reason to be alarmed about illicit drug use. It spawns serious crime, and it derails young lives. Strong, effective law-enforcement responses should be arrayed against it.

The key word is “effective.” Unless responses are chosen thoughtfully, limited resources may be squandered on empty strategies.

The Spokane City Council should have shown more thoughtfulness Monday when it adopted a feel-good ordinance that even the attorney who drafted it said won’t keep people from using drugs. What began as a proposal to ban the sale of novelty items, including glass tubes convenient for smoking dope, quickly grew into a long list of mundane items that become contraband when marketed under a complex set of conditions that qualify them as drug paraphernalia.

The discussion that preceded the 6-1 council vote was couched largely in terms of sending a message and taking a stand. No one on the council nor among the citizens who commented offered evidence that this approach will reduce drug abuse.

Bravo to Councilman Richard Rush for resisting the stampede. He alone raised concerns about the civil-rights ramifications of outlawing legitimate products (straws, blenders, spoons) based on assumptions that certain customers of certain stores will put them to certain uses. Rush also reminded his colleagues that the city could incur unknown legal costs if it has to defend the ordinance in court.

Even Rush, who cast the only dissenting vote, said he had supported the concept until the ordinance tripled in size from two pages to six – a growth spurt that compounded the constitutional risks while multiplying the enforcement burden on the already overloaded Spokane Police Department.

At an earlier meeting of the Council’s Public Safety Committee, police Chief Anne Kirkpatrick reminded members that spooning another demand onto her officers’ full plates will mean something else has to be scraped off. That seems to be a dubious trade-off to attack a list of products that are harmful only when used in conjunction with other substances that are both harmful and illegal. Retail shelves across the city are full of common goods that can be co-opted for illegal uses.

Yet only one council member of seven voiced any reservations about the ordinance.

If this ordinance remains on the books a year from now, or two, or 10, will it have accomplished anything? Will drug abuse in Spokane be impacted? Will legal and law enforcement resources have been diverted from more important needs? Will the message that council members talk about sending have been worth it?