Skip to main content

Latest

Blog

Legal Marijuana Will Not Increase Crime. Please Stop Saying That.

The closer we get to legalization, the more people are talking about it, and the more people are talking about it, the greater the likelihood of hearing bizarre and incoherent viewpoints:

Those in favor also contend that if you remove the black market by making pot consumption legal — much of the marijuana-related crime would automatically go down.

That is where I have to respectfully disagree.

Money is legal, but criminals still rob banks to get it.

The more marijuana there is out there being grown, the more of it there will be to be stolen.

Criminals gravitate to wherever there is anything of value they can steal. [Oakland Tribune]

Excuse me, but what the hell does that have to do with whether or not marijuana should be legal? Yeah, we're all familiar with the fact that people prefer to steal stuff that's worth money. What on earth is your point?

I think the author might actually be arguing that prohibition somehow devalues the marijuana supply, which would have to be the stupidest understanding of drug laws I've ever encountered. So let me respond in very simple terms: marijuana will not be worth as much money when it is legal. Marijuana sales will take place in secure facilities, and thugs will be put out of business, so you'll be less likely to see stories like this in the news:

Police said Arrington was selling marijuana to one of the victims in the back seat of a white Chevrolet Yukon when the two began arguing about the quality of the marijuana. Arrington allegedly pulled out a gun, shot the man with whom he was arguing, then shot two of the man's acquaintances, who were in the front seat. [Washington Post]

That shooting took place a week ago and only a mile from my home, so I take this very seriously. Marijuana laws are a matter of life and death, and anyone who walks around spouting off opinions without thinking is making the problem worse. If we don't want people getting shot over pot deals in the back of SUVs, then we need to put it somewhere safe. We put money in banks, and sometimes they get robbed, but no one ever argues that banks are a dangerous way to store and distribute money.

We don't need to prove that legalization is 100% perfect and invincible in every conceivable way in order to justify our position. We can easily show that it's the safest and best available option. If that's not enough for you, then you're either an obstructionist, an idiot, or both.
Chronicle
Chronicle
Event
Blog

Ron Paul and Sarah Palin Discuss Marijuana Legalization

Well, you know what to expect from Ron Paul, but Sarah Palin's comments might surprise you (starts at 6:16):


Though unwilling to support legalization, Palin clearly has some sympathy for marijuana users on privacy grounds and sort of gets the fact that marijuana enforcement is a stupid distraction from important police work. But you can't have it both ways. As long as police and prosecutors hold the power to pursue and punish people for pot, they'll continue to do so, and they'll say they were just doing their job when some poor soul gets their dog shot over a dimebag. There exists a rather fundamental incompatibility between prohibition and politeness.

Still, Palin's comments are interesting in the context of the overall discussion. The whole point of the segment was to bring together representatives of the Tea Party movement and debate some sensitive issues. Listening to Ron Paul's opposition to marijuana laws and Palin's reluctance to defend them, you start to wonder if anyone in the right-wing activist movement still cares about fighting a war on marijuana.

Obama has been attacked viciously from the right for almost everything he's ever said or done, yet when his administration talks about scaling back the war on drugs, the backlash never comes.
Blog

Cops Kill Father-to-Be in Botched Marijuana Raid

Drug Raids: Las Vegas Narc Serving Marijuana Search Warrant Kills Father-to-Be In His Own Bathroom A 21-year-old father-to-be was killed last Friday night by a Las Vegas Police Department narcotics officer serving a search warrant for marijuana. Trevon Cole was shot once in the bathroom of his apartment after he made what police described as "a furtive movement." Police have said Cole was not armed. Police said Monday they recovered an unspecified amount of marijuana and a set of digital scales. A person identifying herself as Cole's fiancée, Sequoia Pearce, in the comments section in the article linked to above said no drugs were found. Pearce, who is nine months pregnant, shared the apartment with Cole and was present during the raid. "I was coming out, and they told me to get on the floor. I heard a gunshot and was trying to see what was happening and where they had shot him," Pearce told KTNV-TV. According to police, they arrived at about 9 p.m. Friday evening at the Mirabella Apartments on East Bonanza Road, and detectives knocked and announced their presence. Receiving no response, detectives knocked the door down and entered the apartment. They found Pearce hiding in a bedroom closet and took her into custody. They then tried to enter a bathroom where Cole was hiding. He made "a furtive movement" toward a detective, who fired a single shot, killing Cole. "It was during the course of a warrant and as you all know, narcotics warrants are all high-risk warrants," Capt. Patrick Neville of Metro's Robbery-Homicide Bureau said Friday night. But a person identifying himself as Pearce's brother, who said he had spoken with his sister, had a different version of events: "The police bust in the door, with guns drawn to my little sister and her now deceased boyfriend," he wrote. "My sister is 8 ½ months pregnant, two weeks until the due date. But they bust in the door, irritated they didn't find any weapons or drugs, drag this young man into the restroom to interrogate him and two minutes later my sister hears a shot. They shot him with a shotgun, no weapon. For what? My sister is a baby, this young man is a baby, now my sister is at his house telling his mom her son is dead, and he is barely 21." Pearce herself told the Las Vegas Review-Journal Monday that police forced her to kneel at gunpoint in the bedroom and that she could see Cole in the bathroom from the reflection of a mirror. According to Cole, police ordered Cole to get on the ground, he raised his hands and said "Alright, alright," and a shot rang out. According to Pearce and family members, Cole had no criminal record, had achieved an Associate of Arts degree, and was working as an insurance adjustor while working on a political science degree at the University of Nevada-Las Vegas. He was not a drug dealer, Pearce said. "Trevon was a recreational smoker. He smoked weed, marijuana. That’s what he did," she told KTNV-TV. "They didn't have to kill him. We were supposed to get married next year, plan a black and white affair,” she said. "He was all I ever knew, we were gonna make it." LVPD Monday identified the police shooter as narcotics detective Bryan Yant, a 10-year veteran of the force. This is the third time Yant has controversially used his police firearm. In 2002, he shot and killed a robbery suspect, claiming the suspect, who was on the ground, aimed a weapon at him. But although the suspect's gun was found 35 feet away, a jury took only half an hour to find the shooting justified. The following year, he shot and wounded a man armed with a knife and a baseball ball who had been hired to kill a dog that had killed another neighborhood dog. Yants claimed the man attacked him and that he mistook the bat for a shotgun, but the man said he was running away from Yants when Yants fired repeatedly, striking him once in the hip. Because there was no death in that case, no inquest was held, but the department's use of force board exonerated Yants. Yants is on paid administrative leave while the department investigates. The family has hired an attorney to pursue a civil action. And another American has apparently been killed for no good reason in the name of the war on drugs. "Narcotics warrants are high risk warrants," said Capt. Neville. The question is for whom, and the answer is obvious: The people on the receiving end of them. The police? Not so much, as we have shown in our annual surveys of police casualties in the drug war.