Latest
Law Enforcement: This Week's Corrupt Cops Stories
Weekly: Blogging @ the Speakeasy
Feedback: Do You Read Drug War Chronicle?
Feature: Marijuana Decriminalization and Legalization Bills at the Statehouse This Year
Legal Marijuana: It's Coming, Whether You Like it or Not
Paul Armentano has an exciting summary of various marijuana reform legislation, initiatives, etc. that are moving forward around the country. Meanwhile, The Washington Post had a report Monday entitled Support for legalizing marijuana grows rapidly around U.S., celebrating the issue's forward momentum in terms of public opinion and political victories.
Looking around the room, it seems we've moved beyond the question of whether marijuana reform is possible, and everyone seems to be asking instead when the breakthrough will occur or what form it will take. And no, I don't think there's anything misplaced or unhealthy about this sudden sense of inevitability. Time has always been on our side and optimism is a very necessary virtue in the fight for social and political change.
A wise colleague (I think it was this guy) recently suggested to me that we should stop introducing our arguments with phrases like "if marijuana were legalâ¦" and instead say, "when marijuana is legalâ¦" and he's exactly right. One of our greatest obstacles has always been a widespread lack of faith that our politicians and fellow citizens would ever stand with us in great enough numbers to create a mandate for reform. That simple assumption stops untold numbers of potentially great activists dead in their tracks before they ever sign up for an email list, send a letter to the editor, or make a small donation. It also helps explain why the press spent decades fueling anti-drug hysteria and investing in the drug war doctrine, even after the case for reform had begun to bubble beneath the surface.
Yet, the instant that spell is broken, you get the opposite result. People you'd never heard of prior to this year are leading legalization efforts in California. Journalists you've known for decades are speaking out about drug policy reform for the first time in their careers. And the leaders of the drug war army are experimenting with new language to replace the failed propaganda that so profoundly discredited their predecessors.
So those who have a problem with legalizing marijuana should really consider doing everyone (including themselves) a favor and refrain from spending the next several years trying in vain to prevent this from taking place. It's going to happen one way or the other and it's going to work, because we're all going to make sure it works.
Ten years after marijuana legalization takes hold in America, almost everyone will agree that it's an improvement, and those who most vigorously opposed it will probably deny ever having done so.
Will Foster is Free! He Walked Out of Prison in Oklahoma Today
Canada: Montreal Heroin Maintenance Study in Doubt after Quebec Refuses to Pay
LA City Council Okays Sales of Medical Marijuana; Ordinance Deliberations to Continue Next Month
The Difference Between Drug War Violence and "Drug-Related" Violence
This article in the New Hampshire Union Leader gets it right:
Testimony: Drug war behind street shooting
MANCHESTER â Lennoxx Tibbs was shot to death as a result of a drug sellers' turf war, according to police testimony yesterday at probable cause hearings in Manchester District Court for the man accused of shooting Tibbs and the man accused of accompanying himâ¦
Meanwhile, the Herald & Record in Illinois gets it wrong:
Three charged in drug-related shooting
DECATUR - Three Decatur men allegedly involved in a drug deal Thursday that ended in a shooting have been charged in Macon County Circuit Court with five Class X felonies and an assortment of drug charges...
There's been a longstanding and misleading tendency in the press to invoke the term "drug-related" to describe unfortunate events that didnât even involve drug use, and that's why the Union Leader headline above is such a rare and refreshing example of responsible reporting on drug trade violence.
When you hear the term "alcohol-related," you can be damn sure we're talking about someone doing something reckless & dangerous after getting wasted on booze. Thus, we must also insist that the term "drug-related" be used exclusively to describe incidents arising from the effects of drug consumption, and never the ubiquitous harmful results of drug prohibition itself.
Just imagine if the media properly attributed every episode of horrific drug war violence to prohibition rather than just drugs. That critical distinction is truly the fulcrum from which an individual's view of our drug policy swings in one direction or the other. The instant one learns to identify and distinguish between the harms of drugs and the harms of the laws against them, it becomes vastly more challenging to justify and uphold our present policies. Â
So please, the next time you see the term "drug-related" used to described harmful outcomes caused by prohibition, send the reporter a note suggesting that a term like "drug war violence" be used instead. It's just a fact that the drug war kills infinitely more people than all illegal drugs combined, and we should demand media reporting that places the blame squarely where it belongs.
Latin America: Mexico Drug War Update--November 25
Middle East: In Israel, Medical Marijuana Advances in the Knesset and at Sheba Hospital
The Staggering Incoherence of Drug Warrior Charles Grassley
It's just a transparently pathetic strategy of defending the drug war status quo by outlawing meaningful debate and keeping alternatives off the table. Fortunately, just about everyone saw right through it. Pete Guither points out that Grassley is so cornered, he's now begging his constituents in Iowa to back him up on this. And the harder he tries to defend it, the weaker it sounds:
First and foremost, Congress ought to tackle issues whenever possible before bucking them to commissions. Increasingly, Congress is using commissions to avoid doing what Americans elect members to do: ask tough questions, identify possible answers, debate policy solutions and take a stand. [Des Moines Register]
Yeah, who needs experts when we've got politicians to make all our decisions for us?
This commission also would cost $14 million. It's hard to justify that expenditure in the current fiscal situation, especially when it's work that Congress should be doing itself.
Wait, so you can justify spending $50 billion a year on the war on drugs, but we can't justify $14 million to evaluate whether it makes any sense?
Finally, I put forward an amendment to address the issue of decriminalization and legalization of any controlled substance. I filed this amendment in an effort to start a debate on this important issue.
Really, Chuck? Really? How exactly does banning discussion of something promote debate? Everything, from the language of Grassley's amendment to his rich history of ignorant pro-drug-war posturing, proves what a total lie that is. The very essence of this controversy is that he blatantly attempted to prevent experts from looking into the issues he doesnât want to talk about. Clearly, Grassley greatly underestimated the growing public demand for a new dialogue about our drug policies and got burned by his own arrogance, to such an extent that he is now hilariously masquerading as the champion of that critical discussion. Â
The obvious bottom line here is that Grassley is consumed by his fear about what the experts will say. That is just implicit in all of this. If he wasn't deeply afraid of their conclusions, he wouldnât be introducing amendments telling them what conclusions not to reach. Â
The commission hasnât even been appointed yet, so the very notion that it will become a referendum on the urgent need for sweeping reforms to our drug policy is purely a product of his paranoid imagination (combined perhaps with a subconscious recognition that the drug war is a gaping suckhole and smart people aren't exactly in love with it anymore). If Congress had named an expert panel consisting of Ethan Nadelmann, Rob Kampia, Jacob Sullum, Paul Armentano, Micah Daigle, Norm Stamper, Pete Guither and Willie Nelson, then maybe Charles Grassley could be forgiven for tearing from D.C. to Des Moines on horseback, flailing a dinner bell over his head and screaming that the legalizers are coming. Â
Until that happens, the drug war pep squad would be well advised to just pipe down for the time being, lest their suggestions that we not discuss certain things should lead to yet more discussion of the things they donât want discussed.
Update: Turns out Grassley's piece was a response to this Op-ed by Marni Steadham of University of Iowa SSDP. More coverage here.
Cory Maye: Drug War Victim Gets a New Trial
The battle over the fate of drug war victim Cory Maye has been fought quietly in court for the last several months, but Radley Balko brings the long-awaited & exciting news that Maye has been granted a new trial. Â
For those new to the case, Maye is a young, single father whose home in Prentiss, MS was raided by police in the middle of the night in late 2001. Unaware that the intruders were police and fearing for the safety of his infant daughter, Maye opened fire and killed an officer. As it turned out, the warrant was for the neighboring unit and Maye had nothing illegal, except marijuana ashes. Nevertheless, Maye was convicted of capital murder and sentenced to death. The case has become widely regarded as a classic example of how aggressive drug war police tactics can lead to terrible misunderstandings and injustices.
But it's also become an inspiring illustration of how bloggers and activists can effectively use the internet to fight for justice. Radley Balko's initial coverage of the case at his blog, The Agitator, ignited national interest in Maye's plight. The case drew the attention of an attorney at the prestigious law firm Covington & Burling, which offered to represent Maye pro bono. That changed everything. Maye's death sentence was challenged and overturned. Then, last week, it was announced that Maye will receive a new trial altogether, one in which he will enjoy superb representation and his best chance yet at securing his freedom once and for all.
It's an incredible story that we'll continue to follow as the new trial approaches. For more detailed background on the case, check out Radley Balko's award-winning 2007 report at Reason.
Update: Reason.tv has a good piece on Maye's case as well:
International Harm Reduction Association Conference
Pagination
- First page
- Previous page
- …
- 510
- 511
- 512
- 513
- 514
- …
- Next page
- Last page