Latest
Almost Any Drug Offense Can Keep You from Becoming a Citizen or Getting a Green Card
[P]retty much every drug offense is sufficient to permanently bar getting a green card or obtaining U.S. citizenship.There are exceptions that the government can make in limited circumstances, but they are limited, and many more cases carry the likelihood of automatic deportation -- no judicial exceptions. Plea bargaining might help one avoid a prison sentence, but it doesn't help with the immigration problems. There was a little good news in this area courtesy the Supreme Court in 2006. But there is still little to be done in most cases, and people are being deported who for all intents and purposes have never lived in any other country than here.
Do Pharmaceutical Companies Support Marijuana Prohibition?
I highly recommend reading the whole thing before forming an opinion, but here are the basic points as I understand them:
1. Pharmaceutical companies are vigorously pursuing patents on various marijuana components and derivatives for a great variety of potential medical applications. Given the rigorous and heavily politicized FDA approval process they'll ultimately need to pass, there's no sense in indulging anti-marijuana hysteria within the government bureaucracy.
2. These products will ultimately be marketed to a populace that has been spoon-fed mindless anti-pot propaganda for decades. Since the origins of the coming generation of marijuana-based medicines will be widely known, their manufacturers have an interest in marijuana being trusted, rather than feared, within the marketplace.
3. Pharmaceutical companies understand that marijuana can never live up to its reputation as a panacea that can replace modern medicine. This is true because most people don't smoke it, and most people donât want their medicines grown on a tree. Conditions in places where medical marijuana is currently widely available demonstrate this.
4. Government bureaucrats, police and prison lobbies, and voters who've succumbed to drug war propaganda are the real forces behind marijuana prohibition.
Paul also observes the important role marijuana reform efforts have played in fostering a climate in which marijuana-based medicines have become recognized as viable. Only by breaking down bit by bit the barrier of hysteria surrounding marijuana have we been able to set a tone in which medical marijuana research can be discussed rationally in the public domain. There are exceptions, of course, but now that the science and the will of the voters can speak for themselves, corporate profiteers associate marijuana with dollar signs, not reefer madness.
It has also been proposed by some in the reform movement that pharmaceuticalized marijuana may lead to a crack down on the medical use of herbal marijuana, as corporate profiteers pressure police to purge their most obvious competitor. I reject that notion for a couple reasons: 1) the marketing of new marijuana-based medicines will have a trickle-down effect of politically legitimizing pre-existing medical marijuana activity. 2) We can't afford to bust 'em now, we won't be able to afford to bust 'em then. 3) The risk of jury nullification when bringing medical marijuana cases to trial is substantial and will remain so.
Finally, though Paul doesn't address this, many people have cited instances of pharmaceutical companies supporting organizations like Partnership For a Drug Free America as evidence of their complicity in the war on marijuana. I've attempted to research this in the past and couldn't find anything worth our time. The story died on my desk. To the extent that pharmaceutical companies fund so-called "anti-drug" advocacy, I now believe it has nothing to do with marijuana, but rather with a desire to proactively cover their asses for the destructive effects of the legal drugs they themselves manufacture and market.
So, I believe Paul's analysis should probably replace much of the conventional wisdom that currently exists on this issue. Unless other evidence emerges, or other experts of Paul Armentano's caliber (few exist), emerge to convincingly challenge his assertions, the burden of proof placed on those blaming Big Pharma for marijuana prohibition has been raised several notches today. If this helps us to refocus our advocacy towards other more demonstrable, palatable, and persuasive arguments for reform, that would be a good thing.
Dispatch from Vienna, Day Two: A Spy in the House
Campaign Against Marijuana Planting: Another Record Failure in 2008?

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASEÂ Â Â
JULY 9, 2008
Campaign Against Marijuana Planting: Another Record Failure in 2008?
CONTACT: Bruce Mirken, MPP director of communications ............... 415-668-6403 or 202-215-4205
SAN FRANCISCO -- With both the state and federal budgets awash in debt, reform advocates are urging California to rethink its annual Campaign Against Marijuana Planting (CAMP) as the annual CAMP season prepares to launch.
   "Record-setting busts each year have done nothing to reduce the marijuana supply or keep marijuana out of the hands of kids, but they have succeeded brilliantly in driving the growers to more dangerous locations, putting national parks and residential communities at risk," said Bruce Mirken, the Marijuana Policy Project's San Francisco-based director of communications.
   Last year, Attorney General Jerry Brown announced that CAMP -- funded by federal, state and local dollars -- had seized an all-time record 2.9 million marijuana plants, nearly tripling 2004 seizures and a 2,200 percent increase since 1997. With no apparent effect on marijuana availability, the U.S. Justice Department's National Drug Threat Assessment 2008 cited such outdoor raids as a force pushing growers into indoor sites in residential neighborhoods. The report, available at http://www.usdoj.gov/ndic/pubs25/25921/25921p.pdf, stated, "Federal, state, and local law enforcement reporting indicates that vigorous outdoor cannabis eradication efforts have caused major marijuana producers, particularly Caucasian groups, to relocate indoors, even in leading outdoor grow states such as California and Tennessee." Citing suburban homes as one type of site used for such operations, the Justice Department predicted, "DTOs [drug trafficking organizations] and criminal groups ... will adapt to the increasing law enforcement pressure and improved detection capabilities associated with outdoor grow sites and will most likely shift operations indoors ... [T]he groups will produce higher-potency marijuana year-round, allowing for an exponential increase in profits derived."
   Last year, the Marijuana Policy Project wrote to Brown asking him to supply evidence that CAMP had reduced the marijuana supply, environmental damage from illicit marijuana growing or teen access to marijuana. Brown did not reply.
   "If you want marijuana to be more potent and produced in the most dangerous way possible, CAMP is a roaring success," Mirken said. "If you want to solve these problems, it's time to put aside the fantasy of 'eradication' and regulate California's marijuana industry like we regulate our wine industry."
   With more than 25,000 members and 180,000 e-mail subscribers nationwide, the Marijuana Policy Project is the largest marijuana policy reform organization in the United States. MPP believes that the best way to minimize the harm associated with marijuana is to regulate marijuana in a manner similar to alcohol. For more information, please visit http://MarijuanaPolicy.org.
United States Sentencing Commission's Symposium on Crime and Punishment: Alternatives to Incarceration
"From Prison to the Stage" at Kennedy Center
Police Refuse to Take Responsibility For Botched Drug Raid
Still, the latest botched drug raid, which took place outside Albany, NY on the eve of July 4th, prompted a reaction from police that is so callous and plainly dismissive that it managed to surprise even me. The point isn't that I don't believe some police officers think this way, but that I just wouldn't expect them to reveal it as shamelessly as this.
Here is what Troy Police Sergeant David Dean told Albany's News10 correspondent Anya Tucker after the raid:
Sgt. Dean: "We did not hit the wrong house, we hit the house that the search warrant directed us to hit."
Anya: "But was that information that led up to that right?"
Sgt. Dean: "My bosses are going through this whole investigative process to make sure that we were as thorough as possible."
Anya: "What was the level of threat that you assessed prior to coming into the home?"
Sgt. Dean: "That there were weapons in the house, or that the drugs were stored in that manor."
Anya: "In this house, you found no drugs?"
Sgt. Dean: "We are not publicly speaking on that issue at this point."
Anya: "Do you think this will hurt your credibility?"
Sgt. Dean: "The last thing we want to do is enter an innocent person's home - it doesn't get us anywhere, and it doesn't hamper the drug trade."
Let's just stop there for a second. That is why they donât want to raid the innocent? Because "it doesn't get us anywhere, and it doesn't hamper the drug trade"!? Sgt. Dean either won't acknowledge, or doesnât even believe, that law-abiding citizens have a right not to be treated this way. No duty could be more central to police work than the protection of innocent people and property, yet that fundamental concept takes a back seat, if any at all, to the concern that police weren't able to put anyone in prison that day. And it gets worse:
Anya: "Will you be going back to clean-up the damage to the house?"
Sgt. Dean: "We just have to enter lawfully with our search warrant, that is our only obligation."
Anya: "And you can leave it in any state that you left it?"
Sgt. Dean: "Yes. We had probable cause that led us to believe there was drug activity."
Regardless of what the policy is, does that even sound right when it comes out of your mouth? What sort of public servant goes on TV and says they can trash innocent people's homes with no recourse? If nothing else, I'd be afraid that talking about it this way might lead to these draconian police powers being taken away. Such candor reflects perfectly the paramilitary mentality through which such violent and utterly unnecessary police behavior is born and repeated endlessly.
These remarks should be Exhibit A at a hearing before the state legislature. If police don't feel at all responsible for the damage they cause when they are wrong, what incentive do they have to make sure they're right? This is just another painfully predictable result of raiding homes based on the testimony of some desperate informant with everything to gain and nothing to lose by making up names and addresses at random. That appears to be exactly what happened here, and if it's not, well, donât hold your breath for an alternate explanation.
Maybe I don't say this enough, but I respect cops. I was a criminal justice major. I've studied under them, dined with them, toured D.C. in a squad car and answered calls with them. I've witnessed heroic policing at frighteningly close range and I'll be the first to concede that a good cop is worth anything we can afford to pay.
But the great thing about good cops is that they make you feel safe, and that's the opposite of what happened here. These officers are telling the public that they can destroy your home when you've broken no law, that they donât have to fix it, and that they needn't even explain the circumstances that brought them crashing violently into your peaceful life. Why would anyone anywhere ever want cops like that?
Immigration and Drug Law: A Dangerous Intersection
Marijuana decriminalization initiative qualifies for Massachusetts' ballot!
[Courtesy of Marijuana Policy Project]Â
Dear friends:
The Massachusetts government has announced that it has certified a landmark marijuana decriminalization initiative for the November 4 ballot â which is the first time in history that an initiative to decriminalize marijuana possession will appear on any statewide ballot.*
When MPP polled Massachusetts voters in February 2007 on this question, we found that the initiative was supported by a 60% to 30% margin (with 10% undecided).
The initiative would reduce the penalties in Massachusetts so that the possession of up to one ounce of marijuana will be punishable only by a ticket and a $100 fine â similar to a speeding ticket â with no arrest, no jail or other penalties, no lawyer's fees, and no court appearances. Please visit http://www.sensiblemarijuanapolicy.org/ to learn more about the initiative.
MPP has been working closely with the Massachusetts campaign operation, the Committee for Sensible Marijuana Policy (CSMP), to ensure the initiative's placement on the ballot. CSMP turned in more than 100,000 signatures last November and another 20,000 last month to qualify the initiative for the ballot.
Your help is now needed to wage a strong campaign between now and Election Day to ensure that this groundbreaking initiative passes. Would you please visit www.SensibleMarijuanaPolicy.org/donate.html to donate $10 or more today?
CSMP â led by campaign manager and long-time Massachusetts activist Whitney A. Taylor â is well-positioned to make history this November: In addition to completing both parts of the intensive signature drive, the campaign successfully lobbied the Massachusetts Legislature not to take any action that would harm the campaign, in addition to building a statewide coalition of opinion leaders who support the initiative and volunteers who will be working to pass the initiative.
Would you please visit www.SensibleMarijuanaPolicy.org/donate.html to make your most generous donation to the campaign today? I want to thank you in advance for anything you can do to help.
Sincerely,
Rob Kampia
Executive Director
Marijuana Policy Project
Washington, D.C.
* Seven out of seven statewide initiatives to end various aspects of marijuana prohibition have failed over the course of our nation's history â in California (1972), Oregon (1986), Alaska (2000 and 2004), Nevada (2002 and 2006), and Colorado (2006). At a minimum, all seven initiatives would have removed all penalties for marijuana possession. The Massachusetts initiative is polling much better than any of these seven initiatives because it seeks a more modest change â to treat marijuana possession like a speeding ticket, rather than imposing no penalty at all.
Pagination
- First page
- Previous page
- …
- 848
- 849
- 850
- 851
- 852
- …
- Next page
- Last page