Word from the pharmaceutical industry yesterday was that in response to complaints that there was too much abuse going on with the drug Oxycontin,the drug would be altered so that it would be harder t

Steve Chapman had an awesome piece last week that sent drug war nutjob Cliff Kincaid over the edge yet again:

"Mexico is the biggest supplier of cannabis to the United States," he writes. "Control of that market is one of the things that Mexican drug cartels are willing to kill for. Legalizing weed in this country would be their worst nightmare. Why? Because it would offer Americans a legitimate supply of the stuff."

What he fails to realize is the fact that the Mexican drug cartels have already infiltrated the U.S. and are growing the "stuff" in the United States. Hence, legalization could have the effect of making these criminals into "legitimate" businessmen.

Ed Brayton has a good response:

The obvious answer is: so what? Yes, it could make those currently peddling an illegal product into a legitimate company selling a legal product, just as ending prohibition allowed some bootlegging operations to become legit businesses (though more likely the distribution would be done by already existing companies, most likely tobacco companies). But the question is, why is this a bad thing?

Has Kincaid not noticed that having legitimate businesses competing on the basis of quality, service and advertising is a hell of a lot better than having rival gangs compete for territory through mass violence?

Right on, but I would take things a step further though and refuse to concede that cartel bosses would even made able to make that transition. Yes, the marijuana industry would go legit, but that doesn't mean we have to patronize or give business permits to anyone on an international most-wanted list. The genius of legalization is that we get to decide who our marijuana comes from.

Here's an Arizona case that illustrates why you should never give police consent to search your vehicle:

The state appellate court has overturned the cocaine-transportation conviction of a Canadian man passing through Flagstaff after ruling the search of his vehicle was illegal.

The reason: The Arizona Department of Public Safety officer who stopped Alvin J. Sweeney, 53, didn't have reasonable suspicion to search his vehicle. [AZDailySun.com]

The suspect refused the search, and although the officer detained him and ultimately searched the car anyway, the whole thing was ultimately thrown out in court. If he'd agreed to the search, the evidence would have been admissible and he'd still be in jail.

Something to keep in mind, even if you've never broken a law in your life. Unless you're the only person who's ever set foot in your car or house, how can you really be sure there's nothing that could get you in trouble?

Here's Jay Leno and Bill Maher discussing the effort to legalize marijuana in California:


Of course, it's a win just to have these kinds of conversations on The Tonight Show, and you can't look for perfect messaging from entertainers. But seriously, what the hell was Leno talking about with this:

Leno: Well, here's my thing, here's my thing. California, they spend all this money trying to get things on ballots. But federal law trumps state law.

Maher: Oh, Jay you're such a buzzkill.

Leno: Well, it's true. No matter what the state says, the federal government goes "sorry, it's a federal law. You lose."

Really, Jay? I wonder how far you'd have to walk from your studio in Los Angeles to find a dispensary selling marijuana in violation of federal law. Come on, man. We've moved way beyond that nonsense, and you don't have to be constitutional scholar to understand that state-level marijuana policies can be reformed dramatically by popular vote. All you have to do is read the LA Times any day of the week.

If the drug czar doesn’t even know what the hell the feds would do about this, I can't fathom why Jay Leno thinks he's got it figured out.