BLOG
Straight racist the drug war is, simple and plain
This is an article I wrote for the Nubian Message, the African American newspaper on my campus. It will run this Wednesday, October 3rd. All thoughts and comments are welcome! Drug War Hysteria: A Roadblock to Equality of Opportunity
The Drug War Costs Each Taxpayer $530 a Year
Big numbers are hard to fathom for most people, and the confusion they create helps to undermine peopleâs understanding of the impact that the failed Drug War has on oneâs or a hard-working familyâs bottom line. Your share of this century-long war is costing you dearly.Have you ever thought about the fact that the feds and states combined have spent over 1 trillion dollars ($1,000,000,000,000) on the failed policy of drug prohibition, and that we spend about $69 billion a year on the Drug War while not taxing the $100+ billion Americans spend on drugs annually? With about 130 million taxpayers in the US, that breaks down to a cost of $530 a year per taxpayer. Then there's the tens of billions in additional tax proceeds weâre not collecting that could be funding, well, geeez, I donât know...health coverage for millions of uninsured children, safer borders and streets, Social Security, better schools, etc. Yes, thatâs right, you could be paying less in taxes at the same time that current or desired programs are more robustly funded. Drug prohibition is a textbook double whammy. Check out Lost Taxes and Other Costs of Marijuana Laws by Jon Gettman â it will show you the US is missing out on $30 billion in taxes just on marijuana alone. We sure could fend off some budget crises with that kind of money. In California, producers and distributors of marijuana are trying to help, they just recently offered Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger at least $1 billion a year in new tax revenue. What would you rather spend your money on -- your mortgage, your childrenâs education, a new car? Had you had that money to buy Google stock, I bet youâd be quite happy. Over the last ten years, Iâd have paid more than $5,000 of my federal student financial aid loans, and improved my credit ranking in the process. Plus, the extra taxes from drugs would have helped insure my retirement future and made my community stronger at the same time.While we are faced with almost $9 trillion in national debt (each personâs share is about $30,000), massive trade deficits, a US dollar falling all over the globe, spending billions a month in Iraq, housing market woes, a pending Social Security crisis, high gas prices, etc., the Drug War keeps sucking our wallets even dryer. Next time you are asked to pay higher taxes, a little short on money, or realize youâre not as far along in saving for your retirement as you wish, go ahead and thank your politicians who favor drug prohibition over your present and future financial solvency.
Video of Ron Paul Debate Comments Opposing Drug War
Last week we posted some Mike Gravel footage on about drug legalization, and promised to do likewise for Ron Paul if recent links were sent. Fresh from the Republican candidates debate on PBS, Dr. Paul speaks, via YouTube (and Drug WarRant): Interestingly, he discusses the racial disparity in drug enforcement, not such a popular angle with Republican audiences generally, despite the overwhelmingly evidence about it. Good for him. Now, any Dennis Kucinich anti-drug war footage out there?
Harvard Scientists Build Very Cool Bong
At last, a solution to the problem of not being able to get high during a brain scan:Smoking during a brain scan is not easy. Why would you want to? Because functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) allows researchers to observe activity in the brain, and doing so while smoking tobacco or pot could enhance our understanding of addiction and how to treat it.â¦Displaying skills that would put MacGyver to shame, Frederick constructed a makeshift water pipe inside of a picnic cooler, then ran 2.4 meters of tubing to a plastic facemask that rests inside of the scanner. Since the mask is made from materials that are not magnetic, it will not interfere with the imaging. [Wired]In college, my friend Derek conducted some remarkably similar research. Lacking an MRI scanner, he simply conducted informal interviews to see how the device affected participants.To be sure that the contraption can get people high, Lindsey and her associates asked nine volunteers to inhale smoke from a marijuana cigarette with exactly 3.51 percent THC, then checked to see how much of the drug made it into their blood. Using the mask, the subjects got almost as high as if they had puffed on a joint directly. The researchers suggested using stronger weed to achieve more realistic effects.These people are geniuses. Next they need to build a device to administer nachos during a brain scan. Hypothesis: Scott Morgan will experience feelings of contentment.
Why Do Police Really Oppose Marijuana Legalization? Part II
Yesterday's post failed to address the prevalence of police officers who privately oppose the drug war, but silently uphold it even though they know it's wrong. My argument is quite incomplete without addressing this important phenomenon.LEAP director Jack Cole has told me that police constantly admit to him in confidence that they agree with LEAP's arguments. Former Seattle Police Chief and LEAP speaker Norm Stamper has also stated that several high-ranking police officials have privately commended his efforts to end the drug war. How then do we explain the behavior of police who carry out a war they don't believe in? Are they just following orders and collecting their paychecks? Are they fearful that speaking out will compromise their status within a profession they otherwise enjoy? Do they believe the laws are here to stay, so someone has to enforce them? Are some just waiting for their pension to kick in before joining LEAP?I'm sure all of these factors contribute here, but I suspect that many officers have a more nuanced view of drug enforcement. I once asked a highly-regarded police sergeant what he thought of a controversial teenage curfew law aimed at curbing crime in D.C. "It's a useful tool," he replied, meaning that it gave him the authority to take action against suspicious youths in the absence of other evidence. If he can't prove they're out tagging cars, he can at least stop them and send them home. Drug laws, particularly marijuana, perform a similar function by granting police the discretion to forgive or destroy individual suspects based solely on their demeanor and the contents of their pockets. Police can ignore the smell of marijuana when dealing with a polite citizen, or fabricate it entirely when they believe someone's hiding something. A law that criminalizes vast portions of the population, justifying detentions, searches and arrests, is a "useful tool" indeed. Officers needn't believe they're winning the war on drugs to find value in the vast authority it bestows upon them.Wielding inflated drug war powers with the best of intentions may help some officers justify their participation in something they otherwise find distasteful. Of course, none of this justifies the massive collateral damage that occurs in the process, but it might help explain how conscientious people could engage in behavior that shocks the conscience.
Why Do Police Really Oppose Marijuana Legalization?
The superb efforts of our friends at Law Enforcement Against Prohibition notwithstanding, police generally oppose efforts to reform marijuana laws. Initiatives in Colorado and Nevada were vehemently contested by law-enforcement interests, who claimed that reform would invite crime and undermine community safety. Sheriff Fred Wagner of Park County, CO even tried to link marijuana reform efforts to a recent school shooting.Intuitively, there's nothing surprising about police lobbying to retain the gratuitous powers granted them by the war on drugs. Yet, as marijuana arrests reach a new record high each year, it becomes increasingly difficult to point towards any societal benefit to these costly attacks on otherwise law-abiding Americans. Because I believe most officers really do want to protect the communities they serve and make a difference, I have often pondered their willful enforcement of, and political support for, a war that endangers communities while failing to a make a difference.I was pleasantly surprised, therefore, to learn that Joplin, MO Police Chief Lane Roberts has pledged not to oppose a local marijuana decriminalization initiative. Roberts correctly defines his role as defending the constitution rather than opining on what the law ought to be. But he goes on to explain that officers sometimes overreact to policy changes that reduce police authority:When asked how his officers had reacted to the decriminalization of pot possession in Oregon and in Washington State where he previously headed up departments, Roberts reclined in his office chair and smiled."When that law was first passed, most police officers thought that the end of the world as we know it was about to occur," he said. "But, we thought the same thing when the Miranda decision came down." [Joplin Globe]Miranda is such a wonderful analogy for law-enforcement's knee-jerk assumption that any restriction on police power will invite pure chaos. The U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Miranda v. Arizona that police must inform criminal suspects of their 5th Amendment right against self-incrimination before conducting interrogations provoked panic among police. Murderers and rapists would go free, we were told, and crimes of the most despicable nature would become unsolvable. The result was nothing of the sort. Police simply became more professional. It turned out that the freakiest psycho killers still insisted on confessing their misdeeds, while the rest got taken down through good old-fashioned police work. "You have the right to remain silentâ¦" has become a popular and familiar symbol of due process, and the horror show predicted by law enforcement has been long forgotten.The point here is that it was the experts, the interrogation specialists themselves, who were so wrong about Miranda. Today, when police speak out against marijuana reform, they are motivated not by experience at all, but rather a fear of the unknown. Indeed, today's officers simply have no real frame of reference for what law-enforcement in a post-drug war America would look like. I'm optimistic, however, that whatever our friends at LEAP can't explain to their colleagues will ultimately find a way to explain itself. Inevitably, the truth about drug policy reform will become self-evident each and every time it is given the opportunity to do so.Update: I've posted a follow-up to emphasize the important point that a significant number of police officers actually do realize the drug war isn't working and continue to fight it anyway
Prohibition Causes Violence: Medical Marijuana Murders in California and Colorado
Prohibition-generated violence tragically took the life of a medical marijuana user's immediate family member. According to AP News, Rex Farrance, a 59-year-old senior editor at PC World magazine, was killed last January by burglars attempting to steal marijuana that his son had grown at their home in Pittsburg, California, for medical use. Charged against three men were filed in the case yesterday. February also saw a prohibition-related murder in a medical marijuana situation, when Colorado activist Ken Gorman, who provided marijuana to patients under that state's MedMj law, was also killed in what appears to have been a similarly-motivated robbery. We need legalization NOW, so people won't get killed anymore over drug money or drugs that can be sold for money, and not just of medical use and not just of marijuana. In the meanwhile, if we can help this problem by making medical marijuana legal while we continue to work for full legalization, that's worth doing too. But all of this needless killing caused by drug prohibition is a real shame.
Missouri Police Chief Promises Not to Oppose Marijuana Decrim Initiative
A pending marijuana decriminalization effort in Joplin, MO revealed the city's police chief to be a pretty decent guy. This is a textbook example of how a professional public servant regards the democratic process:"Somebody is going to say, 'you're the chief ... you ought to oppose this thing,'" he said. "Somebody else will say 'you are the chief of police and supposed to be protecting our constitutional rights.' My argument is, 'yep ... you are right.'" [Joplin Globe]It's such a simple concept, yet it is so often abandoned by law enforcement agencies when citizens work to reform marijuana policy. There's something very creepy about police lobbying to protect their own obscene drug war powers, and it's refreshing to hear a veteran police chief speak in defense of democracy.
John Edwards Supports Needle Exchange
As part his new proposed plan to combat AIDS, democratic presidential hopeful John Edwards is speaking out in favor of needle exchange:"And I think we also ought to promote programs that prevent harm and specifically needle exchange, which I support. We ought to get rid of the federal ban on needle exchange." [NPR]Drug war absolutists have long opposed needle exchange, despite overwhelming evidence that it prevents AIDS and saves lives. It is just amazing that the people in charge of protecting Americans from drugs support policies that spread AIDS and kill people. Edwards deserves credit for calling out one of our nation's most ill-conceived drug policies. It's a no-brainer for sure, but at least he got it right. And in the process, John, you may have stumbled upon a nifty device for drafting a superb drug policy platform for your campaign: simply check what the federal policy is on any drug issue and advocate the opposite. You will be correct every time.Update: At the risk of further emboldening the hysterical Obama fans who freaked out over my last post, and irrationally implied that he's good on drug policy, it's only fair to add that Barack Obama has also spoken in favor of needle exchange. Hillary Clinton, who's otherwise sounded good on drug policy (for a front-runner, anyway) wants to see more proof that it works, which, at this point, is like demanding proof that the sun will rise tomorrow.
Important Criminal Justice Hearings Coming Up in Senate
I've been hearing about this from one of our members who has a son in prison, and now it's been discussed in the Boston Globe: Sen. Jim Webb is holding hearings on October 4th dealing with the economic impact of incarceration. Webb crossed our radar screen last March when he remarked on George Stephanopoulos' program that mass incarceration is "tearing this country apart." Check out Life Sentence, a column published in the Globe Sunday by Christopher Shea, which uses the hearings as a hook to examine the issue and highlight works by some important scholars. There's a discussion taking place on the comment board too that you can join.
CMMNJ Meeting Agenda 10/9/07
Monthly Public Meeting Lawrence Township Library Tuesday, October 9, 2007; 7:00 PM â 9:00 PM Agenda: 7:00 â 9:00 Introductions. Approve minutes. Review correspondence. ? CMMNJ's Benefit concert(s) in planning stages. Early discussions with some bands/promoters, inc. Mike Kessler for VFW Hall in Toms River and another for Finnegan's in Princeton area.
Mike Gravel Talks Drug Legalization on "The Young Turks"
Presidential candidate and former US Senator from Alaska Mike Gravel has continued his calls for legalization of drugs, last week on the Air America Radio and Internet web cast program The Young Turks, which published the story under the title Democratic Presidential Candidate Calls for Legalizing Cocaine. Read the full transcript here, and watch the YouTube video version here below. P.S. If anyone reading this isn't already aware of where we stand on the issue, we think Gravel is ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. P.P.S. Ron Paul supporters, I know I'm going to hear from you, so I'll just say right now, let us know when your guy talks about this stuff and we'll post that too.
Asset Forfeiture in Drug Cases is Hurting Investment in the Inner Cities
One of our readers sent in the following observations about asset forfeiture and its impact on investing (and consequently economic development) in neighborhoods that are perceived to have illegal drug problems. (Forfeiture is not solely limited to drug cases, but drugs are the mainstay.) I am in the real estate investment business. Increasingly I find investors staying away from investing in rental properties and neighborhoods perceived to have illegal drug problems. Investors more frequently state police can too easily forfeit their real estate because of one tenant's illegal activity at a rental property, e.g., selling drugs, even when it is unknown to the owner. Consequently investors' fears of forfeiture are depressing property values in certain neighborhoods and cities, driving downward the property tax base needed for tax revenues to support the infrastructure of the community. Consider: As governments more and more force landlords to act as attorney generals policing the lives of their tenants, and hold landlords accountable to police for not stopping their tenants from committing unknown or foreseen illegal acts, more investors say, "who needs this!" Constant police raids in certain neighborhoods may actually result in a financial net loss to a community where investors retreat, causing assessed property values and property taxes to decline. There is little incentive for investors to spend money upgrading rental property in neighborhoods where drug problems exist if the police are targeting rental property for asset forfeiture. I think that pretty much speaks for itself. But it would be a shame to stop there. So, a few links: click here to read how the Fulton County (Atlanta, GA) DA's office spent forfeiture funds on banquets and balloons and a superman costume; click here to read about the Austin, Texas police department's criminal inquiry into possible misuse of forfeiture funds; and click here for a recent report over what is basically an act of theft via forfeiture committed by New Mexico police. (Make them stop, Gov. Richardson!) Read our asset forfeiture reporting on an ongoing basis here, or subscribe to it by RSS here. And of course, check out the organization Forfeiture Endangers American Rights (FEAR).
Obama is So Bad on Drug Policy, He Got Endorsed By Prison Guards
I guess the title says it all. Barack Obama is far and away the worst democratic contender when it comes to drug policy and criminal justice reform. It is unsurprising, therefore, that people who make a living off our grotesquely bloated criminal justice system are supporting his candidacy. Via Talkleft:â¦one of the largest municipal jail unions in the country said Monday it would endorse Democratic Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois for president. The endorsement would be Obama's first from a union.â¦Obama said, "It's an honor to have the endorsement of these men and women who put themselves at risk every day to serve on the front lines of our nation's criminal justice system." [CBS News]Ah, the ever-expanding front lines of our criminal justice system. Obama just keeps saying things like this. It remains perplexing to watch the so-called "change" candidate gaze with reverence upon our massive drug war and criminal justice system. Obama's support from incarceration specialists is richly deserved to be sure.Update: At the risk of further emboldening the hysterical Obama fans in the comment section, it's only fair to add that Barack Obama has spoken in favor of needle exchange. Hillary Clinton, who's otherwise sounded good on drug policy (for a front-runner, anyway) wants to see more proof that it works, which, at this point, is like demanding proof that the sun will rise tomorrow. So Obama understands that issue, at least.
A Marijuana User Gets Arrested Every 38 Seconds in America
Marijuana arrests have once again reached an all-time high, NORML reports:Washington, DC: Police arrested a record 829,625 persons for marijuana violations in 2006, according to the Federal Bureau of Investigation's annual Uniform Crime Report, released today. This is the largest total number of annual arrests for pot ever recorded by the FBI. Marijuana arrests now comprise nearly 44 percent of all drug arrests in the United States."These numbers belie the myth that police do not target and arrest minor marijuana offenders," said NORML Executive Director Allen St. Pierre, who noted that at current rates, a marijuana smoker is arrested every 38 seconds in America.â¦Of those charged with marijuana violations, approximately 89 percent some 738,915 Americans were charged with possession only.Possession of marijuana has got to be one of the stupidest, most trivial things you could ever get arrested for, and yet it happens with remarkable and increasing frequency. I reject, but at least understand the notion that marijuana should not be openly sold in convenience stores. But it amazes me that anyone still thinks we should be handcuffing people, hauling them to the station, ruining careers, collecting fines, administering drugs tests, and otherwise tormenting and humiliating people for having marijuana.I honestly feel badly for people whose view of the world is so twisted that they canât think of something better to do with our police and our tax dollars than this. At the same time, I'm convinced that most Americans donât support a marijuana war of this magnitude.I believe the right politician, at the right time, could make tremendous headway by simply coming out and saying it: "In America, we have better things to do than arrest each other for trivial reasons. We're sending the wrong message to our kids when we threaten to arrest them. Let's help people who need it and leave everyone else alone." If anyone wants to use this, please, be my guest. Hillary? Fred? Hello?
Intellectual freedom
I posted; This Week's Corrupt Cops Stories on XXL. mag forum over the weekend. And now I can't log in! ... I now the forum is "up" and everything looks OK, but I can't log in like I been doing for months.
B.C.colledge of physicians and surgeons in conflict of interest
In B.C.,the methadone program is the sole domain of the colledge of physicians and surgeons.They recruit the doctors,train them and give them a very narrow path on which to walk.Doctors that might oth
60 Minutes - a realistic look at California's medicinal marijuana issue.
This story has been submitted to digg.com. Digg.com get millions of hits. Please digg up the story on Digg.com so that it gets front page!
Class action suit against the DEA, DOJ, etc...
I'm ready to launch one. The claim originates from this Federal Code; TITLE 42 > CHAPTER 21 > SUBCHAPTER I > § 1983 Civil action for deprivation of rights The creation of the drug laws was illegal - unconstitutional.
Drug Taxes Out of Control Violating Due Process
Last week I posted some discussion of the Drug Tax phenomenon, along with a scan of a notice one of our readers received following his being charged with an alleged marijuana offense. Last night I got an email from Matt Potter, president of North Carolina State University's Students for Sensible Drug Policy chapter and a member of the Student Senate, with some very revealing information recounted from his freshman year in a Law and Justice course. Matt wrote: My freshman year of college I had a professor for Law and Justice who was the interim director of the NC Illegal Substances Tax division, and he loved going off on tangents talking about his job... [H]e told me several things [about drug taxes], such as that the burden of proof in a drug tax hearing is actually on the defendant. In addition to hearsay being enough to find people responsible for the tax, the person can actually be acquitted of the crime (or not charged at all) and still be found responsible for paying the tax. It is also a retrospective tax. He explained this by saying: If your grandmother smoked an ounce in the 60s and we found out about it, we could collect the tax from her on that ounce. Well there it is, as Matt put it, right "from the horse's (ass') mouth." I think the evidence is more than clear -- drug taxes are an outrage. As I commented last week, "take this drug tax and..."