BLOG
The Government is Still Trying (and Failing) to Prove That Marijuana is Dangerous
Ever heard someone argue against medical marijuana on the grounds that there hasnât been enough research to prove that it works? There's been plenty, of course, but there would be even more if the government weren't spending all its grant money trying to prove that marijuana is poisonous instead of therapeutic:The Medical College of Wisconsin will investigate the effects of chemicals in marijuana on the development of psychiatric disorders thanks to $1.7 million grant from the National Institute of Health's National Institute on Drug Abuse.â¦Using lab research and mouse models, this study will test the hypothesis that the primary psychoactive chemical in marijuana produces an over-activation of an enzyme in the brain and that this is responsible for the increased incidence of psychiatric disorders in marijuana users.Last I checked, the "primary psychoactive chemical in marijuana" is widely available in an FDA-approved pill that the National Institute on Drug Abuse has never lobbied to take off the shelves. How concerned could they possibly be about the dangers of THC if they let doctors prescribe it to people? The sick truth here is that their only agenda is to create negative headlines about marijuana, not to discover anything of actual scientific significance. That's why they spend their money dosing rats with powerful synthetic chemicals instead of studying the massive population of real medical marijuana patients who are using it successfully to treat a variety of illnesses.
The Best Argument Ever for Legalizing and Taxing Marijuana
Ok, maybe it's not the best ever, but this observation from the comment section of a recent article caught my eye:I never did (and pretty surely never will do) pot, alcohol or cigarettes in my life so legalizing pot (or even cocaine, heroine, crack etc) won't change my life at all. as a matter of fact any taxation that doesn't affect my pocket is welcomed.I see two different important points here:1. Legalization doesn't mean that people who don't do drugs will have to start doing them.2. If other people are paying taxes on a product you don't buy, that just means more government services for you.It sounds like a really great deal, as long as you can keep yourself from becoming confused by the apocalyptic predictions of people whose job it is to hate and vilify drugs.
Teachers for Marijuana Legalization
More of this please:Teachers union boss Randi Weingarten thinks it's high time marijuana is legalized.Weingarten - head of the American Federation of Teachers and former president of New York's United Federation of Teachers - came out in support of a California proposition to legalize pot for personal use.â¦While advocates of legalization have applauded Weingarten, the Partnership for a Drug-Free America blasted her stance."Legalizing marijuana would just add another substance, along with alcohol, to the menu of intoxicants that are already too available - and harmful - to kids," said Partnership spokeswoman Josie Feliz. "It's hard for us to look on legalization as a positive." [NYDailyNews]This "adding another substance to the list" argument just kills me every time. It's such a classic prohibitionist fantasy to pretend as though marijuana is just a theoretical concept, the dangerous risks of which remain entirely unknown thanks to prohibition. Please, oh please, can we legalize marijuana so I can finally give it a try?The longer folks like the Partnership for a Drug-free America continue spouting such nonsense, the more we can expect to hear from prominent educators like Randi Weingarten who aren't buying it anymore.
Dr. Drew Endorses Planting Evidence on Drug Users to Get Them Locked Up
Celebrity addiction specialist Dr. Drew Pinsky is someone I used to respect as a teenager. Too bad he sold-out and became a dangerous quack who'll say anything to make headlines:While Lindsay Lohan continues to party until the wee hours of the morning, and her family and friends grow increasingly concerned for her, Dr. Drew Pinsky, who is not treating Lohan, has some candid advice for the people closest to her.The board certified addiction specialist tells RadarOnline.com, "If she were my daughter, I would pack her car full with illegal substances, send her on her way, call the police, and make sure she was arrested. I would make sure she was not allowed to get out of jail. I would then go to the judge and make sure she was ordered to a minimum of a three year sobriety program." [Radar]You see, Dr. Drew is really concerned about her safety:"I absolutely wish no harm to her, but I just have a feeling that something awful is going to happen to her, like she is going to lose a limb. I hope Lindsay gets help before something terrible happens."Something terrible? Like getting framed for a carload of drugs by your own family!? Maybe they don't cover this in medical school, Dr. Drew, but you should really make yourself aware of the fact that many people have been accidentally shot by drug cops, sexually assaulted in jail, and otherwise mercilessly screwed over by the criminal justice system in ways that you and your massive ego don't have the luxury of predicting. Planting drugs on anyone is a serious crime that could go wrong in more ways than you can possibly imagine. Anyone who endorses screwing around like this has no business practicing medicine, parenthood or friendship. You can get people killed with this sort of idiocy, and as much as it would reveal about the stupidity of the war on drugs, "Hollywood Starlet Shot in Face by SWAT Team" is a story no drug policy blogger wants to write.There is a real drug war going on in America and the men and women who come to save you from your "illness" don't wear white coats; they come in body armor bearing machine guns with the safety off. So when you sell Beverly Hills addiction therapy as pop-culture entertainment media, you forget that those same rules don't apply in Ohio and any parent taking Dr. Drew's reckless advice is putting their family in the drug war's deadly crossfire. When drug cops start making their own rules, it's time to take away their badge and gun. When celebrity addiction doctors do the same, it's time to take away their license and, more importantly, their microphone.
Mike Huckabee Compares Using Drugs to Committing Incest
In defense of his anti-gay prejudice, former Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee goes off the deep end:"You donât go ahead and accommodate every behavioral pattern that is against the ideal," he said of same-sex marriage. "That would be like saying, well, there are a lot of people who like to use drugs, so letâs go ahead and accommodate those who want who use drugs. There are some people who believe in incest, so we should accommodate them. There are people who believe in polygamy, so we should accommodate them." [TCNJPerspective]Yeah, I'm not aware of any political movement to legalize incest, though. This reminds me of the popular prohibitionist argument that you can't legalize drugs without legalizing murder (except with a dose of homophobia mixed in for extra meanness points). Keep up the good work, Mike. We can't wait to see you back on the campaign trail.
Eating Your Stash Won't Keep You Out of Jail
We've been over this before, but it's worth repeating: attempting to swallow your marijuana when approached by police is really not as brilliant an idea as it sounds:
Fighting for Legalization Isn't Enough. You Need to Know Your Rights.
As the debate over marijuana legalization rages on and U.S. drug policy draws more public scrutiny than ever before, the arrests and injustices just keep adding up. We can debate the law until we're blue in the face, and we should, but it's equally essential that every American understand the terms of engagement in a battle that catches peaceful people in its crossfire each and every day. It is because so few of us truly understand our basic rights that police are able to trample them so routinely. But it's also the haunting thought of that knock at the door, and the uncertainty of how to respond, that prevents so many among us from ever coming out of the closet and lending their voices to the debate. Fear and intimidation are the vital instruments without which the war on drugs would have been banished to the bowels of history long ago.If you haven't yet seen the new Flex Your Rights video 10 Rules for Dealing with Police, please take this opportunity to do so, and please share it with the people you care about. It won't end the drug war, but it might help you get a better night's sleep. And you deserve that.
The Onion vs. The Drug War
The Onion wins by KO. Still, it's hard to laugh about this considering how often police actually do raid homes on suspicion of pathetically minor drug offenses.DEA Official Announces Successful Drug Bust On Son's Room
Confusing Legalization With Prohibition
No matter how hard you struggle to explain the basics of the black market drug economy to supporters of the drug war, they stare blankly back at you. Yet, the instant you propose legalization, they will predict the creation of a massive criminal empire, as though it never existed before:For starters, California will become a legitimate shipping and marketing point for the deadly weed. Such legalization will spur many entrepreneurs in California to invest in marijuana production and distribution because of the big money to be generated. An oversupply of marijuana will force some of these legalized pot cartels to set their sights on other states as their customers, even though it is illegal in those states, as in Alabama.Secondly, the crimes associated with marijuana use and efforts to dominate the market will flood not only California, but the surrounding states. [Montgomery Advertiser]If all of this sounds familiar, that's because it happened already. But it happened under prohibition, not legalization. It's as if our opponents have literally stolen all of our talking points and are now incoherently parading them around in a strange cynical attempt to confuse everyone. I guess that's not the worst strategy to deploy in a debate you've been losing for more than a decade.
Oxycontin to heroin and spread the gang culture around
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
Drug Cartels Are Terrified of Marijuana Legalization, Part 2
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.
Refusing a Search Doesn't Give Police the Right to Detain You
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?
Has Jay Leno Ever Heard of Medical Marijuana Dispensaries?
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 doesnât 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.
Since When do Rockstars Know Anything About Drugs?
Sting's call for an end to the war on drugs is getting some good press, and it sounds like the drug warriors aren't too pleased about it:"Sting should stick to singing and not meddle in matters he doesn't understand. We do not need pop stars coming out and making irresponsible statements like that," said a spokesperson for DARE, which teaches schoolchildren about the dangers of drug use. [Daily News & Analysis]How classy. I think it's pretty telling that Sting, an A-list international celebrity, was proud to associate himself with this cause, while the DARE spokesperson who chides him for it chose to do so anonymously. It's obvious who is more embarrassed by their viewpoint. Note to anti-drug zealots: if your argument sounds ridiculous even to you, to such an extent that you don't even want your name attached to it, then just don't talk to the media. I know it sucks to see the political climate changing before your eyes. I know you canât bear the thought that mainstream entertainers can now come out against the drug war and get nothing but positive press. But your stupid ideas are what got you into this mess in the first place, so opening your mouth right now isn't going help at all. DARE's only accomplishment here was to erase any doubt about whether Sting's announcement is a big deal.
UPDATE: Philadelphia DA on Philly's "Decrim"
Earlier today, I blogged about Philadelphia embracing a sort of decriminalization of minor marijuana possession based on an article that appeared today in the Philadelphia Inquirer. It appears that article not only caught my attention, but also that of a lot of Philadelphians, who have been calling up the DA's office all day. This afternoon, District Attorney Seth Williams issued the following statement of clarification: Based upon inquiries to this office it appears that some confusion exists regarding potential changes in charging policy when it comes to minimal amounts of marijuana. "We are not decriminalizing marijuana--any effort like that would be one for the legislature to undertake. The penalty available for these minimal amount offenses remains exactly the same. What we are doing is properly dealing with cases involving minimal amounts of marijuana in the most efficient and cost effective process possible. Those arrested for these offenses will still be restrained, identified and processed by police in police custody. They will still have to answer to the charges, but they will be doing so in a speedier and more efficient process. We want to use valuable court resources in the best way possible and we believe that means giving minor drug offenders the option of getting into diversionary programs, get drug education or enter drug treatment centers. Again we are NOT decriminalizing marijuana, and the penalty for these offenses remains the same." It looks like DA Williams is trying to have it both ways. The Inquirer story--which Williams doesn't contradict in his statement--says that small-time pot offenders will be sent to a special "quality of life" court and fined. While Williams is correct that it would be that state legislature that woud decriminalize marijuana possession, It is a sort of de facto partial decriminalization, with people arrested, but not processed in the criminal courts or jailed upon conviction. I'll try to have this cleared up by the time we publish the Chronicle story about it on Friday.
Marijuana: Philadelphia to Decriminalize Possession of Up to 30 Grams, But Arrests to Continue Anyway
People caught with 30 grams (a bit more than an ounce) or less of marijuana in Philadelphia will no longer be charged with criminal misdemeanors, but with civil summary offenses under a new policy that will go into effect later this month. Fines are expected to be in the $200 to $300 range. But while pot smokers won't face criminal charges, they will still be arrested, handcuffed, searched, detained, and fingerprinted. Then, their cases will be heard by a special "quality of life" court that is already in use for things like dealing with unruly Eagles fans and public drinking. "We're not going stop locking people up," Lt. Frank Vanore, a police spokesman, told the Philadelphia Inquirer, . Marijuana possession remained illegal, he said. "We're going to stop people for it. . . . Our officers are trained to do that. Whether or not they make it through the charging process, that's up to the D We can't control that. Until they legalize it, we're not going to stop." According to the Inquirer, the policy shift is the result of a collaboration between new District Attorney Seth Williams and a pair of Pennsylvania Supreme Court judges. It is part of an effort to unclog the city's overwhelmed court dockets. Under Williams' predecessor, former DA Lynn Abraham, police arrested an average of 3,000 people a year for small-time pot possession, about 75% of them black. That figure represents roughly 5% of the city's criminal caseload. About another 2,000 are arrested for marijuana distribution and 2,500 more are arrested for possession of more than 30 grams. Overall, enforcing drug prohibition has resulted in about 18,000 arrests a year in Philadelphia, or nearly one-third of the entire criminal caseload. "We have to be smart on crime," Williams told the Inquirer. "We can't declare a war on drugs by going after the kid who's smoking a joint on 55th Street. We have to go after the large traffickers." Supreme Court Chief Justice Ronald Castille, one of the two justices who worked with Williams on the policy shift, said decrim was "appropriate" for such a small-time offense. "It's a minor crime when you're faced with major drug crimes." Removing such cases from the criminal courts, he said, "unclogs the system." Philadelphia NORML has been quietly lobbying city officials for the change. "The marijuana consumers of Philadelphia welcome this," said chapter head Chris Goldstein. "This is a very progressive thing to do on the part of the city," Goldstein said of the new policy. "I couldn't be happier about this." Goldstein was much less enthused by the continued arrests policy. "It is completely absurd," he said. "It's harsh. For minor marijuana possession, it's very harsh treatment." In most states and localities with decriminalization laws or policies, people are merely issued a ticket after police seize their stash. Still, this is a quarter-step forward for Philadelphia.
Embarrassing Typo on Anti-Legalization Site
Allow me to introduce you to Citizens Against Legalizing Marijuana, an apparent front for the opposition to legalization in California. They're kicking things off in style with this grammatically incorrect slogan:Our childrenâs future are in your handsâ¦I wonder if they've printed up any t-shirts yet. Honestly, I'm never sure how far to go in the direction of mocking our opponents for petty stuff like this, but I just couldnât let this one slide. Even as I write this post, my grammar check is telling me to fix it. It'll be fun to see how long it takes them to correct this, and while we're waiting, they have a moderated comment section that might be worth attempting to participate in.
Drug Czar Doesn't Want to Discuss California's Legalization Effort
California could legalize marijuana this November and the drug czar isnât sure exactly what to say about it:The Obama administration's top drug enforcement official sidestepped a question Thursday on how the federal government would react if California voters legalize pot this fall.Drug czar Gil Kerlikowske said he wouldn't speculate on what the Obama administration would do if California voters approve a ballot initiative that would make marijuana legal for consumption but subject it to regulation."Since it hasn't passed, right now it would be improper to speculate on what the federal government's role is," Kerlikowske said during an appearance on ABC's "Top Line" webcast. [The Hill]There's not much here to try to interpret, but it's certainly an improvement from the hysterical response I'm sure we'd have seen under the Bush Administration. Isn't it incredible that the nation's top anti-drug official -- the man whose primary responsibility is to serve as head cheerleader for the war on drugs â can't think of anything more interesting to say about the country's most populous state attempting to legalize marijuana for recreational use? You could get as much insight from a random guy on the street.This comment from the article is helpful in explaining what's going on with marijuana policy at the White House:Obama has played the medical marijuana issue perfectly, allowing MM states to push the envelope and creating acceptance for cannabis in the general population while expending no political capital of his ownâ¦This is exactly right, and it's vitally important to understand this concept even as we condemn the Obama Administration for upholding the status quo in most aspects of drug policy. We've reached a point where it's no longer politically wise for the Administration, particularly a Democratic one, to be visibly associated with aggressive reefer madness. They've appeared to understand this so far, thus the Administration's tone regarding the California legalization effort will speak volumes, regardless of whether or not they actually say anything.
Sting Says End the Drug War
Our friends at the Drug Policy Alliance have persuaded A-list rockstar Sting to join the drug policy reform movement. I'm not exactly gonna leap out of my seat every time a celebrity says the drug war sucks, but Sting is a big name and it was fun getting a mass email from him today telling me lots of things I agree with. Hopefully we'll be seeing some more press on this, or better yet a wave of rockstars joining the cause and rocking out for justice. And can we please do one of those PSA-type ads where like 8 famous people take turns looking concerned and saying why some issue is important, except this time the issue is legalizing marijuana in California and the famous people are all super famous and not just cast members from various shows on whatever network you're watching?If we can get Bono and Bill Clinton, we'll win with leaflets left over.
Medical Marijuana on South Park Tonight
Oh no, something tells me this is going to boil my blood. Or maybe not. From one episode to the next, South Park either speaks directly to my soul, or makes me wanna puke. In any case, I'll be tuning in tonight to see where they're going with this: Feel free to come back and discuss the episode in comments.