BLOG
LA City Council Approves Medical Marijuana Ordinance; Hundreds of Dispensaries Will be Forced to Close, Thousands of Jobs Lost
The Los Angeles City Council voted 9-3 today to approve a medical marijuana dispensary ordinance that, if enforced, will shut down more than 80% of the city's estimated nearly one thousand dispensaries. The ordinance also bars dispensaries from operating within a thousand feet of schools, parks, day care centers, religious institutions, drug treatment centers, or other dispensaries. The ordinance allows for only 70 dispensaries to operate in the city, but grandfathers in 137 dispensaries that were licensed before the council imposed a moratorium on new dispensaries. The number of allowed dispensaries could shrink even further if suitable locations that do not violate the 1,000-foot rule cannot be found. With this vote, the city council will effectively push thousands of dispensary employees onto the unemployment rolls. Look for a feature article on the council vote and its ramifications on Friday.
When Police Mistake Candy for Crackâ¦
Everyone's talking about this wild story from New York City, in which two men spent 5 days in jail for a bag of coconut candy. The driver consented to a search of his vehicle and both men were arrested after police discovered what they believed was crack cocaine. An officer told the passenger to "shut up" when he insisted it was candy, and the men had to wait in jail for almost a week before lab tests proved their innocence. In addition to demonstrating the combined arrogance, incompetence, and contempt for innocent people that so often characterizes drug war policing, the story also provides another glaring example of how consenting to police searches can instantly make a bad situation much worse. Pete Guither explains:Lesson #1: Never, ever, ever, ever, agree to a search. If youâre guilty, youâre helping them catch you. If youâre innocent, youâre wasting your time, youâre taking a chance since they arenât required to fix anything they break, youâre leaving yourself open for being charged for something you didnât know about that fell out of a friendâs pocket, and youâve got the possibility that a couple of morons will think your coconut candy is crack and throw you in jail for a week.Whether or not refusal prevents the search is beside the point here (although, yes, refusal often prevents the search). Such cases are less likely to be prosecuted, even after evidence is discovered, due to the fact that police and prosecutors do â believe it or not â sometimes recognize a constitutional violation and decline to proceed simply because they donât want to bring a messy case into the courtroom. Finally, consider how much more impressive a civil suit would look in this case with an illegal search thrown into the mix along with the already-compelling story of spending days in jail over coconut candy.We'll never know how things would have turned out if these guys had refused the search, but there's no question what happened when they agreed to it.
The Irrationality of Banning Marijuana Offenders From Working at Dispensaries
As the Nation's Capital moves quickly towards implementing our very long-awaited medical marijuana law, we suddenly find ourselves obsessing over the sorts of local regulations many of us have only observed from afar. As one might imagine, the D.C. City Council is less than thoroughly experienced when it comes to regulating the distribution of medical marijuana, resulting in proposed amendments like this one:No person with a misdemeanor conviction for a drug-related offense or felony conviction shall own or work for a registered dispensaryWhoa, slow down there. Naturally, none of us want to see D.C.'s first dispensaries run by a bunch of thugged-out ex-cons, but let's all just stop and think about this for a second. Would you ban someone from working in the medical marijuana industry because they have an arrest on their record forâ¦medical marijuana? It just so happens that many people in the patient and caregiver community have been arrested, not because of their own character flaws, but because of long-standing character flaws in the criminal law itself that turn sick people into criminals. We've waited an unbelievable 11 years for Congress to step aside and allow this law to take effect. Certainly, anyone who's accumulated battle scars during that time shouldn't be sanctioned again now that their past actions will finally be protected under the law.  If the people of the District of Columbia can agree, as they emphatically did back in 1998, that it's wrong to arrest patients for medical marijuana, then we really shouldnât be closing new doors to those who've had the misfortune of being arrested for their medicine. This is by no means the most significant regulatory hurdle to be overcome in D.C., but I find it noteworthy for the ironic prejudice it exhibits towards the exact people this law is designed to protect.
Southeast Asia: Human Rights Watch Charges Torture, Rape, Illegal Detentions at Cambodian Drug "Rehab" Centers; Demands They Be Shut Down
In a scathing 93-page report released today, the international human rights group Human Rights Watch (HRW) accused Cambodian drug detention centers of torturing and raping detainees, imprisoning children and the mentally ill, and illegally detaining and imprisoning drug users. The centers are beyond reform and should be closed, the group said. "Individuals in these centers are not being treated or rehabilitated, they are being illegally detained and often tortured," said Joseph Amon, director of the Health and Human Rights division at HRW. "These centers do not need to be revamped or modified; they need to be shut down." The report cited detailed testimonies from detainees who were raped by center staff, beaten with electric cables, shocked with cattle prods, and forced to give blood. It also found that drug users were "cured" of their conditions by being forced to undergo rigorous military-style drills to sweat the drugs out of their systems. "[After arrest] the police search my body, they take my money, they also keep my drugs...They say, âIf you don't have money, why don't you go for a walk with me?...[The police] drove me to a guest house.... How can you refuse to give him sex? You must do it. There were two officers. [I had sex with] each one time. After that they let me go home," said Minea, a woman in her mid-20's who uses drugs, explaining how she was raped by two police officers "[A staff member] would use the cable to beat people...On each whip the person's skin would come off and stick on the cable," said M'noh, age 16, describing whippings he witnessed in the Social Affairs "Youth Rehabilitation Center" in Choam Chao. The title of the HRW report is "Skin on the Cable." More than 2,300 people were detained in Cambodia's 11 drug detention centers in 2008. That is 40% more than in 2007. "The government of Cambodia must stop the torture occurring in these centers" said Amon. "Drug dependency can be addressed through expanded voluntary, community-based, outpatient treatment that respects human rights and is consistent with international standards." Cambodian officials from the National Authority for Combatting Drugs, the Interior Ministry, the National Police, and the Social Welfare Ministry all declined to comment when queried by the Associated Press. But Cambodian Brig. Gen. Roth Srieng, commander of the military police in Banteay Meanchy province, denied torture at his center, while adding that some detainees were forced to stand in the sun or "walk like monkeys" as punishment for trying to escape. Children as young as 10, prostitutes, beggars, the homeless, and the mentally ill are frequently detained and taken to the drug detention centers, the report found. About one-quarter of those detained were minors. Most were not told why they were being detained. The report also said police sometimes demanded sexual favors or money for release and told some detainees they would not be beaten or could leave early if they donated blood. The report relied on testimony from 74 people, most of them drug users, who had been detained between February and July 2009.
ALMOST 50 YEARS OF LIES AND BURIED FACTS
I was at the drug store the other day,picking up my weekly legalized drugs and ran into an old friend I hadn't seen for a few years.We had been the friends of another friend and had never actually bee
War On What?
Just a brief comment... The "war on drugs" baffles me in the exact same way and for a similar reason that the "war on terror" baffles me.
The Government Conspiracy to Prevent Medical Marijuana Research
It's impossible to rank in order of severity the numerous lies that have long formed the foundation of the federal government's position on medical marijuana. But one of the most calculated and audacious deceptions deployed in this debate is certainly the manufactured myth that insufficient evidence exists to demonstrate the drug's medical efficacy.That's why this NYT article should be required reading for anyone in the habit of expressing opinions on the scientific merits of medical marijuana:Marijuana is the only major drug for which the federal government controls the only legal research supply and for which the government requires a special scientific review.â¦But federal officials have repeatedly failed to act on marijuana research requests in a timely manner or have denied them, according to a 2007 ruling by an administrative law judge at the Drug Enforcement Administration. What an impressively cynical and corrupt political strategy it is to literally block research while simultaneously citing the absence of said research as an excuse for prohibition. The whole situation is so maliciously dishonest that it's disturbing to think how many government agencies were complicit in manufacturing it. Meanwhile, medical marijuana's enemies condemn state-level reforms by reflexively insisting that the ballot box is not the place to formulate health policy. Our response is pretty straightforward:"The more it becomes clear to people that the federal government is blocking these studies, the more people are willing to defect by using politics instead of science to legalize medicinal uses at the state level," said Rick Doblin, executive director of a nonprofit group dedicated to researching psychedelics for medical uses.We did what we had to do, and it reflects well on the American public that this issue has been so well understood despite a massive federal conspiracy to make it confusing.
Marijuana and the Massachusetts Senate Race
Ben Morris at MPP makes an interesting observation regarding Martha Coakley's high-profile loss in Massachusetts:To state it simply, the Democrats chose a bad candidate. They backed one of the most vocal and public opponents of the MPP-funded ballot initiative, Question 2, which decriminalized marijuana possession in Massachusetts in 2008. Question 2 was more popular than President Obama on Election Day, garnering 65% of the vote compared with the presidentâs 62%. All but three towns in the state supported the initiative.The point here isn't that Martha Coakley lost because her anti-marijuana advocacy from 2008 was fresh in everyone's mind as they entered the polls on Tuesday. This campaign wasn't about marijuana at all, and that's the problem. You see, Coakley's victorious opponent Scott Brown had actually championed a sparsely-publicized effort to re-criminalize certain marijuana offenses in the aftermath of question 2. It went nowhere, of course, and could easily have been wielded against him on the campaign trial, had Brown's challenger for the vacant Senate seat not been a rabid prohibitionist herself. In a state where 65% of voters endorsed decriminalization, a pro-reform message could easily have given some heft to the Democrats failed campaign strategy.This is advanced pot politics, to be sure, and I certainly wouldn't expect to see such strategies deployed deftly by the major parties in the short term. But as the issue continues to heat up, it's just a matter of time before someone figures out how to use it effectively. And that will be fun as hell to watch.
Medical Marijuana Dispensaries Don't Attract Crime, They Prevent it
Much like every other bad thing that's ever been said about marijuana, complaints about the role of medical dispensaries in creating crime have turned out to be wild exaggerations. If you don't believe me, try asking someone a little more qualified to opine on the matter, like, for example, the frickin' Police Chief of Los Angeles:Despite neighborhood complaints, most medical marijuana clinics are not typically the magnets for crime that critics often portray, according to Los Angeles police Chief Charlie Beck."Banks are more likely to get robbed than medical marijuana dispensaries," Beck said at a recent meeting with editors and reporters of the Los Angeles Daily News.Opponents of the pot clinics complain that they attract a host of criminal activity to the neighborhoods, including robberies. But a report that Beck recently had the department generate looking at citywide robberies in 2009 found that simply wasn't the case. [LA Daily News]Well, how do you like that? Banks are robbed constantly by angry gun-wielding assholes, but you've never heard anyone lobbying to keep them 1,000 feet away from schools and parks. Meanwhile, the biggest security threat at the dispensaries has typically been the DEA (and yes, they were routinely grabbing money from dispensaries at gunpoint until the DOJ told them to find something better to do) The very notion of dispensaries attracting crime is largely illogical on its face, given that the whole purpose of their existence is to remove sick people from the black-market marijuana economy. Legal medical marijuana providers reduce crime on a massive scale simply by opening their doors each day. Even The Washington Post has observed the role of dispensaries in undermining cartel profits, and one couldnât possibly calculate the cumulative crime-control benefits of millions of marijuana transactions that would otherwise have occurred in the shadows.Cheap and unfounded claims about dispensaries attracting crime have served only to discredit their authors, while infusing needless controversy and confusion into the regulatory process. As advocates for medical marijuana, we have no opposition to sensible regulations, but policy debates should be aimed at serving the interests of patients and the community, not indulging fictitious fears at the expense of helping real people.
New Poll: 8 in 10 Americans Support Medical Marijuana
Each time we ask the question, more people get it right:With New Jersey this week poised to become the 14th state to legalize medical marijuana, 81 percent in this national ABC News/Washington Post poll support the idea, up from an already substantial 69 percent in 1997. Indeed the main complaint is with restrictions on access, as in the New Jersey law. [ABC]Yes, the only controversy that remains with regards to medical marijuana is how best to distribute it. So here's my question: Will we see presidential hopefuls in the 2012 republican primaries still making fools of themselves by supporting a federal war on medical marijuana? I'm honestly beginning to doubt that we will. Especially if this guy's on stage.
It's Official: Gov. Corzine Signs New Jersey's Medical Marijuana Law
That makes 14 states, with several more to come in the next couple years. Congratulations to everyone who worked so hard to make this possible. Oh, and while you're at it, Governor, how bout pardoning John Wilson?
Great Job By the Seattle City Attorney
I was pleased to hear the good news about the new City Attorney of Seattle stopping all proesecutions related to pot possession.
A Gusher of Hope and Healing!
The American dream is, for the power of love to overcome the love of power. The Love Revolution is a gusher of hope and healing!
Good News: Marijuana Won't Make You Kill Yourself
What a relief:NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Smoking marijuana (also called cannabis) is unlikely to increase a person's risk of killing themselves later on, an analysis of more than three decades worth of death records on more than 50,000 Swedish military recruits suggests."I don't think this can be interpreted as saying, 'Well, there are no risks of using cannabis,'" Dr. Stanley Zammit of the department of psychological medicine at Cardiff University School of Medicine in the UK told Reuters Health. Nevertheless, "we can pretty much rule out a strong effect of cannabis on long-term risk of suicide whether it's through depression or whatever," he added. [Reuters]Well, thanks for clearing that up I guess. But was this really even necessary? I had already figured it out a long time ago based on the observation that marijuana users are some of the happiest people I know. Of course, considering Reuters's history of wildly misconstruing and distorting marijuana research, maybe we should just be glad they at least understood the outcome of the study.
The New Argument Against Marijuana Legalization: It Will Kill Everyone
Having apparently run out of other ideas, opponents of marijuana legalization are now arguing that people are going to die. Seriously:Carnage? Lost Lives? Ok guys, you just keep on talking like that and see what happens. Frustrated and desperate, the anti-pot crusaders have finally and firmly established themselves as the true nutjobs in the marijuana debate. For decades, the prohibitionists have taken pot politics for granted and their sudden struggle to adapt to the current political climate is indeed an ugly thing to behold. The very notion of an organized, intellectual and popular movement for marijuana reform is utterly incompatible with their deeply ingrained prejudices. By shielding themselves from even a vague comprehension of the case for reform, they're now entering the debate armed only with the same antiquated rhetorical weaponry that's been alienating the public by growing margins each year.In other words, let them claim that legalization will kill people, let them childishly insult and stigmatize our supporters, for it is precisely those behaviors which have served to expose their ignorance, while catapulting our cause into the political mainstream.
New York Post Can't Write About Marijuana Without Laughing
Even as medical marijuana's cascading political momentum becomes undeniable, there nevertheless remain a few aspiring comedians in the press who just can't talk about it with a straight face:Â NJ 'joint' vote to legalize medical potBy ED ROBINSON and MAGGIE HABERMANNew Jersey moved to the brink of legalizing medical marijuana last night when both houses of the state Legislature voted that it's high time to make the move. [New York Post]Get it? 'Joint' vote? 'High' time? You're lucky if you saw this story first in the New York Post, because none of the other papers covered yesterday's developments with such irreverence. For example, check out NYT's boring coverage, which completely fails to find any humor in the situation and focuses instead on the seriously ill patients who will soon have legal access to their medicine.Ed and Maggie were so busy dreaming up clever puns that they got a little sloppy with the facts:The weed would be doled out by authorized state suppliers under the bill, which would make the Garden State the 14th to allow purchase of pot for medical reasons -- though the home-grown type would still be outlawed. Actually, most of those states don't permit medical marijuana sales, and it's typical that the reporters who work hardest to make jokes about marijuana policy also have the toughest time getting the details right. Fortunately, New Jersey's lawmakers, as well as the American people and even the White House have come to understand that there's nothing the least bit funny about ending the arrest of seriously ill patients who rely on marijuana for medical treatment. Whether you're the New York Post, or even the President of the New Jersey Senate, if you think anyone's looking for laughs in the medical marijuana debate, the joke's on you.
In US First, California Assembly Committee Approves Marijuana Legalization Bill
A bill to legalize the adult use, sale, and production of marijuana was approved Tuesday by a 4-3 vote in the California Assembly Public Safety Committee. While the vote was historicâit marked the first time a state legislative committee anywhere had voted for a marijuana legalization billâa Friday legislative deadline means the bill is likely to die before it reaches the Assembly floor. hearing room audience Still, supporters pronounced themselves well pleased. "The conversation is definitely gaining traction in Sacramento," bill sponsor Assemblyman Tom Ammiano (D-SF) told a press conference at the capitol after the vote. "This is a significant vote because it legitimizes the quest for debate. There was a time when the m-word would never have been brought up in Sacramento." âThis historic vote marks the formal beginning of the end of marijuana prohibition in the United States,â said Stephen Gutwillig, California state director of the Drug Policy Alliance, who testified before the committee both Tuesday and in an earlier hearing. âMaking marijuana legal has now entered the public dialogue in a credible way. Decades of wasteful, punitive, racist marijuana policy have taken quite a toll in this country. The Public Safety Committee has demonstrated that serious people take ending marijuana prohibition seriously.â "The mere fact that there was a vote in the Assembly to regulate and control the sale and distribution of marijuana would have been unthinkable even one year ago," said former Orange County Judge Jim Gray, a member of Law Enforcement Against Prohibition, who also testified before the committee last fall. "And if the bill isn't fully enacted into law this year, it will be soon. Or, the bill will be irrelevant because the voters will have passed the measure to regulate and tax marijuana that will be on the ballot this November," Gray pointedly added. The bill, AB 390, the Marijuana Control, Regulation, and Education Act would impose a $50 an ounce tax on marijuana sales and would task the California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control to regulate them. It was amended slightly from the original by Ammiano. In one example, the bill strikes "legalize" and replaces it with "regulate." It also strikes out language saying the bill would go into effect after federal law changes. And it adds language to clarify that medical marijuana does not come under its purview. Tuesday's Public Safety Committee opened to a hearing room packed with legalization supporters, but also by more than a dozen uniformed police chiefs and high-ranking police officers from around the state. Law enforcement was out in force to make its displeasure known. police and preacher present to oppose the Ammiano bill But first came Ammiano himself, recusing himself from his position as committee chair to testify in favor of his bill. "This is landmark legislation to legalize and regulate marijuana," Ammiano told his colleagues. "It would generate nearly a billion dollars annually in revenues, according to the Board of Equalization, and would leave law enforcement to focus on serious crimes, violent crimes, and hard drugs. The drug wars have failed," the San Francisco solon said emphatically. "Prohibition has fostered anarchy. Legalization allows regulations, and regulation allows order." Since the primary hearing on the bill took place last fall, Tuesday's hearing was limited to 30 minutes (it was closer to 45), and witnesses either said their pieces succinctly or were gently chided by committee Vice-Chair Curt Hagman (R-Chino Hills). The Drug Policy Alliance's Gutwillig recapped testimony he gave last fall, as did the Marijuana Policy Project California state director Aaron Smith. "AB 390 is a historic reversal of failed marijuana policies," said Gutwillig. "It would begin to control a substance that is already commonly available and consumed, but unregulated. Prohibition has created enormous social costs and jeopardized public safety instead of enhancing it." "This legislation would finally put California on track for a sensible marijuana policy in line with the views of most California voters," said Smith. Also endorsing the bill was Matt Gray of Taxpayers for Improving Public Safety, a California group lobbying for more progressive criminal justice policies. "We support the bill," said Gray. "Marijuana is the state's largest cash crop, and this bill will remove a revenue stream from organized crime and decrease availability for youth." The opposition, led by law enforcement, church and community anti-drug groups, and a former deputy drug czar, threw everything short of the kitchen sink at the committee in a bid to sink the bill. Hoary old chestnuts reminiscent of "Reefer Madness" were revived, as well as new talking points designed to discourage members from voting for legalization. bill sponsor Assemblyman Tom Ammiano, with Dale Gieringer,Stephen Gutwillig and Aaron Smith in background "I traveled here with a heavy heart," said former deputy director for demand reduction for the Office of National Drug Control Policy Andrea Barthwell, the big hitter leading off for the opposition. "The eyes of America are upon you," she told the committee. "We don't want you to set a course that worsens the health of Americans for years to come. This is a scheme that will benefit drug cartel kingpins and corner drug dealers and create chaos in our public health system," she warned. "People all over the country are afraid California will have this leverage in the same way the medical marijuana initiative was leveraged to create a sense that these are reasonable policies," Barthwell continued. "We've reduced drinking and smoking through public health, and prohibition is working for our young people to keep them drug free," she added. "Legalization of marijuana will only increase the challenges facing us," said San Mateo Police Chief Susan Manheimer. "What good can come from making powerful addictive drugs more cheaply available? Don't we have enough trouble with the two legal drugs? Adding an additional intoxicant will lead to increase drugged driving and teen sex," she told the committee. "Marijuana of today is not the dope your parent's smoked," she added for good measure. After mentioning that in the Netherlands cannabis cafes have "run rampant," asserting that "drug cartels will become legal cultivators," and that legalization would bring about "quantum increases" in the availability of marijuana, Manheimer swung for the fence. "To balance the budget on the back of the harm caused by illegal intoxicants is mind-bogglingâI would call it blood money," she said. Worse, "the addictive qualities of these drugs will cause more crimes as people struggle to find money to buy marijuana. We are very concerned about marijuana-related violence." Then it was the turn of Claude Cook, regional director of the National Narcotics Officers Associations Coalition. "This is dangerous work we do," Cook said by way of introduction. "We are strongly opposed to AB 390, we see no benefit for our communities. Marijuana is also carcinogenic. If we want to raise revenue, maybe it would be safer to just bring back cigarette vending machines. This is human misery for tax dollars." And by the way, "Drug offenders who are in prison have earned their way there by past criminal conduct," he added. Cook predicted downright disaster were the bill to pass. "Use by juveniles will increase. Organized crime will flourish. California will become a source nation for marijuana for the rest of the country. The cartels will thrive. Highway fatalities will rise," he said without explaining just how he arrived at those dire conclusions. police waiting to speak at anti-drug rally after committee vote "I see the devastation of marijuana and drugs in my community," thundered Bishop Ron Allen, "CEO and president" of the International Faith-based Coalition, and a self-described former crack addict who started with marijuana. "If marijuana is legalized and we have to deal with it in our liquor stores and communities, you have never seen a devastation like you're going to see. It's going to lose us a generation. You don't want this blood on your hands." "I'm going to discount the ad hominems and alarmist attacks," Ammiano replied after the testimony. "Some of the arguments today reminded me of Reefer Madness," he said Before moving to a vote, committee members briefly discussed their positions. Assemblywoman Nancy Skinner (D-Berkeley) noted that because of the state's medical marijuana law, "We have created a class difference, where a certain class of our population can utilize dispensaries for their own reasons to use marijuana, and on the other hand, we have the street activity around marijuana that is not under semi-legal status." Skinner voted for the bill, while saying she was not sure she would support it on the Assembly floor. "I'm not supporting marijuana, but the question is who we regulate it and is it time to have a serious debate." In the end, four of five Democratic committee membersâall from the Bay areaâsupported the bill, while one Democrat joined the two Republicans on the committee in opposing it." The bill would normally head next to the Assembly Health Committee, but given the time constraints on the legislature, no further action is likely to be taken this session. Still, Tuesday was a historic day in Sacramento and in the annals of the American marijuana reform movement.
If We're Gonna Incarcerate Millions of People, We Should Do More to Stop Prison Rape
 For a nation that leads the world in putting people behind bars, we're doing an absolutely horrible job of looking after the poor folks we keep tossing in there:The Justice Department reported Thursday that 12 percent of incarcerated juveniles, or more than 3,200 young people, had been raped or sexually abused in the past year by fellow inmates or prison staff, quantifying for the first time a problem that has long troubled lawmakers and human rights advocates. [Washington Post]So often, "protecting the children" is the knee-jerk justification for all sorts of draconian criminal justice policies. Yet, the youth who need the most help are routinely being sexually assaulted by the people who're supposed to be rehabilitating them. The shameful â though not at all surprising â explanation for this seems to be that we just can't afford to do a better job than this:Four former commissioners on a blue-ribbon prison rape panel that spent years studying the issue say they fear that authorities are deferring to concerns by corrections officials that reforms would cost too much, while not focusing enough on prison safety and the effects of abuse on inmates.  We can afford to put them in prison, but we just can't afford to take very good care of them. That is literally what's happening here, and it illustrates perfectly what an unfathomable travesty our criminal justice system has become. Yet, lawmakers continue to cower before the mighty prison lobbies that fight tirelessly to build more and more prisons that are less and less safe.It's amazing that drug policy and criminal justice reform could be considered even remotely controversial while our correctional institutions remain plagued by endemic patterns of violence and sexual abuse. This would be intolerable even if everyone ever sentenced to prison in America actually deserved to be there (imagine that). It's not enough to just wish it wasn't like this. The bottom line is that anyone who lobbies for aggressive police tactics and harsh laws bears responsibility for the abuse and indignation that innocent (and guilty, though undeserving) people will inevitably suffer within our brutal prison system. If you understand what happens in there, then you have a moral obligation to consider that reality when forming and expressing opinions about who truly belongs behind those bars.