BLOG
Marijuana is Illegal, But it Doesnât Have to be
The Amethyst Initiative is a coalition of college presidents who believe we should consider lowering the drinking age to help address the harms of underground drinking. It's great that they understand how the law creates unintended consequences, but listen to what they have to say about the idea of equalizing penalties for marijuana and alcohol:The leader of the Amethyst Initiative, John McCardell Jr., president emeritus of Vermont's Middlebury College, says there's a big difference between the two debates."The fact is marijuana is prohibited across the board. It's not a matter of age discrimination, as where alcohol is concerned," he said. [AP]Huh? Underage drinking is illegal just like marijuana. What's the difference between reforming alcohol laws vs. marijuana laws? The fact that marijuana isn't legal for anyone serves only to illustrate how marijuana laws are even stupider and more incoherent than the arbitrary drinking age of 21.I understand that these folks might prefer to avoid getting caught up debating a separate issue, but if they don't wanna talk about it, they don't have to. He could have declined to comment instead of trying to draw ridiculous distinctions. The bottom line is that our marijuana laws are a constant source of insanity and injustice on college campuses and it's bizarre that these college presidents would have the courage to question the drinking age while failing to confront the extremely similar problems posed by marijuana prohibition.Anyone who thinks 18-year-olds should be able to buy liquor ought to be open to some kind of marijuana reform. Seriously.
Mexican Jailbreak Proves the Cartels Can Do Whatever They Want
Prohibition has made the drug lords so powerful that the jails won't hold them:Mexico City - A convoy of cars carrying more than two dozen suspected drug cartel members disguised as Mexican police officers arrives at the Zacatécas state prison before dawn. Their helicopter hovers overhead. Minutes later, the men help more than 50 inmates â many of them suspected drug traffickers â flee the prison. A countrywide manhunt ensues.No, this is not a script for a B movie. It's just another day in Mexico's high-stakes war on drug trafficking â Saturday, in fact. [Christian Science Monitor]Nothing works in the Mexican drug war. Nothing at all. Anyone who thinks we're on pace towards addressing any dimension of this problem will be proven wrong over and over again.Calderon and Obama think their bloody war sends a message to the cartels, but the drug lords are just laughing their asses off:Rather than hiding in remote mountain redoubts, Mexico's most wanted traffickers â some with prices of 30 million pesos ($2.1 million) on their heads â are partying openly. In April, police arrested the alleged top recruiter of another cartel, La Familia, at another baptism party held by capos at a resort in the western state of Michoacan."This indicates, along with another famous wedding that happened, that they don't have any fear at all of the authorities, none at all," said Samuel Gonzalez, Mexico's former top anti-drug prosecutor. "They are sending a message that they aren't afraid." [AP]Maybe the reason they aren't afraid of getting caught is that they can just break out of jail anytime they want.
the meth myth
there's nothing being reported as gangland killings so I just thought I'd mention what I know about this new drug.I first came across crystal meth on what was called chemical row,which was 7th ave.Eas
What's So Funny About Trying to Legalize Marijuana?
Slightly less annoying than those who refuse to even debate marijuana policies are those who vaguely support our position, but still mock and insult us for caring about this. A good recent example was Glenn Beck's hostile interview with MPP's Rob Kampia, in which he treated Rob with utter contempt only to then announce that he's a libertarian and he gets it. It was just weird. William Teach at Stop The ACLU put on a similar performance yesterday that I've read twice now and still donât quite understand. He begins by framing the marijuana debate as the dumbest thing on the planet:It seems like every few years we have to have this debate about marijuana, and sometimes other drugs. But, in the era of hopeNchange, it is becoming louder and more open. We know that Attorney General Eric Holder has told the DEA to stop raiding âmedical marijuanaâ dealers, er, shops. We know that El Presidente Barack H. Obama thinks pot is a joke, and that lots of folks who voted for him thought the issue of legalizing ganja was a like, ya know, really, wow, cool, manâ¦.look, a quarter! Then, once his condescension is fully indulged, he switches gears and says this:I will say, I really do not think marijuana is that bad of a drug, there are certainly a lot worse, particularly alcohol, which is much more addictive, mentally and physically, than pot, and much more damaging to the body than pot. Personally, I couldnât care less if it is legalized and taxed, Iâve done it, do not care for the affects. If someone wants to get high and it doesnât affect anyone else, hey, we want government out of our private business, right?Precisely. This is all perfectly simple and logical, so what was it that compelled Teach to begin with a barbed caricature of people who essentially feel exactly as he does? We keep seeing this kind of thing lately and I'm still trying to understand it. The answer may be that we've reached a strange moment where the strength of our argument has outpaced the resolution of the cultural and political associations people attach to marijuana use. In other words, conservatives like Glenn Beck and the folks at Stop The ACLU might simultaneously agree that the war on marijuana is stupid, while also maintaining some animosity towards the stereotypical liberal hippie types that they generally identify the issue with. If that's all this is about, that's fine, but I wonder if anyone would be surprised to learn that the founder of StoptheDrugWar.org, Dave Borden, has never gotten high once in his life. Or that one of the fastest growing constituencies in drug policy reform right now is former police officers who've gotten involved after becoming disgusted by the injustice and corruption they witnessed on a daily basis in the war on drugs. To a tremendous extent, the movement to fix our drug laws is not even driven by a desire among its adherents to take drugs without legal consequence. It's about people like Berwyn Heights Mayor Cheye Calvo, whose dogs were shot dead in a botched police raid over some marijuana that he had nothing to do with. It's about cops choking innocent suspects, or selling drugs themselves, or framing innocent people to cover their incompetence. It's about horrible crazy fiascos you'd never even think about.Since the effects of the drug war are never confined to those who choose to be involved, there's no easy way to stereotype people who want to change our laws. There are matters of life, liberty, and death at stake here that reach far beyond whether or not Joe Stoner can legally do as he pleases. That's why it's so hard for me to understand why people who ostensibly agree with our case nonetheless endeavor to turn this into something silly or frivolous. Perhaps I shall email the folks at Stop The ACLU to request some further insight.Update: I've heard back from both Jay Stephenson and William Teach at Stop The ACLU in regards to the post. Their take is that the tone of Teach's piece is intended to be humorous, while also taking a dig at naïve Obama supporters. Basically what I thought. It's always interesting to hear how peripheral observers view the issue. I appreciate that they took the time to read and respond.
Illinois Sheriff Caught Selling Lots of Marijuana
Wow, you don't hear a story like this everyday. Oh wait, actually you do. Thanks to the drug war, dramatic incidents of gratuitous police misconduct have become painfully typical:ST. LOUIS (AP) â Sheriff Raymond M. Martin has been the law for nearly 20 years in a struggling southern Illinois county. But federal prosecutors say he's been breaking it lately by peddling pounds of pot, some seized by his own department, often in uniform and from his patrol vehicle.Authorities on Monday led away a handcuffed Martin, 46, from his small Shawneetown office after his arrest on federal drug trafficking charges accusing him of supplying a dealer he threatened to kill when that man said he wanted out. The Gallatin County sheriff also allegedly pledged to use his authority to shut down rival drug traffickers.For 20 years, this creep was the sheriff? Can you even imagine all the filthy things he's done in that time? One of the many reasons the drug war fundamentally will never even begin to work is that you can't even trust the "good guys." I shudder to think how often the federal drug war dollars we pour into regional law enforcement end up accomplishing nothing other than to assist corrupt cops in cornering the local market. The whole thing is such a colossal joke, it's amazing that anyone would even bother to defend it anymore. Just look at it. How much more fraudulent and corrupt must this thing become before everyone understands what it is?
Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty Wants to Send Dying Cancer Patients to Jail
We knew Gov. Pawlenty was likely to veto medical marijuana legislation due to pressure from law enforcement, but then the bill was changed so that only terminally ill patients would qualify. Surely, the governor would at least agree not to arrest people who are dying, right? Wrong:He announced his intention to veto the medical marijuana bill at his news conference today. Then, amazingly, he went on to wax rhapsodic about how âThe sky is blue, the sun is out. The minds of Minnesotans are turning to Memorial Day, summer, fishing.âTell that to Joni Whiting, whose daughter Stephanie gained some comfort and the ability to eat from medical marijuana during the last months of her doomed struggle with melanoma. Pawlenty thinks itâs just fine to treat Joni, Stephanie, and others in that dreadful situation as common criminals. [MPP]There's no middle ground here. You either think it's ok to arrest dying patients for using doctor recommended medicine, or you don't. If Pawlenty vetoes this bill, he firmly rejects even the vague appearance of compassion for dying patients.Send him a polite note here.
U.S. Supreme Court Kills Effort to Overturn State Medical Marijuana Laws
Good news! Something bad could have happened, but didn't:California's medical marijuana law survived its most serious legal challenge today as the U.S. Supreme Court denied appeals by two counties that argued they were being forced to condone violations of federal drug laws.The justices, without comment, denied a hearing to officials from San Diego and San Bernardino counties who challenged Proposition 215, an initiative approved by state voters in 1996 that became a model for laws in 12 other states. It allows patients to use marijuana for medical conditions with their doctor's recommendation. [San Francisco Chronicle]Today's result was really a foregone conclusion because it's just a basic fact that states can make their own drug laws. Still, it's good that this happened insofar as it will hopefully serve to silence those who continue to cite conflict between state and federal laws as a reason why no one can have medical marijuana. They are completely wrong and it's amazing how many federal judges had to break it down for them.For the hundredth time, conflict with federal law is not an obstacle to passing and implementing state laws that permit medical marijuana. Federal law enforcement can come in and cause trouble, but that doesnât make state laws invalid. Those laws still apply and provide valuable protection against state police, who patients are more likely to come in contact with. The very idea that federal law somehow cancels out state policies is just some made-up nonsense that enemies of medical marijuana have been spewing in desperation for several years now. Nice try, but you're wrong. Case closed.
Michael Phelps and Marijuana Legalization
Phelps resumed competition this weekend, prompting Jim Caple at ESPN to call for a debate on legalizing marijuana:We need to hear all sides, as part of a serious discussion on this subject, and then make a rational decision about whether marijuana should be legal in this country.What we do not need is to waste any more energy fretting over a college-age athlete smoking pot and the negative lesson it sends to the nation's youth. Otherwise the negative message kids will learn from Phelps' bong hit is this: Adults are too busy shouting about meaningless crap to intelligently discuss what is actually important.Damn straight. I'm assuming, of course, that he's referring to those who condemned Phelps and not those of us who launched an angry boycott against Kellogg's. Because that was totally necessary.
Pete Guither Will Correct Your Incoherent Editorial for Free
This is funny. That is, if your idea of funny is arguing with people who have strong unfounded opinions about marijuana.When I criticize individuals in the blog, I try to choose my words based on the assumption that the post will be read by the person I'm writing about. I sometimes forget to do this, but it's a good habit. Regardless, I don't see how Pete could have handled the situation any better.Update: My favorite example of someone getting pissed about something I wrote can be found here.
Increased Marijuana Potency is an Argument for Legalization, Not Against it
Here we go again:The average potency of marijuana, which has risen steadily for three decades, has exceeded 10 percent for the first time, the U.S. government will report on Thursday.â¦The stronger marijuana is of particular concern because high concentrations of THC have the opposite effect of low concentrations, officials say. [CNN]Who the f#$k said that? My god, is it really necessary to explain that stronger marijuana has the exact same effect, except more of it? This is basic, basic stuff here. The argument that good pot makes people feels unpleasant is just a non-starter, and I couldnât be less surprised not to find a name attached to it.Marijuana has gotten stronger under marijuana prohibition, just like alcohol got stronger during alcohol prohibition. Suppliers are incentivized to maximize the potency of their product to achieve the highest profit while reducing risk. Harsh laws also encourage consumers to obtain the strongest product since penalties are determined by weight, not potency. In a regulated market, there would be high demand for lower potency marijuana, just as light beer and light cigarettes are extremely popular. A flavorful strain with mild effects and a low price could become a big seller, but nobody in their right mind would ever try to grow something like that right now. Why risk jail over a crop that's half as profitable? Prohibition is shaping the marijuana market, yet drug warriors ironically turn around and cite potent pot as an argument for keeping the policy that made things the way they are.There's really nothing bad about higher potency pot, since it's completely non-toxic and easy to consume in controlled doses, but to whatever extent anyone is concerned about it, the obvious solution is regulation. Test it. Label it. Put age restrictions on it. Then watch in amazement as marijuana users become even healthier and happier than they already are.
Wall Street Journal Thinks Americans Still Love the Drug War
Yesterday's Wall Street Journal interview with new drug czar Gil Kerlikowske is generating discussion due to Kerlikowske's statement that we must move beyond the "war on drugs" analogy. But Gary Fields's piece also included a dubious assumption that shouldnât escape notice:Mr. Kerlikowske's comments are a signal that the Obama administration is set to follow a more moderate -- and likely more controversial -- stance on the nation's drug problems. Prior administrations talked about pushing treatment and reducing demand while continuing to focus primarily on a tough criminal-justice approach.This is controversial? There is no evidence of that. In fact, everywhere you look, you'll see a changing political climate with regards to drug policy:1. Obama made repeated statements in favor of various drug policy reforms on the campaign trail, including support for medical marijuana, treatment over incarceration, needle exchange, and fixing the crack/cocaine sentencing disparity. In a hard-fought campaign, these were among his least controversial positions. 2. Support for legalizing marijuana is surging in America, currently polling as high as 52%. Since taking office, Obama's biggest controversy with regards to drug policy was his statement in opposition to legalizing marijuana. 3. A recent Zogby poll found that 76% of Americans believe the war on drugs has failed. This view was held by a majority of Democrats, Republicans, and independents. The idea that there's anything controversial about moving towards a more moderate drug policy is just false on its face. The opposite is true. Americans are tired of the "tough criminal justice approach" and they elected a president who said he'd bring a new perspective to this issue.If anything, it would have made more sense to say these policy shifts will most likely make our drug policy less controversial. Certainly, that's what Kerlikowske expects by making these conciliatory remarks. He's pandering to the growing public sentiment that the drug war is getting out of hand. Seriously, why on earth would anyone expect controversy over this? To the contrary, people find it reassuring, which is exactly why the White House is framing it this way. I thought that was obvious.Thus, with this one seemingly harmless quip, "likely more controversial," the WSJ ends up missing the entire point of the story and utterly misdiagnosing what Kerlikowske represents. Public attitudes about the war on drugs are changing, thereby forcing our political leadership to begin implementing certain popular reforms while generally reframing the entire issue.Any questions?
Wall Street Journal reports on Kerlikowske's call to end the "War on Drugs"
As Noam Chomsky has said, reading the WSJ provides enlightening insight into the thought processes of Americas power elite.
An open letter to the new "Drug Czar"from Norm Stamper
Norm Stamper from LEAP has written an open letter to Gil Kerlikowske. It starts out:
New Drug Czar Says "War on Drugs" Mentality is Over
In his first interview since taking office, newly appointed drug czar Gil Kerlikowske had some very interesting things to say:WASHINGTON -- The Obama administration's new drug czar says he wants to banish the idea that the U.S. is fighting "a war on drugs," a move that would underscore a shift favoring treatment over incarceration in trying to reduce illicit drug use.In his first interview since being confirmed to head the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy, Gil Kerlikowske said Wednesday the bellicose analogy was a barrier to dealing with the nation's drug issues."Regardless of how you try to explain to people it's a 'war on drugs' or a 'war on a product,' people see a war as a war on them," he said. "We're not at war with people in this country." [WSJ]Coulda fooled me. It's plainly ridiculous to suggest that we're not waging war as we arrest nearly a million Americans every year just for marijuana, as we kill innocent people and even harmless dogs in an endless parade of botched drug raids, and continue promising new crackdowns on American drug users.Still, it's certainly encouraging to see that Kerlikowske is determined to separate himself from his predecessors. This is a bold and remarkable statement no matter how one interprets it. Any effort to pander to growing drug war opposition is encouraging, even if disingenuous. On that note, I think Ethan makes a good point:Ethan Nadelmann of the Drug Policy Alliance, a group that supports legalization of medical marijuana, said he is "cautiously optimistic" about Mr. Kerlikowske. "The analogy we have is this is like turning around an ocean liner," he said. "What's important is the damn thing is beginning to turn."Stay tuned.
CNBC Attacks Schwarzenegger For Endorsing Marijuana Legalization Debate
Watch CNBC's Larry Kudlow go ballistic over Gov. Schwarzenegger's recent statement in favor of debating marijuana legalization:Here's what Schwarzenegger actually said:"Well, I think it's not time for that, but I think it's time for a debate. I think all of those ideas of creating extra revenues [are worth considering] ⦠I think we ought to study very carefully what other countries are doing that have legalised marijuana and other drugs. What effect did it have on those countries?"And here's what Kudlow heard:"I mean he basically wants to get everybody stoned and then raise taxes" Did you even read the damn quote, Larry? It's just incredible to watch the childish hissy fits that erupt over something as sensible as suggesting we talk about marijuana laws. Anyone who doesn't want to discuss marijuana policy doesnât have to, but if you don't think it's important, please do the rest of us a favor and just be quiet.
DEA Agent Indicted for Framing 17 Innocent People
Over and over, the very foundations of the war on drugs are revealed to be utterly fraudulent and corrupt. These laws are harmful enough when they're enforced honestly, but moments like this really illustrate what a colossal fraud this whole thing truly is:CLEVELAND â An agent of the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration was indicted today on charges that he lied repeatedly in a botched 2005 drug case that caused 17 people to be wrongly charged.Lee Lucas, a 19-year veteran, was charged in U.S. District Court in Cleveland with perjury, making false statements, obstruction of justice and violating a person's civil rights involving a case that resulted in 26 arrests in Mansfield. [Cleveland Plain Dealer]As one might expect, all of this revolves around a lying informant who played everyone in a desperate attempt to save his own hide. Officer Lucas is accused of failing to provide proper supervision and repeatedly lying to cover up the mess.Of course, Lucas's fellow officers have eagerly come to his defense, because there scarcely exists any form of police misconduct so shocking to the conscience as to disqualify from being treated as a martyr by their colleagues. This comment, posted on the Plain Dealer story, perfectly reveals the mentality that police aren't responsible for mistakes in the war on drugsLee Lucas is being a scapegoat for a convicted drug criminal named Jarrell Bray. Jerrel Bray turned on Lee because Lee would not engage in getting Jerrel off the hook for a shooting Jerrel committed.â¦Jerrel is afraid to return to prison as a snitch. Can you blame him? He is a weasel who is trying to save his skin on the inside.How do you think a snitch like Jerrel would function in the big House?Is Jerrell Bray the person you want to trust?No, he's not, and that's exactly the problem. This shady informant's dubious allegations should never have formed the basis for criminal charges against anyone. It was Lucas and the DEA who trusted this guy and used him to serve their agenda, not anyone else. Everything these informants say is treated as gospel when it comes to getting search warrants and scoring convictions, but the second the informant turns on the cops, all you hear is that informants can never be trusted. No kidding.If you rely on untrustworthy people to help you make drug arrests, then your drug arrests can't be trusted. It's just that simple. And if you can't (as drug cops often claim) do basic drug enforcement without relying on these people, then it follows that solid and reliable drug enforcement is truly impossible.It's amazing to watch a disgraced drug cop comes forward and try to defend himself with no better argument than the fact that his whole job revolves around working with notorious liars to put people in jail who may or may not have done anything wrong. It sounds like Lucas stepped way out of line here, but the real fault lies with the way our drug laws are enforced in general. Can you even imagine how often this process produces gratuitous injustices without anyone but the innocent defendant paying the price?
Video: SWAT Raids -- No One Is Safe
We've made a video -- there's a petition too, sign it here. Spread the word...
Out of the silence
I don't know if anyone ever reads this stuff but you may have noticed I haven't posted in a while.After the arrests of the Bacon brothers and several UN gang members and the crew that worked my area,t
Who Put Stephen Baldwin in Charge of Opposing Marijuana Legalization?
CBS News has a pro/con feature today on marijuana legalization with a great piece from Ethan Nadelmann and an opposing view coauthored by Stephen Baldwin and Kevin McCullough. Pete Guither properly demolishes the later here, but I just want to reiterate how crazy it is that Stephen Baldwin has become the poster boy for the war on marijuana. It's ridiculous.Fortunately, Baldwin totally lives up to everyone's expectations by ceasing to make sense the instant he gets started:America doesn't want its pot...American potheads do!Sure the debate is raging presently, but it's as fictional in its need as whether pigs can fly or whether Superman was or was not faster than that bullet.In the modern trumped up controversy over whether marijuana should be legalized for the masses, the biggest canard of all is the supposed demand that exists. As a team that produces a weekly talk radio show now heard on 195 stations, we can earnestly say one thing is definitively true in the discussions we've launched about the revival of the "Should pot be legal?" question: "America doesn't want its pot...American potheads do!"It's hilariously false on multiple levels:1. There's an online poll embedded right there on the same page showing 94.86% support for legalizing marijuana.2. Baldwin claims only potheads want to legalize marijuana, despite having recently gotten his ass kicked in a debate with Ron Paul, who has never tried it.3. If the press could find someone more famous than Stephen Baldwin to oppose legalization, he wouldn't even get the opportunity to say these things.