Tuesday, May 11, 2004

Mayor's getting ideas Some good ones. VANCOUVER, British Columbia -- Mayor Larry Campbell has proposed legalizing and taxing marijuana sales ... to raise money for treatment of the effects of more dangerous drugs. ... Campbell said regulation should be similar to that of tobacco and alcohol, citing the example of Amsterdam, where cultivation and sales of marijuana are legal within certain regulations. Studies indicate fewer residents of the Netherlands than, for example, Americans, have tried marijuana, and cannabis use among Dutch schoolchildren has fallen, he said. "The conclusion is pretty clear," he said. "Legal, regulated sale of marijuana may actually produce less consumption." Looks like that new study I've been talking about is getting around. Via Hit and Run 6:08:38 PM |  drug policy | Links | permalink | comment []

A really bad trip Joel Miller, senior editor of World Net Daily Books, is coming out with a new book: "Bad Trip: How the War Against Drugs is Destroying America.". Today at WND, he talked about it: Drug laws only have public support so long as drugs are deemed extremely dangerous. Every time an effort to crack down on drugs is made with new laws, politicians hype the threat caused by narcotics and other psychoactive substances in an attempt to whip the public into a frightened tangle of angst-ridden nerves. More fear means more support for whatever is supposed to alleviate the fear, and more support means bigger budgets. Every politician knows how to exploit this peculiar form of calculus. This doesn't mean that drug abuse does not cause problems. It only means that pols have every incentive to inflate problems and stoke dread to get what they want, namely tougher prohibition measures. But as I argue in my forthcoming book, "Bad Trip," these measures amplify every problem drugs are supposedly the cause of: crime, corruption, destructive abuse, the whole nine kilos. It's a bureaucratic make-work program -- a self-justifying and self-perpetuating system that both deceives and bilks taxpayers to keep going. Joel nails it. I look forward to reading the book, which I've added to my wish list. 5:49:57 PM |  drug policy | Links | permalink | comment []

A cartoon for drug warriors 12:34:29 AM |  drug policy | Links | permalink | comment []

Getting... the point Thanks to David for pointing out a somewhat strange report about Haiti. I hadn't been aware of News Central TV before this. Apparently they're trying to be some kind of national news network. I'm not impressed. They've got this guy named Mark Hyman who gives you "The Point" -- apparently while missing it by a mile. In a recent "Point," he talks about Haiti and the departure of Aristide (spoken with the animation of a piece of wood): A welcomed development since his departure is the drop in illegal drug shipments through Haiti and into the U.S. Robert Charles, head of the U.S. Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs, reported that drug traffickers thrived in Haiti because of political instability, economic hardships and corruption. Charles credits the new Haitian government, foreign troop presence and increased interdiction efforts for stopping the drug flow. ... Successful efforts to reduce the flow is good news for combating drug trafficking in the U.S. And that's The Point. I'm Mark Hyman. Is that the point? I'm wondering if what the New York Times reported might be at least a partial point... Difficult as it may be to believe, people here say, life in the poorest nation in the hemisphere has gotten worse in the past two months. The fact that people are starving and the price of rice has doubled might be an important point. But why bother about the people when you've got drugs to stop? That's certainly the view of foreign policy moron Robert Charles. Fortunately, not that many people take him seriously. I've already shown you his stupidity regarding Afghanistan. I have another question for Mark Hyman. What does this "successful efforts to reduce the flow" mean? Has there been any evidence that drugs are less available? How do you successfully "reduce the flow"? How about the DEA seizing one million tons of cocaine? Well they did more than that between 1986 and 2002 with no apparent effect. What is the "point" of attempting to reduce the flow? I'm going to give Mark a free lesson in drug economics: Think of drug supply as a river, and drug demand as gravity. As long as there is gravity, the water in the river will find a way to flow. You can divert it and it goes around. You can take out buckets of water, but there's always more coming. Focusing on drug flow in Haiti is stupid and (as long as people are starving) criminal. Hey, Mark! Still think you know the point? 12:16:01 AM |  drug policy | Links | permalink | comment []