Drug WarRant Wednesday, January 7, 2004 New Marijuana Blog The appropriately named Mary Jane wrote me to let me know about her new Marijuana Blog focusing on the spiritual, psychological and physical benefits of marijuana. While there are only a couple of posts so far, I look forward to seeing what Mary Jane has to contribute. She has an interesting post on the use of marijuana in treating ADD -- as a replacement for much more dangerous prescribed drugs. 11:59:26 PM |  drug policy | Links | permalink | comment [] Interesting High School Drug Testing Case There's a little case being considered in Fairbanks, Alaska that intrigues me. The father of a High School student is suing over the district's drug and alcohol policy. There are several issues involved, including the fact that the school had a policy of a 5-day suspension for failing a drug test, but a 90-day suspension for refusing to take one (they have since changed that policy). The most interesting part, however, is the proper argument that urinalysis is an invalid measure. One of the changes they are seeking is to prevent school officials from using a urine test to determine whether a student is intoxicated at school.  When the assistant principal ordered Frey to take a urine test, the lawyers argued in a court filing, it amounted to an order for him to submit to an unreasonable search. Because a urine test can detect a substance taken several days ago, the analysis does nothing to determine if a subject is currently intoxicated, they argued. "There can be no legitimate dispute that the urinalysis requested could not prove whether Anthony Frey was, or was not, under the influence of some substance on the morning of May 22 at 7:35 a.m.," attorney Don Logan wrote. This is an extremely important point, and I haven't heard of any other similar cases before. It is important, not only from the perspective of school testing, but because of the push in many quarters for using urinalysis as proof of "drugged driving" (even though it gives absolutely no measure of current impairment). The judge denied a request for a preliminary injunction, but "ruled that many of the Frey's claims have merit and invited the attorneys to submit more briefs on the issues." The Freys plan to continue to pursue the case. I hope so, and I'm very curious to see what the results will be. Any legal mavens want to weigh in? Can the government decide that a positive THC test will, in fact, be proof of intoxication, and legally define it as such (even though it's not necessarily true)? How would the courts balance the constitutional rights with compelling government interests, if the action prescribed to achieve the government interests don't actually provide data that is specifically pertinent? 7:19:26 PM |  drug policy | Links | permalink | comment [] Tuesday, January 6, 2004 Ogilvy and Mather execs charged today with conspiracy for drug war ad overcharges From AP: Advertising executives charged with cheating U.S. in $684M anti-drug campaign. A current and a former executive at the Ogilvy & Mather advertising agency were charged Tuesday with conspiracy for allegedly overbilling the U.S. government for a campaign to reduce the illegal drug trade. .. According to the indictment, from May 1999 through April 2000, Early and Seifert engineered "an extensive scheme to defraud the United States government by falsely and fraudulently inflating the labour costs." Among other allegations, they are said to have directed employees to lie about their working hours after a 1999 analysis showed Ogilvy & Mather was going to get $3 million less than it had expected for its first year of work on the contract. Now if we can just go after the drug czar for conspiring to cheat the taxpayers by using tax money to fund lies and propaganda. (Hey, I can dream, can't I?) 9:48:53 PM |  drug policy | Links | permalink | comment [] Green Tide - a study in absurdity by the Ontario police The Ontario Association of Chiefs of Police last month released a study (pdf) on "the detrimental effects of Marihuana Grow Operations" called Green Tide. It's a fairly silly report, presented with the seriousness of a major scientific study, with charts and graphs and tables and "upper confidence values" and endnotes and 59 pages, but it actually means very little. I did enjoy the opening sequence that established in documentary style what a typical grow-op is like: Typically, a person -- usually with suspected ties to organized crime -- will purchase or lease a residential dwelling in an urban centre with over 2,000 square feet and a price of $200,000 to $500,000. The dwelling will have an unfinished basement to facilitate wiring, a fireplace to vent the powerful odour of the marihuana, and an attached garage to conceal vehicles used to transport the harvested crops. Once the dwelling is purchased or leased, a renovation crew makes structural changes to the dwelling, and installs heating systems, venting systems, and an electrical bypass to facilitate the theft of the electricity required for growing plants. Next, the growing equipment is moved in and set up. The growing equipment typically includes, among other things, multiple ballasts to boost electrical power, 1000-watt lights to grow the plants, fans to cool the electrical circuitry, and litres of liquid nutrients, fertilizers, pesticides, and fungicides. Once the operation is set up, a "crop sitter" -- often a recent immigrant -- with little or no knowledge of the rest of the operation is paid a nominal wage to water the plants and generally tend to the daily upkeep. To avoid eliciting suspicion by neighbours, the crop sitter will sometimes have his or her entire family live in the dwelling. Periodically, a crew is sent in to harvest the marihuana and prepare it for sale and distribution. Then it gets into the meat of the painstakingly researched data. The study concludes that there were precisely between 2,276 and 11,380 grow-ops active in Ontario in 2003 (and that range is based on the scientific "police estimate" technique). It estimates that 1.2 million plants were seized, and: "Grow ops in Ontario may produce and house between approximately 127,000 and 1.2 million kilograms of marketable marihuana and related product over the 2000-2003 period." They also note that marihuana from grow-ops could be worth as much as $1.2 billion or perhaps $12.4 billion (note they seemed to come up with 1.2 a lot). The study then goes into the costs to Ontario from grow-ops, including theft of electricity ("grow ops will have stolen between approximately $16 and 160 million in electricity over the 2000-2003 period"), law enforcement costs (such as jailing those caught), dismantling costs, etc. It concludes that grow ops may cost Ontario as much as $260 million over the 2000-2003 period. The report recommends: In sum, investigations that further law enforcement's understanding of the connection between organized crime and grow ops are required. This will allow police to target the root cause of grow ops and encourage justice system personnel to seek tougher sentences. Of course, this comes out of the blue without any support from data, nor any indication that such a course of action would have a positive impact. What makes this study so funny is that every single negative factor could be completly eliminated with one move: Follow the recommendations of the Senate and legalize marijuana. 9:33:10 PM |  drug policy | Links | permalink | comment [] Nominated for a Koufax! Drug WarRant has been nominated for a 2003 Koufax for Best Single Issue Blog. It's a real honor, and a great group of blogs to be listed with. Check them out, and check out all the other Kaufax categories at Wampum. 9:31:29 PM |  drug policy | Links | permalink | comment [] NORMLcast - New - Tune in tomorow NORML introduces the 'National NORMLcast', a weekly news and review of all things relating to cannabis-n-culture, pot-n-politics and language-n-law. Your host is radio personality, libertarian and Tampa-based entrepreneur Glenn Klein. Each Wednesday evening, starting at 10:00 PM (eastern), Glenn explores the 'world of weed' on air with producer and Executive Director of The NORML Foundation Allen St. Pierre. At showtime, follow the link at NORMLcast (RealAudio needed) 8:27:52 PM |  drug policy | Links | permalink | comment [] More on Mandatory Minimums Via Hit and Run, we get Debra Saunders' article today in the SFGate -- a followup to the 60 Minutes piece on mandatory minimums. When I reached Bogan on his cell phone, I asked him how many drug kingpins he thought were in federal prison today. Bogan answered, "My estimation is of the 85,000 drug traffickers in the federal system, there are probably fewer than 1 percent of whom you could call kingpins." She also notes: The worst part is that "60 Minutes" didn't touch on the most egregious case in the federal system, that of Clarence Aaron, who is serving a life sentence with no possibility of parole for a first-time, nonviolent offense that netted him $1,500. "60 Minutes'' executive producer David Gelber confirmed that federal officials wouldn't allow the show access to Aaron. ... and ends: But if you feel safer because first-time offenders are in for 12-1/2 years to eternity, it's because you've bought into an illusion: It's like feeling safer because Al Capone's accountant is doing more time than Capone. 7:32:21 PM |  drug policy | Links | permalink | comment [] Monday, January 5, 2004 A pain-full administration From Alternatives, in Salem Oregon, check out an important editorial about pain medicine: Chronic Pain - The Hidden Epidemic by Rick Bayer, MD. While the science of pain control has progressed, the politics of pain control remains in the Dark Ages. This doctor's editorial particularly takes the current administration to task for their drug policies and what that means for suffering patients: To fix the problem of untreated and under-treated pain in chronically ill patients, we must vote out the Bush/Ashcroft party and re-examine our nation's War on Drugs.  What are we gaining besides over-funding the doctor-busting narcotics agencies while laying off police who actually protect us from violent criminals? Why are we willing to sacrifice civil liberties, healthcare, education, a clean environment, and solid infrastructure in a self-destructive pursuit of a "drug-free America"? We need drug education and drug treatment--not another war.  We can no longer be passive when drug warriors threaten the practice of compassionate scientific medicine and make the chronically ill do without necessary medication.  For the compassionate, I ask you to inform yourself, contact your representatives, and vote.  For those who need more convincing, I ask you to consider that anyone is only one accident away from a life with chronic debilitating pain. 7:39:59 PM |  drug policy | Links | permalink | comment [] My current favorite editorial line... Oh, it's good to be the king.  You float high above the law and plunder your subjects with impunity. Yesterday's Rocky Mountain News skewers the DEA and their arrogance for disobeying a judge's order to return marijuana and paraphernalia to a medical marijuana user. "The feds can't just steal the marijuana and therefore make it federal property," [attorney Kristopher Hammond] said. But they try, and they convince local law enforcement officials that even they don't have to obey Colorado law. As Hammond puts it, "It's no secret that the federal government claims to be for states rights - until the states do things they don't like, such as enacting a medical marijuana statute." He's asking the judge to cite the DEA with contempt.  We hope the judge does just that.  If he doesn't, or if the DEA brushes off the citation as if it were a gnat, perhaps Hammond should try again in federal court. Even if it isn't found in contempt, the DEA is clearly guilty of violating the old mob dictum: "Never steal anything small." 7:31:55 PM |  drug policy | Links | permalink | comment [] 60 Minutes transcript now online You can now read the entire transcript from the 60 Minutes program on mandatory minimums: More Than They Deserve. A sample: "Judges throughout the country, of all political persuasions, feel that they have to have discretion so that they can do justice in the individual cases," says Martin, who is resigning from the bench. "It is unjust. It's taking people who are low-level violators and putting them in jail for 15-20 years. I had a situation where a defendant was an addict. He sat on his stoop. People came to him and said, 'Do you know where I can buy some crack?' He told them about an apartment where there was crack being sold. For this, the people who sold it every once in a while gave him some crack for his own personal use. The guideline range for that man was 16 years in jail. That doesn't seem to me like justice." The online story is not exactly a transcript of the show, and is a little nicer to the one drug warrior represented (Congressman Bill McCollum) than Bradley was on the show. Note this exchange in the article... [Bradley:] If you look at the government's own figures, it had 12 million illegal drug users in 1991. Now, there are 19 million, so it's gone up after a decade of tough sentences by 7 million drug users. "If we didn't have those tough sentencing laws, you'd have a whole lot more people than 19 million on drugs," says McCollum. "It would be worse today if we didn't have them. Far worse." On the show, Bradley follows this with a expression of disbelief that this record could possibly be considered a success, and McCollum repeated his idiotic and unsupported assertion that it would have been worse without the drug war. 7:22:43 PM |  drug policy | Links | permalink | comment [] Goose Creek's Principal McCrackin Sent to His Office The Associated Press announced that Principal George McCrackin of Stratford High School in Goose Creek had resigned (see my original story). Several hours later, the AP headline was revised to a indicate that he had been "reassigned"... Following a November drug sweep in which police with guns drawn ordered Stratford High students to the floor, Berkeley County School District officials announced Monday that Principal George McCrackin had resigned. "I realized it is in the best interest of Stratford High School and of my students for me to make a change," McCrackin said. District Superintendent J. Chester Floyd said he had had several conversations with McCrackin and that the decision to reassign him came last weekend. "These past 60 days have been extremely challenging and pressure filled, particularly for Mr. McCrackin," Floyd said. "His decision reiterates his commitment to doing what's best for the school and the students at all times." Floyd has not decided to what position McCrackin will be reassigned, but he said McCrackin would probably spend time in the coming weeks preparing for two lawsuits filed by students stemming from the incident. So basically, he has resigned as principal so he can move to an office and work on his lawsuits. Probably safer for the kids... 6:56:38 PM |  drug policy | Links | permalink | comment []