|
|
|
Drug WarRant
 |
Saturday, April 16, 2005 |
University Colorado Students Pass Referendum
Via Cannabis News:
Colorado -- University of Colorado students this week approved a measure that asks officials to ease up on marijuana penalties.
The referendum, put forth by the Boulder-based group Safer Alternative For Enjoyable Recreation, asks that university officials make sanctions for marijuana use no more severe than they are for comparable alcohol violations.
The students have put their finger on an essential question that has been unanswered by prohibitionists -- "Why are penalties for marijuana harsher than those for alcohol, when alcohol is the more dangerous substance?"
School officials say they won't be bound by the outcome. That's going to cause a conflict.
8:56:04 PM | drug policy | Links | permalink |
|
|
|
A new job for Andrea?
Libby at Last One Speaks scooped me big time with the rumor that Andrea Barthwell has been hired by G.W. Pharmaceuticals to lobby for approval of its cannabis-plant extracts in the U.S.
No problem for Andrea's new-found flexible viewpoints.
Libby's got the right idea when she says:
I have a feeling the prohibitionists are brewing this new strategy of keeping the plant illegal by vilifying the innocuous buzz so they can control the market with derivatives and chemical synthetics. They've known for decades the plant is safe but they couldn't figure out how to keep people from obtaining the drug on their own by growing it. This lets them work both sides of the fence.
That's certainly been the plan for the pharmaceutical companies -- keep medical marijuana illegal while they patent every possible derivitive.
8:21:42 PM | drug policy | Links | permalink |
|
|
|
|
Friday, April 15, 2005 |
Action Alert: Five Years for Passing a Joint
Absolutely horrible legislation is going through Congress. Please take a moment to email your Representative and Senators. (Via TalkLeft)
Congressman James Sensenbrenner has launched his next assault on freedom. The full House Judiciary Committee is set to vote as early as next week on H.R. 1528, which creates a new group of mandatory miniumum penalties for non-violent drug offenses, including a five year penalty for passing a joint to someone who's been in drug treatment.
That's right: Passing a joint to someone who used to be in drug treatment will land you in federal prison for a minimum of five years.
The "Defending America's Most Vulnerable: Safe Access to Drug Treatment and Child Protection Act of 2005" (H.R. 1528) was introduced by House Judiciary Committee Chairman James Sensenbrenner (R-WI) on April 6, and it has already passed out of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security.
Senselessbrenner has been after this for a while (I mentioned an earlier version of this bill last year).
The list of atrocities in this bill are unbelievable. Here are a couple of examples:
- 10-year sentence for a second offense of distributing marijuana to a person under 21. (this would include one 20-year-old college student giving a joint to another 20-year old college student)
- Three-year mandatory minimum for parents who witness or learn about drug trafficking activities, targeting or even near their children, if they do not report it to law enforcement authorities within 24 hours and do not provide full assistance investigating, apprehending, and prosecuting the offender.
- Increase to five years the federal mandatory minimum sentence for the sale of a controlled substance within 1,000 feet of a school, college, public library, drug treatment facility (or any place where drug treatment, including classes, are held), or private or public daycare facilities - in short, almost anywhere in cities across the U.S.
- Punishes defendants for the "relevant conduct" of co-conspirators that occurred BEFORE the defendant joined the conspiracy.
There's much more. Read TalkLeft's full post.
Please act now.
7:56:32 AM | drug policy | Links | permalink |
|
|
|
An Unlucky Crook
A Palm Bay, Florida man was at work when a tornado came and ripped off the roof of his home. That's pretty bad luck. Unfortunately, the lack of roof exposed the 54 marijuana plants in his bedroom, which were noticed by the emergency crews looking for injured victims. Police arrested him at work.
Now he's got no marijuana plants, no roof (and probably no job).
The unlucky man's name? Geoffrey Crook (I think it's time to change it.)
Link.
[Thanks, Tim]
12:29:13 AM | drug policy | Links | permalink |
|
|
|
|
Thursday, April 14, 2005 |
Smoking pot makes you better educated, gives you higher income
Of course, the headline to this post isn't really true, but if we were to use the tactics of the Drug Czar, that is what we'd say.
Particularly given this news from Canada (you know, the place where they have that Super Pot -- the crack cocaine of marijuana -- that Walters says is destroying our citizens):
Ottawa, Ontario: Lifetime cannabis users are likely to be single, well
educated, and earning an above average salary, according to a recent survey
of 13,900 Canadians conducted by Health Canada and the Canadian Executive
Council on Addictions.
Approximately 45 percent of the Canadian population over age 15 reported
having used cannabis during their lifetime - up from 23 percent in 1989, the
survey reported. Lifetime cannabis use increased with education and income.
Among those with some post-secondary education, 52 percent reported having
used cannabis. By comparison, among those without a high school degree,
only 35 percent reported having tried cannabis. In addition, 55 percent of
those respondents with a "high income adequacy" said they had used cannabis,
as opposed to only 43 percent of those with a "low income adequacy."
Among those who reported consuming cannabis, most said that they used it
infrequently and did not "experienc[e] serious harm due to their cannabis
use."
So no, this news doesn't say that smoking pot causes a better education or a higher income, but it does make it pretty hard to support a whole lot of the things that drug warriors claim.
Via NORML. Full text available here (pdf).
6:22:14 PM | drug policy | Links | permalink |
|
|
|
Schapelle Corby
In another trial, in another part of the world, a female student faces a possible sentence of death by firing squad for a marijuana offense, when it's quite possible that baggage handlers used her luggage (without her knowledge) to do the smuggling.
Sickening.
[Thanks, Scott]
6:02:34 PM | drug policy | Links | permalink |
|
|
|
Pain doctor gets 25 years for helping people
Could have been worse -- prosecutors asked for life -- but this is essentially a life sentence. At TalkLeft.
Virginia medical doctor William Hurwitz was sentenced to 25 years in a federal prison today for over-prescribing pain medication.
It's time to get federal police out of the business of deciding our medical treatment. States and the medical community should handle this, not national law enforcement.
Here's hoping that Raich v. Ashcroft can be a step in that direction.
5:33:51 PM | drug policy | Links | permalink |
|
|
|
Presidential Humor
Link
NOW, THEREFORE, I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim April 14, 2005, as National D.A.R.E. Day.
Hasn't anybody told him?
I think yesterday was National Flat Earth Day.
[Note: some background on the failure of D.A.R.E. is here]
10:07:23 AM | drug policy | Links | permalink |
|
|
|
And we only have one drug war...
In Thailand:
Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra yesterday launched his government's third war on drugs with the Office of Narcotics Control Board (ONCB) setting a target for Thailand to be free of illegal drug production by the end of this year. ...
Ah, those wonderful drug-free goals. Remember them? The U.S. used to have a goal of drug free America by the year 2000 (just in case you haven't been following along, it didn't happen). Of course, prohibition ended up causing more problems (including contributing to a younger initiation in drug use). So now we have a goal of reducing teen drug use by 10%.
Back to Thailand. So how did their first two wars go?
The first war on drugs in 2003 resulted in the killings of over 2,500 drug suspects. Police claimed traffickers were killing each other to sever any links to themselves.
However, local and foreign human rights organisations accused the authorities of a secret campaign of summary execution of suspects, charging that many innocent people were killed on the basis of hearsay.
Well, there's 2,500 people who won't be doing any more drugs. I guess the Prime Minister would consider that a successful war.
Mr Thaksin, however, refused to admit any failure and launched a second war in October last year. But he released no statistics this time round.
Oops. No statistics for Drug War II. Not a good sign. Usually if you win a war, you like to brag about it, not suddenly go quiet and then declare a third war.
So let's see how the drug smugglers have reacted to these wars:
Despite the increased suppression of the trade, Thailand is still attractive to many drug smugglers due to its higher retail prices ...
Yep, Thailand has made itself very attractive for drug smuggling because of its harsh prohibition tactics. Prices have gone up (while demand is inelastic) and now smugglers can make a huge profit for a small amount of drugs. It's the get rich quick opportunity for the bold or violent international criminal -- made possible by Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra.
That's how the black market works.
8:39:16 AM | drug policy | Links | permalink |
|
|
|
More humor
Check out Bob Merkin's post at Vleeptron --- particularly the last half: "Do cannabis withdrawals need drug therapy? Controlled trial from America."
CASE STUDY: Cannabis Withdrawal in Adult Caucasian Male
PUBLICATION: The Journal of Non-Peer-Reviewed Politicized Irreproducable Junk Science
EXPERIMENTAL METHODOLOGY: Subject ran out and couldn't get any for a couple of weeks.
CLINICAL OBSERVATIONS: Subject was observed to be grouchy, and vocalized using vocabulary acquired during prior enlisted military service. Subject reported loss of desire to play scratchy old Jimi Hendrix and Traffic vinyl. Noticeable loss of appetite for Reeses Peanut Butter Cups, Necco Skybars and "Dagwood" sandwiches.
7:56:08 AM | drug policy | Links | permalink |
|
|
|
|
Wednesday, April 13, 2005 |
Afghanistan
US mercenaries spill blood over Afghan opium in today's Independent (UK) [thanks, Sanho].
Hundreds of Afghan eradicators under the command of American private security contractors were going to head into the fields around the town and destroy the beautiful red and white blooms days before they could be harvested for their narcotic sap.
But instead of the peaceful, model operation that was promised as an example to demonstrate the Kabul government's serious intentions, Maiwand and its surrounding villages exploded into violence in what could be a foretaste of resistance to Western-backed efforts to bring Afghanistan's opium industry under control.
By the end of yesterday four government soldiers had been wounded by gunfire from farmers, American security contractors were said to be sheltering behind razor wire in a protected camp, and Afghan police and counter-narcotics forces had fought fierce battles which local people said left five dead. Plans to eradicate poppies were temporarily shelved in the area as political bigwigs shuttled to and fro trying to ease tensions and broker some kind of deal with the angry opium farmers.
Dense clouds of black smoke hung over the town from burning barricades, hundreds of shots rang out from gun battles, and American helicopter gunships flew low overhead. ...
Maiwan was being targeted first for eradication because it was regarded as a relatively peaceful area with effective government control. The hard cases have yet to be tackled. ...
"The farmers are angry with the Americans and the Kabul government," said Ahmed Weil. "It is only the fields of the poor that are being destroyed, not the fields of the rich." Afghans complain that wealthy warlords keep their stockpiles of opium while poor farmers are stopped from growing the crop or have their fields cut down.
Sigh.
Is there nobody in government who understands basic economics? Supply and demand? And what did you think would happen when you come in as foreigners and destroy the only livelihood that exists for poor farmers? What do you expect them to do? Get a job at McDonald's?
Note: a separate article notes that the provincial governor is trying to make a "voluntary" program work (in what is one of the more bizarre uses of the word "volunary")
Mashal said that if the farmers did not volunteer for eradication the police would resume the operation.
8:20:27 AM | drug policy | Links | permalink |
|
|
|
|
Tuesday, April 12, 2005 |
He's at it again.
The Drug Czar's got a new set of advertisements coming out. According to his release:
The Office of National Drug Control
Policy's (ONDCP) National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign today launches a new
advertising campaign to provide scientific facts about marijuana risks and
harms for parents of teens. Themed "Facts for Parents," the print ad campaign
underscores the potency and carcinogenic content of marijuana and outlines
short- and long-term consequences of marijuana use on adolescent brain
development and learning. Starting today, the ads are running in The New York
Times, USA Today, The Washington Post and The Wall Street Journal. During the
course of the next four months, they will also appear in Newsweek,
BusinessWeek, Time and Smithsonian magazines.
"Scientific facts." Spare me.
Check their new ads yourself.
An example:
Reliable evidence shows that marijjuana today is more than twice as powerful on average as it was 20 years ago. It contains twice the concentration of THC, the chemical that affects the brain. Pot can turn your hopes and dreams for your kids into a nightmare of lost opportunities.
Reliable evidence shows that gin has more than twice as much alcohol as beer Which is why you don't drink gin by the case.
Notice how they word the ad? They don't come out and specifically claim that higher THC pot will cause a nightmare, but they make the reader infer it.
Check out this next one.
Quite a few people think that smoking pot is less likely to cause cancer than a regular cigarette. You may have even heard some parents say they'd rather their kids smoked a little pot than get hooked on cigarettes.
Wrong, and wrong again.
According to the National Institute on Drug Abuse, one joint can deliver four times as much cancer causing tar as one cigarette.
Again, notice what they did? They didn't say that marijuana causes cancer (there's no evidence that it does). They simply said it can deliver "cancer causing tar" -- but not that tar from marijuana cigarettes alone, in the amounts that most people consume it, adds anything to your chances of getting cancer. And they ignore the fact that people smoke much less pot than cigarettes (particularly if it's more potent!) and it's not addictive, so they tend to quit (unlike cigarettes).
But the ONDCP cares so little for life, that they're willing to blatantly advise parents that it's better that their kid get hooked on cigarettes than smoke a joint!
It's particularly disturbing to see this now -- with tax day approaching -- knowing that I'm paying for it.
6:28:23 PM | drug policy | Links | permalink |
|
|
|
Alabama?
I've been negligent in reporting that a medical marijuana bill is quietly working its way through the legislature of -- yes that's right -- Alabama.
I admire the persistence of some pretty incredible drug policy reformers in Alabama (Loretta Nall is one of the most notable, but there are others as well). The medical marijuana effort in Alabama is starting to gain some publicity, and although few think it will succeed, the effort is getting a positive message out there.
Alabama has a history of being fairly proud of its harsh marijuana laws and enforcement. Interestingly, Alabama was one of several states to provide supporting statements in the Raich v. Ashcroft case -- not because they believed in medical marijuana, but rather because they believed in states' rights enough to support the philosophical concept despite their clear opposition to medical marijuana.
Here are some excerpts from the Amicus Brief of Alabama, Mississippi and Louisiana:
Alabama, has apparently earned something of a reputation for its zeal in prosecuting and punishing drug crimes. See E. Nadelmann, An End to Marijuana Prohibition, National Review, p.28 (July 12, 2004) ("Alabama currently locks up people convicted three times of marijuana possession for 15 years to life."). It is not a reputation of which Alabama is embarrassed or ashamed. On the contrary, Alabama's Attorney General has every intention of continuing to prosecute drug crimes to the fullest extent of the law. ...
Under Alabama law, as under the U.S. Code, marijuana is a "Schedule I" drug, meaning it has a "high potential for abuse" and has "no accepted medical use in treatment in the United States or lacks accepted safety for use in treatment under medical supervision,"
Respondents' conduct -- cultivating and possessing marijuana for personal consumption -- would thus plainly be criminal in the State of Alabama. Notably for present purposes, Alabama courts have -- again, at the Attorney General's urging -- expressly refused to recognize "'medical necessity' as a valid defense in a prosecution for the unlawful possession of marijuana."
Good luck, Alabama. Always keeping it interesting.
12:07:11 AM | drug policy | Links | permalink |
|
|
|
|
Monday, April 11, 2005 |
Souder gets some love at home
An article in the Fort Wayne Journal Gazette (Representative Mark Souder's hometown paper) takes the drug warrior to task:
Over the past six years, most major education, addiction recovery, civil rights and student organizations have said that Souder's law is a bad idea. Some of the more than 180 organizations that have risen in opposition to Souder's HEA drug provision are the National Education Association, the National Association of Student Financial Aid Administrators, the Association for Addiction Professionals, the NAACP and the United States Student Association.
In response to this growing outrage, Souder has backtracked, saying that his own law should be scaled back and calling its current enforcement "Draconian." He claims he meant for the law to apply only to students who get convicted while they're attending college, but that the Department of Education is misinterpreting the law by also denying aid to students with convictions in the past.
But blaming his own mistakes on others doesn't help the victims of his fundamentally flawed law. ...
Souder has been talking about changing his law for several years but hasn't done anything to make it happen. This shows that while he's more than happy to talk the talk, he doesn't care enough about the victims of his law to truly walk the walk. ...
It's time for Rep. Souder to come clean and admit that writing the HEA drug provision was a horrible mistake. His new proposal is simply a diversion meant to fool voters into thinking he cares about students. Thousands of young people like me continue to be unnecessarily hurt by Souder's wrongheaded law every year, and his new proposal won't help many of them.
Thanks to the always helpful Tom Angell and Students for a Sensible Drug Policy. This organization, with chapters all over the country, has been doing incredible work in raising awareness of the horrible HEA financial aid provision. With their work, and the support they've generated in Congress, the act may finally be repealed.
If you haven't yet raised your voice about the HEA drug act, do so now.
11:41:55 PM | drug policy | Links | permalink |
|
|
|
|
|
|
