Friday, May 19, 2006

Open Thread There's a couple of articles that I've been meaning to discuss, but others have done a good job of taking them on, so I'll link instead. thehim properly trashes a really stupid article on "drugged driving Radley parses and dissects Jonah Goldberg's rather bizarre What if Mexicans were Crack piece. I'm off to play a gig in Iowa. Back in a couple of days. 11:52:18 AM |  drug policy | Links | permalink | comment []

Colorable Suspicion? Just got this from Tom at DARE Generation Diary Stop Congress From Expanding School Searches Students for Sensible Drug Policy is asking for your help to stop a bill that would further curtail the rights of students in public schools all across the country. The so-called "Student and Teacher Safety Act of 2006" (H.R. 5295) would make it easier for teachers and school administrators to search students' lockers and bags for drugs and other contraband. SSDP needs your help to make sure that this bill never becomes law. Currently, in order for a teacher to search a student's locker they need to have "reasonable suspicion" that the student is in possession of illegal drugs. H.R. 5295 would change the standard needed for a search to "colorable suspicion," a term that has been made up entirely for this bill. Essentially, a teacher would need nothing more than a hunch in order to search a student's locker or possessions. This bill is nothing more than another attack on the constitutional rights of young people by the federal government. Students should never have to check their constitutional rights at the schoolhouse door. Please take two minutes to send a letter to your member of Congress asking him or her to oppose H.R. 5295. SSDP has created a pre-written letter that you can easily send by visiting http://capwiz.com/mobilize/issues/alert/?alertID=8779706 Colorable Suspicion? WTF? As far as I knew, a blank sheet of paper is "colorable" and that doesn't seem to be much of a standard for searching anything. So I decided to look up "colorable". Meant to deceive; not genuine. Seemingly true or genuine; plausible. So... a suspicion that is not genuine? Or maybe one that is seemingly true? "Well, gee, my suspicion was... plausible." Ah, yes, we see the direction the Fourth Amendment is heading. The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. In general, people and their possessions shouldn't be searched unless someone can come up with a plausible reason to do so. 11:14:51 AM |  drug policy | Links | permalink | comment []

The media needs education on the economics of the drug trade Marcela Sanchez has an interesting article in today's Washington Post: Bolivia's Morales Wants to Expand Coca Use The article covers most of the salient points about the issue that have been covered here and elsewhere, but glaringly absent is any understanding on the part of Ms. Sanchez of two critical points regarding cocaine trade: Cocaine eradication and interdiction does not work. Demand for cocaine is relatively inelastic. If you understand these two simple facts (and these are not just opinions, they are demonstrable and provable), then parts of her article make no sense. Such as: One might say that by arguing that more cultivation is needed, Morales is already recognizing defeat in efforts to stem the supply of coca leaves for the illegal market. Also, it seems naive to think that encouraging coca growers to produce crops for products yet to be marketed would be any more successful than crop substitution has been for overall reduction of illicit coca use. Meanwhile, drug traffickers, with their highly sophisticated means for developing and delivering their product worldwide, would be the first to profit from increased production. The flawed assumption here is that the production of legal coca will somehow bail out the traffickers who have not been able to produce enough cocaine on their own or allow them to vastly increase their market. But the economics of the drug trade do not support this assumption. Additionally, it is ridiculous to assume that marketing of new products must occur before their production (ignoring the fact that Morales has been working on international allowances, discussion of new products and working to give farmers some hope simultaneously). And dismissing the effort as one as likely to fail as other crop substitutions shows ignorance of the culture. Morales is attempting to develop a unique market for a product that his people are particularly well-suited to supply. That deserves both support and kudos. If he is allowed by the international community to do this, it will improve the health of the legal economy in Bolivia, while reducing the fiscal power of the drug traffickers as an overall percentage of the country's "actual" GDP. Marcela needs to go back to school. 10:52:07 AM |  drug policy | Links | permalink | comment []

This is Bill O'Reilly's brain... Via Media Matters May 17: O'REILLY: You know, this immigration thing is very interesting because it -- it points out a lot of things, bigger issues that y'all should be aware of. You know, Mexico doesn't care about us. Mexico doesn't care about the United States. And, you know, it -- it -- we have to be friends with them. I mean, we just can't be enemies with them. But we're dealing with a country that is -- you know -- is so corrupt and so out of control that we -- you know -- we have to deal with them on a certain level. But we certainly can't let their corruption infect us, and it has, particularly with the drug trafficking. You know, when you have the volume of narcotics, millions of tons of narcotics coming across the southern border -- if I'm the president of the United States -- that alone makes me put the [U.S. National] Guard on the border and not 6,000 guards. I would have 30, 40 thousand down there, because the damage that narcotics do to the fabric of society -- my makeup artist for the TV side -- I don't need makeup for radio, but some people say -- LIS WIEHL: Yeah, it would help. O'REILLY: Yeah, thank you -- was mugged the other day; punched in the face in Greenwich Village. Now, who does that? Drug addicts desperate for money. So, this poor woman is walking down the street trying to support her little son, some guy walks up to her, punches her in the face and takes her purse. Now, nine out of 10 of these guys are drug addicts. So, she is a victim of the Mexican drug corruption. And -- and -- and all you have to do is multiply that by 10 million and you see how all of this corruption in Mexico has infected our society. Yet, you have these pinheads in Congress -- see, they're not gonna get mugged. President Bush isn't' gonna get mugged. All right. It's a wonder that his brain doesn't just leak out his ears. It doesn't seem to be attached to anything. 12:01:17 AM |  drug policy | Links | permalink | comment []