|
|
|
Drug WarRant
 |
Saturday, September 22, 2007 |
Privatizing the Drug War
It's bad enough when government agencies are all lobbying for a chunk of drug war cash. But when you get private companies into the act as well, then the entire power structure has a financial stake in continuing and escalating the destruction.
Lucrative private players have been heavily in the mix for years, from drug testing companies to privately owned prisons -- all lobbying for harsher drug laws.
A couple of other instances have been in the news lately.
 Link
The Defense Department has picked five companies, four of them from the Washington area, for a contract to support the Pentagon's counter-narcoterrorism activities. The government may spend as much as $15 billion through the five-year contract.
The local companies are Arinc of Annapolis, Lockheed Martin of Bethesda, Raytheon Technical Services of Reston and Northrop Grumman Information Technology of McLean. The fifth company is Blackwater USA of Moyock, N.C.
Yes, we're talking about that Blackwater:
Senior Iraqi officials repeatedly complained to U.S. officials about Blackwater USA's alleged involvement in the deaths of numerous Iraqis, but the Americans took little action to regulate the private security firm until 11 Iraqis were shot dead last Sunday, according to U.S. and Iraqi officials. [...]
In the United States, Blackwater is facing a possible federal investigation over allegations that it illegally smuggled weapons into Iraq that later might have been sold on the black market.
And we're also paying them to help fight the drug war. A war that isn't really a war, but has all the casualties and corruption of war.
Closer to home...
Via The Agitator...
A private firm (Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation), has been stopping motorists and asking them to submit to tests of their breath, blood and saliva -- assisted by sherrif's deputies.
Declan McCullagh analyzes this fishy enterprise, learning that it receives over $35 million in taxpayer dollars (its only source of revenue appearing to be government grants and contracts.
PIRE seems to specialize in devising new and intrusive ways of
government meddling in personal lives.
And apparently, this kind of work pays well.
Robert Carpenter, PIRE's CEO, was paid $221,785 in 2005
Ted Langevin, a VP/CFO, was paid $200,760
Joel Grube, a PIRE research director, was paid $237,075
Ted Miller, a PIRE research director, was paid $192,444
Jan van der Eijk, IS director, was paid $194,532
Paul Gruenwald, a science director, was paid $212,437
Robert Saltz, an associate director, was paid $191,527
Genevive Ames, a staff director, was paid $183,770
Isn't it nice to know that you're paying for all this?
9:57:29 PM | drug policy | Related | permalink |
|
|
|
Where are the African-American leaders when it comes to the War on Drugs?
I bring this up from time to time... partly in the hopes of provoking a response.
No particular bit of news that set this one off -- I just happened to be looking up something at the Black Congressional Caucus website.
Given that blacks are disproportionately impacted by the drug war and that the drug war is the largest factor in the massive disenfranchisement of black voters, I was once again completely dumbfounded that I could find almost nothing at all about the war on drugs anywhere on that site. The closest I found was a mention in a past newsletter that one of its members had sponsored a bill making it harder to buy cold medicines since they can be precursors for methamphetamine!
The drug war is not anywhere on their agenda (pdf) or even their blog. No calls for crack/powder disparity sentencing reform. No calls for legislation preventing the next Tulia.
They do, however, have a riveting report on America's Switch to Digital Television (pdf).
I had hopes for another group -- National African American Drug Policy Coalition, but as far as I can tell from their website and Google/News searches, they don't appear to actually be doing anything.
So where is the African-American leadership?
- Do they secretly believe that blacks are genetically predisposed to commit crime and that the drug war is necessary to "prune" the race?
- Do they simply believe, by massive coincidence, that a larger percentage of blacks "had it coming"?
- Are they so afraid of losing political power that they'd rather see huge numbers of blacks ripped from their families and incarcerated, rather than publicly touch the "drug war issue"?
(And yes, I am purposely asking offensive questions, and I'll keep doing it until I hear the leadership speak.)
Sometimes when I see the African-American "leadership", I feel like I've stumbled into some kind of twilight zone episode -- a town whose children are regularly sacrificed to an unseen monster, and everyone keeps quiet about it for fear of something bad happening to the town -- or, perhaps, The Lottery.
I miss Martin Luther King, Jr.
8:43:46 PM | drug policy | Related | permalink |
|
|
|
|
Friday, September 21, 2007 |
Cost-benefit analysis
Link
MEXICO CITY -- A government-run human rights commission accused soldiers of rape and torture today and recommended the army be pulled out of Mexico's nationwide drug war.
What's a little rape and torture? After all, isn't it worth some raping and torture if it means that the Mexican government is able to make it look like they're making a valiant though unsuccessful effort to make it a little bit harder for Americans to buy Mexican pot?
I mean, it's just rape and torture. It's not like they're killing anybody.
The fourth case already has been widely reported. On the night of June 1, on a deserted highway in the western state of Sinaloa, soldiers opened fire on a pickup truck packed with people, killing two women and three children.
OK, but they're not killing a lot of people. And nobody important. Just women and children...
4:28:45 PM | drug policy | Related | permalink |
|
|
|
The absurdity of not being allowed to even consider all the options
The United States Government Accountability Office has prepared a report U.S. Assistance Has Helped Mexican Counternarcotics Efforts, but Tons of Illicit Drugs Continue to Flow into the United States
It starts out by assessing the realities:
According to the U.S. interagency counternarcotics community, hundreds of tons of illicit drugs flow from Mexico into the United States each year, and seizures in Mexico and along the U.S. border have been relatively small. The following illustrates some trends since 2000:
- The estimated amount of cocaine arriving in Mexico for transshipment to the United States averaged about 275 metric tons per year. Reported seizures averaged about 36 metric tons a year.
- The estimated amount of export quality heroin and marijuana produced in Mexico averaged almost 19 metric tons and 9,400 metric tons per year, respectively. Reported heroin seizures averaged less than 1 metric ton and reported marijuana seizures averaged about 2,900 metric tons a year.
- Although an estimate of the amount of methamphetamine manufactured in Mexico has not been prepared, reported seizures along the U.S. border rose from about 500 kilograms in 2000 to highs of almost 2,900 kilograms in 2005 and about 2,700 kilograms in 2006. According to U.S. officials, this more than fivefold increase indicated a dramatic rise in supply.
In addition, corruption persists within the Mexican government and challenges Mexico's efforts to curb drug production and trafficking. Moreover, Mexican drug trafficking organizations operate with relative impunity along the U.S. border and in other parts of Mexico, and have expanded their illicit business to almost every region of the United States.
Now, any sane person, business, or organized entity, when confronted with a picture that dire, would sincerely want options -- all options.
But the United States Government isn't sane, so even a major accountability report is not allowed to consider certain options.
This report goes on for over 40 pages, detailing all the failures of the drug war. The corruption. The waste. The lack of results.
And at the end of all of that, here is the totality of the GAO's recommendations:
To help counter the increasing threat of illicit drugs reaching the United States from Mexico, we recommend that the Director of ONDCP, as the lead agency for U.S. drug policy, in conjunction with the cognizant departments and agencies in the U.S. counternarcotics interagency community, coordinate with the appropriate Mexican officials before completing the Southwest Border Counternarcotics Strategy's implementation plan to help ensure Mexico's cooperation with any efforts that require it and address the cooperation issues we identified. To help maximize ongoing U.S. assistance programs, such efforts should include, but not be limited to (1) promoting greater cooperation and coordination between Defense and the Mexican military services; (2) agreeing to a maritime cooperation agreement; (3) resolving the personnel status issue to allow aerial patrols along the U.S.-Mexico border to resume; and (4) reviewing Mexico's overall aviation requirements for interdiction purposes and determining how best the United States can assist.
If only we cooperated better, it would all be fixed. Right.
And of course, not once were the words "legalize" or "regulate" included in the document. Because actually considering real solutions is not allowed.
1:15:32 AM | drug policy | Related | permalink |
|
|
|
Open Thread
I was planning on writing about New Zealand drug warrior Jaqui Dean, who was completely taken in by the Dihydrogen Monoxide joke and moved to ban water, but Steve R at Transform is all over it. Just go there and read (complete with copies of letters).
Read about LEAP's Howard Woolridge's short conversation with Congressman Mark Souder. Check out both Howard's questions and Souder's complete non-answers.
12:00:50 AM | drug policy | Related | permalink |
|
|
|
|
Thursday, September 20, 2007 |
Richard Paey receives full and immediate pardon!
Incredible news.
TALLAHASSEE -- Richard Paey, a victim in the war on drugs, was granted a full, immediate and unexpected pardon by Gov. Charlie Crist and the Cabinet Thursday morning, allowing him to get out of prison and be reunited with his family later in the day. [...]
''This is not a pleasant case,'' said Attorney General Bill McCollum, who noted that he supported mandatory-minimum sentences when he was in Congress. ``Our laws are very much to blame.''
But so are the prosecutors in Pasco County, said Paey's wife, Linda Paey, who said she couldn't understand why they zealously pursued her husband through three trials despite the widespread acknowledgement that he was a pain victim and not a drug dealer.
''I've changed. I no longer trust the police. I don't trust the justice system,'' she said. ``Only the media got our case right.''
Crist, too, took a swipe at the prosecutors, saying the war on drugs itself isn't just to blame in cases such as this. ''If they're prosecuted appropriately, then justice will be done,'' he said. ``Obviously, this case cries out for a review of that process.''
This case cries out for a review of a whole lot of things.
11:52:57 AM | drug policy | Related | permalink |
|
|
|
Doing a little happy dance
This is a small thing for the rest of you, but it's a great piece of news for me and my little piece of the world.
Rep. Jerry Weller, dogged by ethics questions surrounding his Nicaraguan investments and his wife's finances, is set to announce his retirement in the near future, Republican sources said Wednesday.
One of the sources said the announcement could come as soon as Thursday. Others said it would be early next month. A spokesman for the Illinois Republican did not return messages seeking comment.
Weller is my Congressman (R-Illinois 11). He has consistently voted in favor of the drug war in pretty much every way, and attacked me personally in 2004.
A little recap for those who weren't around then...
Speaking of smears, Weller, in the closing days of the campaign, is running a radio ad and sending out a direct mail piece noting that Renner is endorsed on a Web site called "DrugwarRant.com" and implying that Renner is somehow aligned with a group promoting heroin use. -- Chicago Sun Times
And the highlight was Renner blowing up over allegations he supports the use of all drugs including heroin. He called the attack scurrilous and said Weller stepped way over the line. Weller says Renner accepted a campaign donation from a website that also has directions on how to inject heroin. -- WHOI
Some endorsements are not worth it. Democrat Tari Renner says it shouldn't be a crime to have a small amount of marijuana but he is rejecting an endorsement from a group that favors the legalization of all drugs. His opponent, republican congressman Jerry Weller, whose engagement to the daughter of a Central American dictator has generated a controversy of its own, says that Renner's views on drugs endanger families in the district, and so it goes in this hot congressional race. -- WLS
(More here)
It sure would be nice to have a Representative that I could write to and talk to about drug policy issues. I'd even be happy with one that disagreed with my views, but wasn't a total... (fill in your own word)
Update:
Sun Times
Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics, a Washington watchdog group, labeled Weller one of the 22 most corrupt members of Congress, accusing him of improperly disclosing land deals in Nicaragua.
Weller also is fighting a subpoena to testify in a bribery trial involving a jailed former California congressman.
Then word spread Wednesday in Republican circles that Weller won't seek re-election.
But his campaign manager, Steven Shearer, insisted Weller, a seven-term congressman, is running.
We'll see.
And just for the record, I don't care if he leaves voluntarily, by indictment, or by the ballot box.
9:08:39 AM | drug policy | Related | permalink |
|
|
|
|
Wednesday, September 19, 2007 |
More on the Annual Report on Major Illicit Drug Producing Countries
A very surreal presentation by Christy McCampbell , Deputy Assistant Secretary for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs, where it appears that success is measured by wishing it.
QUESTION: You threw out a bunch of countries where there are extenuating circumstances. I understand Afghanistan being one of them, but a few of the other ones are close U.S. allies and in some cases, this is what Plan Colombia has been going on for many years. Why are there extenuating circumstances in these countries beyond the fact that they're U.S. allies? [...]
MS. MCCAMPBELL: Okay. Well, first of all, let me go back to your questions about -- you mentioned Plan Colombia. Plan Colombia has absolutely been a success and a lot of that is because of the assistance that the United States has put in there. Now they are on the -- what we're -- Colombia is going on a downhill -- gradually moving downhill to take over all the eradication and the counternarcotics activities themselves. We call it nationalization. They have done a great job down there and because of Plan Colombia, they have amazing statistics. Their kidnappings are down by 76 percent. Their homicides are down by over 40 percent. There has been a great success rate there.
So when you talk about extenuating circumstances, they still are growing cocaine -- or coca. They still are producing cocaine. But in the overall picture, over the last years that we have helped them and worked with them as partners on Plan Colombia, it has been nothing but a success. So that's what I would say to you on Plan Colombia. [...]
QUESTION: Well -- but just to follow, I mean -- in addition to Plan Colombia, I mean, your whole Andean Regional Initiative, which was launched several years ago -- why are these countries still the major drug transit or producing nations? I mean, I understand that you say that there's been some success, but how can you claim it's a success when out of all the countries in the world, these are still the most major producing and transiting countries?
MS. MCCAMPBELL: Well, my answer to that is they are a success because they are absolutely working with the United States. Those governments are trying their best to keep the coca and the cocaine out of our country, and that's what we're striving for.
1:48:05 PM | drug policy | Related | permalink |
|
|
|
The Farce of Drug War Certification
It's that time again, and President Bush has issued his memorandum -- Presidential Determination on Major Drug Transit or Major Illicit Drug Producing Countries for Fiscal Year 2008 -- identifying which countries have been naughty and nice to see whether they get a lump of coal in their stocking (or a pile of cash and Sikorsky Black Hawk helicopters).
Of course, it has nothing to do with drug war success. It is, to an extent, public bribery to toe Washington's absurd drug war line, but it's mostly a way to reward and punish regimes based on other political goals.
Now you might well ask what the United States would do about a country that had suddenly vaulted into producing almost all of the world's opium in just a short time under a particular regime. Wouldn't the country in charge of that be up for some strict sanctions? Of course, the country is Afghanistan and the ones in charge... well, that's kind of... us.
So the President necessarily spends some time talking about Afghanistan, but I have absolutely no idea what was said. It's a fine piece of obfuscation and doublespeak.
Although President Karzai has strongly attacked narcotrafficking as the greatest threat to Afghanistan, one third of the Afghan economy remains opium-based, which contributes to widespread public corruption, damage to licit economic growth, and the strengthening of the insurgency. The government at all levels must be held accountable to deter and eradicate poppy cultivation, remove and prosecute corrupt officials, and investigate and prosecute or extradite narcotraffickers and those financing their activities. We are concerned that failure to act decisively now could undermine security, compromise democratic legitimacy, and imperil international support for vital assistance.
In Afghanistan, one model for success can be drawn by comparing the marked differences in cultivation between the northern and southern provinces. Several northern provinces contributed to a decline in poppy cultivation resulting from a mixture of political will and incentives and disincentives, such as public information, alternative development, and eradication. Furthermore, several northern provinces with very low amounts of poppy are well on their way to becoming poppy free.
Despite the significant progress made in Afghanistan since 2001, the country continues to face tremendous challenges. Our struggle to win hearts and minds, while confronting the insurgency, continues to directly hinge on our ability to help the Afghan government produce visible results. We need to encourage a firm belief among the Afghan people that their national government is capable of delivering an alternative to the preceding decades of conflict. Our reconstruction assistance is an essential instrument to achieve that goal.
Ah. Yes. There's a clear road-map.
[Thanks, Allan]
9:28:39 AM | drug policy | Related | permalink |
|
|
|
Members of Congress write a letter
Link
Washington, D.C. -- A letter signed by 45 members of the U.S. House of Representatives will be delivered today to the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) demanding an end to the obstruction of scientific research aimed at developing marijuana as a legal prescription medicine.
Good for them. Here are the 45 members (including two Presidential candidates), in case you want to thank any of them.
John W. Olver, Dana Rohrabacher, George Miller, Howard Berman, Ron Paul, Tammy Baldwin, Barney Frank, Sam Farr, Jim McGovern, Steve Rothman, Maurice Hinchey, Raúl M. Grijalva, Henry A. Waxman, Jerrold Nadler, Lynn Woolsey, Dennis Kucinich, Mazie Hirono, Michael Capuano, Jim Moran, James Oberstar, Barbara Lee, Julia Carson, Robert Wexler Jan Schakowsky, Steve Cohen, Danny Davis, Zoe Lofgren, John Lewis, Fortney Pete Stark, Michael M. Honda, Ed Pastor, Jesse L. Jackson, Jr., Gary L. Ackerman, Neil Abercrombie, Donald M. Payne, John F. Tierney, Lois Capps, Rosa L. DeLauro, LorettaSanchez, James R. Langevin, John Campbell, David E. Price, Peter A. DeFazio, Lucille Roybal-Allard, Edolphus Towns
12:08:10 AM | drug policy | Related | permalink |
|
|
|
|
Tuesday, September 18, 2007 |
Waiting to Inhale screening in Chicago Thursday
The Chicago premiere of Waiting to Inhale will be a free screening on Thursday at 6:30, followed by a post-screen discussion that will include the director/producer, the Dean of the College of Rush University, and noted Illinois drug policy reform advocate James Gierach.
7:55:10 AM | drug policy | Related | permalink |
|
|
|
|
Monday, September 17, 2007 |
How to prevent progressive neurodegenerative disorders
Via ezrydn and Lady Bee...
Pro-Pot Group Claims Marijuana Cures Mad Cow Disease
A New Zealand pro-marijuana group says it has scientific evidence that cannabis can stop the development of mad cow disease.
It was not clear whether the findings applied to both cows and humans.
The National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML) said a French study showed cannabidiol might be effective in preventing bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), known as mad cow disease, the New Zealand Press Association reported. [...]
Scientists at the National Centre for Scientific Research in France found cannabidiol -- a non-psychoactive ingredient -- may prevent the development of prion diseases (progressive neurodegenerative disorders), the most well known of which is BSE, Norml said.
Researchers found cannabidiol inhibited the accumulation of prion proteins in infected mice and sheep.
My favorite quote from New Zealand Norml spokesman Chris Fowlie:
"[It] should be supported by any MP with a clear head. Unfortunately most politicians act like mad cows whenever cannabis is mentioned."
11:52:29 PM | drug policy | Related | permalink |
|
|
|
Happy Constitution Day
- Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
- A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
- No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
- 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.
- No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
- In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.
- In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
- Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
- The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
- The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
Note: It's been pointed out that Bill of Rights Day isn't until December, but I don't care. This is Constitution Day, and the Bill of Rights is my favorite part of the Constitution, so I celebrate it every day.
However, I'll give you a quote from the main part of the Constitution as well -- a part that has been, unfortunately, misused to create the entire Federal war on drugs.
The Congress shall have Power ... To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;
7:15:37 AM | drug policy | Related | permalink |
|
|
|
|
Sunday, September 16, 2007 |
Careful what you wish for...
There's a bit of a move recently to claim a victory in the drug war, particularly regarding cocaine.
First you have Bolivia's drug war wins U.S. approval -- an article about how the United States has determined that Bolivia has contributed enough to the worldwide drug war disaster, after all, to continue to get big payoffs from American taxpayers. This is merely part of the annual dance of the U.S. tying foreign aid to countries' agreeing to be accomplices in the drug war.
Then you have Uribe Claims Success in Drug War as He Pushes U.S. on Trade -- more of the same dance. This time, you have Uribe pointing to arrests of drug traffickers as proof of Colombia's worth in getting a massive free-trade deal.
But now it gets a little interesting.
High U.S. cocaine cost shows drug war working: Mexico
MONTERREY, Mexico (Reuters) - Mexico's attorney general said on Friday fewer drug-related killings at home and rising narcotics prices in the United States showed his government is winning the war against cartels. [...]
Cocaine and methamphetamine prices are rising across 8,000 U.S. towns and cities and purity is falling, showing fewer drugs are getting into the United States, he added.
"Average wholesale prices for cocaine have risen from $17,000 (per kg) the end of 2006 to almost $30,000 last month," Medina Mora said at a news conference in the northern Mexican city of Monterrey.
And, of course, you have the drug czar getting excited about all this...
A counterdrug intelligence community collaborative analysis recently reported a striking development in the decades-long battle against cocaine: according to law enforcement and intelligence sources, many cocaine markets across the United States have been experiencing reduced availability at the wholesale level, with reverberations affecting retail sales in many U.S. cities.
Expect the drug czar to play this up quite a bit.
The reality is that any shortages or price increases that actually exist are likely to be a blip -- a short term realignment of black market leadership and/or trade routes. That's the way market forces work. Supply always manages to meet demand. If you close off a trade route, then another one is found, or an official's corruption point is found.
But let's say, for argument's sake, that there could be an extended reduction in the availability of cocaine in the United States -- that is, after all, a stated part of the mission of the DEA ("reducing the availability of illicit controlled substances on the domestic and international markets")
What if the DEA was successful? What would happen with a cocaine shortage?
Of course, price goes up -- everyone understands that. But what happens next? Everyone who has been using cocaine suddenly decides not to do it any more? Not on your life.
Price elasticity: For those who didn't sleep through economics class, you know that elasticity refers to the change in quantity demanded relative to the change in price. The DEA would like to believe that cocaine is very elastic-- that an increase in price will cause people to no longer demand it.
The truth is that most products have a range of elasticity within different user groups. For the casual, non-problematic user of cocaine (who makes up most of cocaine users, but consumes a smaller portion of the total) the price may be relatively elastic. If the price goes too high, he'll stop (or, more likely, substitute). However, for the heavy cocaine user (minority of users, but consuming the majority of the total quantity), price is likely to be very inelastic.
A price increase for the heavy cocaine user simply means that their already stretched financial resources will be pushed even further, causing them to go to extraordinary lengths to get the money to purchase their drugs (and you know what that's likely to mean).
So, once again, you have the drug warriors attempting to accomplish the worst possible scenario -- driving away the non-problematic users, and making the problematic users more problematic -- the very opposite of what a sane policy would do.
Substitution: Here's the other challenging, and often unpredictable, aspect of external interference with supply and demand of illicit drugs. In most cases, people don't stop using drugs if the price of a drug goes to high -- they merely switch to another one.
Methamphetamine, for example, is largely a substitution drug. The intense crack-down on prescription amphetamines and the prices of other drugs created a demand for this cheap, dirty drug.
And even if it was theoretically possible to dramatically reduce the long-term availability of all illicit drugs (and it isn't), people would find something else. Invent a new drug. Sniff glue (or like the two kids who died in my high school huffing kerosene).
And the DEA and the drug czar should maybe wonder what drug might be the substitution of choice in the current situation, if there really is a shortage of cocaine -- perhaps some drug that's being over-produced somewhere in the world.
Careful what you wish for. And learn the basics of economic principles.
The DEA and the Drug Czar (and, in fact, the entire drug war apparatus) are kind of like the underpants gnomes of drug policy.
- Step One: Reduce availability
- Step Two: ???
- Step Three: Drug-free America
10:54:06 AM | drug policy | Related | permalink |
|
|
|
|
|
|
