My host this weekend sadly lost a whole lot of valuable stuff in the basement after the incredibly heavy rains in Chicago Friday night, including his wifi, so I’m just getting caught up.
The big news: V.A. Easing Rules for Users of Medical Marijuana
The Department of Veterans Affairs will formally allow patients treated at its hospitals and clinics to use medical marijuana in states where it is legal, a policy clarification that veterans have sought for several years.
For a federal agency to actually recognize medical marijuana, even in this limited way, is pretty amazing.
Cannabis Commerce. After discussing the recent RAND study on the uncertainties of a narrow range of the effects of legalizing cannabis in California, it is interesting to check out Cannabis Commerce in the U.S.A.. Author Lory Kohn, who describes himself as someone who “bypassed Economics 101 for obscure liberal arts courses like Love And The Secular Spirit,” got interested enough in the economics of cannabis legalization to interview economists at length and attempt to put together a layman’s guide to the economics.
I haven’t read it all, yet, but from what I’ve checked out, it certainly seems useful.
An update regarding the shooting of Trevon Cole in Las Vegas. It appears that there were some errors in the affidavit prepared by the officer who shot and killed Cole.
Las Vegas police say they thought Trevon Cole was a hard-core drug dealer with a long record of arrests in Texas and California when they broke down his apartment door and pointed a gun at his head last month.
They were wrong. […]
Investigators might have confused him with another Trevon Cole — one with a different middle name who is seven years older, at least three inches shorter and 100 pounds lighter, records show. That Trevon Cole has several marijuana-related arrests in Houston, all misdemeanors.
Shoddy police work? Probably. But would even some additional marijuana-related misdemeanors actually justify breaking down someone’s apartment door and pointing a gun at his head?
No. There’s no excuse for the action to begin with.
Remembering 1972. Kate Woods writes Proposition 19: Weâ€™ve Been Here Before, a really nice piece remembering the devastating vote on the first Proposition 19, almost 40 years ago, and some increased optimism about the current one.
The always excellent Dan Gardner explains the drug war for the idiots who failed to learn the lesson of “Colombianization”: We have been ‘winning’ the war on drugs for 90 years
A very odd “Pro vs. Con” by Larry Lechuga at the 420 Times: Pro vs. Con: To Legalize Or Not?. He gathers quotes from advocates and opponents of legalization on the following questions:
- Will legalizing marijuana lead to widespread and excessive use of the drug?
- Will legalizing marijuana lead to huge social costs in terms of hospital visits, traffic safety, etc.?
- Will the legalization of marijuana lead to increased crime rates?
- One of the leading arguments in favor of legalizing marijuana is that it would generate a significant amount of tax revenue for cash-strapped California. Is this a good source of income?
Really? Those are the only questions? Not one on prohibition?
The BBC is on the cutting edge of investigative journalism and has discovered something earth-shattering: Some people enjoy taking drugs. (I couldn’t get the video to load so I don’t know the content of the story, but the headline is priceless).
Mark Kleiman condescends to consider voting for Proposition 19, but only if he’s sure it’ll lose. Apparently there’s no length he won’t go to let his disdain for legalizers triumph over the facts.
Like it or not, in November California voters are either going to vindicate the dishonest strategy of Prop. 19â€²s backers â€“ falsely promising to help resolve Californiaâ€™s fiscal crisis as bait for legalization â€“ or ratify the nonsense still being preached on the other side. Since weâ€™re currently spending loads of public money to peddle Skip Millerâ€™s nonsense to tens of millions of schoolchildren with tax dollars, and since prohibition is currently the law of the land, I think I will give rebuking the drug warriors priority over rebuking the legalizers: assuming the polls still show the proposition losing. Having the damned thing actually pass is not a risk worth running.