Alaska police chiefs warn that they’ll need new gravy train

Alaska police chiefs say legalizing marijuana will increase funding, training needs

Police administrators across Alaska worry that marijuana legalization could mean increased costs for their departments, according to survey results released Tuesday by the Alaska Association of Chiefs of Police.

AACOP estimates the cost of legalizing marijuana could mean $6 million in unanticipated costs for law enforcement in Alaska if the initiative passes this year. The association says much of those costs account for what they believe will be an increase in drug use, specifically among teens and impaired drivers.

I’m still trying to wrap my head around it, but apparently the idea is that although marijuana is currently widely used and is illegal, and they obviously expend significant resources enforcing it now, with legalization, they’ll have to work harder in order to find ways to continue to arrest people for it.

Laren Zager, Fairbanks chief of police, said legalization would mean most of his 32 patrol and traffic officers will likely have to be trained in the drug recognition expert program as well. Zager estimates that only four officers have the training currently. He said while the number of officers receiving that training has increased in recent years, marijuana legalization would “jet engine” that process.

Zager said his police department will happily carry out whatever becomes law but said this particular initiative is worth a second look.

“(Legalization) carries with it certain social hazards,” Zager said. “Most officers find it alarming.”

Sure they do.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

33 Responses to Alaska police chiefs warn that they’ll need new gravy train

  1. Dante says:

    Currently, there is some debate about what to do in Iraq. The only thing people can agree on is that we should never again listen to the idiots from the Bush administration who led us into the fiasco in the first place. In fact, those same idiots should be prosecuted as war criminals.

    Same goes for the drug warriors. When the pendulum of justice finally swings against the war on drugs, the drug warriors should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. If the law does not allow their prosecution, then We The People should change the law. The drug warriors are terrorists, and deserve nothing other than our contempt.

    Protect & Serve (themselves!)

  2. claygooding says:

    I still say the best way to shut the law enforcement’s propaganda down is expose how much money they receive from federal grants and property seizures,,expose their greed for what it is.

  3. DonDig says:

    Maybe they’re alarmed because instead of arresting tokers who don’t generally put up too much of a fuss, they’ll have to deal more with aggressive types again, and they want to be compensated for it.

    Needing ‘more drug recognition expert program’ training doesn’t seem to make any sense at all to me though: more drugs are not being added to the mix.
    Everyone wants to protect their own little piece of the pie, and that’s natural.
    What are they smoking?
    The taxpayers, of course.

  4. ezrydn says:

    They’ve told you their basic gripe. They’re too lazy to learn something new to them. I had an EX-wife that was the same way. The VA offered her a free education and her response? “I don’t like to read.”

  5. Dano says:

    It’s basically police extortion. They won’t be getting overtime for marijuana eradication and enforcement, so they’ll take their money in another fashion.

  6. allan says:

    Zager estimates that only four officers have the training

    damn those big numbers!

    When I was doing the event/concert medical thing we used to love figuring out what drug/s someone was on… worst combo I dealt with? Shrooms, ketamine and ganja edibles. The shrooms and ganja was easy to figure but that ‘special K’ thru us a curve. The man went catatonic, his most eloquent muttering was “zibba zabba zooba” but he was coherent enough to rejoin the show after a couple of hours. I told his friend they could leave our med tent when the client could find Waldo (we had a sheet hung as a privacy curtain that was covered with Waldos). When he found Waldo it was quite the moment in human awareness (not quite on the scale of the ape in 2001, but more like Mel Brooks had written it)… “OH! there’s Waldo! oh man, he’s everywhere…”

  7. divadab says:

    Is this what happens to the Law ENforcement brain on prohibition? They will need funds for prohibition withdrawal symptoms treatment.

  8. claygooding says:

    Perhaps law enforcement needs an IQ limit that allows for smarter crime solving instead of strong arm home invasions,,with higher IQ’s they could go after cyber-crimes and frauds,money laundering and some of the real crimes with victims..

    • primus says:

      We have all heard how police departments don’t hire bright people because the work is so repetitive and routine that (they posit) the smart people will leave due to boredom. Now that cannabis is going to be legal and the mindless, easy job of busting tokers is going away, they can move on to more interesting crimes such as you listed. To effectively investigate those types of crimes will require much more brain power than cops currently display. They will be forced to hire smart cops, who will find that type of policing stimulating enough to keep their interest. Overall, the public’s interactions with smart cops are much better than those with goons so with more smart cops, everyone wins. Except the real criminals who will then have a much better chance of being caught. Also, the public’s perception of the cops should improve. What a slap in the face to the existing cops when the chief says they have an upper threshold of intelligence in their hiring parameters. Says the cops they do have are not that bright. Way to motivate the troops, chief.

  9. allan says:

    I missed this the first read but once I realized what chief ZigZager has done has moved us from the train trax to the runway!

    marijuana legalization would “jet engine” that process

    Pat Kennedy gave us our 300 mph freight train but the chief just put us on a jet!

    Hard hats AND seat belts folks! Buckle up, turbulence ahead.

    I mean I certainly hope he’s not putting that jet engine on Kennedy’s loco-motive!

    • Jean Valjean says:

      I hope no one’s letting Pat Kennedy near the controls of either the jet or the locomotive if his past experience with vehicles is anything to go by.

  10. kaptinemo says:

    “(Legalization) carries with it certain social hazards,” Zager said. “Most officers find it alarming.” (Emphasis mine – k.)

    Notice the phraseology? Right out of SAM’s, uh, er, ONDCP’s playbook.

    The same phraseology. Everywhere. And you’ll recall that there was even a copy of Kevvie’s ‘book’ on one police chief’s desk a few months back.

    “Party Line” or talking points? Either description is appropriate.

    The prohibs have always been singularly lacking in creativity; that’s why they have to hire mouthpieces like Kevvie, who are only just a little more glib in purveying the standardized, homogenized prohib lies. But it is always the same old BS.

    They just can’t get it into their thick skulls that the old incantations, the old shibboleths, the waving of the (now tattered and torn) ‘bloody shirt’ of the The Children, all of it, doesn’t work anymore. And yet they keep making the same old tiresome noises as if they still had some kind of magical powers.

    They just can’t wrap their brains around that fact; it’s almost like they are trying by force of will, in repeating the same easily-called-out lies ever louder and faster, to make those who cannot ever believe in anything they say to believe them.

    Sad, really. I feel embarrassed for them, even if they can’t feel such themselves. Watching them is like watching a denizen of ‘special class’ forced to compete with someone not troubled by learning disabilities. The problem is, in this case, the former are not only mentally short-changed, they’re armed.

    • Randy says:

      “… cats and dogs living together! Mass hysteria!” from Ghostbusters.

      Sadly this what the prohibs think will happen with the ending of cannabis prohibition. In short, they believe their own propaganda.

    • Jean Valjean says:

      Jeez….they don’t even know how to plagiarize properly… you know, change the wording a little bit so it’s not quite so obvious…

    • primus says:

      I think that is why our side is doing so well. Now that open debate has been seen on tv and online by millions, and they have been made to appear stupid or evil over and over again. Nobody wants to identify with someone who has been shown stupid. They automatically want to side with the smart guy. Because these prohibidiots lack creativity and can only recite the incantations taught by others, without really understanding the ‘charm’ and its strengths and weaknesses, they are fat easy targets, inevitably appearing weak and stupid. That, ultimately is why the tipping point has been reached with such speed; A certain amount of the gain is due to attrition, but not all of it. Some is due to people not wanting to side with the stupid guy. We primed the pump on this and other sites, also writing many LTE’s thus exposing the public to alt.viewpoint. MSM picked up on it from the ‘net and together they overwhelmed the PHI (ProHibIdiots). Now, it’s not cool to be too rabid a PHI if you want to be elected, and soon it will be political suicide. Keep pushing people that boulder is near the lip of the steep part of the hill. Then it can’t be stopped.

  11. kaptinemo says:

    If it isn’t becoming clear by now, just as predicted, the prohibs are (tacitly) admitting just how much of prohibition hinges on cannabis.

    Of course, if they have any sense, they don’t come right out and say it. (But that doesn’t stop them from getting very close to it.) Just recall what the LE personnel in States bordering Colorado were saying a few weeks back, whining about ‘compensation’ for all the ‘hard work’ in stopping cars from CO, while looking specifically for cannabis…as, indeed, they always have.

    This is just getting closer to an actual admission that Officer Jack Boot is hopelessly addicted to cannabis prohibition because of the money.

    A pity there’s no such thing as fiscal rehab for LE folks so addicted. They’ll have to go ‘cold turkey’, and will experience a lot of fiscal and emotional pain from the withdrawal symptoms. And they won’t be able to afford those fancy military toys they want to use on their paymasters, either.

    Lots of changes in the wind, and none of them good for authoritarian civil servants who seek to become our masters. The social pendulum, pegged at the far right for decades, will swing back to the center – and those who seek to keep it at the far right position will find their fingers sliced off from trying to hold its string back.

    • allan says:

      yeah Kap… that the majority party is now NO party otter be a clue to folks interested in being elected. The senatorial race here in OR (Jeff Merkley vs Monica Wehby) is gonna be a hoot. Jeff is a good guy and our side, Wehby on the other hand is being spoon fed by the Repubs and looks and sounds like a one-issue (“it’s the Democrats fault!”) right wing nut job.

      I think I’m going to have to inquire her status on mmj and legalization and drug policy reform in general. She of course doesn’t stand a chance. And we’ll be getting rid of a very anti-pot county sheriff in So Oregon in November!

      • allan says:

        of course… I went and looked and nobody in the Oregon press has covered it but apparently (I had to find the story in the CS Monitor) she is a social liberal, ok w/ gays and mmj.

        I’m still going to inquire. There is still legalization and all the other drugs.

        • Windy says:

          Too bad there is not a libertarian also running in that race, allan; that would make it REAL race.

  12. Howard says:

    And from those who will cling to their beloved gravy train as long as possible;

    Pot Scientists Brace for Marijuana Abuse as Laws Ease

    Pot scientists?

    “I’m open to the data, that’s why we do research,” she said in an interview. “But based on what I’ve seen, I predict that it’s going to be negative and we’re going to be in a position of trying to deal with the consequences.”

    The “she” being quoted above is Nora Volkow. More of her nonsense in the article.

    • allan says:

      what’ever! Good lord I’ve tried to abuse pot. Lord knows I’ve tried! And I certainly am not alone (looks down the couch…) in that herculean effort. The worst abuse of pot is wasting it trying to abuse it.

      • Howard says:

        Allan, that’s what I don’t get about what they don’t get. Here are two hypothetical conversations;


        Neil Armstrong: “Howard, this is Neil, I’ve been to the moon and you have not. You have no clue what it’s like there.”

        Me: “Neil, you’re right buddy, I haven’t been to the moon and I have no clue what it’s like there.”


        Nora Volkow: “Howard, this is Nora. I’m an addiction expert and marijuana is very addictive. You have no clue about the addictive devastation of marijuana.”

        Me: “Hold the phone Nora! You’re out of your league on this one. I, and many of my friends, are personal walking laboratories of marijuana addiction experimentation. We know about it because we’ve lived it. And we’ve never been addicted, dipshit. You have no clue.”

        Nora: “I’d love to continue this conversation but I’m sitting at the airport with Kevin Sabet. We’re heading to the next marijuana addiction conference.”

        Me: “Don’t let the cabin door hit you in the …”

    • strayan says:

      NIDA is to drug prohibition what the Tobacco Industry Research Committee* was to big tobacco Рa fa̤ade through which they could call for endlessly more research.

      Funny how liars use the same tactics.


    • kaptinemo says:

      Volkow is a Lysenkoist who prostitutes her academic creds for a paycheck. Exactly the sort that NIDA likes to hire.

      Compare her drivel with something NIDA published just before they went all the way to the Dark Side:

      Themes in Chemical Prohibition

      Like night and day…and was probably the last time NIDA told the truth about anything.

  13. tensity1 says:

    What I love is how the chief said only four out of 32 officers had drug recognition training. What the hell were they doing before? Playing eeenie, meenie, miney, druggie? Is this what our taxpayer dollars were being used for in the WoD? Guessing at shit? I guess so (huh huh, huh huh). Certainly our policies and the ensuing results initiated by Tricky Dicky point to guessing at shit or just plain making crap up. BTW, my wife would point to making crap up as “ass-facts,” because those facts are pulled outta tha ass.

    If guesswork doesn’t take care of things, there’s always racial profiling (to ameliorate the strain guesswork puts on LEO peabrains), taking people’s property because the property was “guilty,” and militarizing themselves to “serve” the people.

    Thanks, fuckers!

    • Dante says:

      “eeenie, meenie, miney, druggie”

      LMAO, that is a classic description of how LE actually functions.

  14. DdC says:

    Why do we give the scaredy cats weapons? Makes me feel all warm and safe knowing the cops are afraid of someone smoking a joint. What does that say as far as protecting us from actual terrorists or other bad guys? Another showing how much they actually hate Americans. Willing to sacrifice citizens and keep seizure treatment from kids, just to pad their pockets with more tax dollars. Still a puzzle as to why they feel it is their problem other than kickback from the prison industrial complex. Tax dollars diverted from social services and health care and infrastructure heading to the doughnut shops. Priorities, priorities. Meanwhile more saveding us from smoking blue jeans. I am so ashamed of this country of cowards and cuthroats.

    Hemp Seeds Seized at US-Canada Border

    • primus says:

      Couple years ago, a yankee cop came to Calgary for a visit. Of course he left his sidearm at home, because they are not permitted in our country. While in Calgary, he was approached by a couple young guys offering him free tickets to the Calgary Stampede (The Greatest Show on Earth (TM registered)). He was so afraid of these young people that he adopted a protective stance and retreated. He then posted on the ‘net how he was intimidated by not having his gun with him, how he felt threatened by someone talking to him and other such nonsense. Of course he was pilloried in the chats, but held to his viewpoint even then. This is the mentality, this is the kind of stupidity, the craven cowardice and the kind of goon that cops all appear to be. If he had his gun with him, there would be two dead Canadian kids in Calgary. Putz.

      • kaptinemo says:

        Then you should be glad that you didn’t run into the American LEOs running traffic stops in BC a while back.

  15. Griz Lee says:

    ‘Nuff. Emo Whaa Whaa palaver bla bla whatever. Why so Nervous, Nancies? GirlMen. Layoffs and DeFunding, Now. Citizen Stipend for ALL, with the Monies $aved.

  16. Duncan20903 says:


    Rand Paul, Cory Booker Team Up on Pot
    Amendment Would block Justice Dept from prosecuting state-approved medical marijuana
    June 19, 2014 5:21 pm

    The Senate is expected to vote late Thursday or Friday on an amendment introduced by Sens. Rand Paul (R., Ky.) and Cory Booker (D., N.J.) to block the Justice Department from interfering with state-approved medical marijuana laws.

    The amendment, attached to a spending bill, would block the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) and federal prosecutors from investigating people complying with state marijuana laws.

    • Duncan20903 says:


      I think that there’s a very simple explanation. People just can’t get it through their very thick skulls that prohibition doesn’t keep anyone from getting high. Yes, I believe that there are people who don’t choose to enjoy cannabis because it’s against the law. I even have a very special name for this cohort. I call them drunks, and they’re belly up to the bar as we speak, their car keys in their pocket, and their cars in the bar’s parking lot.

      The really peculiar think about their “reasoning” is that they’re never worried that one of these newly minted potheads is going to be the person making the assertion who is going to end up suffering from the fiction of merrywanna addiction.

      Evidence doesn’t appear to be important to these people. They’re so sure that it exists that they don’t even bother to look. Oh, but what about the children? I’m pretty certain that everyone reading this knows that the prohibitionist peckerheads got a ballot initiative on the 1990 Alaska ballot and on Election Day claimed to have re-criminalized cannabis. In 2002 the Alaska Court of Appeals struck down the law as unconstitutional and in 2003 the Alaska Supreme Court refused to grant certiorari. So what about the children?

      Ever used marijuana (one or more times during their life)
      2003: Alaska 47.4%
      USA: 40.2%

      2013: Alaska 39.0%
      USA 40.7%

      Tried marijuana before age 13 years (for the first time)
      2003: Alaska 13.1%
      USA: 9.9%

      2013: Alaska 10.4%
      USA 8.6%

      Currently used marijuana (one or more times during the 30 days before the survey)
      2003: Alaska 23.9%
      USA 22.4%
      2013:Alaska 19.7%
      USA: 23.4%

      Alaska v USA 2003

      Alaska v USA 2013

Comments are closed.