Drug WarRant

Seattle’s new city attorney to dismiss cases of pot possession

City Attorney Pete Holmes, who beat incumbent Tom Carr in November, said he dismissed two marijuana-related cases in his first day on the job, and several others are about to be dismissed.

In addition, his new criminal division chief, Craig Sims, said he is reviewing about 50 more cases. Unless there are “out of the ordinary circumstances,” Sims said, the office doesn’t intend to file charges for marijuana possession.

“We’re not going to prosecute marijuana-possession cases anymore,” Holmes said Thursday during a public interview as part of Town Hall’s Nightcap series. “I meant it when I said it” during the campaign.

We need more people like Pete Holmes running for city attorney and attorney general. How about some of you?

This is a very pleasant thing to see — a reporter for a major newspaper noting and pointing out how a federal drug warrior is actively lobbying against state laws.

Susan Greene: No one’s told drug-war soldier about peace breaking out

A Coloradan who works for the president’s drug-policy office is leading efforts to undermine the state’s constitutional amendment allowing cannabis for medical use. On the federal dime, Tom Gorman, director of the Rocky Mountain High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area program, is lobbying state lawmakers to gut the Colorado law.

Either Gorman didn’t get the memo about changes in federal drug policy, or he’s going rogue. Whichever the case, no one in D.C. seems to mind. […]

“Technically, if you ask me who I represent, it’s the Colorado Drug Investigators Association,” he tells me, oddly.

That technicality exempts him from longstanding federal laws prohibiting federal workers from lobbying, he claims. Meanwhile, he’s lobbying without having registered as a lobbyist, and says he’s doing so with the nod of his bosses.

They wouldn’t comment.

Of course, this article disturbs me in the fact that Gorman feels so confident that he can do what he does with impunity. The good part is that here’s one reporter who isn’t falling for it:

And a lobbyist is a lobbyist, no matter which government agency happens to be laundering his paycheck.

Here’s a real doozy: New year brings new round in fight to keep marijuana illegal by Sam Contakos. Sam is is a retired Johnstown [PA] businessman and former practicing physician. He also formerly served as a lecturer on the topic of drug abuse. And he’s a power lifter in Anti-Drug Athletes United. It was interesting to read that all their events are drug tested. So apparently Sam Contakos’ cognitive problems stem from another source.

This one is hard to pick apart piece by piece, because he goes all over the place. But when you read it, note how he puts in a number of facts about marijuana (as if to make the piece look more balanced) and then proceeds to pull conclusions about marijuana’s drawbacks out of thin air.

Check out this fascinating diversion within the OpEd:

With the increased interest for the legalization of marijuana, the findings of the Indian Hemp Commission are dusted off and presented to support the benignity of marijuana’s use. This was a strictly political commission empowered during the reign of Queen Victoria in 1893 by the British Government of India. There were no physicians on it.

The conclusion was that the use of cannabis by the people of was harmless, but it’s exportation to Britain was discouraged.

In fact (though not stated), the widespread use of cannabis was an effective means to control a couple hundred million subjects of the empire.

I hadn’t noticed an increase in the use of the Indian Hemp Commission report as a justification for legalization, especially since there is so much modern evidence of marijuana’s medical effectiveness and safety. And this notion that the British Empire used cannabis to control its subjects — that’s a new one to me (as is the notion that cannabis can be used that way).

Here’s another bizarre passage. In it, Contakos appears to actually downplay the gateway effect, because he thinks marijuana is the dangerous drug.

Those who wish to continue the enforcement of the draconian laws against the use and abuse of marijuana (and let there be no mistake that all marijuana use is truly abuse) seem to foolishly focus on the questionable fact that marijuana is an “introductory drug” to more serious forms of substance abuse.

Marijuana is, in fact, a very dangerous drug. There have been many huge studies that have shown this to be true.

Ah yes, the nameless huge studies that prove your point that nobody else has heard of. And I love the declarative statement “and let there be no mistake that all marijuana use is truly abuse” as if stating it that way makes something completely false to be true. It would be like me saying “and let there be no mistake that all Pennsylvanians are truly terrorists.” Sounds pretty strong, but it’s meaningless.

As is most of his writing.

Ethan Nadelmann has been selected to be part of Change.org’s Changemakers network. He talks about how The War on Drugs is a War on People

Change.org: If you could ask 1 million people to all do 1 thing to advance your cause or causes, what would it be?

Come out of the closet about your drug use. Drug war propaganda demonizes and dehumanizes people who use drugs. Let your fellow citizens – your colleagues, your friends, and your family – know the real face of the American drug user.

We need credible people, especially public figures, to stand up and say, “I contribute to society, I work hard, I love my family, and I am an otherwise law-abiding citizen – but I do not believe that people should be treated as criminals simply because of what they put into their bodies. This law is wrong.”

Outstanding video promoting Students for Sensible Drug Policy (about 10 minutes) with a lot of great people in it.

SSDP’s national conference will be in San Francisco in March, and they’re accepting reservations now (Titled “This is your Brain on Drug Policy.” I’m not sure if I’ll be able to make it this year given my work demands.

In the Wall Street Journal, A Doctor’s Case For Legal Pot by David L. Nathan

So why do I support decriminalization? First, marijuana prohibition doesn’t prevent widespread use of the drug, although it does clog our legal system with a small percentage of users and dealers unlucky enough to be prosecuted. More to the point, legal cannabis would never become the societal problem that alcohol already is.

In most of my substance-abuse patients, I am far more concerned about their consumption of booze than pot. […]

The time has come to accept that our nation’s attitude toward marijuana has been misguided for generations and that the only rational approach to cannabis is to legalize, regulate and tax it.

California is free to make its own drug laws by Tamar Todd. A timely reminder about the power of the states, even today.

The Times is simply wrong to suggest that California does not have the authority to tax and regulate marijuana. There is nothing in the U.S. Constitution that requires states to criminalize anything. We could scrap our entire penal code tomorrow if we wanted to. States get to decide state law, not Washington. This is why California and 13 other states have been able to legalize and regulate medical marijuana despite continuing federal prohibition.

Certainly, even if AB 390 becomes law, the federal government could still enforce its marijuana laws against California residents. The reality is, however, the federal government does not have the resources to undertake sole — or even primary — enforcement responsibility for state drug crimes. More than 95% of all marijuana arrests in this country are made by state and local law enforcement agencies.

Maui Time Weekly has a nice feature on LEAP with their interview with David Bratzer. He really nails all the points beautifully.

DrugSense Weekly – a weekly review of the most interesting or relevant articles in the press and on the web related to drug policy reform.

Drug War Chronicle – weekly update of drug war news and analysis from Stop the Drug War.org.

That sure is a lot of bizarre. Let’s check it out.

MARIJUANA LEGALIZATION
WASHINGTON (AP) – Cheech and Chong, and Cohen, too. Tennessee Congressman Steve Cohen shared the stage last night with the stoner comedy duo Cheech Marin and Tommy Chong. Cohen’s a Democrat from Memphis who supports legalized medical marijuana and easing of drug laws. He was a featured speaker at the pro-legalization Marijuana Policy Project’s 15th annual gala. Cohen got nearly as big a hand from the crowd as Cheech and Chong, who were given a lifetime “trailblazer” award by the pro-pot group.

My God! Someone who supports medical marijuana and the easing of drug laws. Wow, now that’s really bizarre!

Denver Post: The hypocrisy of John Suthers by Sean Paige

The AG’s major complaint about medical marijuana, as I understand it, is that it’s all a giant scam — a backdoor path to legalization. He, like a lot of law enforcers, look back fondly on a time when the “drug war” battle lines were boldly drawn in the sand. Use of pot for any purpose was prohibited. Drug busters were the good guys, marijuana users the bad. Partial legalization complicates their jobs. It’s disorienting. It goes against deeply ingrained (but largely personal) prejudices.

Suthers is nostalgic for that simpler time, because it made his job easier. But policy isn’t and shouldn’t be made for the convenience of attorney generals. His personal prejudices about pot and potheads are largely beside the point. And if he can’t adapt to the new situation, and defend the Colorado Constitution, he should go back to private practice.

I’m not an advocate for medical marijuana or non-medical marijuana. I don’t doubt there’s some abuse of the new system (such as it is) going on. And, yes, I’m sure some out there view the medical marijuana movement as a circuitous route to full legalization. But I am an advocate for freedom, reason, limited government, states’ rights and constitutionalism (both state and federal), which in this case puts me at odds with an attorney general who (at least on paper) espouses some of these same values.

Nice job. That particular point: “if he can’t adapt to the new situation… he should go back to private practice” needs to be made more often regarding law enforcement officers and prosecutors/attorneys general who defy the wishes of the people.

Thanks to Bailey for sharing this first-hand account…

Wednesday’s hearing by the Washington State House Public Safety &
Emergency Preparedness Committee on a decriminalization bill (HB 1177)
and legalized sales via the state operated liquor stores bill (HB
2401) was a surprising show. Tuesday night Rick Steves, travel author
and NORML adviser, gave a presentation with the Washington ACLU titled
“Marijuana: It’s time for a conversation.” (marijuanaconversation.org)
It’s the first pot reform infomercial! (Note: Only 50% more
interesting than standard infomercials.) However the discussion with
Steves, three members of the Washington Legislature, and Wash. ACLU
drug policy expert/hottie/new mother Allison Holcomb was entertaining
and informative.
Continue reading →

So, with the small victory of the California Assembly Public Safety Committee voting in favor of marijuana legalization, some real characters have emerged to express their… concern.

Scott Morgan brings us this video story about the vote.

In this video, we have Bishop Ron Allen, of the International Faith-Based Coalition saying:

I don’t think they understand how many lives are going to be lost. Are you kidding me? Seriously. In our community, legalizing drugs — I don’t think they clearly understand the carnage.

Yep. He’s talking about pot. Lost lives and carnage. You know, that worked back in Anslinger’s day, because not that many people knew anything about marihuana. But today, when just about everybody’s been exposed to it in some way, it’s hard to convince people that legalization is going to mean death.

And take a look at the Bishop’s quote again. “In our community, legalizing drugs — I don’t think they clearly understand the carnage.” Shouldn’t African-Americans be outraged by this? It sounds pretty offensive to me. It sounds like he’s saying that black people can’t handle pot and if it’s legal, it’ll make them all go wild and kill people and tear stuff up.

Once again I ask: where the hell is the African-American leadership when it comes to the damage of the drug war to African-Americans? Why is it that the lily-white faces of Jack Cole and Ethan Nadelmann are the ones we see fighting for the end of racist policies?

…

Now we turn to the truly bizarre [Thanks, Tom]…

Check out the domain name: www.nipitinthebud2010.org, with the banner “Taxing California by intoxicating Californians with Marijuana is un-American!”

The site’s leader, Alexandra D. Datig, is a little confused about her position. At one point she’s giving “A message from initiative proponent” and elsewhere she’s giving “A message from the Proponent of the Opposition to the California Marijuana Legalization Initiative of 2010,” which is pretty awkward and apparently means that she is the person who is in favor of being opposed to the initiative.

Let’s see what she has to say:

… I want to reach out to voters, and I want voters to really think about the consequences of legalizing marijuana. What quality of life issues are we going to have with legalized marijuana? What national security issues will we have? How will our children look at their parents, watching them smoke marijuana, and cultivating it. Let’s really think about the consequences of legalizing marijuana. I think there are more responsible ways to tax California …

I’m fascinated by the idea that kids will somehow be horrified or harmed by watching their parents… garden.

And, of course, the national security issues. Elsewhere on the site, under a “Never Forget 911” banner:

Will legalizing Marijuana place our National Security at risk? We think so.

It has been proven that Marijuana use causes memory loss. How will California defend itself in a newly intoxicated condition? – Not very well.

Marijuana use causes poor judgment and forgetfulness. Marijuana blocks pain receptors, causing emotional and metabolic instability. Can we afford to be this irresposnible and have a casual attitude about Marijuana in a world haunted by the lessons we have to learn each day from terror?

You know, if we aren’t afraid, terror doesn’t work. Just sayin’

Seems to me the poor judgment isn’t coming from marijuana use.

Prohibitionists use a lot of deceit and misdirection to further their cause (in fact, the drug czar is required by law to lie). What else have they got? Any kind of clear analysis of all the facts will show that ending prohibition in some way is the only thing that makes sense.

The biggest lie, however, is the one where they say they’re doing it because they care about the safety of people.

Just from the broad outlines of prohibition, you can immediately see that isn’t true — from the violence in Mexico and our streets to the overdose deaths of people afraid to seek help.

But it goes beyond that. The sado-moralists who dominate prohibition legislation want extra assurance that people will die (or at least be harmed in some way).

So they oppose needle exchange (yes, even voluntary non-taxpayer supported ones), despite the fact that all studies show that needle exchange saves lives without increasing or encouraging drug use.

They oppose providing Narcan kits (which can stop overdoses from being fatal) to heroin users.

They oppose reality-based education on drugs (or sex, for that matter) because they’d rather have kids die than know the truth.

That’s right — it’s not just in drug policy that these sado-moralists thrive. I was astonished to learn that in some cities possession of condoms can be used against you as evidence of prostitution. How absurd, and how wrong, is that? To set up a system where they are essentially encouraging sex workers to not carry condoms.

That’s sado-moralism, all right. And we’ve got way too much of it in this country.

Just a little while ago, the California Assembly Public Safety Committee approved a marijuana legalization bill, AB 390, by a vote of 4 – 3.

Apparently, this is the first time that a state legislative committee has voted to legalize marijuana for non-medical purposes.

Update: She just won’t go away…

Andrea Barthwell, a deputy director in the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy under President George W. Bush, countered that drug prohibition “is working to keep our young people drug-free It is a fact that legalization of marijuana will increase its use.”

Drug-free?