Drug WarRant

Some New York Republicans are thinking about going the “soft on drugs” route

Queens Republicans and their Assembly colleagues signaled last week that they will make a major issue of the repealed Rockefeller drug laws in next year’s legislative elections.

Personally, I think it’s a bad political move in this economy. [Via]

I love the title of this OpEd by Bruce Mirken: Why Is L.A’.s District Attorney Helping Mexican Drug Cartels?

LAST Thursday, Los Angeles County District Attorney Steve Cooley announced a sweeping new plan to boost the profits of Mexican drug cartels, a plan almost certain to increase the slaughter these vicious gangs are perpetrating on both sides of the U.S. – Mexico border.

Of course, Cooley didn’t call it that. He claimed, on dubious legal grounds, that all medical marijuana dispensaries in the county are illegal and announced plans to crack down on them.

Why I Give Marijuana to my Autistic Child by Marie Myung-Ok Lee. Powerful piece you should read.

Don’t walk up to a policeman with a bag of marijuana stuck to your forehead. Just a thought. [Via]

Looking for one of those articles that really makes you doubt the humanity of the author? Here’s one. [Thanks, Tom]

First, drug addiction needs to be viewed as a choice, not an illness. Mao Zedong, the former leader of China, cured 20 million opium addicts over just one weekend by announcing that anyone still addicted would be shot on Monday.

Economics and the Drug War by Bart Frazier at Lew Rockwell. Basic stuff (to us).

Headline: Cops report dead man ate broccoli on the night he died.

That would make as much sense as this one: Cops: Stephen had smoked cannabis
(the article is even worse). [Thanks, Mike]

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.

Washington Post:

The Senate’s second-ranking Democrat introduced a bill Thursday that would eliminate the sentencing disparity between crack and powdered cocaine, an issue that has frustrated judges, civil rights advocates and drug reform proponents for more than two decades. […]

Some law enforcement officials have advocated eliminating the disparity by increasing the penalties for possession of powder cocaine, rather than, as Durbin’s bill does, reducing the sentence for crack.

But those calling for a change in the law also cite economic reasons at a time when budgets are tight, noting that half of all federal inmates are imprisoned for drug offenses.

Good for my senator Durbin. I just wonder what’s taken so long for it to get to this level. Sentencing commission, Obama, and everyone else (except certain law enforcement and prison lobbying groups, of course), have called for this final step in ending the disparity.

Remember, this is part 2 of the sentencing reform. In January, 2008, there was a small amount of crack cocaine sentencing reform that involved the early release of some of the longest sentences for crack cocaine.

At the time…

Speaking before the U.S. Conference of Mayors, Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey said that “a sudden influx of criminals from federal prison into your communities could lead to a surge in new victims as a tragic, but predictable, result.”

A year later, I noted that the fear card was toothless.

You can bet that the fear card will be played again to try to derail the Durbin bill (and its companion in the House).

But perhaps people are starting to realize that the fear card has been maxed out.

James Pasco, executive director of the Fraternal Order of Police in Washington, said Thursday he was still digesting the Durbin bill. In the past, his members had taken the position that “the best way to eliminate the disparity would be to raise the penalties for powder to those of crack.” But Pasco said his organization had developed a good relationship with the Judiciary Committee and that he would “look forward to the process” in Congress.

That’s a new one.

David Montgomery, in the Washington Post, has a delightful article about the symbolic planting that took place Tuesday at DEA headquarters by industrial hemp advocates.

The group included David Bronner of Dr. Bronner’s Magic Soaps, North Dakota farmer Wayne Hauge, and 73-year-old Will Allen, a farmer from Vermont. VoteHemp staff were there as well.

A total of six were arrested for trespassing and will have hearings this week. The expected fine is $240.

The DEA had nothing to say.

Phillip Smith has detailed coverage of this protest, including video, over at Stop the Drug War.

The Tri-City Times has published several letters responding to the Illegal drugs means danger OpEd that we discussed.

Drug warriors keep telling us that we’ve had big successes in Colombia — that we’re winning the drug war there by dismantling the top cartels, and working with Uribe to extradite them to the U.S.

And if we have patience with Calderone’s efforts in Mexico and just realize that increased violence is a sign that we’re winning, we’ll dismantle those cartels as well.

But what happens when you dismantle the large organizations without eliminating demand or removing drugs from the black market (or repealing the laws of economics)?

CNN: Power vacuum fuels vicious drug war

Oops.

Medellin [Colombia] is once again in the grip of a vicious drug war. In January to September this year, city authorities say the murder rate has more than doubled with almost 2,000 killings. […]

That makes Medellin as dangerous as Ciudad Juarez, the frontier town dubbed Mexico’s most dangerous city as a result of the ongoing cartel war there. Authorities in Juarez say killings are up from last year and are hitting record highs. […]

Until earlier this year, Medellin’s drug underworld was ruled by the so-called “Office of Envigado,” named after a district of the Medellin metropolitan area. The “office” was a syndicate of the top cocaine bosses who agreed on the basic rules of doing business in the area. They shared smuggling routes and acted as the ultimate enforcers if cartel members reneged on deals or debts.

But the “office” has been ripped apart by infighting. Some senior members were arrested, some of those already in jail were extradited and others cut cooperation deals with U.S. authorities. That left the lower ranks fighting to fill the power vacuum.

It’s an internal battle that is still raging.

“The ones fueling this war are the ones from the other side. They’ve f***ed up Medellin,” Chief says. “They’re from Medellin but they’re traitors.”

“They want to get control of all Medellin so they’re shooting up one gang then another. They’re getting paid to fight. These are wars between the big capos and we’re paying the price out here on the streets,” he adds.

I don’t think we can survive too many more drug war “successes.”

American Violet is an important and compelling film based on the real-life incident in Hearne, Texas where a large segment of the African-American population was busted on false drug charges in a massive operation. One young single mother, with the help of the ACLU, brought the house of cards down.

The film is available today on DVD and Blu-Ray. Get it now at Amazon or it’s also available through Netflicks Netflix.

• Main American Violet Site
• IMDB entry

I had a wonderful vacation many years ago in Australia — 5 1/2 weeks traveling in a station wagon with camping gear. Beautiful country with wonderful people. Everything was familiar, but different. Exquisite.

The laws had that same feel. For example, they could randomly conduct breathalyzer tests on anyone (something not allowed here). The cops would simply stand in the middle of the highway and randomly point at cars that were to pull over, have their breath checked, and continue on their way. I got caught in one of those (it was my first and only breathalyzer test — in fact, it was the only drug test of any kind I’ve ever taken). I was amused about what it said of the Australian love of drink — I was pulled over on a Thursday… at 10 am.

Some laws were more generous, some more restrictive.

Now Western Australia is moving toward the authoritarian …

West Australian police will have the nation’s toughest powers to stop and search people under a plan, unveiled yesterday, which removes the need for them to show any grounds for suspecting an offence.

Premier Colin Barnett […] said legislation would be introduced within weeks to allow anyone to be stopped and searched without reason…

And what’s the need for this extraordinary use of police power? Terrorists? Civil unrest?

He said Labor had failed on law and order, and he accused the former government of trying to con the community into believing cannabis was harmless, when it was ruining lives.

“The cannabis of today is not the cannabis of the 60s or 70s. It is far stronger, it is harmful,” he said.

Ah, yes, that scary cannabis that causes so much violence and societal disruption.

What really bothers me is when people cheer for the loss of their own freedom.

To thunderous applause at yesterday’s state Liberal conference, Australia’s only Liberal Premier said law and order was a defining issue at the September 2008 election.

“I make no apologies,” he said. “We will act on that small minority that destroy the quality of life and the amenity of this great state for the silent majority.”

Mr Barnett said he knew he would be accused of breaching civil liberties but it was a small price to pay if people felt safer.

Small price? I think he’s confusing “priceless” with “small price.”

Last month, the U.S. denied that they were setting up military bases in Colombia, claiming that the new arrangement to lease up to seven military bases in Colombia was simply for “fighting drug traffickers.”

This didn’t pass the smell test for Venezuela’s Chavez and Bolivia’s Morales, who were concerned about having these military bases in their back yards.

Now Evo Morales has announced that Bolivia plans to buy six military aircraft “to fight drug traffickers.”

“Last week we issued a supreme decree to … acquire six K-8 aircraft from China,” said Morales in a speech in La Paz to mark the 52nd anniversary of the Bolivian Air Force.

“The aircraft purchase is aimed at the fight against drug trafficking and not … any arms race,” he added.

This, after the U.S. blocked them from purchasing Czech planes.

And…

Morales’ main regional ally, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, is also buying Chinese K-8 to be used to pursue cocaine flights. They replace a purchase of Brazilian Super Tucanos blocked by a US arms embargo.

Sure is handy to have that drug war, isn’t it?

Mary Anastasia O’Grady has always been one of the brighter lights in the Wall Street Journal opinion section. She understands that supply side efforts in the drug war are incapable of success. It’s a simple matter of the laws of economics.

Yesterday, she writes about the subject again in George Shultz on the Drug War:
The former secretary of state has long doubted the wisdom of interdiction.

It’s a positive piece and valuable, I guess, but what strikes me in the article is how furiously everyone mentioned in it is dancing around the solution without quite being able to say it, even while bemoaning the fact that people aren’t able to talk about it.

What a strange and dark world it must be to have power, know the truth, and be afraid to tell it.

That’s the title of a strange, disconcerting, and absurd column by Doug Hunter in the Tri-City Times (Michigan).

Doug Hunter has been riding along with the St. Clair County Sheriff’s Department, and reports on a couple of heinous crimes that were committed, and uses these stories to somehow attempt to make the point that “Drugs beget violence.”

He seems to have a real love of pulp crime stories based on his writing…

The order was given to Colleen Sturdevant of Emmett Township to retrieve the empty Miller High Life beer bottle from the car. Handing it off, the bottle was broken and the jagged weapon was applied to the exposed throat of the semi-conscious Maurice.

The life sustaining blood flowed freely and the perpetrators soon became covered with it. […]

That was a story about some criminals who robbed and beat a man who was meeting some friends out in the country to smoke pot. The next is about a man who was going out to buy some pot and was murdered by youths who had offered to show him where to get some.

The report from the small caliber revolver was loud inside the vehicle. Turning his head Devon Sapp saw his older friend slump forward. Gasping and gurgling sounds and fluid began emitting from his now open mouth. […] Through the open window another bullet tore through Matt’s right lung, aorta and into his beating heart. […] The gurgling and gasps had ceased. Matthew Rogul, the father of young children, had passed from this life for a ‘Ten Sack.’

Kind of a bad Mickey Spillane wanna-be.

Here’s the kicker:

All this suffering for an illegal drug that some want to legalize, claiming it’s medicinal and harmless.

What???

If marijuana was legal, Matt Rogul would be alive now, and Maurice wouldn’t have been robbed and beaten.

Here’s what I wrote to the editor:

Doug Hunter certainly has a pulp crime novelist’s skill for telling tragic stories about violence (Illegal drugs mean danger, October 7), but his conclusion — “All this suffering for an illegal drug that some want to legalize, claiming it’s medicinal and harmless” — makes no sense whatsoever.

If marijuana was legal, Matt Rogul would be alive today. Instead of turning to criminals to score some pot, he would have gone to the store, where, just like with alcohol, he could have purchased it safely in a controlled and regulated system.

Prohibition makes the black market obscenely profitable and recruits people into the criminal lifestyle. Every drug dealer we arrest creates an instant job opening, increasing the numbers of criminals, and law enforcement efforts wasted on the revolving drug dealers (who would be put out of work with legalization) result in letting violent criminals, like those involved in “Hit a Lick,” slip through the cracks.

The reason to legalize marijuana isn’t because it’s harmless (although it is certainly safer than alcohol, tobacco, or just about any other drug). The reason to legalize it is to reduce the damage of prohibition, which fuels crime and puts the control of drugs in the hands of criminals.

Now interestingly, the title of the piece was accurate: “Illegal drugs mean danger.” But it’s not because of the word “drugs.” The only way to reduce the danger of illegal drugs is to make them legal.