Drug WarRant

Last week, I mentioned the excellent OpEd by Joy Strickland of Mothers Against Teen Violence: Drug laws fertilize teen violence
Well, special agent in charge of the Dallas Field Division of the Drug Enforcement Agency James Capra responded (can’t have people thinking that the drug war is bad for teens).
Here are a couple of his more outrageous comments:

There is absolutely no evidence to suggest that legalization or decriminalization would reduce crime in our communities.

and

For Ms. Strickland to suggest that she “is not aware of one single death directly caused by marijuana” or that it “is irrational to lock up an individual because of what he chooses to put into to his own body” as justification to decriminalize is disturbing logic.

What’s disturbing is that our tax dollars are paying for him to lie to us. Prompt at Newsvine does a nice job of taking this apart.
…
Elsewhere, we have an idiotic background paper from The Heritage Foundation written by Ray Walser, their Senior Policy Analyst for Latin America: Mexico, Drug Cartels, and the Merida Initiative: A Fight We Cannot Afford to Lose. Now, much of this very long background article is just providing, well, the background, but Walser lacks even the basic understanding of drug policy, drug use, and the effects of prohibition, which results in very bizarre statements:

Drug consumption and the resulting international trade in controlled substances remain one of the greatest man-made catastrophes of the past 30 years.

What? Drug consumption is a man-made catastrophe? Anything else related to drug policy perhaps have an impact in the past 30 years? Bueller? Bueller?
Of course, the idiot gets his “facts” from Walters.

Despite modest progress, continued U.S. drug consumption is a root cause and a central driver of drug-related violence in Mexico. John P. Walters, director of the Office of National Drug Control Pol icy (ONDCP), recently exclaimed, “We will all need to come to grips that American consumers are fund ing the violence. We share responsibility, and we need to do more to help!”

Drug-related violence. Right. And even worse, in Walser’s words, later:

Drug violence inevitably translates into economic losses as well as human loses.[sic]

Drug violence? What is that?

The Mexican people are besieged by the continuing drug violence. […] Much of the intensified drug violence in Mexico is the result of open warfare among the dif ferent trafficking organizations. Undoubtedly, many of Mexico’s mounting drug casualties are traffickers murdered by traffickers. […] Military surge operations have targeted several epicenters of the drug violence [emphasis added]

Don’t you mean prohibition violence?
The conclusion was so dramatically over the top, I couldn’t help laughing:

Mexico is teetering on the brink of another crisis, which involves bullets rather than banking policies and exchange rates. The victims of this crisis range from honest cops and Mexican children to American youth who become hooked on cocaine or methamphetamines.
Mexico and the U.S. face the same enemy: elusive, sophisticated, resourceful, and violent transnational criminal networks that exploit U.S. and Mexican weaknesses and vulnerabilities, defy historical concepts of sovereignty and nationhood, supply the most dangerous and darkest human desires, and undermine the foundations of democratic goverÜnance and the basic concepts of free societies. Making common cause against such an enemy makes eminently good sense.

Oh, and according to Ray Walser’s bio his “areas of policy research and interest include defending the values of freedom and individual liberty.”

When looking at these stories, keep in mind that drug policy reform could just as easily be the target in each of these.
“bullet” Maryland Troopers spied on activist groups

Undercover Maryland state troopers infiltrated three groups advocating peace and protesting the death penalty Ö attending meetings and sending reports on their activities to U.S. intelligence and military agencies, according to documents released Thursday. […]
‡ On Oct. 3, 2005, an undercover state police agent attending a meeting of activists ferreted out the fact that antiwar protesters were laying plans to distribute fliers at the Towson Town Center mall.

Hmmm, our meetings are much more interesting.
“bullet” They could be eavesdropping. In Massachusetts, where they opposed federal spying on citizens, they apparently want to do it themselves:

MASSACHUSETTS residents are on the verge of losing a fundamental protection from government spying if the Legislature and governor approve a bill to give prosecutors the power to seize Internet, telephone, and electronic communications records – without judicial oversight and without notifying a citizen they have done so.
The attorney general and district attorneys have attached their power grab to a bill aimed at increasing sentences for sex offenders, which is named “An Act to Further Protect Children” or “Jessica’s Law.” However, the power that they seek isn’t limited to investigations of suspected sex offenders or child abuse cases. It is a general grant of unchecked power to district attorneys and the attorney general that can be used against all of us.

Yeah, make it a bill to go after sex offenders, but allow police to use it for anything. Who will vote against that?
“bullet” And score one for the good guys. From the ACLU:

We just received word today that the Third Circuit struck down a federal Internet censorship law as unconstitutional. The law, called the Child Online Protection Act, imposed civil and criminal penalties on those who place ‹harmful to minorsŠ material on the Web. Under this law, no adult, no matter how mature or responsible, would have been allowed to see material that is deemed unfit for a child. The law would have forced vast swaths of constitutionally protected speech off of the Web.

That’s good news. I’ve been involved in the fight against internet censorship since the predecessor of COPA (the Communications Decency Act) back in 1996 — I was part of 24 hours of Democracy — my first major internet activism.
These are where the real fights for our freedom take place. Not on the Iraq/Pakistan border.

Senator Jim Webb was just on the Colbert Report and mentioned that the U.S. has 25% of the world’s prison population and only 5% of the world’s population, and that we need to do something about that. Imprison those who are dangerous, but stop trying to just look “tough on crime.” He stumbled over it a bit, but still…
Nice to see a U.S. Senator saying good things on the TeeVee.
Here’s the video (Thanks, Scott)

View at your own risk

“bullet” Talk about selective historical memory… A very bizarre article in the Guardian: Gangs have made Dublin ‘like Chicago in the 1920s’ makes the parallel between today’s drug gangs and the alcohol gangsters of 20’s Chicago, yet never mentions prohibition.
“bullet” Christian Science Monitor has a piece about an effort to convince environmentally conscious cocaine users that their recreational drug use is harming the environment. The project is being run by Colombian officials. It’s an irresponsible article, which we thoroughly and excellently critiqued in the comments.
“bullet” Margaret Wente really stinks up the place in her final installment of her series with Legalization In Disguise with random statements like these:

In Mr. Weselowski’s view, harm reduction is a farce. “They’re killing people by the truckload,” he says. […]
The noisy marijuana lobby provides a lot of fuel for this crusade, despite the fact that pot is not the issue. […]
Not surprisingly, the group that runs Insite, Vancouver’s safe-injection site, stridently opposes current drug laws, as does the publicly funded drug users’ lobby, VANDU. These two groups are notorious for the noisy lengths they go to in order to silence their critics. […]
Sadly, all this theatre has deprived Canadians of a genuine debate over drug policy.

She even found a way to blame Soros in there. Really horribly bad journalism.
“bullet” DEA bad girl Director Michele Leonhart gave a speech to the International Drug Enforcement Conference. In her world, drug enforcement efforts are doing just fine.

These are just some of the new challenges we all face as we fight a nimble and global enemy. However, we have proven that we are an even more innovative, skilled, and flexible global force. We‰ve proven that no agency or nation can succeed alone in this fight against transnational criminals. In just the last year, we have succeeded beyond what any of us probably hoped for when we met in Madrid.
We are making history against some of the most powerful narco-terrorists, cartels, and global traffickers.

And check out this completely delusional take on Mexico:

In the U.S., we feel the effects of Mexico‰s success. Combined with other enforcement efforts, in the U.S. we‰re seeing a 15-month long sustained trend where prices for meth soared 56 percent and cocaine 30 percent and purity for both dropped by double digits.

And, of course, to the drug warriors, even failure is an indication of success

Inevitably, with our coordinated, successful attacks on drug networks and supply, drug traffickers become more frustrated and more violent.

which is a horrible disconnect with a statement just sentences later

We make a difference in the lives of the citizens we‰re sworn to protect and keep all our countries safer.

Safety through violent and unending war. Right.

Smith: Confused About War on Drugs
Yes, he is.

Can someone explain this to me?
New weapon launched in drug war
It’s all about the creation of a database of DNA profiles of cannabis plants that will be “ready for police operations in just over a year.”
As science, it’s interesting, but as a “weapon” for police, i really don’t understand it. What actual possible use would this database be in getting convictions?
Say that marijuana seized in a bust matches the DNA of other cannabis seized somewhere. What does that prove (that’s actionable) that the seizure itself wouldn’t already prove?

Lots of stuff here…
“bullet” Scott Morgan covers another segment of Margaret Wente’s horrible series in the Globe and Mail. In this one, she just makes up her “facts” out of thin air. He suggests you write Globe and Mail. I agree.
“bullet” Bob Barr Endorses Accountability Now/Strange Bedfellows coalition. Good for him. Not specifically drug war, but it is about beating back the cross-partisan authoritarianism that’s dominating Washington.
“bullet” Kevin Carson has Just Another Drug War Rant at the art of the possible.
“bullet” Norm Stamper: One way out of endless drug war
“bullet” William Reed for Insight News: War on drugs costly for Blacks

When the Draconian drug laws were being enacted African American legislators went along with “law and order” politicians with practices that would incarcerate millions of drug offenders from inner city neighborhoods and help rural politicians make the business of imprisonment a major industry in their districts.
Every passing year the drug problem gets worse and its time African Americans make legislative representatives face up to the impact the War on Drug has on us.

“bullet” Joy Strickland Drug laws fertilize teen violence

Those concerned about the message decriminalization would send to our children would do well to consider the message we are sending by continuing the status quo. […]
We don’t want our children to die as innocent victims of turf wars and gang violence.

“bullet” A very interesting and thorough discussion of marijuana by Matt Johnson at the Vernon Broadcaster. Marijuana’s Tangled Roots Run Through Society
“bullet” Alex at Drug Law Blog reports that Elaine McKellips has filed a lawsuit against San Louis Obispo County Sheriff Pat Hedges alleging that he violated the California Constitution when he invited federal law enforcement officials to raid a medical marijuana dispensary.
“bullet” Looks like the war on marijuana is just about over: Massive Load Of Marijuana Seized In Miami and Tokyo Police Make Biggest Marijuana Bust and in Monterey, California, police eradicated $128 million worth of marijuana. That’s gotta be pretty much all of it, don’t you think? Now it’s just a matter of mopping up what’s left. I mean, it’s not like this stuff grows on trees, you know. Oh… never mind.
“bullet” DrugSense Weekly
“bullet” “drcnet”

link

The War on Drugs has cost taxpayers $500 billion since 1973. Nearly 500,000 people are behind bars on drug charges today, yet drugs are as available as ever. Do you plan to continue the War on Drugs, or will you make some significant change in course?
Anybody who sees the devastating impact of the drug trade in the inner cities, or the methamphetamine trade in rural communities, knows that this is a huge problem. I believe in shifting the paradigm, shifting the model, so that we focus more on a public-health approach. I can say this as an ex-smoker: We’ve made enormous progress in making smoking socially unacceptable. You think about auto safety and the huge success we’ve had in getting people to fasten their seat belts.
The point is that if we’re putting more money into education, into treatment, into prevention and reducing the demand side, then the ways that we operate on the criminal side can shift. I would start with nonviolent, first-time drug offenders. The notion that we are imposing felonies on them or sending them to prison, where they are getting advanced degrees in criminality, instead of thinking about ways like drug courts that can get them back on track in their lives Ö it’s expensive, it’s counterproductive, and it doesn’t make sense.

It is the silly season, but this goes beyond to some kind of twilight zone. John McCain gave a speech at the NAACP convention, and authorized Dr. Ada Fisher (candidate for the House in North Carolina) to speak as official surrogate to journalists. Here is part of what she said:

‹áObama in his book about his father talked about his use of drugs. And I think it‰s disingenuous of people to vote for somebody for President when you won‰t allow a drug user in any secure or nuclear facility. Yet we as a nation, are willing to consider making somebody President of the United States I think that speaks very poorlyáBill Clinton said he smoked but he didn‰t inhaleáBut he didn‰t come out and flagrantly say he used drugsáand if that‰s going to be our standard God helps us in nuclear facilities and secure facilities who have this kind of history..and this nation must be very careful when it lowers the bar on who and what it will accept.” […]
“See, if you admit it, it should disqualify you. Otherwise, we‰ll have to let all those people who áapplied for jobs in these facilitiesáThere is a reason that those rules are there. I was a detox director for 16 counties in North Carolina , so I have a great understanding about what drugs and what they do to people. And I know that in moments of weakness, people tend to revert those things that they‰ve used in the past. I don‰t think it‰s disingenuous, I don‰t think its fair. If I ran for President of the U.S. and I had that history, I would expect people to look at that very carefully. We cannot have a nation high on drugs and have the Presidentá as an example.”

Now I’ve read Ada’s bio, and while she has some odd thoughts, she doesn’t appear to be stupider than a post, so I’ve got to believe that she’s purposely being stupid for political reasons (which is even worse).
First, I wonder if in her experience as detox director for 16 counties, she ever ran across a person having difficulties with alcohol. Ya think? Is it possible that someone could ever revert to using alcohol? Is it possible that we’ve ever had a President who admitted to using alcohol in the past? Oh, wait.
Second, when did it become a better qualification for President to lie about their past than to tell the truth?
And finally, when did President and nuclear facilities employees end up with the same qualifications? Does this mean that nuclear facilities will have to start employing 72-year-olds who don’t know how to get on the internet?
My view on qualifications for President is that whoever is President should have some real world experience. Nobody should be allowed to be President unless:

• They’ve held several non-political jobs.
• They’ve traveled abroad and they actively seek out new experiences.
• They’ve enjoyed a wide range of cultural offerings, including music, theatre, art, literature.
• They’ve had a close friend from a different race (or at least, from a different socio-economic background).
• They’ve surfed the web and read a wide range of blogs.
• They’ve inhaled.