Drug WarRant

I’ve decided I’m annoyed by stupid people this week. So here’s another rant about them. I’m not talking about just any stupid people — in other words, not the ones who just sit at home and watch 700 Club reruns — but the stupid people who decide to go out into the world and loudly attempt to convince the rest of us of their particularly odious brand of stupidity.
Stupid #1
Let’s start with the amazing video that has been circulating the last couple of days. Rabid talk show host Kevin James is on Hardball screaming about appeasement, and Chris Matthews decides to actually ask him if he knows what it means. James digs himself into one of the deepest holes I’ve ever seen, and the video, while extremely painful to watch is, at the same time hilarious.
Forget about the mentions of Bush and Obama in the video — this isn’t about them. This is about the notion that anything other than pro-war can be loudly proclaimed as appeasement or surrender. This kind of stupidity dramatically reduces options and damages the country’s ability to accomplish anything. This stupidity completely cuts out rational discussions of diplomatic, economic, humanitarian, isolationist, and other options which are potentially potent tools with no relationship to appeasement or surrender. And in fact, it may turn out that war is the least viable option.
Unfortunately, recent years have given these idiots the notion that they are actually, uh, important, and that people with… facts are merely elitists (hopefully this is a temporary trend and not the beginnings of the death of empire — the dead hand of Hari Seldon would have a field day slapping around Kevin James)
What does this have to do with the drug war? Same situation. The screaming about the imperative to be “winners” — to win the war on drugs — is often paired with the notion that anything else is surrender. Thus, they attempt to shout-down any rational discussions of legalization and regulation, harm reduction, black market profit reduction, safety, targeting specific problems, etc.
When the stupids rule the discussion, then your ability to actually find solutions is limited or destroyed.
… as even a dumb machine knows.

Stupid #2
Via Grits for Breakfast is a letter to the editor in which a woman actually wishes harm to the families of criminal defense attorneys. Fortunately, the 14-year-old daughter of a defense attorney slapped her upside the head.
But as is so eloquently (!) shown by FarkingSean in a Fark.com discussion about the letters, there’s a whole lot of stupidity out there.
His view is, that while perhaps harming their families is going too far, defense attorneys should refuse to defend people they think are guilty. And he believes this to be common-sense justice.
He also believes that it’s better for an innocent man to be jailed than for a guilty one to go free because of the simple math that a freed guilty man may go out and harm others, while the jailed innocent man won’t.
I grew up with a real understanding of the Constitution and individual rights, so such a statement is so foreign that I had a bit of a hard time at first even responding in my head to such nonsense. I didn’t think I’d ever have to.
But I guess maybe we’re in a time when we have to respond to the stupids. So…

Even if you discount the moral, Constitutional, and American reasons for not jailing innocent people, consider this: If an innocent man is sent to jail, that usually means that the person who actually did the crime has not been sent to jail. So you’ve got your free guilty person plus an innocent in jail. Now do the math.

Recipe for disaster:

• An out-of-control drug war, where half the American citizenry is a potential enemy
• A win-at-all-costs mentality, with discussion of any other options being considered surrender and therefore anathema
• A lock-em-up attitude toward the criminal justice system that fails to understand citizen rights.

With apologies to Randy Newman

Stupid people have no reason…
Stupid people have no reason…
Stupid people have no reason to…

There’s lots more coverage of Rachel Hoffman’s murder every day.
Rachel Hoffman’s friends and supporters protested police department actions and remembered Rachel.
And much more information continues to surface…
Hoffman didn’t have “Confidential Informant” training

TPD officials said they didn’t train Hoffman because she was already involved in the drug business and knew what she was doing.

Yeah. Because she already sold pot to her college friends, she was perfectly trained to go undercover with marked bills and suddenly buy large amounts of different drugs and a gun. Right.
Told to Inform, They Live at Risk

In Hoffman’s case, it was the work of another informer that led to her own work for the police.
On April 15, an informer told Tallahassee police that Hoffman had sold marijuana in the past but hadn’t done so recently, according to police records. […]
Two days after police got the informer’s tip, a Tallahassee police officer stopped Hoffman as she was getting into her car.
The officer asked Hoffman if she had any drugs in her apartment. A quarter-pound of marijuana, she said, plus two ecstasy pills and four Valiums, according police records.
While she waited, police obtained a search warrant and found the marijuana and ecstasy in the apartment. She wasn’t arrested.
Instead, with the prospect of serving time for more serious charges, the graduate of Countryside High and Florida State University agreed to work with police.

I’d really like to be able to hear from Rachel what actually happened at that stop, or some of what happened after. Unfortunately, she’s dead, so we can’t ask her.
Details Surface in Hoffman Case

Hoffman, 23, had $13,000 in recorded bills to buy a gun, 2 ounces of cocaine and 1,500 ecstasy pills May 7 from two men, Deneilo Bradshaw, 22, of Tallahassee, and Andrea Green, 25, of Perry. But somehow the drug deal went bad and Hoffman’s body was found the next day in Taylor County.

Wait. $13,000 for a gun, 2 ounces of cocaine and 1,500 ecstasy pills???? But I’ve always thought that these things were much more expensive.

• 2,000 Ecstasy pills with an estimated street value of $43,000
• 800 Ecstasy pills with a street value of $20,000
• 400 Ecstasy pills… the street value of the pills was $20,000

Hmm… do you think the police sometimes exaggerate about street value? But of course they do.
Then we learn a little more about a truly messed up operation

On May 7, Hoffman drove alone in her 2005 Volvo to meet the two men, according to the reports. About 6:40 p.m., Green called her on her cell phone and told her to meet them in the parking lot of the Royalty Plant Nursery. The nursery is north of Forestmeadows on North Meridian Road.
Pender last saw Hoffman on North Meridian Road south of Forestmeadows, according to the court document. Hoffman called Pender and said she was following Green and Bradshaw in their car down Gardner Road. Pender said he told Hoffman not to follow them, but Hoffman hung up.
About 6:45 p.m., investigators lost contact with her. Calls to her phone went unanswered, and the monitoring device stopped working.
At some point, Special Agent L. Andris of the Drug Enforcement Administration said he saw two men in a gray BMW parked in front of the nursery as he drove by.
Jeanette Moran, DEA spokeswoman, said the Tallahassee Police Department had asked the DEA to assist them in the case. She wouldn’t comment further.
When investigators reached the 1000 block of Gardner Road, they found one back flip flop, one spent .25 caliber bullet, two live .25 caliber rounds and tire skid marks. Hoffman was wearing black flip flops when she was reported missing.

If only she could talk to us.
…
Somebody asked me recently if I thought Rachel Hoffman’s case was getting additional attention in general because she was an attractive, young, white girl.
The answer is… most definitely yes.
It’s a simple fact that is part of our culture and part of the history of this drug war.
A critical part of the drug war has historically been to marginalize certain segments of society. And so even now, when a young black or hispanic man is shown on the news in a drug bust it seems somehow… unimportant. That is partly due to the inherent racism of the drug war, both in perception and in percentages of arrests and incarcerations.
But when the press gets hold of the murder of a young white girl with so much potential, it always eats it up.
And so while it may seem… cold to “take advantage” of the death of Rachel Hoffman, there is the fact that she can accomplish something important because of who she was and the tragedy of her demise. She can draw national attention to the problems of the drug war and the use of confidential informants.
I can’t count the number of times I’ve heard police recently say that the drug war wouldn’t work without confidential informants.

Law enforcement officials say such work is necessary to get drugs and bad guys off the streets.
“The drug world is subversive, and there is no way to penetrate it without confidential informants,” Tallahassee police Officer David McCranie said.
Statistics are hard to come by, but officials in Pinellas and Hillsborough counties say the use of informers is common, and sometimes they get hurt.

Rachel has a lot of work to do, and we can give her a hand.

“bullet” Minnesotans for Compassionate Care are having to counter some really outrageous claims by the Police Association.
“bullet” In the “duh” headline category: CNN’s Lou Dobbs Is Clueless When It Comes to the Drug War
“bullet” Scott Morgan: Tallahassee PD’s Pathetic Response to Rachel Hoffman’s Death
“bullet” Questions for Mr. Costa (put together by the Hungarian Civil Liberties Union (h/t Alex)

“bullet” DrugSense Weekly
“bullet” “drcnet”

Daniel writes me with this link saying: “those repubs are insane.”
And I’ve got to agree.
One of the most bizarre things I’ve read in the silly season of politics. The GOP seems to be claiming that Obama’s suggestion — that he’d focus federal efforts on something other than interfering with state medical marijuana laws — is somehow a violation of the oath to defend the Constitution of the United States.

Barack Obama‰s pledge to stop Executive agencies from implementing laws passed by Congress raises serious doubts about his understanding of what the job of the President of the United States actually is. His refusal to enforce the law reveals that Barack Obama doesn‰t have the experience necessary to do the job of President, or that he fundamentally lacks the judgment to carry out the most basic functions of the Executive Branch. What other laws would Barack Obama direct federal agents not to enforce?Š

This makes my head explode on so many levels.
After 7 1/2 years of rubber-stamping the Bush Presidency, someone in the GOP apparently found a copy of the Constitution… and then failed to read it.
The Bush administration has quite possibly been the greatest danger to the Constitution in history, and the GOP (as well as the Democrats for the most part) have sat idly by and cheered.
Even when the administration has not been openly subverting the Constitution, the President has simply decided that he can interpret the Constitution his own way and ignore any laws that he wishes (remember signing statements?)
So now the GOP has decided that anything less than full-on federal harassment of law-abiding medical marijuana patients is a violation of the Constitution (when in fact, any proper reading of the Constitution would make the federal government’s actions illegal).
Wow.

Yet another driving study that confirms what we already know. This one specifically compared THC intoxication and alcohol intoxication.

THC primarily caused elevation in physical effort and physical discomfort during the drive while alcohol tended to affect sleepiness level. After THC administration, subjects drove significantly slower than in the control condition, while after alcohol ingestion, subjects drove significantly faster than in the control condition. No THC effects were observed after 24h on any of the measures.

No, it’s not good to drive while impaired in any way, including being tired, or talking on a cell phone, or under the effect of prescription drugs. But there is a dramatically different danger of driving drunk compared to driving under the influence of marijuana.
Those on marijuana, as a rule, drive more cautiously because they are aware of their impairment, while those on alcohol drive more recklessly. This is why the boogieman of roads full of drugged drivers from marijuana legalization is such nonsense.

There’s one problem often faced by those of us well versed in the facts of the drug war. We know the history and the science. We’re able to clearly distinguish the difference between negative consequences of drugs and negative consequences of prohibition. Our factual knowledge base is, quite frankly, overwhelming, and all of it points clearly, unmistakably, and inexorably to reform.
We’re even open to carefully considering opposing arguments (which fail the test of reason time after time), thus strengthening our confidence in the comprehensive nature of our information.
This didn’t happen overnight in most cases. It was the result of a lot of research, observation, and critical thinking.
So when we come across someone who opposes reform, we assume one of two things:

1. They are profiting from the drug war (politically, financially, or sadomoralistically) and thus are uninterested in the truth.
2. They simply don’t have the facts yet.

Once we’re relatively sure that the person is not category 1, then all we have to do is educate them. Right?
And yet, sometimes we find ourselves baffled by the reaction.
There are individuals for whom you could prove conclusively that:

• Legalization would result in less crime
• Legalization would result in reduced use of drugs by children
• Legalization would result in reduced drug abuse
• Legalization would result in enormous financial savings
• Legalization would result in dismantling of dangerous criminal organizations

… and they would still look at you like you were a crazy person bent on destruction of civilization as we know it for even suggesting consideration of legalization, even in controlled, regulated and limited situations.
These people are suffering from a form of cognitive distortion. [The term is most often used in relation to cognitive therapy to deal with things like depression, but I think it’s also appropriate to this situation.]
The cause? An authority figure need combined with a lifetime of propaganda. This combination sets the information down in pathways that cannot be disrupted by mere facts. (The conflict between factual information and established pathways can even cause unpleasant cognitive dissonance, resulting in lashing out against the person with the facts.)
Now I’m probably generalizing way too much in this post, but I’m guessing that a weak and/or fearful mind is much more susceptible to this kind of thing.
On the other hand… if, as a child, you found yourself on occasion saying to yourself “Hey, my teacher got that one wrong,” — and it was because of your own knowledge and not blind adherence to some other authority figure (church/parents) — then I’m guessing you’re probably less susceptible to propaganda and this form of cognitive distortion.
How do you deal with those with cognitive distortion? (Other than years of therapy.) It’s not easy. Those with only mildly set propaganda pathways may be dislodged through gentle yet persistent repetition of facts. It also helps, of course, to eliminate the propaganda reinforcement (we’ve got to do something about the ONDCP).
Maybe, once we’ve legalized drugs, we can use some of those hundreds of thousands of empty prison cells and convert them to mental health facilities to help the cognitively disabled. We wouldn’t want them to suffer.

… particularly if you’re also wearing a badge.

“The agents actually brought with them 146 pounds of marijuana in the trunk of an undercover vehicle,” […]
In addition to posing as drug buyers, [undercover officers] pose as drug dealers and the marijuana will be useful bait to trap more traffickers down the road.
The seized boat will be auctioned off and the sheriff’s office and the other police agencies that took part in the bust can keep the money. They’ll also split the cash the suspects paid for the marijuana.

And they get to keep the cash that we paid them through taxes, too!
And we get…
?
Seriously, we get…
?

Chief Dennis Jones, describing murdered Rachel Hoffman:

“She was completing a diversion program for possession of over 20 grams of marijuana and pending felony charges for possession with intent to sell MDA (or Ecstacy), maintaining a drug house, possession of a controlled substance with intent to sell, possession of drug paraphernalia.”

Sounds pretty hard core, doesn’t it?
Translation:

Rachel was a college student who sold pot to her friends. She was first caught with less than an ounce of pot and later caught with 5 ounces of pot and six ecstasy pills.

On the basis of that, they decided she should go to hard core dealers and attempt to purchase 1500 ecstasy pills, two ounces of cocaine, and a gun.

WFLA-FM 100.7, Tallahassee, FL
http://www.wflafm.com

Wednesday, May 14th at 7:30 am EDT
“The Morning Show” with Preston Scott and Eric Eggers

Guest: Mike Jones of Law Enforcement Against Prohibition
Topic: The Rachael Hoffman murder

If you smoke between two ounces and nine ounces of marijuana every week, it’s possible that you might be at an increased risk of heart attacks and strokes. But we don’t actually have any, uh, actual evidence of it.
Link