Drug WarRant

– photo by Bruce Chambers, Orange County Register –

See Drug Law Blog: Drug Raid at Orange County Hotel Fails to Locate Drugs

Remember that mild marijuana decrim bill in New Hampshire that I mentioned yesterday? Well, apparently it’s strong enough to cause Mayoral insanity.

Mayor Frank Guinta has asked state Rep. David Scannell to resign as spokesman for the Manchester school district after Scannell voted Tuesday to decriminalize possession of small amounts of marijuana.
Scannell insisted he will not resign, saying his vote is a form of political speech protected by the U.S. Constitution. He also raised the possibility he would take legal action against the mayor or anyone who tries to strip away his job.
In a letter signed yesterday, Guinta said Scannell’s vote on the bill, which passed the House but is unlikely to become law, “permanently and irrevocably harms” Scannell’s ability to serve Manchester’s schools. The mayor argued Scannell’s resignation is necessary to “help restore the integrity” of district anti-drug policies.
“He’s the face of the district,” Guinta said yesterday. “He interacts with kids on a daily basis, and he is taking a position to decriminalize marijuana. That is counter to logic, in my view.”

The notion of calling for the resignation of someone from a public position for their vote as a representative in the State House is extraordinarily absurd, particularly when coming from a public official invoking logic while demonstrating a complete lack of it.
But it’s also a very telling moment as it relates to drug policy. Sure, Guinta’s a moron. But how did he arrive at such a low point of humanity?
I’m convinced that there is a small core segment of the population that has so thoroughly drunk the kool-aid of prohibition that they firmly believe two propositions to be as true as the law of gravity:

1. Marijuana is very, very bad. Always.
2. An effective way, and the only way, to deal with marijuana is through strict prohibition

Despite being completely wrong, these two points are so ingrained that these people will not/cannot comprehend/listen to any rational arguments, so they assume that no rational opposing viewpoint exists. Thus, anyone who has an opposing viewpoint must want bad things to happen and should therefore certainly not be put in any connection with young people.
Prohibition propaganda overrides parts of the brain that actually allow rational thought. This makes our job much harder.
I’m not sure I’m as pessimistic as Dr. Tom O’Connell, but he makes some interesting points…

I found that I hadn‰t been prepared for just how truly mistaken and destructive the policy really is; not only was is it far worse than I‰d imagined, the reasons that drug prohibition and similar punitive policies have always found favor with a significant fraction of humans probably has a lot to do with our physical evolution; but not necessarily as imagined. In other words, a profoundly mistaken policy has now been based on erroneous assumptions for nearly a century. […]
fixing the mess we‰ve created may actually be impossible in the time left to pull it off. On the other hand, Earth is the only planet we‰ve got; so long as there‰s even a remote chance of saving it as our habitat, we‰d be foolish not to make the effort.

More on the New Hampshire zaniness from Paul Armentano at NORMLblog: Pot Makes You Lose Your Mind.

“bullet” Aren’t statistics interesting? Especially the ones not mentioned. For example, in Report urges LAPD to change SWAT unit we have:

Intensely proud and tightly knit, the unit is used largely to serve warrants on dangerous suspects and handle standoffs involving barricaded people.
Its record is impressive. In its 3,371 operations between 1972 and 2005, 83% ended without “untoward incident” and with the suspect in custody, the panel found. Of the 174 incidents involving hostages, several were killed by suspects, but only one died accidentally at the hands of SWAT officers.

So, that means that 573 operations ended with “untoward incident” and 3,197 (94%) of SWAT’s operations were undertaken despite the fact that there were no hostages.
“bullet” Alex at DrugLawBlog gives us reason with Rational Actors, or Why “Generation Rx” Uses Cough Syrup for Fun

Rational young people will do exactly what kids are in fact doing: switch to different drugs. They’ll use drugs that produce many of the same psychoactive effects that illegal drugs produce but which are sold by big pharma corporations and so are regulated in a much less draconian fashion.
Is that good or is it bad? Whatever one thinks about it, we should at least acknowledge that it is happening.

“bullet” Drug War Goes Crazy, Cyclist Forced to Provide Sample at Son’s Cremation

Van Impe’s fellow cyclists have protested, delaying the start of races over the weekend and reading a statement saying, “We’ll say yes a thousand times to a determined and responsible fight against doping, but today and even in an even stronger manner in the future, we say no a thousand times against the violation of our rights, the rights of every human being.”

“bullet” Some video fun…

New Hampshire residents could possess one-quarter ounce or less of marijuana without facing jail under a bill headed to the state Senate.
The House voted 193-141 Tuesday to decriminalize the small amount of the drug, making possessing it a violation subject to a $200 fine. Under current law, possessing that amount could mean spending a year in jail and paying a $2,000 fine.

OK, that’s something. Legalization is better, but $200 beats $2,000 plus jail. And here’s the interesting part…

Supporters argued current law costs youths who experiment with the drug all chances at receiving financial aid to attend college. They said it wasn’t fair to penalize them for life for a youthful mistake.
Windham Republican Jason Bedrick said he doesn’t advocate using marijuana, but that wasn’t the issue.
“The question is whether a teenager making a stupid decision should face a year in prison and loss of all funding for college,” said Bedrick.

As Scott Morgan points out, the unconscionable harshness of the financial aid penalty promoted by Mark Souder may have actually led to this bill passing the NH House.

Congrats to friend Grits for Breakfast for reaching some blogging milestones. In the mandatory blogself-reflection that such milestones bring, he makes these observations:

With the exception of occasional investigative articles or self-styled “analyses,” modern journalism too often reverts to a formula where “fairness” and “balance” – to use the famous buzz words – prevail over “honesty” or “truth.” […]
Reporters inevitably feel obligated to print “the other side,” even when they know they’re being misled. (A New York Times reporter famously said he was glad to quit covering Congress because he was tired of sitting around all day on marble slabs waiting for politicians to lie to him.) […]
To me, it’s unethical for a reporter to promote arguments or fact propositions to their readers if they don’t personally believe they’re true, even if they quote “the other side,” for “balance.” A lie ain’t a side of the story, it’s just a lie.
When reporters print a quote and don’t tell readers they think it’s misleading or obfuscatory, which happens ALL the time, IMO they do their readers a serious disservice. And journalists, don’t tell me you “let the facts speak for themselves” – you’re the writer, so you’re speaking. Period. It’s not just “the facts” but the facts you choose to present. Plus you’re the one who researched the story – your readers presumably don’t know as much as you do. […]
Newspapers frequently attribute their circulation decline to the rise of new technology, but IMO their greatest failing hasn’t been a reliance on dead trees, but their insistence on clinging to an outdated and counterproductive approach to newsgathering and storytelling. People read blogs not to get information, for the most part, but to help decipher what news stories mean, a niche that’s only available because of the shortcomings of hundred-year old journalistic canons and customs.
So do not expect what you read here to be “fair” or “balanced” (though I try to be “honest” and “truthful,” and admit mistakes when I make them).

It’s a good point, and one we run up against quite often in drug policy reform. It is what allows the drug czar to continue time and time again to widely distribute propaganda. The press will, for the most part, not fact check the claims or report that the data doesn’t support the conclusions, but rather, at best, add a quote from a drug policy reform organization leader to show a difference of opinion. This point alone makes quality blogs a better place to read about drug policy than most of the other media.
Now, to be sure, bloggers also often have a bit of advantage over other journalists in that they can specialize. I know more about drug policy that any journalist because that’s pretty much all I write about. But that doesn’t excuse the lack of integrity involved in standard media practice of knowingly putting forth misinformation.
So no, you won’t get balance here, either. But you’ll get a lot of truth. (And if I’m wrong, someone will correct me).

Lima, Ohio

An Allen County grand jury today indicted a Lima police sergeant on two misdemeanors for shooting 26-year-old Tarika Wilson to death and injuring her 14-month-old son during a Jan. 4 drug raid at her home.

The charges are negligent homicide (for Tarika’s death) and negligent assault (for her son’s injury).
Reactions:

Wilson’s family and Lima’s NAACP office said the misdemeanor charges against Chavalia should have been more severe.
“When you take aim and shoot someone with your gun, I don’t see how it’s negligent,” said Ivory Austin II, brother of Tarika Wilson

One interesting bit about Tarika’s boyfriend, who was the target of the raid…

Terry, 31, was later indicted for three counts of trafficking in crack cocaine, six counts of permitting drug abuse, and four counts of trafficking in marijuana for incidents occurring between September 2007 and Jan. 4, the day of the raid.

Permitting drug abuse? I hadn’t heard of that before. Sounds positively… crimethink.
Ah, but here it is.
Note how in the law, any criminal drug offense is considered, by definition, a drug abuse offense. Remember, in Newspeak “use” = “abuse.”
Also, killing a mother holding her baby is a misdemeanor. Selling or growing marijuana is a felony.

I was at the small group Q & A when Costa was asked that same question and avoided it.
Update: This really is a telling video. Kudos to Frederick Polak, who respectfully, yet firmly and persistently, tried to get an answer to a very basic question: “If prohibition is the only way to contain the drug problem, how do you explain that the prevalence of cannabis use is lower or similar in the Netherlands than in many neighboring countries?”
Peter Sarosi reports that

Some NGO representatives on the other end gave a standing ovation to Mr. Costa when he left the hall (you can see the same people applauding his anti-coffee shop statements in our video). The celebration was initiated by the lapdogs of the U.S. and Swedish governments of course, like the European Cities Against Drugs, an international organization funded by the Swedish government to promote its drug policy, praising ‹treatmentŠ services in Russia notorious for chaining and humiliating drug users, or SUNDIAL, an ‹NGOŠ led by the former speechwriter of the American drug czar. Among them we found the representative of the Partnership for a Drug Free America as well, who advocates the idea that we can solve drug problems by forcing schoolchildren to piss to a flask, despite the growing evidence that school drug testing doesn‰t work at all.

Pretty amazing when you watch the video and hear these people applauding Costa’s obvious avoidance tactic. I mean, if you understand even the basics of English, it’s obvious that Costa was purposely not answering the question and refusing to allow it to be considered. And for that they applauded?
It’s almost as though they were sitting there thinking “Uh, oh, that druggie guy got nailed us good on that one — how will Costa respond? … Oh, excellent technique! You simply dodged it! Bravo!”

A busy day for me — I’ll have more later.
“bullet” It’s not just a war…

Ahmadu Giade has assured Nigerians that the agency will continue its onslaught on illicit drug dealers.

“bullet” Idiot. We’re going to have a little lesson on logic later today.
“bullet” Court Ruling Limits Employment Drug Testing – a rare moment of clarity.
“bullet” The LAPD conducts so many wrong-address raids that they’ve got a special unit just to fix all the doors.
“bullet” In Alabama, pregnant drug users getting jail, not help.
“bullet” Doggy Style – Border Patrol Checkpoints Near Yuma Nab Hordes of Pot Users Headed Back From the Beach — a good, extended article about how border concerns have turned into a complete loss of Constitutional rights for many residents.

This is the day that Saint Urho drove the grasshoppers out of Finland, thus saving the grape and (some say) marijuana crops.
Enjoy.

There’s a must-read article by Marc Caputo in the Miami Herald today:
Crist wants to maintain drug penalties
Check out the well-constructed lede:

Though he has admitted to smoking marijuana, Gov. Charlie Crist said he still favors Florida’s tough drug laws and doesn’t support legislative plans to review whether to lessen penalties for some crimes such as non-violent drug possession.

There’s an incredible amount of meat in that one sentence — the hypocrisy of Gov. Crist, the fact that Florida’s drug laws are tough, the fact that the legislature is actually considering reform, and that many locked up for drug possession are non-violent offenders. This is a real breath of fresh air in a news piece.
It continues:

The state’s prison population is expected to swell at year’s end to a record 100,000, about 20 percent of whom are non-violent drug offenders convicted of crimes such as trafficking and simple possession.
And some legislators have wondered aloud and in private how the state can afford to pay for it now that Florida’s economy is sagging and crime is rising. It costs more than $19,000 a year to lock up an inmate, not counting the millions it will cost to build two prisons per year through 2013 to keep up with prison-population growth.

Two prisons per year. Wow. See, this is the kind of reporting that can really make people sit up and take notice. And it’s an article where the “smart on drugs” crowd really look like they’ve got it together much more than the “tough on drugs” Governor.
Of course, the two questions that I wish had been asked…
First, the Governor said:

”And what I support about the law is the deterrent effect”

So why didn’t the law deter him?
Second, the standard question to hypocrite politicians: If you had been caught, it’s likely your life would have been ruined and you probably wouldn’t have become Governor. So why is it OK for you to do that to others?