Drug WarRant

(Via Susie Bright)
Check out this old Black and White educational video clip of British troops being administered LSD for experiments.
Hilarious.
Now if you could just get both sides to take it, maybe they’d stop fighting.

I hope you have better things to do on Valentine’s Day. But if you want to, and you can stomach it, let me know how Frontline does with this.
Interestingly, Frontline publicist Jessica Smith contacted me and thought I might be interested. Based on the description, though, it sounds like the usual sensationalist drug war epidemic attempt to raise ratings.

Speed. Meth. Glass. On the street, methamphetamine has many names. What started as a fad among West Coast motorcycle gangs in the 1970s has spread across the United States, and despite lawmakers’ calls for action, the drug is now more potent, and more destructive, than at any time in the past decade. In The Meth Epidemic, airing Tuesday, February 14, 2006, at 9 P.M. ET on PBS (check local listings), FRONTLINE, in association with The Oregonian, investigates the meth rampage in America: the appalling impact on individuals, families and communities, and the difficulty of controlling an essential ingredient in meth — ephedrine and pseudoephedrine — sold legally in over-the-counter cold remedies.

Tellingly, the release indicates that the special will explore two potential solutions to the meth “crisis.” 1. controlling the retail sale of the ingredients, and 2. regulating the source of the ingredients. No discussion indicated regarding non-drug-war solutions or indication that the drug war caused the “crisis.”
Apparently Souder is interviewed. No indication as to whether anyone outside the drug war industry is involved.
Update: I didn’t watch it, but the web site is now live, complete with all the standard sensationalism and some of the shoddiest reporting I’ve seen. Pages of stuff, and only one slight mention that there might be another view…

There are some observers who say the meth problem is blown out of proportion because the number of meth-related drug treatment admissions, seizures, and fatalities are relatively few when compared to those for heroin or cocaine. However, meth’s impact on families and communities is much more devastating.

That’s it.
And the interview with Souder? Practically kissing his ass. Check out this exchange as the interviewer brings up the issue of cold medicine with alternate ingredients:

[Interviewer]One thing that’s happening is now that companies are losing shelf spaces because their products with pseudoephedrine must be placed behind the counter. They are bringing out products with phenylephrine, [which, unlike pseudoephedrine, cannot be turned into crystal meth]. But phenylephrine has been around for about 50 years. Why do you think it took so long?

[Souder]As I understand it, the alternative products are not as effective in treating pain or symptoms as the products that had the pseudoephedrine in them, and it isn’t clear whether something can come to market that will replace that. But the plain truth of the matter is that in order to tackle the meth problem, at least in the short term, we are probably going to have some reduction in some quality of impact of some products. The question is, are we better off as a nation to have a little bit less effective headache medicine or cold medicine in order to get rid of meth?

But why has it taken so long to introduce these products?

I believe in America we’ve reached a tipping point. If it [were] just in rural Nebraska, it would be a fair political debate to say, “Should we restrict a grocery store in New York City from having the most effective headache product in their choices from 120 choices to 20?” But if the problem moves beyond just Nebraska — and it’s now in 40 states, quickly heading to 50 states, and it’s devastating costs to law enforcement, to treatment, to environmental impact — so you say, “OK, the marginal change here in headache medicine is worth it.”

Some say the pharmaceutical industry has had to be dragged kicking and screaming here.

So we’re talking about reducing the quality of medicine for everyone because of panic over this so-called epidemic, which is, of course, just fine for Souder, and the Frontline interviewer is practically screaming “Why didn’t we sabotage our medicine earlier?”
Shameful for PBS.

Link

Possession of less than an ounce of marijuana would no longer be a criminal offense under a bill that won the backing of a legislative committee yesterday. The bill, approved by the Mental Health and Substance Abuse Committee on a 6-1 vote, would make possession of a small amount of marijuana a civil offense punishable by a $250 fine.

In cases involving those 18 years old or younger, parents would be notified. Possession of less than an ounce of marijuana is now considered a criminal offense, punishable by up to six months in jail and a $500 fine for the first offense.

An excellent step.

Via JMBzine, who writes Oh, great, another stupid Oklahoma drug law.
Link

Oklahoma teenagers too young to buy alcohol are getting high by drinking bottles of cough syrup containing a non-regulated ingredient, according to supporters of a bill approved by a state House panel Monday that would put the medicine behind pharmacists’ counters. […]

“This is going to become an epidemic, just like meth did,” said Rep. Doug Miller, R-Norman.

Back many years ago when I was a child, I remember two students in school who were using Kerosene to get high and one of them died (quite frankly, while my young mind had not yet heard of the not-yet-invented Darwin Awards, I instinctively understood the concept and approved in this particular case). Glue sniffing was also around. And, of course that happens today, as well. Which means…
Oh, no, we’d better hurry up and pass a lot more laws!
To start with, we must have the following things put, by law, behind the counter:

• Kerosene
• Gasoline
• Propane
• Paint, paint thinners, lacquer, etc.
• WD-40
• Nail polish remover
• Lighter fluid, butane lighters
• Cleaning fluids and spot remover
• Non-stick coating spray cans
• Shoe polish
• Glue, rubber cement
• Hair sprays and spray deodorants
• Magic Markers

Oh, yeah, and better get those cans of whipped cream. And the helium balloons.
We’re going to need a much bigger counter.
Look. Some kids are going to find ways to get high, and nothing you can do as a legislator is going to stop that, so stop deluding yourself into thinking you have that power. In fact, you should be aware that just about anything you do is likely to have unintended consequences that will make things worse (like the way cracking down on legal amphetamines spawned the methamphetamine home cooking craze).
Good parenting, truthful education, and harm reduction approaches will do more to save young lives than your stupid laws.

Tomorrow, the state senate Health and Human Services Committee is scheduled to hold hearings on a medical marijuana bill — S.B. 2568.
If you live in Illinois, call or write your State Senator today. Here’s an easy way to send an email to the committee.

Sometime this past week, Allan pointed out to me this bit of nonsense by Cliff Kincaid: Soros Infiltrates the Conservative Movement. Cliff, who is an ignorant drug war cheerleader and always writes bizarre anti-reformer screeds (example), decided to complain about a drug policy session planned at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), which ends today.

The notion of a drug policy session at CPAC isn’t new — there was a very successful one last year. But Cliff jumped on the fact that Ethan Nadelmann and Bruce Birken would be participating, and that — horror of horrors — both worked for organizations “funded by leftist billionaire and anti-Bush activist George Soros.” (I’ve also contributed to both the Drug Policy Alliance and the Marijuana Policy Project, but Cliff didn’t mention me.)

The kicker, for Cliff, was the fact that poor Calvina Fay of Mel Sembler’s Drug Free America Foundation had to pull out of the debate because it “had been stacked against her” by those George Soros meanies that were trying to infiltrate the conservative movement.

MPP responded with the real story.

Kincaid reported that Fay cancelled her scheduled debate because it “had been stacked against her.” However, during a Monday phone conversation with MPP Director of Government Relations Aaron Houston, Fay’s Director of Communications Lana Beck told Houston that Fay had cancelled because she did not want to engage in a back-and-forth debate, and would only accept under the condition that each side give five-minute speeches, without openings, rebuttals or closings for each speaker […]

On Thursday, Houston and a staffer for the Drug Policy Alliance (DPA) offered both Fay and Kincaid slots in a Friday panel discussion with MPP’s Kampia and DPA’s Ethan Nadelmann titled “War on Drugs: Misplaced Priority on Marijuana?” Fay had already been offered a slot on the panel, but declined. On Friday morning, the pair finally informed Houston that they refused to participate in the panel.

So much for Kincaid’s outrage. Calvina simply wasn’t willing to face an opponent who might be able to correct her lies.

It was a fun little dust-up, and several reformers got to take over the comments big-time at the Kincaid article published in the Conservative Voice. I thought that was all there would be to it… But no.

Here comes our old friend/nemesis, sado-moralist Mark Souder (Jacob Sullum has also talked about this at Hit and Run). Representative Souder also read the Kincaid piece and decided that the drug policy mini-session at CPAC is a threat to the conservative movement that rivals… the Jack Abramoff scandal!

He placed this in the Congressional Record:

George Soros, the radical liberal financier who dedicated himself to defeating President George W. Bush in the last election, has taken a lesson from Jack Abramoff.

As much of Abramoff’s pernicious lobbying technique has come to light, we’ve seen how he was adept at manipulating certain conservative organizations to pursue a decidedly anti-conservative agenda, namely the promotion of gambling. By working hand in hand with the Traditional Values Coalition (TVC), for example, he was able in 2000 to undermine conservatives’ best effort to outlaw on-line gambling. Proxy organizations played a fundamental role in Abramoff’s strategy.

Since 1974, the American Conservative Union has held the Conservative Political Action Conference, or CPAC, which is billed as a three-day meeting for thousands of conservative activists and leaders to discuss current issues and policies and set the agenda for the future. I myself have addressed the conference in the past.

One can imagine a conservative’s surprise to read on the CPAC 2006 agenda that a representative of the Marijuana Policy Project (MPP) is slated to moderate–yes, moderate–a panel Friday discussing drug policy. For those who are unacquainted with it, the pro-marijuana MPP has been funded by Soros in the past. Also represented on the panel is the Drug Policy Alliance, which is Soros’ principal pro-drug arm. Incidentally, the moderator himself is a convicted drug dealer.

What on earth were the CPAC organizers thinking? Why would the American Conservative Union allow extremist liberals like George Soros and Peter Lewis (who is responsible for most of MPP’s funding) to access a meeting of conservatives? And, in exactly whose estimation would there be balance in a debate moderated by the MPP?

Thanks to Accuracy in Media Report editor Cliff Kincaid, these are just a few of the questions that the CPAC organizers now face. I’d like to submit into the record his article of February 7, 2006, entitled “Soros Infiltrates Conservative Movement.” In exchange for a donation, is this 32-year old conservative conference turning itself into a Soros proxy organization just like Abramoff’s TVC?

Over the last number of months, we’ve been surprised to learn how one such as Abramoff was able to exploit conservatives for his own purposes. Surely in this environment we can’t miss seeing it when it’s happening once again.

This is just wrong on so many levels.

First, Souder makes it sound like this is the comparison: Jack Abramoff manipulated conservatives into supporting gambling against their will. Now Soros is attempting to manipulate conservatives into supporting drugs against their will. What bull!

The Abramoff scandal isn’t about promoting gambling. It’s about pitting one gambling interest against other gambling interest and paying Legislators hefty bribes to get them to pass legislation that will make certain clients and lobbyists rich, while victimizing certain Native American tribes.

The other situation is about two organizations, which get donations from a lot of individuals, hosting an optional panel discussion/debate on drug policy at a conference. And for that, Souder uses the Congressional Record?

There’s another thing happening here. Souder, and certain other social conservatives, would like nothing better than to frame drug policy reform as a “liberal” issue and remove it from conservative thought. But it won’t work, unless they’re somehow able to cleanse all traditional conservative beliefs in liberty, individual responsibility, and limited government from the Republican party, in which case that party is doomed.

By the way, early reports that I’ve heard indicate that the drug policy sessions were among the most interesting at CPAC, with the majority of attendees supporting the reform arguments.
Update: Here’s a report from the Stamford Advocate.

Julian Sanchez is blogging at CPAC

Professional virgin Ben Shapiro just strolled by talking about his highly nuanced position on the war on drugs: “People who use marijuana piss me off, so I support their prosecution.” Which seems more or less consistent with his general philosophy.

Flex Your Rights blog has the info on 87 women who were illegally searched for drugs at O’Hare airport. They’ll be receiving a $1.9 million settlement.

At airports, only “reasonable suspicion” is necessary to justify brief detentions and searches, but even this minimal evidentiary standard couldn’t explain why it was always Black women getting pulled out of line and humiliated.

Link (thanks to Matt)
OK, here’s the smart, reasonable public official who knows how to set priorities:

Johnson County Sheriff Lonny Pulkrabek, who oversees the University of Iowa in Iowa City, told a legislative committee he would treat possession of small amounts of marijuana like a traffic violation, allowing hundreds of students arrested each year to graduate without a criminal record.

“The guy that’s carrying 50 bales of marijuana … that’s a different animal,” Pulkrabek said, adding he favored rounding up intoxicated people in a locked “detox center” in lieu of the crowded jail.

Reasonable, right?
Then comes the politician…

But Republican legislator Clel Baudler, a former state trooper, shot down the notion as sending the wrong message to drug users and abusers.

“We could simplify law enforcement’s job if we didn’t have rock concerts. We could simplify their job a lot quicker if we just didn’t have football games there where we arrest hundreds of drunks over the weekend.” Baudler said.

We could simplify our lives if we rounded up all legislators like Baudler and put them away where they can’t hurt anyone.

Link

More Americans (some 575,000) died of cancer last year than perished in all our last centuries’ wars combined, but why no anger? We should be angry. We went to war against cancer 35 years ago and haven’t won.

President Nixon declared War on Cancer in his 1971 State of the Union speech, perhaps to draw attention from a shooting war gone bad in Vietnam, but nevertheless the cancer war was joined. Part of today’s problem might be his proclaiming a drug war that steals attention, with raids and arrests, featured on TV and movies, leading to a lot bigger budget. We’re losing that war too.