Long Whine

Posted on October 14, 2005 by Pete Guither

The DEA is triumphantly announcing the conclusion of Operation Long Whine (have they run out of good operation names?). Reports say they seized a bunch of coke, meth, and cash, and arrested 28 people.

DEA Administrator Karen P. Tandy said in a statement. “To decimate the drug trade, we are following drug money back to its sources, targeting the laundering networks and eliminating the profits that fuel drug trafficking gangs.”[…]

Of the 28 arrested, 19 were illegal Mexican immigrants, DEA said.

Another batch of drugs seized that will have no impact on availability, another bunch of small fish arrested, another trumpeted claim to be “decimating” the drug trade. Your tax dollars at work.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Long Whine

This is nice…

Posted on October 14, 2005 by Pete Guither

Link

Advocates for medical marijuana use will have an ally in the governor’s office next year, regardless of whether Democrat U.S. Sen. Jon S. Corzine or Republican Doug Forrester wins November’s election.

Both candidates said Tuesday night that if elected, they would allow for the medicinal use of marijuana if it is prescribed by a doctor.

“Under the proper circumstances, I think we need to provide all medical resources, and that includes what is emerging now with regard to this particular application,” Forrester said. “I’m very much open to that.”

Corzine said, “If a doctor prescribes it, we need to do what is in the best interests of the patient.”

Are politicians starting to get on the bandwagon?

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on This is nice…

Drug War Victims

Posted on October 13, 2005 by Pete Guither

“bullet” Radley Balko at the Agitator has more good questions about the Anthony Diotaiuto case. A good piece. Go read.
“bullet” It’s nice to see a lot more of the blogosphere picking up on the Steve Tuck case, with some appropriate outrage. Still not much coverage in the press.
Update:
Steve Tuck (a medical marijuana refugee who was snatched from a Canadian hospital by U.S. police and brought to the states and given nothing but ibuprofen in jail) has finally been temporarily released by a judge’s order so he could get medical attention.

His lawyer, Douglas Hiatt, and the president of Washington Physicians for Social Responsibility, Sunil Aggarwal, brought him to Harborview Medical Center, where he was being evaluated in the emergency room Thursday night.

“The doctors are appalled at the condition he’s in,” Hiatt said.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Drug War Victims

Thank you, James P. Gray

Posted on October 13, 2005 by Pete Guither

I have been a fan of Superior Court Judge James P. Gray since I discovered his book several years ago: Why Our Drug Laws Have Failed and What We Can Do About It: A Judicial Indictment of the War on Drugs . It was simply one of the clearest and easiest to read arguments against the war on drugs — a particularly good book for someone to read who was just getting ready to consider drug policy reform. I bought 6 copies and have had them out on loan (and given some away).
Well James continues to amaze. His article in Wednesday’s National Post: The war on drugs cannot be won” is superb.

Based on my experience as a federal prosecutor with the United States Attorney’s Office in Los Angeles, as a criminal defence attorney for the U.S. Navy JAG Corps, and as a trial judge in Orange County, Calif. since 1983, I’ve concluded that the U.S. government policy of drug prohibition has not only failed, but that it is hopeless.

The problem is not that our law enforcement officers aren’t doing a good job. In truth is they have a dangerous and difficult task, and are doing better than we have a right to expect. They are no more to blame for the failure of drug prohibition than was Elliott Ness for the failure of alcohol prohibition. The problem, rather, is that our prohibitionist laws make the trafficking in illegal drugs so obscenely profitable that we will never exhaust the supply to criminals willing to take the risk of imprisonment in order to produce and sell them.

In fact, our present system is giving us the worst of all worlds. As a direct result of our policy of drug prohibition, crime, violence, corruption, taxes and — in many cases — even drug usage have increased, while the health and civil liberties of citizens have suffered. America’s “prison-industrial complex” has gotten so fat and powerful from the money our governments have budgeted for the War on Drugs that it has become politically dangerous for elected officials to speak out against the current policy. Under these circumstances, it is up to ordinary people — as citizens, taxpayers and voters — to call a halt to these failed policies.

And he asks all the right questions as well…

– Why do we not make distinctions between drug use, drug misuse, drug abuse and drug addiction? I agree that marijuana, for example, can have harmful effects upon the user if taken to excess on a regular basis. But obviously, so can alcohol. I drink a glass of wine almost every night with dinner. Does that mean that I am in need of an alcohol treatment program? […]

– Given that there has never been a society in human history that has not embraced some form of mind-altering drug to use and abuse, should we not put our focus on harm reduction, rather than fighting human nature through prohibitionist mechanism?

And check out this line: “The people of Colombia do not have a drug problem: No one is dying from coca plants. What they have is a devastating drug money problem.”
Good stuff. He ran for Senate in California as the Libertarian Candidate in 2004. He only got 1.7% of the vote. Sad. I’d love to have him in Washington.

[Thanks, Bruce]
Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Thank you, James P. Gray

Let’s Get Political

Posted on October 12, 2005 by Pete Guither

This is a single-issue blog, and although I have personal political views beyond the drug war, I try to stick with the drug war here. I welcome conservatives, liberals, moderates, and libertarians.
However, there is no reason to avoid the big elephant in the room. The Republican leadership controls the House, Senate, Presidency (and has appointed most of the Supreme Court). And they are therefore responsible for the current escalations and travesties of the drug war. Sure, I still go and yell at the Kos Kids for their complicity through lack of attention to the drug war, but for now, the responsibility falls primarily with the Republican leadership (Note that I purposely do not say “conservatives,” for most true conservatives do not support the drug war.)
Because of this, a recent rant from Doug Bandow of the Cato Institute really hit home.

The House Republican leadership must go. Even if that means the GOP loses control of Congress. Democrats spent decades practicing the policy of spending lavishly to win elections. Republicans refined the practice in just a few years.

More fundamentally, it took the Democrats four decades to fully succumb to the temptations of power, ruthlessly abusing their control of Capitol Hill. After only one decade the Republicans are proving to be even worse. […]

When it comes to policy there seem to be ever fewer serious differences between the two leading political parties. Both expand government power, increase federal spending, lavish money on pork barrel projects, and put their own interests before that of the public at every turn. And these days, at last, the GOP appears to be more ruthless about using every bit of the power that it has accumulated for its own advantage.

While there are few substantive reasons to choose between the parties, there now is a practical reason to vote Democratic: to put at least one organ of national power into someone else’s hands. As Lord Acton famously observed, “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”

The GOP seems intent on proving the truth of Lord Acton’s axiom.

Regardless of your political beliefs in other areas, it’s clear that the Republican party has gone overboard in its support of the extreme excesses of the drug war.
It’s tough enough to imagine a party that encourages people like Mark Souder, but this one puts him in charge of drug policy…

  • Mark Souder, Chair, SubCommittee on Criminal Justice, Drug Policy and Human Resources
  • F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr., Chair, Committee on the Judiciary
  • Tom Davis, Chair, Committee on Government Reform
  • Dan Burton, Chair, Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere

I can’t imagine any worse choices for these positions (although there are rumors that Dan Burton has occassional moments of doubt). So even though we may not be able to defeat the individuals, remember that a change of party means a change of committee leadership, and while that may not mean so much in the Senate (we’d be giving up Graham for Biden in the Crime and Drugs SubCommittee), in the House, a change of party would be huge for us. Right now we’re on the defensive with all the horrific bills being developed by Sensenbrenner and Souder, et al. It’s hard to develop good reform policy when you’re spending all your time fighting off these idiots.
November, 2006, is going to be coming remarkably soon.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Let’s Get Political

SSDP is the future

Posted on October 11, 2005 by Pete Guither

I am continually impressed with the work and energy of Students for Sensible Drug Policy. Check out the latest from the Brown chapter’s Jesse Adams — this column in today’s campus newspaper.

I heard it for the first time in first grade and then again every single year from the fourth grade to the end of high school: “Drugs are bad. Drugs are addictive and destroy your life. Drugs will kill you.”

Considering that this message came from my kindly neighborhood police officer, the guidance counselor with the never-ending supply of Tootsie Roll Pops and eventually my high school’s endearingly dim-witted football coach, I was at first inclined to believe their obviously well-intentioned warnings. But over time, just like thousands of kids who have endured the DARE program, my peers and I became jaded and cynical.[…]

[…] what turned the kids I knew against DARE was the blatant inconsistency of the (mis)information it provided. […] For most kids, I think, it seemed ridiculous to respect warnings from an organization with such a clear lack of respect for its audience’s intelligence.

This group is not only getting the word out, they’re doing something important.

What we have now is a vacuum of readily available truthful information about drugs, at least for those who don’t want to conduct their own extensive research online. In the absence of education that could encourage safety, I have witnessed some truly dangerous drug-related activity: smokers wrecking their constitutions by single-handedly burning through ounces of marijuana in a matter of weeks; students snorting Adderall so that they can do their homework after an evening of using downers; even people assaulting their livers by washing down prescription painkillers with copious amounts of alcohol. Since prohibition is clearly impossible, harm reduction should be the goal. It is clear that students need an objective, trustworthy and confidential source for factual information about drugs and drug safety.

Last year, the Drug Resource Center opened as a joint project between Students for Sensible Drug Policy and the Department of Health Education. Its mission is to provide unbiased and truthful information about drug use, including the dangers thereof. The DRC’s volunteers are trained to direct visitors to the best sources of information so as to reduce harm. A more informed student body will be a safer one.

I encourage all students to visit the DRC, regardless of their personal stance regarding drugs – knowledge is power, and power is safety.

Congrats to the Brown SSDP.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on SSDP is the future

Punishing the Poor

Posted on October 11, 2005 by Pete Guither

Nice editorial in the Providence Journal about the HEA financial aid provision.

We have many misgivings about the so-called war on drugs. But as long as it is being prosecuted, it should not hurt the drug-taking poor more than the drug-taking rich. Almost every statistic on the subject says that this is the case.

One of the most sordid examples of the unequal treatment is the law that withdraws federal financial aid from students with drug convictions. Because such aid goes mainly to low-income students, the law hits them far harder than their well-to-do classmates. Aid has so far been pulled from 175,000 students, no doubt ending a college education for many people who needed it.

The editorial also stuck it to the politicians who turned their backs on it.

It disappoints us that Rhode Island Sen. Jack Reed, a member of the committee that marked up the Senate bill, did not respond to pleas (by, among others, University of Rhode Island President Robert Carothers and Brown University President Ruth Simmons) to try to kill the drug provision.

Massachusetts Congressman Barney Frank has proposed a stand-alone bill that would repeal the law. It has 70 House co-sponsors, but Rhode Island’s James Langevin and Patrick Kennedy are not among them. (Ironically, Mr. Kennedy made news as a teenager for having received treatment for cocaine use; he was not, of course, denied a college education because of it.)

Perhaps Rhode Island’s Sen. Lincoln Chafee, who admitted to cocaine use while a student at Brown, would like to step forward and denounce drug penalties that single out lower-income students.

Any courage out there?

That’s what we need to see more of — political cost for supporting (or failing to change) stupid drug war laws.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Punishing the Poor

U.S. captures terrorist Steve Tuck

Posted on October 11, 2005 by Pete Guither

Well, we haven’t gotten Osama yet, but the federal government has Steve Tuck in custody.
What can I tell you about this terrorist? I didn’t know much about him until recently (and what I do know is still a bit sketchy).
Steve Tuck served in the US military, and while part of the military, his parachute failed to properly open. Miraculously, he didn’t die.
He did, however, have 13 back surgeries and a metal plate inserted in his lower back. The pain requires high doses of morphine, which can be reduced somewhat by the use of marijuana.
But then he turned terrorist. What did he do? He helped supply medical marijuana to sick people in California! Well, federal agents were on the ball and swarmed down on him, but he was able to sneak past their net and across the border (to Canada).
In Canada, Steve got involved in medical marijuana activism. This, combined with his bold move of actually smoking pot in a marijuana club in front of our Drug Czar. This apparently caused the feds to make Steve Tuck one of the most wanted, probably just behind that #2 Al Queda operative they keep catching.
So they infiltrated the weak Canadian police and grabbed Steve. He now is in the United States, in custody, denied morphine and medical care. Just like a terrorist.
MarijuanaNews.com is the place to follow his story. (More here.)

[Thanks to Scott]
Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on U.S. captures terrorist Steve Tuck

FBI radical idea: consider ‘whole person’ in hiring

Posted on October 9, 2005 by Pete Guither

Via Cannabis News:

Washington, D.C. — The FBI, famous for its straight-laced crime-fighting image, is considering whether to relax its hiring rules over how often applicants could have used marijuana or other illegal drugs earlier in life.

Some senior FBI managers have been deeply frustrated that they could not hire applicants who acknowledged occasional marijuana use in college, but in some cases already perform top-secret work at other government agencies, such as the CIA or State Department.

That’s right. By eliminating marijuana smokers, you’re dumbing down the FBI! And of course it’s true. Almost 50% of the U.S. population has tried pot. That’s a huge reduction in your hiring pool.

The new FBI proposal would judge applicants based on their “whole person” rather than limiting drug-related experiences to an arbitrary number.

You mean you’d use actual decision-making in your hiring and find the best person for the job? What a concept! Except, that’s how I’ve always hired people. I didn’t realize I was so far ahead of the field. Maybe it would work in other areas.

Private companies have wrestled with the same problem. Employers complain they can’t afford to turn away applicants because of marijuana use that ended years earlier, said Robert Drusendahl, owner of The Pre-Check Co. in Cleveland, which performs background employment checks for private companies.

“The point is, they can’t fill those spots,” Drusendahl said. “This is a microcosm of what’s happening outside in the rest of the world.

Yep, it’s getting difficult to keep up with that zero tolerance stuff and still have a competent work force.

“I don’t think you could find anybody who hasn’t tried marijuana, and I take a lot of credit for that,” said Tommy Chong, the comedian whose films with Cheech Marin provided over-the-top portrayals of marijuana culture during the 1980s. “They’re going to have to change their policy.”

Thank you, Tommy.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on FBI radical idea: consider ‘whole person’ in hiring

French embarrassed by science

Posted on October 9, 2005 by Pete Guither

Thanks to Tim Meehan. Info at Drug Sense

A major new French study of drugs and driving concludes that cannabis poses a much lesser risk of fatal accidents than alcohol, according to a report in the journal LibÚration. The study is deeply embarrassing to the French government, which passed a “zero-tolerance” law against driving under the influence of marijuana before results of the study were available. This is just the latest in a long line of studies indicating that marijuana is a lesser hazard than alcohol on the road, and that zero-tolerance standards for marijuana DUI are unjustified.

Here’s the article in French and the study.
While we can laugh at the embarrassment of the French in this case, we’re quickly sobered by the fact that the U.S. government in this situation would simply ignore the study and pretend that it didn’t exist, or, if confronted, claim that the study was meaningless.
Every major study (here are some more) has shown that driving under the influence of marijuana (while not recommended) is far less dangerous than many other influences (including alcohol or fatigue).
Politicians who call for zero-tolerance driving laws (which usually include positive tests from having smoked pot in recent days) have absolutely no interest in safety. They just want to have another way to punish people who use marijuana responsibly. And to do so, they want to re-direct police resources that could be used to target impaired drivers.
That’s not embarrassing. That’s deplorable.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on French embarrassed by science