Drug WarRant

Young Jonathan Magbie in 1982 (paralyzed from the chin down), meeting President Reagan during the proclamation of National Respiratory Therapy Week. Last month, he was sentenced to jail for marijuana possession. It turned out to be a death sentence.
Loretta Nall has been protesting outside the courthouse. She writes: “Tomorrow I plan to get arrested because I am going to unfurl a cloth banner in the courtroom that reads…”

I’ve posted a couple of times now about Jonathan Magbie, paralyzed from the chin down and needing a respirator to breath at night, who was arrested for possession of marijuana and sentenced to 10 days in jail where he died without proper breathing equipment
There’s more at D’Alliance, and a new article in the Washington Post: Another Unnecessary Death in DC by Cobert I. King, details the series of bad decisions that led to the death of Magbie.
I’ve been doing some extra reflection about drug laws and our interaction with them after reading
a commenter at Talkleft, who wrote this about the quadriplegic:

He knew the risks he was taking but took them anyway. …thank’s [sic] to the utterly poor choices of Mr. Magbie, Magbie had the biggest role in killing Magbie. … Magbie clearly deserved a sentence of 10 days.

The other commenters jumped on him pretty quickly.
This is, however, not a completely isolated viewpoint.
For example, the link to my Drug War Victims page has been distributed on a lot of message boards around the web, and I often like to check out the comments that people have after reading it. The vast majority is horrified, but there are usually a few who will say, “That’s what they get for getting involved in drugs.” When reminded that many of the drug war victims were innocent, they respond, “Sometimes accidents happen when enforcing the law. That’s just the way it is.”
No, it’s not.
I hear “Well, that’s the law,” as if drug laws were some kind of absolute, like the law of gravity. To them, questioning the law is like blaming the ground for being there at the end after you step off a cliff.
Drug laws are not gravity.
I also hear, “The reason marijuana is illegal is that the government determined it was dangerous and so they outlawed it.” This is not only false, but also shows a stunning lack of understanding of how laws are made in this country (or even how they should be made in this country).
Drug laws are not absolute. Nor are they somehow carefully constructed to serve the general good of the people. In fact, they fall into a special category of law: Bad Law.

• Drug laws Don’t Work. In the 30 or so years of the intensified drug war, drug wars have failed to achieve any of their so-called goals.
• Drug laws have a Negative Cost-Benefit Analysis. There’s simply no way to show that any benefits of the drug war could possibly outweigh the costs (both financial and societal).
• Drug laws are Scientifically Unsound. Drug laws assume that basic principles such as the economic laws of supply and demand will politely step out of the way.
• Drug laws use Cruel and Unusual Punishment. The laws’ disproportionate penalties do far more harm than the drugs they attempt to prevent. It would be like forfeiting your car because the parking meter ran out five minutes ago.
• Drug laws are Contrary to our Nation’s Principles. As Abraham Lincoln said, “A prohibition law strikes a blow at the very principles upon which our government was founded… Prohibition goes beyond the bounds of reason in that it attempts to control a man’s appetite by legislation, and makes a crime out of things that are not crimes.”
• Drug laws Promote Lawlessness. Since almost half of the population has used an illegal drug, there is a tendency to hesitate in actively cooperating with enforcement personnel. Additionally, enforcement efforts aimed at drug laws take away from the focus on other crime.
• Drug laws Promote Dangerous Crime. The demand for drugs under prohibition creates a very profitable black market in the criminal realm. Increased prohibition efforts escalate related violence and other criminal activities.
• Drug laws Endanger the Public Health. The drug laws prevent safety, age and purity regulations, actually making drugs more dangerous.

• Legislating bad law is wrong.
• Legislating law you know to be bad, but that serves a political interest, is not only wrong, but it’s corrupt.
• Enforcing a bad law may be necessary, but it’s wrong.
• Prosecuting a bad law may be necessary, but it’s wrong.
• Prosecuting a bad law enthusiastically, including tacking on charges or sentences that go beyond even the intent of the law is not only wrong, but it’s corrupt.
• Imposing sentences based on bad law may be necessary, but it’s wrong.
• Imposing maximum or increased sentences solely based on bad law in order to send a message or give the accused a lesson is not only wrong, but it’s corrupt.
• Jury conviction based solely on a bad law is not only wrong, but unnecessary.
• Breaking a bad law may be wrong, but that doesn’t make the enforcement or prosecution right.
• Advocating for change of a bad law is not only right, but it is a citizen’s responsibility.
• Promoting a bad law is wrong.
• Promoting a bad law through lying and propaganda in order to further political or financial goals is not only wrong, but it’s corrupt.

There’s only one action in that list that is “right.”
Do the right thing.

“Unjust laws exist; shall we be content to obey them, or shall we endeavor to amend them, and obey them until we have succeeded, or shall we transgress them at once?”

– Thoreau, Civil Disobedience

I say that you cannot administer a wicked law impartially.
You can only destroy.
You can only punish.
I warn you that a wicked law, like cholera, destroys everyone it touches — its upholders as well as its defiers.

– Jerome Lawrence and Robert E. Lee, Inherit the Wind

No, it wasn’t Kerry or Bush. Libertarian Candidate Michael Badnarik and Green Candidate David Cobb were arrested trying to enter the debates. Badnarik was carrying an Order to Show Cause, which he intended to serve the Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD).
This is newsworthy on this blog, because Badnarik and Cobb recently held their own debate where:

The two also agreed that the U.S. war on drugs has been a failure, and both expressed support for the decriminalization of marijuana.

It sure would have been nice to have that topic discussed at the other debate.

As regular readers know, I love to trash the concept of drug task forces — they really are a danger to our country in many ways — and I’ve been a fan of the work done in this area by the Texas ACLU. This connected me with Scott Henson who has this fascinating post:

One of my biggest beefs is the use of drug enforcement strategies that create new crime instead of investigating current ones. A Tennessee drug task force roped in a Florida woman on money laundering charges recently, but it turned out she was uninvolved, and a confidential informant (who had a long criminal record) had manufactured the allegedly criminal situation.

This is very common, especially for drug task forces funded by the federal Byrne grant program. In Hearne, Texas ACLU is suing because a confidential informant set up innocent people and attempted to manufacture crimes where none existed. In response, the 2001 (77th) Texas Legislature passed House Bill 2351 requiring corroboration for testimony by confidential informants in undercover drug stings. To my knowledge, no other state has enforced that restriction. The requirement for corroborating evidence, though, is as old as the concept of justice itself — in Mosaic law in the Bible, corroboration was mandated for the equivalent of criminal convictions, and both Jesus and the Aposle Paul confirmed the necessity for corroboration in the New Testament.

Also check out Scott’s post on Gypsy Cops, the most notable being “Tulia’s” Tom Coleman.

“bullet” Last One Speaks on the successful protest yesterday at Health and Human Services and a voice of reason in the US House of Representatives.
“bullet” Vice Squad on the shift of FBI resources away from drug investigations (I’ll have more on that later).
“bullet” D’Alliance on Afghanistan, Thailand, and DC.
“bullet” Decrimwatch on Chicago looking for more ways to save money.

decrimwatch was actually at the hearings yesterday and has a report.

Not all the committee members attended the hearing, but those who showed up clearly “got it.” The legislators offered sympathy and respect to the patients who testified, while challenging brainless assertions by the state’s apparently dwindling faction of drug warriors.

There were only a few prohibitionists on hand to speak, and they were relics, typified by Peter Bensinger, former head of the Drug Enforcement Administration from 1976-1981. After reciting a good portion of his lengthy resume, Bensinger got down to business and said… well, it was kind of hard to pull a central point out of the jumble of scary statistics and self-righteous platitudes.

Loretta Nall (of the US Marijuana Party) has written to say that she’s in Washington DC to organize a vigil to protest the death of Jonathan Magbie.
The vigil will start at 2 pm and go until 5 pm today, and then 9 am to 5 pm Wednesday through Friday and possibly into next week. She is looking for people to join her at Carl Moultrie Jr. Courthouse, which is entered at roughly 6th and Indiana Ave. NW, (at D Street) a block from the Judiciary Square Metro station on the red line.
She also notes that Marc Emery has pledged $500 bail/attorney fee money to any American who makes the trip to DC and is arrested for protesting. [Note: Drug WarRant does not endorse or recommend illegal activity.]
If you plan to go to DC and would like Loretta’s phone number to contact her when you get there, let me know.

Speaking of using every tool at your disposal, here’s an action alert for tomorrow (maybe today depending on when you read this) – Tuesday, October 5, 2004.
Phone/ Fax Slam to Tommy Thompson, Secretary of Health & Human Servicesæ – Tuesday, Oct 5
Send a free Fax or Email from the Americans for Safe Access online action center on Tuesday. http://www.safeaccessnow.org/ Follow up with a toll-free phone call to 877-696-6775. Tell Tommy Thomson, the head of Health and Human Services:

• Marijuana does have a currentlyæaccepted use inæmedicalætreatment.
• Please remember that the health and safety ofæpeopleæwhoæbenefit fromæthe medical use ofæmarijuana is in your hands.

WHY HHS?æ To ensure safe access for ALL patients, marijuana must be rescheduled, and its medicinal value recognized on the federal level. Health and Human Services (HHS) has the power to make this change. If HSS allows that marijuana has medical value, the DEA must recommend rescheduling. However, in 2001, HHS ruled that marijuana had, “No currently accepted medical use in treatment.” They did not address the mountain of data recognizing cannabis as a useful treatment. This allowed the DEA to reject rescheduling and gave them implicit permission to raid patients.

Six months later, the DEA started raiding and closing California dispensaries. Our highest health officials can stop this abuse simplyæby doing their job and applying sound science to this policy debate. Reschedule marijuana now!

This is fascinating:

Americans for Safe Access, a Berkeley, Calif., coalition of patients and doctors wanting easier access to pot for research and patient use, plans to file a petition with the Department of Health and Human Services charging the agency with spreading inaccurate information about the drug’s medical value.

Unlike previous efforts to ease marijuana access, which relied on the courts and have dragged on for years, the petition invokes the Data Quality Act, a little-known but powerful law that gives people the right to challenge scientific information disseminated by federal agencies.æ The law demands that agencies respond to petitions within two months.

The act’s use by marijuana advocates represents a peculiar political twist.æ The act was written by a tobacco industry lobbyist and slipped into a huge piece of legislation after the 2000 election without any congressional discussion or debate.æ It has been used almost exclusively by corporations challenging the validity of scientific information that they fear might lead to costly regulations.

I love it! Use every tool, every means at your disposal. We’ve got voter initiatives, a case in the Supreme Court, cities exploring alternate approaches, TV Shows and much more.
And that’s what it’ll take. Eventually we’ll reach a point of saturation where politicians will be embarrassed to oppose medical marijuana or even marijuana legalization.

“bullet” In today’s Boston Globe, a nice article on Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (LEAP) and Jack Cole: Former Cop Changes Sides in Nation’s War on Drugs:

”Right now the people that control and regulate drugs are the dealers,” Cole said. ”They tell us what will be distributed to the community, what the purity will be, how much it will cost and who and where it will be sold. And then we see to it that they get all the profits.”

Cole wants drugs controlled by the government, heavily taxed, and easily accessible to adults. And he wants to see some of the $69 billion a year ”thrown down the rat hole” used to educate Americans about drugs. He points to the campaign to inform Americans about tobacco, which cut use nearly in half in eight years. ”And we did it without incarcerating a single human being.”

“bullet” It’s nice to see that the Anchorage Press (Alaska) has reprinted Ethan Nadelmann’s wonderful article that first appeared in the National Review last month: An End to Marijuana Prohibition. It’s particularly good that Alaska is seeing that article — it could have a positive impact on the referendum.
It’s also worth reading again. It’s really good. And it’s a perfect article for you to give to someone who is wanting to learn more about every aspect of marijuana and legalization. Ethan answers all the major propaganda, myths, and frequently asked questions about marijuana.