Big Week in Washington
We are publishing a lot of stuff on our new web site -- read about it here -- but it was a really big week for drug policy reform in Washington, and we want to make sure that the very latest big news does not drive the really really big news too far down on the screen for people to notice. And so, a brief wrap-up of the biggest news of the week:
- Congress, before going on recess, after almost 25 years of criticism finally enacted a reform, though only partial, to the infamous crack/powder cocaine sentencing disparity.
National Mall, Washington, DC - Medical marijuana is now legal in Washington, DC. Well, sort of. The Congressional review period for the local initiative legislation that enacted this has expired, which means it's clear to go. The city council still has some work to do before the regulations go into effect and before dispensaries can actually open, but it's happening.
- A companion bill to Sen. Jim Webb's legislation to convene a National Criminal Justice Commission has passed the House of Representatives.
Word also has it that the ONDCP's ad campaign, which research has demonstrated to be ineffective, is finally getting zeroed out, but we'll have more on that later. Also from Washington, the Veterans Administration is now allowing veterans with authorization to use medical marijuana under state law to do so without getting thrown out of VA pain treatment programs. Nationally, marijuana legalization polls continue to shift in our direction, and the latest poll on California's Prop 19 marijuana legalization initiative is encouraging.
Have a good weekend. I am now going to join some reform friends to celebrate a big week in Washington.
How Does the DEA Feel about Medical Marijuana in DC?
"Officials with the DEA were not available to comment Tuesday," reports The Washington Post. I guess that pretty much sums it up. No scolding, vague threats or dire predictions. Just silence.
I don't find it at all surprising that DEA would decline to comment at a time like this, but it's a little creepy nonetheless. Dispensaries will soon be opening in the Nation's Capital, just a short distance from the headquarters of the federal drug war. If the DEA has a problem with that, now is the time to speak up. If there's anything we can do to minimize the likelihood of your tactical units raiding these facilities with guns drawn and terrifying patients, we'd love to know what that is.
Nothing? Ok, then. We will interpret your silence to mean that you're cool with this.
Strong Majority Believes Marijuana Could Become Legal Soon
A new Rasmussen poll finds 43% of American in favor of legalizing marijuana, with 42% opposed. But what really got my attention was this stat on attitudes about whether legalization is likely to happen:
However, 65% believe it is at least somewhat likely marijuana will be legalized in the United States in the next 10 years. Just 28% do not expect this to happen.
This emerging sense of optimism is more than just a measure of our success. Upon taking hold, it becomes a weapon more potent than any talking point at our disposal. This movement was formed in the drug war's darkest years by people whose belief in justice overcame the intimidating specter of the prohibitionist empire. We've gone from a fringe movement of academics and weirdos to a massive coalition that spans the political spectrum and shapes the public debate. This was possible only because we believed it could be done, and each new victory is a critical step towards inspiring and activating those who have yet to join our ranks.
At the same time, we have much to gain by driving our opponents to desperation or disillusionment. The political favor once enjoyed by prohibitionist politicians is nowhere to be found and the inherent violence and abuse of modern drug enforcement is chronicled by the press in vivid detail. Those who persist in defending such madness are increasingly met with skepticism and condemnation, further eroding incentives for drug warriors who aren't well compensated for their time. All of this might explain why today's anti-legalization advocacy is so often carried out by idiots who know as little about basic grammar as they do about marijuana.
Welcome to Our New Site
As you can see, we've made some changes around here, which we hope will make the site more enjoyable for everyone. We're still getting used to some of the new functionality, so please be patient if you see any little screw ups and let us know if you spot anything crazy. There's just an immense amount of content that resides here, so it's a bigger job than you might think and it will take some time to get everything working perfectly.
Also, we have some pending design elements that won't launch for another month or two, and an important expansion of the site coming up too. So it's only only going to get sweeter.
Thanks for reading and participating, and don't hesitate to get busy in our new comment section.
Are Opponents of Marijuana Legalization Getting Dumber?
The opposition to Prop. 19 in California would like you to believe that marijuana rots your brain. So it's just a bit ironic that the people writing their slogans couldn't pass a 3rd grade English class.
This one from Citizens Against Legalizing Marijuana remained on their site for weeks after being mocked around the web:
Our children’s future are in your hands…
And this week, the anti-pot group Public Safety First launched a new ad campaign that had to be corrected immediately:
As California goes, do does the
rest of the country.
Hey, mistakes happen. Maybe it's a bit childish to focus on something so trivial when so much is at stake. But I can't help but indulge my amusement at the notion that growing support for legalization has left our opposition in the hands of a bunch of remedial grammar students.
Congress Reduces Crack/Powder Cocaine Sentencing Disparity
More big drug policy news from Congress in this last week before the recess: The House has at long last passed legislation, already adopted by the Senate, which will reduce crack cocaine sentences by reducing the sentencing disparity between crack and powder cocaine offenses. S 1789 will also repeal the much-condemned five-year mandatory sentence for simple possession of crack. It heads now to the president's desk -- AP story here.
With medical marijuana cleared now in DC, and the Webb criminal justice commission bill moving forward by passing the House (unanimous consent!), it has been a big week for drug policy reform, and a good one, here in Washington.
Webb Criminal Justice Commission Passes House by Unanimous Consent
Big news from Washington today -- Senator Jim Webb's has just passed the US House of Representatives, by unanimous consent -- an important milestone that brings this important reevaluation of our dysfunctional policies in this area pretty darn close to being a reality.
Some of Sen. Webb's concerns that motivated the legislation -- shared no doubt by Rep. Bill Delahunt and his colleagues who championed the bill in the House -- from Webb's web page about the bill linked above:
- With 5% of the world's population, our country now houses 25% of the world's reported prisoners.
- Incarcerated drug offenders have soared 1200% since 1980.
- Four times as many mentally ill people are in prisons than in mental health hospitals.
- Approximately 1 million gang members reside in the U.S., many of them foreign-based; and Mexican cartels operate in 230+ communities across the country.
- Post-incarceration re-entry programs are haphazard and often nonexistent, undermining public safety and making it extremely difficult for ex-offenders to become full, contributing members of society.
Needless to say, my colleagues and I are psyched. Look for more details about the legislation and its prospects for the remaining stages in the legislative process in the Chronicle tomorrow or Thursday.
Update: In related news, the New York Times and the Washington Post this week and last called on Congress to address the crack/powder cocaine sentencing disparity.
Awesome Police Chief Works to Educate Citizens About Their Rights
Here's Columbia, MO Police Chief Ken Burton talking about how he uses the new Flex Your Rights video, 10 Rules for Dealing with Police, to teach people about their rights during police encounters:
When we last saw Chief Burton's name in the press, he was taking tough questions after his officers performed a brutal botched SWAT raid in which two dogs where shot in front of a small child, and only a small amount of marijuana was found. He's since made favorable statements about marijuana reform and made it a priority to educate the public about constitutional rights.
I know I've praised him previously, but this interview really helped me appreciate Chief Burton's unique willingness to spread important knowledge that many police departments would never actively promote. This blog is frequently very critical of modern police practices, and I think it's really important to acknowledge committed public servants who set a strong example like this.
As many of you know, I am the co-creator of 10 Rules for Dealing with Police, so seeing it embraced by police departments and activists alike is quite exciting for me. If you're interested in screening the film in your community, it's pretty easy to do.
Pro-Legalization Cops Banned from Anti-Drug Event
There's something very seductive about police officers speaking out against the drug war and explaining how their experiences led them to oppose prohibition. Maybe that's why government officials don't want LEAP represented at an upcoming conference on substance abuse:
CHICAGO, IL -- A group of police officers, judges and prosecutors who support legalizing and regulating drugs is crying foul after a federal agency reneged on a contract that gave the law enforcers a booth to share their anti-prohibition views at a government-sponsored treatment conference in Chicago next week.
After accepting registration payment from Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (LEAP), the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration initially told the police group that it was canceling its booth at the National Conference on Women, Addiction and Recovery because of overbooking and space concerns. However, Sharon Amatetti of SAMHSA's Center for Substance Abuse Treatment later informed LEAP that, in a decision rising all the way to SAMHSA Administrator Pamela Hyde's office, the group was actually being disinvited for its viewpoint. [LEAP]
You know you're doing something right when the government aims to silence your argument instead of attempting to refute it. Despite the Obama Administration's efforts to promote a "new approach" to drug policy, you don't have to look very hard to find the same old tricks being deployed in the drug war debate.
Just listen to the pitiful justification put forth by one of the conference organizers:
On a phone call with LEAP, Pamela Rodriguez of conference co-host TASC, Inc. of Illinois said that the police group wasn't welcome at the event because "our policy perspective and our policy objectives are different from you guys." She added, "It is the emphasis on prohibition vs. legalization that, for me at least, is the glaring dissonance with regard to our agenda."
The only "glaring dissonance" that exists here is the notion that LEAP's view on policy somehow means their agenda must be different than everyone else's. They are public servants working to protect communities and reduce the harms of drugs just like everyone else at the event. You can disagree with their perspective, but you can't possibly deny that their views and experience are relevant to the conversation.
Excluding LEAP from the discussion sends a message that you're afraid of what they have to say, and if your job is to defend the drug war status quo, you probably should be.
Bill Clinton Calls for Harm Reduction
Three new videos from the Hungarian Civil Liberties Union, filmed at the Vienna AIDS 2010 conference this month. In one of them, former US President Bill Clinton calls for harm reduction, an approach to substance misuse and other social issues of which the most well-known example is needle exchange programs.
In another, Anya Sarang, director of the Andrey Rylkov Foundation, criticizes Russia's drug policy -- timely, in light of the recent appointment of Russian diplomat Yuri Fedotov as UN drug czar.
A third video documents the conference's March for Human Rights, including interviews with participants.
The best known example of harm reduction practices is needle exchange. Under President Clinton, the federal government recognized that needle exchange programs reduce the spread of HIV, but do not increase the prevalence of drug use -- two determinations that by statute allowed the administration to lift the ban on states using federal AIDS funds by states to support needle exchange programs. However, the administration did not actually lift that ban, a decision that advocates attribute to the influence of former US drug czar Barry McCaffrey. In his biography published after leaving office, Clinton expressed support for needle exchange.
Jane Hamsher Talks Marijuana Legalization on MSNBC
Hey, watch this unbelievable video of firedoglake's Jane Hamsher hurling marijuana legalization like a hand grenade into the middle of the immigration debate:
…and everyone just nods in stunned agreement. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I sure haven't seen much coverage of marijuana policy on MSNBC recently, if ever. Is it necessary to tell them you'll be discussing immigration in order to get some airtime for legalization on the most left-leaning cable news network?
It's time to stop labeling marijuana reform as a liberal issue when FOX News has two pundits talking about it constantly, and MSNBC's got nothing to say.
Diane Feinstein Wants to Continue Arresting Marijuana Users, and Other News
Paul Armentano calls out California Senator Diane Feinstein for opposing marijuana legalization and points out the flagrant dishonesty of her attack against Prop. 19.
Mark Kleiman says California can't legalize marijuana. Pete Guither says yes, it can.
Marijuana policy groups have issued a unified statement opposing Michele Leonhart's nomination to head the DEA. She embodies everything that's wrong with U.S. drug policy, and Obama's nomination makes a mockery of all the "new approach" rhetoric we've heard from his administration.
"The U.S. State Department has no effective way to measure the success of its billion-dollar program to help Mexico and Central America fight drug traffickers," according to a new report from the GAO. Well yeah, it's hard to measure success when you haven't had any. Sounds to me like the problem isn’t that success is hard to measure, but rather that failure is hard to admit.
How to Get Arrested for Marijuana in One Easy Step
The officer pulled Vento over at entrance 13 to Interstate 95. While talking to Vento, he appeared nervous, according to police. When asked why, Vento said he had been arrested in the past on drug charges, police said. The officer then asked if there was anything illegal in the car. Vento said he had a marijuana blunt.
Upon searching the car, police found two more blunts. All three tested positive for marijuana. Police also found a bag with a small amount of marijuana.
Vento posted a $250 bond and was released with a Monday, July 26, court date. [Darien Times]
As you can see, the police don't "go easier on you" just because you made things easier for them. If you admit to a crime, you'll be arrested for it. The constitution protects you against self-incrimination and unreasonable searches, so don't confess and never give police permission to search you or your belongings.
If you need more info on your rights during police encounters, watch 10 Rules for Dealing with Police. Then watch it again.
Oakland Okays Mega-Pot Farms
At about 11:15 Pacific time Tuesday night, the Oakland City Council passed an ordinance that would allow for four permitted industrial-scale medical marijuana cultivation facilities. In response to widespread concerns among the medical marijuana community, it also vowed to work on permitting medium-sized grows in the fall and to defer any crackdown on medium-sized grows until after the first large-scale permits are issued in January. Patients can still grow up to 32 square feet and to three-person collectives can still grow up to 96 square feet without permits. Look for a Chronicle feature story on this historic vote to be posted in the morning.
The New Politics of Marijuana Reform
MPP's Mike Meno nails it in this piece at Huffington Post. It's almost as if he's been reading my mind (or my blog). He's got some more great examples of how the surging marijuana policy debate is shaking up party politics this election season. Anyone who still doesn't understand that marijuana is no longer a third-rail political issue is in for some big surprises in the coming years, and possibly as soon as November.
Former Pain Prisoner Appearing on Penn & Teller "Bullshit" This Week
Is America's criminal justice system weighed down with bad science, ineffective methods, incompetence and corruption? Penn & Teller set out to reveal that the only thing scarier than crime is America's war on crime."Criminal Justice" will start airing this Thursday at 10:00pm. In the meanwhile, you can read more about Richard Paey in our archive, at the Pain Relief Network or in the 2006 Sixty Minutes episode, "Prisoner of Pain."
DARE Attacks Marijuana Legalization While Praising Alcohol
Do we really want to make it easier to get stoned?
Cut through the smoke and that's really what California voters will be deciding in November with Proposition 19, which would make this the only state to fully legalize marijuana — a drug with proven negative health consequences.
…
The concern with marijuana is not based on my personal disapproval or bias but upon what science tells us about the drug's effects. The science is clear: Marijuana is associated with physical and mental illness, poor motor performance and cognitive impairment. [San Jose Mercury News]
So according to Skip Miller, science compels us to keep marijuana illegal. Yet, as SAFER points out, his website takes a very different tone when it comes to alcohol:
Take a minute and think how often adults drink alcohol: a cold beer at a baseball game, a glass of Chardonnay with a piece of broiled fish, a gin and tonic on a warm day. Social drinking is an acceptable and pleasurable activity for millions of Americans. It relaxes you, curbs stress, and chases away inhibitions… [DARE.org]
Wait, what!? Although the statement goes on to acknowledge the problems associated with alcohol abuse, there's no question that DARE is going out of its way to defend recreational drinking. And I agree with every word. Teaching young people that there's nothing wrong with responsible drinking is important, even though I find it ridiculously weird that DARE, of all places, would seek to do that.
All of this just serves to highlight the mind-blowing prejudice and hypocrisy that underscores DARE's position on marijuana policy. If alcohol can be enjoyed responsibly by millions of adults, despite all the mayhem associated with it, then of course the same must be true of marijuana. On the other hand, if the potential for negative outcomes trumps the rights of responsible users, then why on earth is DARE applauding "acceptable and pleasurable" alcohol instead of insisting that science compels us to start arresting people for possessing it?
When pressed, the architects of this brainless disparity typically resort to some desperate nonsense about alcohol being accepted and familiar in our culture, as though marijuana just arrived on a boat sometime last year. These same idiots actually are the last remaining obstacle to broader social and legal acceptance of marijuana, and if only we could take away their precious beer, we'd find them at the bargaining table within 48 hours.
RAND's Research on Marijuana Legalization is Questionable
Confusion abounds following last week's release of a RAND study on the ramifications of legal marijuana in California. In particular, RAND's discussion of rock-bottom prices has growers panicking and the suggestion that use could increase dramatically has opponents chomping at the bit. But, as Pete Guither helpfully explains, the whole thing is just a bunch of wild speculation.
Just look what passes for scientific analysis at RAND when it comes to marijuana legalization:
However, a simple calculation suggests that, if someone believes that marijuana is causally responsible for many crashes that involve marijuana using drivers, legalization’s effect on crashes could be a first-order concern for them. [...]
There is no empirical evidence concerning an elasticity of fatal accident rates with respect to marijuana price, prevalence, or quantity consumed, and, as we have underscored repeatedly, there is enormous uncertainty concerning how legalization might affect those outcomes.
However, 50- or 100-percent increases in use cannot be ruled out; nor can the possibility that marijuana-involved traffic crashes would increase proportionally with use. So it would be hard to dismiss out of hand worries that marijuana legalization could increase traffic fatalities by at least 60 per year…
Nor can we entirely rule out the possibility that legalizing marijuana could somehow cause the earth to stop spinning on its axis, resulting in the incineration of a hundred nations, while others are left buried beneath sheets of ice.
I'm exaggerating, but the point is that when RAND says legalization might double marijuana use and lower the ounce price to $38, they're just babbling because the media is stupid enough to listen. Even RAND admits that their analysis is subject to so many intangible variables as to render futile any effort to quantify legalization's practical impact. The problem is that they went ahead and proceeded to announce various arbitrary computations that sound provocative and mean absolutely nothing.
So, for what it's worth, let's just establish a couple principles that might help sort out some of the confusion here:
1. Marijuana will never cost $38 per ounce in California as long as it remains illegal everywhere else and sells for up to $500. Prop 215 didn't reduce prices by 80% and neither will Prop 19.
2. Marijuana is already way too available in California for any policy change to dramatically impact rates of use. No one is sitting around in Los Angeles waiting for legalization so that they can find a way to buy some weed.
3. If marijuana were a significant cause of traffic fatalities, California's highways would already be stained with blood. See point #2.
Update: Dave Borden has convinced me that I've been at least somewhat unfair to RAND, insofar as a big part of my frustration here results from the way the media presented the research. It's true that the study's authors were careful to explain that there remains considerable uncertainty about the practical impact of legalization. There are issues that I think could have been handled much better, but I wouldn't want to set a standard that prohibits inquiry, simply because so much remains unclear.
Greedy Dispensary Owner Opposes Marijuana Legalization
"I'll give you two reasons," Craig said. "One is big tobacco. Did you know that Phillip Morris just bought 400 acres of land up in Northern California? The minute marijuana becomes legal, they'll mass produce and flood the market. And of course, they'll add the same toxins they put in regular cigarettes to get you addicted, and very little THC, so you'll have to buy more... In short, they're going to ruin weed." He gestured around his beloved shop, with every flavor of every strain, in its purist form, selling for at-cost prices. "I like the way things are now."
I'll bet he does. But while you're making money and having a great time, thousands and thousands of people are being arrested. Conspiracy theories about Phillip Morris don't even begin to justify the war on marijuana, and anyone who advances such mindless speculation – while simultaneously lining their own pockets – is a first-rate jackass.
He even tries to bring children into the debate:
"Two, legalization will mean more fifteen-year-old kids smoking pot. Smoking pot mellows you out, makes you lazy. When you're twenty-one, twenty-five, you can make your own decisions. But California doesn't need its fifteen-year-olds lazier than they already are."
Seriously? Well, let me ask you something, sir. Does your dispensary sell marijuana to 15-year-olds? Do your customers resell your product to young teenagers? I imagine you would insist that this isn't the case, and I can't fathom why you think things would be any different if regulated marijuana retailers were allowed to serve all adults instead of just those with a doctor's recommendation.
Let's not forget: Prop 19 is about so much more than just how marijuana will be grown and distributed. It's about stopping the arrest and persecution of marijuana consumers and reducing the violence and chaos of prohibition. Concerns about how it might affect the market are understandable, but people were nervous about Prop 215 as well, and it's clearly become a miracle for patients and a huge step forward for reform in general.
The bottom line is that anyone who currently sells marijuana in California, medical or otherwise, should be thrilled with the prospect of dramatically reducing arrests for marijuana possession and the vicious consequences that go along with it. All other concerns are secondary to ensuring the freedom of adults to enjoy cannabis without fear of arrest, and Prop 19 will do exactly that. Those who object, those who would fight to continue the war, are enemies of justice. Patients should never purchase medicine from anyone who lobbies to continue the disease of prohibition.
Medical Marijuana Raids Continue Despite Obama's Pledge
Recent DEA raids in California are once again raising questions about the Obama Administration's commitment to respecting state laws:
San Diego, CA -- Federal agents raided at least three San Diego-area medical marijuana dispensaries [Friday] in the early morning hours. Sources say that Green Kross, Unified Collective and Kush Lounge were all served federal search warrants and were subjected to aggressive SWAT-style raids which resulted in the arrest of as many as 12 people and the seizure of money, medical marijuana and patient records. These raids come as the City of San Diego is deliberating an ordinance to regulate the local distribution of medical marijuana. [Americans for Safe Access]
It's possible, of course, that there were violations of state law taking place here, in which case the DEA's involvement would be consistent with Obama's policy. But it remains unclear why California police would need federal assistance enforcing their own laws. The cynical interpretation would be that the tendency of local juries to acquit medical marijuana defendants has led San Diego District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis to have the feds do her dirty work.
Meanwhile in Mendocino:
A marijuana activist group on Friday protested a federal law enforcement raid on a Mendocino County pot farm, saying it was protected by the county’s new medical marijuana cultivation ordinance.
…
The Covelo farm owned by Joy Greenfield, 68, was registered with Mendocino County authorities under an ordinance that allows medical marijuana collectives to grow up to 99 plants.
…
Federal agents removed 99 plants and took a computer and cash, the group said. Greenfield wasn’t there at the time.
Mendocino County Sheriff Tom Allman confirmed Friday that the property owner had the proper paperwork and the marijuana was legal in the eyes of the county. [Press Democrat]
Once again, there could be more to the story, but it sure sounds like classic DEA craziness. The grower's relationship with local law-enforcement casts doubt on the possibility of impropriety, so we're left wondering what the hell is going on here.
Events like these are inevitable under a vague federal policy left to the whims of the DEA's bullying cowboy mentality. Only a change in federal law will bring an end to this, but for the time being, the Obama Administration would do well to eliminate all apparent departures from the well-received hands-off approach they've promised the American people. I don't see what's so hard about that. If circumstances emerge that absolutely necessitate DEA activity involving medical marijuana, then it shouldn’t be too hard to provide an explanation for why federal resources were needed. That's the very least you can do.
Obama's pledge to respect medical marijuana laws enjoys broader public support than almost anything else he's done since taking office. Screwing that up would be stupid, cruel and pointless.
Will the Marijuana Vote Help the Democrats in November?
That's the question everyone's asking this week thanks to this piece from Joshua Green at The Atlantic. The idea is that putting marijuana reform initiatives on the ballot could bring greater numbers of young, left-leaning voters out to the polls in November. With marijuana initiatives up for a vote in six states this year, we'll have an interesting opportunity to evaluate how other campaigns are impacted by the pot vote.
The mere notion that state-level marijuana reform efforts can impact national politics is a healthy dose of leverage and legitimacy for our movement. When political pundits begin speculating about our ability to bring out voters, that sends a message to politicians in a language they understand. For decades, the Democratic Party has remained shamefully silent on marijuana policy -- despite overwhelming support for reform within its base – all because party leaders persist in clinging foolishly to the 1980's mentality that any departure from the "tough on drugs" doctrine is political suicide. What now?
Will the Democrats continue defending the arrest of their own supporters, even when doing so threatens to compromise their candidates in close races? Will the Republicans make a show of fighting back against legalization, even when doing so threatens to alienate the party's growing libertarian wing? What happens next is anyone's guess, but it's becoming clear that the surging marijuana legalization debate is pinching political nerves and creating opportunities for anyone clever enough to capitalize on it.
The War on Marijuana = Federal $$$ for Local Cops
If you've ever wondered how police departments can afford to send so many officers off into the woods looking for pot plants, the Wall Street Journal just figured it out:
IGO, Calif.—Shasta County Sheriff Tom Bosenko, his budget under pressure in a weak economy, has laid off staff, reduced patrols and even released jail inmates. But there's one mission on which he's spending more than in recent years: pot busts.
The reason is simple: If he steps up his pursuit of marijuana growers, his department is eligible for roughly half a million dollars a year in federal anti-drug funding, helping save some jobs. The majority of the funding would have to be used to fight pot. Marijuana may not be the county's most pressing crime problem, the sheriff says, but "it's where the money is."
Every year, more money is spent and more marijuana is discovered. The growers then respond by planting still more. New records are set every harvest season, keeping growers and the police who pursue them steadily employed. The big losers in this ridiculous cycle of idiocy are the taxpayers, who spend billions on this stupid self-perpetuating escapade while neighborhood crimes go unsolved.
Just because some people think legalizing marijuana might "send the wrong message," we're instead stuck in a massive domestic war that we can't afford, and we're losing worse every year. Meanwhile, cops and criminals just continue cashing in.
For more, check out this interesting exchange between MPP's Mike Meno and a California reporter who's been following the story.
A Scary New Drug Threatens Our Children: Nutmeg
Just watch this news report and try not to laugh:
My favorite part is at the end when the anchor concludes, "Wow. Well, parents have a very real concern about the nutmeg, but so far there are no reports of deaths from nutmeg overdose." That is classic.
Here's the thing about nutmeg: it sucks. According to Erowid, its effects "are considered unpleasant by most who experience them." I've never heard it compared to marijuana before today. For thousands of years, nutmeg has disappointed people who were stupid enough to try getting high on it.
So, there's actually only one way that an epidemic of nutmeg abuse could ever occur, and that's if someone makes news reports about how you can get high on it, stirs parents into a panicked frenzy, and inadvertently puts the idea in teenagers' heads to go screw around with giant bottles of nutmeg. Nice going, FOX.
Huff Post: UN Drug Policy in the Dark Ages
I'm on Huffington Post again tonight, with a post chastising the UN (and western governments generally) for: 1) continuing the ludicrous coca runaround in South America's Andean region for another year; and 2) turning a blind eye year after year to the indirect support that western funds and cooperation gives to the death penalty for nonviolent drug offenses, mostly in Asia and the Middle East. Check it out here -- comments welcome in either location. If you haven't already, check out our Chronicle articles on these two topics here and here.
What's the Big Deal About Narco-Subs?
The DEA is proud of having helped Ecuadoran authorities capture this "narco-sub":
Silly DEA -- don't they realize what the implications are, of drug traffickers having the wherewithal to operate a submarine? It means they have effectively unlimited resources to devote to the task of finding a way to get their product from point A to point B, and to reducing the cost associated with doing so. If it's not over the border, it's under it. If it's not by air, it's on the sea. If not on the sea, then under the sea -- using narco-subs. Apparently lots of narco-subs:
Oh, and don't forget, if not here, then there. Silly DEA. Random thought on the DEA photograph: Does this remind anyone else of Yoda in the jungle on his planet, using the force to lift the damaged spacecraft, Empire Strikes Back movie?
