New FBI Numbers Reveal Failure of "War on Drugs"
WASHINGTON, D.C. -- A new FBI report released today shows that there is a drug arrest every 19 seconds in the U.S. A group of police and judges who have been campaigning to legalize and regulate drugs pointed to the figures showing more than 1.6 million drug arrests in 2010 as evidence that the "war on drugs" is a failure that can never be won.
"Since the declaration of the 'war on drugs' 40 years ago we've arrested tens of millions of people in an effort to reduce drug use. The fact that cops had to spend time arresting another 1.6 million of our fellow citizens last year shows that it simply hasn't worked. In the current economy we simply cannot afford to keep arresting three people every minute in the failed 'war on drugs,'" said Neill Franklin, a retired Baltimore narcotics cop who now heads the group Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (LEAP). "If we legalized and taxed drugs, we could not only create new revenue in addition to the money we'd save from ending the cruel policy of arresting users, but we'd make society safer by bankrupting the cartels and gangs who control the currently illegal marketplace."
Today's FBI report, which can be found at http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010, shows that 81.9 percent of all drug arrests in 2010 were for possession only, and 45.8 percent of all drug arrests were for possession of marijuana.
A separate Department of Justice report released last month shows that Mexican drug cartels are currently operating in more than 1,000 U.S. cities, whereas two years ago they were in 230 U.S. cities. Meanwhile, a new U.S. Department of Health and Human Services report released earlier this month shows that nearly one in 10 Americans admit to regularly using illegal drugs.
Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (LEAP) represents police, prosecutors, judges, FBI/DEA agents and others who want to legalize and regulate drugs after fighting on the front lines of the "war on drugs" and learning firsthand that prohibition only serves to worsen addiction and violence. More info at http://www.CopsSayLegalizeDrugs.com.
# # #
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: September 19, 2011
CONTACT: Tom Angell - (202) 557-4979 or media@leap.cc
So. . .legalize and regulate? Which means the local guy selling dimebags will still be committing a crime/getting arrested, because REGULATING a plant is not much more sane than saying it's illegal, it costs more money to be regulated, which means more people will buy from the "unregulated"/"illegal" seller than the new "legitimate" regulate ones. Unless the gov't goes and subsidizes the "legitimate" market to externalize the excess cost, in which case the taxpayer has to pay, and your friendly neighborhood hookup will have to compete in a slanted artificial market (um, Wal-mart anyone?)
ReplyDeleteThe herb has killed 0, that's ZERO people from toxicity, the unregulated market has done quite well in spite of gov't interference. Just leave 'em alone!
Economics are notorious for listening less to what is "right" or "legal" or "regulatedd" and more to the cost/benefit analysis.
Hello Mr. Ball Guy, I’m afraid I don’t understand how it can not be regulated. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying bow-down-to-the-prohibitionists type of regulations. But the clear and obvious fact is that everything (legal) is regulated in one manner or another.
ReplyDeletePerhaps you mean to point out the problems with over-regulation? Too many, too complex, or too strict regulations? No argument from me there; those three spell certain doom.
But the fact is that if you put something in a package and sell it, some sort of rules apply.
And surely you’ve been paying attention enough to know that a significant number of dispensaries believe in regulation so much they take it upon themselves to impose guidelines on themselves!
If you’re a cannabis connoisseur then I imagine that you actually give a darn about what you are consuming. I bet a deep look into your own behavior will convince you that you even regulate yourself, you have standards, you adhere to certain values.
Your last sentence/paragraph is remarkably similar to what LEAP (and supporters) have been saying for a long time. Which leads me to believe there is a specific regulation which you don’t want imposed. Would you tell me?
The fact is the number of “local guys selling dimebags” will greatly diminish since s/he will not be able to compete; thus fewer arrests of them, isn’t that a good thing? ;-)
Looking at the Offenses Cleared page, I don’t see anything but one D- and a bunch of F’s.
ReplyDeleteNot only that, but the standards they have to meet are pretty low. According to the webpage a case closed can be obtained by 1) arrest 2) charged 3) prosecuted (note the lack of “conviction”).
Add to that the other verbiage on the page, “formally charging the offender,” and one can see that the FBI is held to lower standards than the mainstream media which apparently must always insert the word “alleged” in front of “offender.”
But I guess, what can we expect now that our country has moved from “innocent until proven guilty” to “guilty until temporarily proven innocent because we know you’re a sinner and we’re going to catch you one of these days.” And “we’re sure your 2-year-old is a terrorist or terrorist in training — didn’t we overhear you on the phone calling her a ‘little terror’ just a few days ago? — so we must strip search her and pat her down.”
Well said Neil, my friend.
ReplyDeleteThank you for leading us all into the World of control, regulation and age limits by fighting for all drugs to be legalized, regulated and sold to adults in a taxable market.
I think what people are seeming to forget is that children are delicate and fragile in EVERY way. Young people should NOT have complete and total access to ANY drug EVER. Hence the need for age limits. Young people's brains are at a very tender stage and development can be seriously delayed by constant and chronic use of cannabis and other, more addictive and more DEADLY drugs, throughout their teenage years.
In a REGULATED cannabis Market the only people "Selling" said drugs would be responsible adults, not our children, the drug dealers, the Cartels or some of the unsavory people who so often do now.
The Criminals we see enticing our children to take on these types of "jobs" to deliver, as of now, an ILLEGAL commodity, I agree, has more ILLEGAL demand than LEGAL supply and CHILDREN should NOT be involved at ALL!
Legalize, Regulate, and Tax these commodities! Put the money toward Health Care and watch the people gain control!
Keep up the amazing work my friends and colleagues at LEAP....
The WORLD is watching.....
Alison Myrden
Retired Law Enforcement Officer
Speaker for LEAP
Law Enforcement Against Prohibition
http://www.leap.cc
Thanks for your comment Alison.
ReplyDeleteSorry if it seems I was distracted and didn’t appreciate Neill’s statement.
Go Neill!
Go LEAP!
No, as a connoisseur one would not need regulation.
ReplyDeleteIt's more about this thing called "self-regulation"
The government does not own the plant one grows, the government does not own part of the money one gets from selling parts of said plant to another person in a mutually consensual exchange.
It WILL cost more to be regulated, hence there will still be a black market because a large segment of the population will not be able to afford the regulated cost, and will then go to an "unregulated" (read: self-regulated) provider.
One would do well to remember that this plant in question existed long before the United States government, and will exist and continue to be used for medicinal/recreational purposes long after the United States government (or any other, for that matter)
Turning it from a "War on Drugs" to the "War on free and un-coerced trade" is no improvement
I am aware of the dispensaries taking on SELF-regulation. I am also aware of the dispensaries that have fought the legalization for non-medical marijuana because their business model could not survive the price drop from legalizing the plant.
ReplyDeleteYes, EVERYTHING must be regulated/taxed, which is why farmer's markets are such hubs of terrorist activity *rolls eyes*
"If you’re a cannabis connoisseur then I imagine that you actually give a darn about what you are consuming. I bet a deep look into your own behavior will convince you that you even regulate yourself, you have standards, you adhere to certain values."
ReplyDeleteWhich is why (if I were indeed a cannabis connoisseur) that I would not require external, taxed, coercive regulation on what I choose to purchase. I was able to locate and purchase herb of quality without the government butting in.
"The fact is the number of “local guys selling dimebags” will greatly diminish since s/he will not be able to compete; thus fewer arrests of them, isn’t that a good thing? ;-) "
Unless the government subsidizes the regulated market (so that they can compete with the local guys that aren't bothering with bogus enforced regulation) the small local guy will absolutely be able to compete, because he'll be delivering the same quality consumable as before, at a lower price than the regulated market can accommodate.
Surely, many individuals will leave that market because the profit margin isn't so insanely high (like in a completely black market), but the small-scale seller will have a healthy business model, and be able to unersell the "legitimate" businesses. Just like buying your local varieties of veggies at a local farmer's market is cheaper than buying them at most supermarkets. Again, if the government subsidizes the regulated market, it may be cheaper for the end consumer than in the free market, but I don't know many stoners who would be willing to stoop so low as to buy their herb from Wal_Mart
The stuff that is bought "on the streets" currently is of high quality, otherwise people wouldn't buy it. THAT is regulation, and it's cheaper/more effective than a government mandate granting the air of "legitimacy"
I've always believed that legalizing marijuana will lead to legalizing heroin. This "legalize drugs" website proves my point.
ReplyDeleteThe problem is, that (first and foremost young and uneducated) people often don't give a single thought about what they're actually consuming, as Cannabis in the last years, especially in Europe, had been often contaminated with "Brix", herbicides, fungi(cides), glass, lead, pesticides, sand etc.
ReplyDeleteSo access, age and quality control is a MUST for sane people who want a legalization which really cares about peoples health and lives.
The state should be the sole provider of all psychotropic substances that are not legalized and regulated by federal law yet. It should not be a profit-oriented business and there should be no advertisements(other than the name on the packaged product) allowed for certain plant sorts etc. or for dispensaries. As this doesn't mean that you put all dispensaries out of business, but instead, that dispensaries and seed companies can produce for the state(that should also be able to produce standardized no-name "State Cannabis" with various fixed delta-9-THC, CNB and CBD ratios, especially designed for the different medical applications) and the state controls these goods(and if a company doesn't pre-control their own products hard enough, they are off the list after 3 warnings and are blocked for at least 1 year or forever, if the contamination is extremely hazardous, like lead) for contamination and tests the information the adult consumer has gained about the substance the consumer wishes to obtain, like when obtaining a gun or driving license.
The dispensaries would be still in business, but the people and the product have to be tested by state employees, who are present in every dispensary to control the companies directly. The dispensaries have to pay a certain monthly amount for the control and license of the state, which equals the loan of the state employees responsible for the dispensaries(the actual number of state employees is calculated by frequency of customers entering the shop). State employees should rotate monthly between the dispensaries in their area(same city/town etc.), so the possibility of corruption is minimized. This creates a lot of jobs and more security for the consumers. The state employees hand out the products to the customers. For all other substances than Cannabis, medical state dispensaries should be created or installed in
current medical dispensaries.
So the consumer pays more for the herb, because the dispensaries have to shell out money to conform to state regulations, AND the taxpayers have to pay for the regulation/auditing.
ReplyDeleteHas the fact that NO-ONE has died from cannabis toxicity totally flown over everyone's head?
Many folks are still going to buy from the local dimebag dealer, and still get arrested/fined for their financial/business choices (which still harm NO ONE)
All this hiring of state employees, instead of letting people go about their business. . .god you gotta love the smell of nationalist fascism in the morning.
@Unknown: Yes, as Amsterdam has proved (seriously, check out the heroine abuse rate of Netherlands compared to the US)
Everyone who still obtains then from the black market or even produces for it, should be punished at a rate at least double(personal profit) or triple(organized crime) the sentence they are getting now, plus for tax evasion(payback of 100% of the potential profit the state could have made with the confiscated products plus an extra prison sentence or fine). If such a asocial person can not pay this amount from his own pocket(or with the confiscated money), he has to work that amount off, as far as possible, during the sentence, and afterwards, if the sentence was not long enough to ensure full compensation of the state's loss of possible products. Confiscated products would be tested and sold at the lowest price possible(no production cost), if they are safe enough to be sold at the state dispensaries, to compensate state costs. So not only will they don't have nearly any potential profit margin left, but they should be forced to compensate the damage done they have done(or were planning to do) to the state economy.
ReplyDeleteBut the basis for the calculations of sentences and compensations would always be the confiscated amount (and naturally any economically organized behaviour or violent acts) and not an imagined amount the person could have sold in the past or future, if the person doesn't admit to have produced more
than had been confiscated.
This and the smaller profit margin should be enough to keep people from supplying substances for their underaged or uneducated friends and neighborhoods. All substances could still be cheaper than from the black market, due to large scale production methods(especially for the no-name sorts), while being a lot safer than uncontrolled products.
The state would make a fortune, get people off the streets, educate them properly for their new work, give them jobs, which enable them to invest for the profit of a taxed economy, instead of the illegal, uncontrolled and untaxed businesses and save a whole lot of money by the prevented prosecution, processes and prison sentences. This frees time to go for real criminals, who cause damage on involuntary victims, like child pornography, corruption, human trafficking, murder, rape, robbery, terrorism, weapon trafficking etc.
This improvement of efficiency of the educational system(regarding substance knowledge), the health system(regarding preventive and therapeutic measures), law enforcement, the justice system and the social system(more jobs means less welfare) will have a formative influence on the security of the whole society and will also bring shiploads of confiscated money to the state, which can also be used for the improvement of the education, health and social system and especially for preventive and therapeutic measures.
It would also educate mankind indirectly, so they would slowly learn to accept, respect or at least tolerate the free choice of human beings, how to modulate their own bodies and minds due to their free will, instead of media manipulation and peer pressure.
But a lot of traditional enemies of this kind of logic insight, like the Mafia monopoly and the corruption pyramid(e.g.:"Air America", "Iran-Contra-affair") built by Prohibition Propagandists are based on exactly this media manipulation and peer pressure.
Can you provide a citation for that claim (of glass, herbacide, etc)?
ReplyDeleteIf the herb were totally legalized, anyone could grow it (it is JUST A PLANT after all), the price would be low due to supply/demand (why risk others contaminating your smoke when you can grow your own without fear of imprisonment/fine?), and the general quality of the offered consumable would increase (competition and free-trade is good for consumers)
You want to penalize me for engaging in consensual commerce with another person.
ReplyDeleteThere is no personal freedom in this.
We need governments because we can't trust people? Governments are made up of people. Cut out the costly (and historically, tragically ineffective/inefficient middleman)
@Unknown:
ReplyDeleteThat's not the case, but historically falsified prohibition directly logically leads to legalization or do you want some tommy gun-totting mobsters back on the streets and criminalize ethanol consumption again to ensure them some more profit?
No? Right, i forgot: they are already there thousandfold(with TEC-9s and MAC-10s to be fair) in another form, better organized and with new substances and technology, due to arrogant and ignorant people like you, who are preventing logical education, reason and enlightenment! Not enough tax money and lives wasted in the contraproductive "war on drugs"? Get a police job in Mexico and tell your corrupt colleagues there to send me a nice photo of your first hand account of how wonderful the contraproductive "War on Drugs" is for our world, when you're done after your first week of "WoD"! And don't forget to smile "Joker"-style! :D
So forced taxation of the herb is NOT mafia extortion?
ReplyDeleteYou want to imprison, rob, and re-educate individuals who have the chutzpah to sell their stuff to someone without paying off the government/mafia.
Seriously, get out
@The "Ball" Guy:
ReplyDeleteIf you've got a GC/MS and other analytical equipment(and the academic knowledge to use it) to scientifically prove that you can really provide contamination free substances, I might give it a second thought.
Otherwise, the only logical and safe answer is:
YES.
If everybody grows their own, the financial perspective of legalization is drastically reduced(only savings of taxmoney, instead new jobs and improvement of the states' debt) and it's not scientifically proven that you consume "safe" homegrown, only because you believe it is safe. And then you would have to control everybody, if they have consumed all their homegrown on their own. I'm absolutely against nationalism and fascism, as prohibition is a form of fascism. Legalization and Regulation are exactly the opposite of fascism. They are direct democracy. It's really frustrating and sad, that some simple minded people would sacrifice the pristine potential of legalization, just because they don't want to play by logical and scientific rules.
And by the way, as most people smoke Cannabis, it's absolutely nonesense to say it doesn't hurt anyone. That's like saying Tobacco hurts nobody.
And I can give you a lot of accounts of contaminated Cannabis. Just look up the site of the "Deutscher Hanfverband":
http://hanfverband.de/index.php/themen/streckmittel
You also find Cannabis from Dutch Coffeeshops there on the blacklist. It's not legalized in the Netherlands. The Coffeeshops have to illegally buy Cannabis. They are not prosecuted, but they don't get the Cannabis the state sells in (general) medical dispensaries.
Corruption at work: The nationalist and racist Geert Wilders said, the drug tourists should stay with their illegal markets and Coffeeshops should only provide Cannabis to Dutch people!
No, it's not a kind of Mafia extortion,
ReplyDeletebut an attempt to eliminate the Mafia.
Is "forced taxation" of alcohol, automobiles, cell phones, coffee, chocolate or tobacco a kind of "Mafia extortion"? I think you don't even know how a functional state system or an economy works.
Their is no "chutzpah" needed to leave out the dues for the organization which has to compensate the damages done to our society by a variety of carcinogenic substances you also find in Cannabis smoke(one preventive measure would be the popularization of handheld vaporizers, also for Tobacco), just an urge to become another Mafia monopolist! [Sorry for the deleted posts/reposts, I have technical problems with posting again, as I did have in the beginning.]
Here are all the kinds of contaminations that were sent to the "DHV"("Deutscher Hanfverband"):
ReplyDeletehttp://hanfverband.de/index.php/themen/konsumentenhilfe/1050-streckmittel-in-marihuana-wie-man-sie-erkennt-und-welche-risiken-von-ihnen-ausgehen
Here are the latest contamination reports since August 2011:
http://hanfverband.de/index.php/sitemap/1260-streckmittelwarnungen
The "DHV" has received 2908 contamination reports since 2009.
Corruption In El Paso
ReplyDeleteGonzales and Dutton allege that the FBI dropped them after “big names” on the U.S. side of the border began to surface in the drug investigations.
Well here is something former CIA director William Colby was trying to tell us in 1995:
“The Latin American drug cartels have stretched their tentacles much deeper into our lives than most people believe. It’s possible they are calling the shots at all levels of government.”
Vector,
ReplyDeleteI guess home gardening of anything is out unless you have a GC/MS set up and know how to use it. Not to mention the inventory of chemicals required for calibration. That is going to cost you. Even if it doesn't attract unwanted attention.
No, because you don't combust and inhale your tomatoes and the problem is that when carbon-based life forms get combusted, the carbon chains and rings break up and form carcinogenic material.
ReplyDeleteCannabis also has other side effects, including munchies, which can cause obesity and therefore chronic cardiac diseases and other potentially negative long term effects. But there are also psychological phenomena which can become a financial factor like the physical side effects and if the state doesn't produce an income from the sell, but only negative effects and no compensation, then legalization will never become a reality, due to logical economic reasons.
LEAP is fighting for the LEGALIZATION and REGULATION of psychotropic substances and
not for the dumb decriminalization of the
black market, which leaves the profits
with the criminals and the damage with
the state.
Netherlands' coffeeshops get their supply from the illegal market(with a lot of contaminations, as you can see on the "DHV" site, you babelfish or some other translator to understand it), while the sell medical Cannabis in general medical dispensaries/apothecaries, but they don't supply the Coffeeshops.
The "Ball" Guy didn't only talk about homegrowing for you own supply, but also for others. You can't brew or burn your own alcohol legally and use it or sell it and you can't grow your own tobacco legally and use it or sell it. And I think that is a good thing for our health system, as this guarantees taxes(first from the producer and then from the customer), which can be used to compensate the damage done.
If people ignore logic and reality,
they are on the same side as the
Prohibition propagandists and this
will prevent reasonable people from
installing legalization, which is
based on access, age and quality
control, the 3 essential things
Prohibition effectively prevents,
as does decriminalization of the
black market and the Mafia monopoly!
Citizens should decide for themselves,
what they can consume as adults,
if they are informed enough to know
about the effects, side effects
and dangers and they need a scientific
guarantee that this material is free
from any contamination, otherwise
legalization will not bring a real
improvement of the situation.
I want to increase the efficiency
of law enforcement for real crimes
and this is only possible, if the
black market profit margin collapses
and is destroyed by a regulated system,
which effectively frees time for other
prosecutions. The DEA is still needed
after this process, as people like
The "Ball" Guy will be still blinded by
the anarchistic urge to decriminalize
the black market the Mafia is based on.
We need to eliminate the Mafia and not
our states, health care systems or
logical and scientific controls!
Cannabis is not anything like tobacco, which you can't ingest (eat) - it is a potentially lethal neuro-toxin when eaten, or smoked. Cannabis can be eaten in many forms, brownies, spaghetti, with frozen honey, cookies; yet rarely does this fact get publicized. One can ingest as much cannabis as one likes, and the stomach ache if any won't come from the cannabis!
ReplyDeleteTrue - tomatoes are not smoked, but neither are grapes. Cannabis is unique in that unlike other plants, it not only is enjoyable and beneficial when smoked, and also beneficial when eaten.
Oddly, it's true, one can't grow their own tobacco, or hops either - to make beer, but one can grow wheat, barley, apple trees, grapes, peaches, etc to make fermented juice and distill it as moonshine. The reason one can't grow hops is it is in the same family of plants as hemp... and one can graft the roots of a cannabis plant to the body of the hops plant.
And unlike poppies, which we can't grow the narcotic form of plant, cannabis is not a narcotic... which by nature and chemistry narcotics are extremely physically addictive - like tobacco, because the nicotine in tobacco is a narcotic. So you can't grow your own tobacco.
To prohibit growing your own cannabis when decriminalized is like removing the grape and the wine industry from the America economy. It doesn't make sense. It inhibits and prevents creativity, agriculture and economic growth.
BTW... who can tell me exactly what makes use, possession and growing of cannabis a crime? A crime that in many states is far more serious than murder? Why is it whenever discussion of cannabis comes up, it's instantly a discussion about "drugs" and "save the children"!?
How do we "save the children" if we are not permitted to know the facts about what makes a drug a danger to society, of which, cannabis is seriously, far less dangerous than the legal ones?
I'd like to point out to VectorNectar that yes, I absolutely can make my own wine and beer at home. Not hard liquors (because the state wants their hefty taxes), but I can grow my own grapes and berries and use them in a wine-making process, and I am in fact planning on doing just that.
ReplyDeleteYou keep going on about the dangers of smoke inhalation. As others have pointed out, eating is a perfectly acceptable alternative to smoking. So are vaporizers. You are not automatically going to wind up with numerous health problems just because of using marijuana, and your insistence on focusing on ONE method of ingestion does nothing to prove your point.
As for taxing and regulating, I say let the government do it's thing, but let the little guy too. Some people would prefer going to a state-run dispensary, while others would prefer to go to their neighbor whom they know and trust. Why can't there be room for both?
One more thing. I can make my own wine, but that doesn't mean I get a free pass to give/sell it to little kids. You are assuming that anyone who sells marijuana (if it were made legal) without going through the state would target minors...that's a big assumption to make with nothing to back it up.
"Legalizing the mafia". . .don't make me laugh.
ReplyDeleteLegalizing a plant, and allowing the consumables to be produced in the US will drive the price down, and it will no longer be a valuable enterprise for the mafia.
My general view:
ReplyDeleteIf you decriminalize drug use, addicts can get the help they need to clean up their lives: They can be treated like patients, not like criminals.
If you outright legalize manufacturing and selling, legal companies forming name brands will have huge advantages over the cartels, since they don't have to spend resorces on secrecy. They're also much more likely to deal with competition through marketing campaigns and lawsuits than with bullets, like rival gangs do right now.
And another aspect I think would be a good result from either scenario: Egocentric, crooked cops would have fewer excuses to roll out SWAT teams. I've read a lot of news of bad cops using excessive force because the war on drugs kept encouraging escalation and easy excuses to show off their new toys so politicians can look "tough on crime."
You simply don't understand that LEAP is actually for L E G A L I Z I N G and R E G U L A T I N G drugs, with access, age and quality control...and that's all what I'm fighting for and everybody who understands a bit about economy and thousand years of human history!
ReplyDeleteThe price will also be driven down by giant-scale indoor and outdoor state farms and state-licensed private companies who can distribute their products in a tightly controlled model like the one I've presented, which is under scientific surveillance. And this method creates far more jobs, which would be absolutely positive for the economic growth.
I know everything that has been mentioned about Cannabis(e.g.: I proposed the popularization of vaporizers), as I use it in an informed manner for over 10 years now and it turned the biographic nightmare that was once my "life" into a wonderful reality with a lot of psychological and physiological health benefits. But I'm not denying any downsides or facts and I can accept the economic and social reality.
I don't want kids to have access to psychotropic substances(other than chocolate, sugar and tea), as I want access control, so the substances only go to really good informed users and I want a scientific quality control. And from what I've read in the last years on this page, this is exactly what LEAP is fighting for!
A decriminalized black market can't guarantee this three essential elements of logical legalization by scientific means.
And even if some people eat and vaporize(like myself), a lot of people prefer smoking and this
behaviour damages the health of our society and the systems who must compensate these effects with tax money. No one of you addressed the problem of munchies. And Cannabis can have scientifically proven physiological and psychological side effects which are often arrogantly ignored by the vast amount of the users! Not every human being is the same and this means every human being can react in a different way and this simply implies hazards.
You try to picture me, like I'm against freedom of choice or against Cannabis. But both is totally false: I'm all for freedom of choice, but freedom always includes responsibility in a democratic state and that comes from information(knowing yourself and the things you do) and control(ling yourself and the things you do). This implies that the state has the same freedom, to know the actions itself and its citizens make and to control the actions itself and its citizens make, if they are not responsible. The state can only provide this control, if the protocol is based on logic and science and not on assumptions of some self-sufficient laymen who like to recreate with a plant. The state can only function on a real long-term basis, if it's sustainable and not creating more debt than it can compensate through production. And that's exactly what I'm talking about. Reducing the costs and reducing the debt, throught the production of income.
It's not "their debt", it's our debt, as citizens of the state and it is our responsibility to take down this system based on Prohibition(and Decriminalization...please take a look at Holland's contaminated Coffeeshop Cannabis on the DHV site) propaganda and guarantee a state system, which can compensate and sustain its behaviour.
Consumers of Cannabis(and other illegalized drugs) often tend to develop a tunnel vision, in which they only imagine what would be good for them and like-minded people. But it's about developing a far-sighted vision for the whole society, especially for those elements who absolute oppose any kind of mind modulation from exogenous psychotropic substances. You have to build a system which can reduce their irrational fears through logic and science, or you are not a bit better like the Prohibitionists!
ReplyDeleteI just thought brewing your own beer was illegal in the US(DEA agent "Hank Schrader"'s brew was mentioned as illegal in "Breaking Bad", afaik)
I'm naturally also for really scientific information about the drugs which are already legal and if you read through my model, it's absolutely not comparable with removing the beer or wine industry from the economy, but it's exactly the opposite(your decriminalization would remove potential jobs, tax money and new state income for damage and debt compensation): We would create a lot of new jobs(also those who control the process, those you don't create in Decriminalization), every private company that can provide quality controlled substances and conforms with the state rules can provide Cannabis for the state and naturally these companies get their money from the state who directly controls and sells it to adult customers who were tested about their knowledge(more jobs...as the info has to be presented and tested) about the plant Cannabis
(or other drugs they like to use).
Another positive effect of the proposed system would be, that people learn about their own endogenous neurotransmitters(those the exogenous compounds mimic) and how to use them instead of exogenous sources, which would benefit the whole society and create citizens who are better informed about decision making and their own daily behaviour and far less suggestible to media manipulation. And that's what the Prohibition and Decriminalization propagandists (and especially the corruption pyramid they rely on) really fear: that society will learn to inform themselves scientifically and question their political propaganda based on esoteric babble, spiritual hogwash and religious radicalism.
No, I'm not a Scientologist(preventive protection), I'm exactly the opposite: I'm a realist who likes to develop a system of reflective introspection and meditation, that can be accepted by whole mankind for the developement of a scientific spirituality based on biology and especially neurologic facts and not the insane ideas of Project CHATTER/Aleister Crowley-victims like L. Ron Hubbard or all the self-proclaimed prophets before and after him.
http://www.leap.cc/dick-shaw-show/
ReplyDeletePlease take a moment to follow this link and sign the petition which requests that all those arrested for marijuana only related offenses to be granted a full pardon. In addition to releasing those currently incarcerated, this would also reinstate the rights lost by those with previous convictions, such as the right to vote. Here's the link: http://wh.gov/gRZ.
ReplyDeleteThanks for your support.
^^[Errata: naturally "thousands of years"...]
ReplyDeleteMr. Ball guy, I think we agree there will always be a black market, and people who have enough time and expertise on their hands to grow plants may end up trying to make a few bucks.
ReplyDeleteBut when commercial growers can finally grow legally they will be able to increase production such that the price should drop substantially, thus making it economically unfeasible for rogue black market players to operate full time.
Frankly, isn't that why there was (what I heard at least) so much Emerald Triangle opposition to Prop 19? They didn't want to be upstaged by mega-corps?
I think the farmer's market you dream of is not going to be one that's open to the public, at least in the foreseeable future. But that the farmer's market will be where where licensed distributors looking for more stock will go to acquire it, and clearly since the product was not grown under their own supervision it should be mandatory to have it tested in some way, shape, or form.
RE: the dispensaries that have fought the legalization for non-medical marijuana because their business model could not survive the price drop from legalizing the plant.
I guess this remains to be seen. But personally I don't believe it. People who care, adapt. Perhaps you hang around green thumbs too much, but I would probably guess that the majority (even if 51%) of consumers will not, nor have any wish to, grow their own. One of the biggest reasons that people grow their own is that black market prices are astronomical due to the ignorant prohibitionist practices of our government.
I would even venture to guess that a significant portion of people who grow their own now will stop once they can just go to the store and buy some, they will have better things to do with their time. Do you think I'm wrong?
This is what we see in modern society now with fruits, nuts, and veggies.
Yes, EVERYTHING must be regulated/taxed, which is why farmer's markets are such hubs of terrorist activity
Tar me if you wish, but I did not say that I was in favor of taxing it. But I'm not so naive as to think no one is salivating over that option.
And since it seems you are determined to grow your own, what do you care?
I just can't get over the laughable notion that the govt. will have to subsidize licensed vendors. This is the same line prohibitionists put forth.
I guess I have a much more expansive view of things that you do. While there certainly lots of people with flesh adornments who are eager to stop having to talk in disguise and hushed tones about their cannabis use, my guess is the amount they consume (smoke/vaporize) will end up being a small part of the total amount consumed/grown. I imagine most people will not inhale it, but use hash oil on skin lesions or eat it, and as you (I hope) know, those methods of application require significantly more bud to be grown.
and clearly since the product was not grown under their own supervision it should be mandatory to have it tested in some way, shape, or form.
ReplyDeleteAt least there is a manner to license and inspect them so every crop doesn't have to be tested.
Maybe you have a rosier view of marijuana growers and drug dealers, but I don't. To say there are unscrupulous growers and drug dealers is a gross understatement. We don't live in the days of altruistic Woodstock anymore (not that "the good old days" EVER existed -- only in people's daydreams). But clearly the ignorant militaristic heavy hand of various people in government has smashed all the nice people out of the business.
Dear "Unknown" we're here for you! Talk to us! Sadly, but you don't even tell us what "your point" is. So how can we respond?
ReplyDeleteWow, VectorNector, you really have the precision of Germany written into your posts! :-)
ReplyDeleteI am not in disagreement that it's handy to note the THC, CNB, CBD, etc… ratios on packages, but I think we should note a big part of the reason we are ending prohibition is for the folks who really don't give a darn about that stuff.
Even though I think it is of the utmost importance for the huge amount of people who use it (or should use it) for medicinal reasons, the fact is most beer drinkers are not experts on how much hops goes into their beer, or the latitude it's grown, or the soil conditions, etc…
I am not sure the amount of regulation/intrusion you suggest will work in the U.S. I mean a state employee who's present at every dispensary is overkill in my opinion. (Unless it's me and I get to bring my guitar. :-) Such close inspection is not even required at FAR MORE sensitive businesses which affect far more people's health in a more substantial way. I.e. beef production, which over the past 10 years has had a number of outrageous incidents which resulted in the waste of millions of pounds of meat (and thus waste of grassland, waste of tons of water, and tons of methane pumped into the atmosphere).
Has the fact that NO-ONE has died from cannabis toxicity totally flown over everyone's head?
ReplyDeleteWe're not the ones who need to hear this. I'm sure everyone who frequents this blog is well aware of that.
In fact I bet most of the biggest cheerleaders of Prohibition know that. However, my guess is there are tons of The Deceived who do not know that.
Like you I am not interested in compromising with intransigent Prohibitionists, they rest all their logic lies and deception. But you must realize that there are reasonable people who have been exposed to the strategies of Joseph Goebbels for SO LONG they believe the lie as though it was the truth.
Everyone who still obtains then from the black market or even produces for it, should be punished at a rate at least double(personal profit) or triple(organized crime) the sentence they are getting now, plus for tax evasion(payback of 100% the potential profit the state could have made with the confiscated products plus an extra prison sentence or fine). [ … ] to ensure full compensation of the state's loss of possible products. (profits?)
ReplyDelete[ … ]
So not only will they don't have nearly any potential profit margin left, but they should be forced to compensate the damage done they have done(or were planning to do) to the state economy.
Wow! I really can't say I'm in favor of any of that. Personally I don't believe any damage is done to the state when country-bumpkin/anarchist/hippy-wannabe/average-dude/etc… sells what amounts to a minuscule amount to another adult. And most definitely I do not think that's where the state's resources should be focused, on catching teeny tiny guy, meanwhile how many more Madoff's are out there running billion (or million) dollar scams? It recently came out that the state of Florida was spending an insane amount of money on drug testing welfare recipients. The time frame was not clear to me, but the ratio of money spent was ~ $1800 to $1 "saved." In other words the state spent $1800 of tax payers money in order to stop payment of $1 to a welfare recipient who tested positive for some kind of drugs. Of course this statistic doesn't take into account the additional costs of denying those people welfare, which I'm sure is not lavish, but instead the state engages in corporate welfare spending on drug testing institutions.
Another reason I am not keen on the reasoning expressed above is that it hints at an attempt to set values on what the state says it deserves for such and such. This really sounds mafioso to me. I mean it sounds like they could begin to say, "your dad was a rocket scientist and you became a teacher in some third world state. Surely you're smarter than that. What a waste. The damage done to our economy because you threw your life away on some underpaying job is lamentable because it breaks our forecasts for taxable earnings." Or "your dad was a lawyer who made millions, and so did we, on taxes. And we had high hopes for you since you went in to the medical field, but what happened, you threw your life away in Doctors Without Borders. You harmed us by denying us millions of dollars in tax revenue, harming the state which could have benefitted, instead you left for some flea-bitten country."
I would add that trying to get rid of the off-beat names people have given strains is in vain. Even if the state was able to banish nicknames from labels, and everyone familiar with such names disappeared, people would still make up names for the various versions.
VectorNectar, I agree with a bunch of what you say, but I do have what seem to be some (at least based on the limited amount I've read) philosophical differences. Personally I don't think citizens should be slaves to the state or corporations. I think it's the other way around. States and corporations should exist to make life better for citizens and the whole world.
In other words, people learn to help the state because they want to, it makes life better for everyone. Clearly this is not what our U.S. govt. has in mind now, it obviously views its citizens as the enemy who must be spied on, and can't be allowed to do various things to improve society because we haven't been given clearance to do such things … the list is long.
I would add that trying to get rid of the off-beat names people have given strains is in vain.
ReplyDeleteHowever, count me in on trying to give strains names that sound less violent and chokingly industrial.
And by the way, as most people smoke Cannabis, it's absolutely nonesense to say it doesn't hurt anyone. That's like saying Tobacco hurts nobody.
ReplyDeleteMost people, in my opinion, smoke it since that is the most cost effective way to obtain its effects. Drop the price to where it should be and I bet most consumers will not smoke it.
And with a bit of time, the cost of vaporizers will come way down too, thus further lowering the numbers who smoke it.
But with regard to smoking it, one of the tentacles of Hydra's head, one of the many that only funds studies they think will turn up vilifying information, found the opposite.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=large-study-finds-no-link
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/25/AR2006052501729.html
http://www.safeaccessnow.org/article.php?id=4519
http://norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=3376
http://www.mpp.org/issues/medical-marijuana/
etc…
M. Simon, "Well here is something former CIA director William Colby was trying to tell us in 1995:"
ReplyDeleteNo argument from me. However, as we can clearly see from the travesty forced on Mexico, they are at each other's throats.
I'm certain they operate at all levels of government. I would add that more than one DTO (Drug Trafficking Organization) is at work at the various levels of government, and just like street corner hoodlums shoot at each other for control, the DTOs in our govt. are battling each other for control; only their weapons affect far more people and cause much greater harm. And I don't mean to imply their weapons are only the kind that draw blood, I also mean "laws" and policies, etc…
Thus, this is another facet of harm reduction.
Cannabis also has other side effects, including munchies, which can cause obesity and therefore chronic cardiac diseases and other potentially negative long term effects.
ReplyDeletehttp://old.news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20110912/od_nm/us_health_marijuana
http://www.drugwarrant.com/2011/09/marijuana-regulates-weight/
In the U.S. people can brew their own alcoholic beverages.
Sorry if it sounds like I'm disagreeable with what you say, I'm not. Like That Ball Guy, I think we agree on plenty. But given the energy it takes to write things, people tend to focus on the differences in an attempt to figure out why, convince, or compromise. :-)
I want to increase the efficiency of law enforcement for real crimes and this is only possible, if the black market profit margin collapses and is destroyed by a regulated system, which effectively frees time for other prosecutions. The DEA is still needed after this process, as people like The "Ball" Guy will be still blinded by the anarchistic urge to decriminalize the black market the Mafia is based on.
My main comments here are that we can definitely cause a collapse of the black market, but a collapse does not mean all players are destroyed. Those who dealt on the side for extra income were not much of a concern to begin with. But people who did it as their full time job, and are stubborn against alternative employment, will be a thorn for some duration.
Along with that is my other comment. I am NOT in favor of keeping the DEA around. I believe time has proved that you can not pour new wine into old wine skins, you can not teach that old dog new tricks. I am positive that the whole agency needs to be shut down. We need to start with a clean slate. I am not necessarily against the hiring of former DEA personnel, but they need to come on to a new organization with a new mission.
Part of the key reason for this is not just to have a new ceremony where they must come to grips with reality, but I am certain that the hierarchy must be revamped. Just giving the same old people different titles and new objectives is probably going to prove to be meaningless. In other words there are probably some at the bottom who deserve to be at the top and some at the top who deserve to be at the bottom (or permanently off the payroll). Frankly there are quite a few agencies which need to be completely shut down. We need a new strategy, not paper pushing or people shuffling in a vain attempt at change.
@BobKat, I could have sworn that people could grow their own hops. I've seen it on a TV show, some guy was growing it as a vine around his back door on an arbor.
We can grow strawberries, which are, from what I'm told, are closely related to hemp/cannabis. Did I see that on a Michael Palin show?
You try to picture me, like I'm against freedom of choice or against Cannabis. But both is totally false: I'm all for freedom of choice, but freedom always includes responsibility in a democratic state and that comes from information(knowing yourself and the things you do) and control(ling yourself and the things you do). This implies that the state has the same freedom, to know the actions itself and its citizens make and to control the actions itself and its citizens make, if they are not responsible. The state can only provide this control, if the protocol is based on logic and science and not on assumptions of some self-sufficient laymen who like to recreate with a plant. The state can only function on a real long-term basis, if it's sustainable and not creating more debt than it can compensate through production. And that's exactly what I'm talking about. Reducing the costs and reducing the debt, throught the production of income.
ReplyDeleteI'm not exactly sure what you're saying here so let me address just one point.
I emphatically do not believe the costs of ending marijuana prohibition will outweigh the money gained through it. And I definitely do not hold to any notion that just because people choose to consume (or anoint or dab or apply) cannabis it will result in a massive growth in the numbers unemployed couch potatoes. Will their be "problematic use," most likely, time has proven it can not be eliminated; but like I've written above, I would suggest the the percentage of problematic users would actually seem to decrease due to a number of factors.
1) better educated consumers who know they should avoid it
2) people who have been prevented from using it who shouldn't be
3) people who currently have a problem can have it addressed in a mature manner vs. the ignorant heavy-handed incarceration/probation/drug court approach.
Monsanto. This is an prime example of how State regulations are costly, harmful, and completely fail at their stated goal.
ReplyDeleteI would never partake of some herb grown on a State "farm" or in a State factory.
The debt incurred by the US nation-state government has been incurred through inflation (the Federal Reserve) manipulation of markets, and wasting money on wars at home and abroad (check it out, a $45-equivalent IED takes out armored vehicles costing millions. Who's business plan is working?). All of these things I as a citizen was not allowed to vote on. I absolutely will not be held responsible, and I do claim the right to engage in free commerce with my fellow human, it is NO ONE else's business (mind you, I'm not even in the black markets).
May I also point out to VektorNektar the ridiculousness of claiming "legitimizing the mafia". The mafia are in their markets because there is lucrative profit. Doing away with alcohol prohibition WITHOUT regulating the market would have also damaged the mafia.
Governments do not "create" anything. They are not producers. They are consumers and redistributors of wealth, not creators of wealth.
Monsanto. This is an prime example of how State regulations are costly, harmful, and completely fail at their stated goal.
ReplyDeleteYour logic, here, is the logic of "Q." You might as well blame humanity itself. After all it is humans who make up the state. Let's wipe out all of humanity.
Clearly you are a thoughtful person, so I would like to see some surgical precision, specifically it's not "the state" per se, it's that specific people have undermined it with illegal laws and policy decisions.
Besides the fact that checks and balances have been eviscerated, the fact is that prohibition is against the natural order of things, it's against God. This is why it has created such a horrible and unsustainable situation, like inbreeding; it's against nature and can lead to people walking on all fours. Likewise, prohibition is a reversal of societal evolution.
I would never partake of some herb grown on a State "farm" or in a State factory.
I won't begrudge you that.
[…] I do claim the right to engage in free commerce with my fellow human […]
Of course the major irony here is if you are using cash to do so! :-)
Governments do not "create" anything. They are not producers. They are consumers and redistributors of wealth, not creators of wealth.
I think we're deviating here from drug policy, but I'm almost always game for philosophical conversations with people who actually give a darn, which you obviously are. :-)
Am I being too un-PC by saying you appear to be contradicting yourself? You say they don't creating anything, but then you are clearly against one thing they create, i.e. regulations. :-)
Personally I do believe in the saying that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. So since humans created government, government itself can create.
I happen to hold to the notion that governments should create level playing fields. And I use that metaphor with a wince since I am NOT a fan of competition, I think teamwork and love are superior. So "friendly competition" is what I really mean to imply with level "playing fields."
I agree that govt. also consumes, but I think there is another contradiction in that you say they do not create wealth. Well, I guess it depends on what you mean by wealth. I think wealth is relative, it's based on perception and what a person values. Thus the circumstance which yielded the saying that one man's trash is another man's treasure.
But for people who use "legal tender" the government is the one who prints money, so it must therefore create wealth, since that is typically how wealth is measured around the world, based on how much money (liquid or assets) a person has. And even if one says that money is not wealth and printing money is not making wealth, then we are still left with the fact, then, that the government has created inflation.
So I stand by my assertions that the government can create things. :-)
Mr. Ball Guy, did you hear that Oakland wanted to supervise a larger than average grow?
ReplyDeleteWhat do you think of that?
Do you think they would “partner” with GMO-types?
Do you think they would hide that if they did?
What do you think their customers would think?
Personally I doubt the people who wanted to have that grow op in Oakland would use GMOs. And while I am certain there is the gamut of cannabis consumers — including those who have no problem with GMO’d cannabis — my feeling is that most cannabis consumers would greatly prefer their herb to be au natural.
Do you disagree with me on any point so far?
So the only logical conclusion I can reach is that you would be in favor of some form of regulations that prevented cannabis from being GMO’d, and that if it ever did happen, that it was labeled as such.
Thus, you are in favor of government creating such regulations.
Where am I wrong?
I would also say that even if you wanted no regulations at all, like you are strongly hinting at, you would immediately change your mind once the mega-corps(es) got involved because you know they’ve got GMO on the brain.
It’s either that, or you are in favor of maintaining Drug War; which (supposedly) prevents the mega-corpses from entering the market, but lets the black market thrive.
No laws, by definition, is lawlessness. But lawlessness is also created by too many, too complex, or too strict laws.
Unfortunately this is where we are today. Lobbyists and corrupt politicians have stripped away laws (regulations) where they were necessary, and in other places they have created too many, too complex, and/or too strict laws (regulations), many which are diametrically opposed to the LETTER & SPIRIT of our Founding Documents. This is why I refer to various plants as illegally illegal. And this is why our country is becoming the tail, not the head; why we are being destroyed and will continue to witness it only getting worse.
1.) I'm not German, but I still try to be as accurate as it gets! ;D
ReplyDelete"It's the quality control..."-Jurassic 5
2.) I didn't say I want all "brands" of Cannabis eliminated, I just thought that this should apply for the "State Cannabis", so you can choose the ratios you prefer, let's say in summer you tend to use more THC-abundant Sativa strains and in winter more CBD-rich Indicas...I think that would be great, especially for various medical users. I would leave the strain names as they are, but I would prohibit advertisement for the strains, their specific qualities should be mentioned on the menu in the licensed and state dispensaries
3.) I think tight control is good for securing the prevention of corruption(a law can be well written, if doesn't get executed it's simply a waste of tax money and time), but I would end all drug testing of welfare-receivers, as this is not the business of the state, if the state sells the psychotropic substances.
4.) I proposed the popularization of vaporizers and I also believe more people would tend to eat, drink or anoint(->Chrism...wiki "Sula Benet") Cannabis products, but I am still for the compensation of potential psychological and physiological damages through direct and indirect(via the licensed vendors etc.) state income. Smoking Cannabis(at least mixed with Tobacco, as a lot of people, at least in Europe, tend to consume their joints in that way) is not healthy, even if there are some anti-carcinogenic compounds in the smoke.
5.) I don't want the users to know how they can grow(hemp or hops)(but I don't want them to prevent them from gaining also this knowledge) , but how using their chosen product will influence their bodies, minds and the perception of both, including all (un)wanted (side) effects. It would be great to apply this to Alcohol, Caffeine and Nicotine, but I think the lobbyists will be too strong to let this become a realistic goal and the tax-paying business would have a hard time with controlling their customers in crowded bars, restaurants etc. But I think it would be a good thing for the health of the society when people get scientifically educated about all psychotropic substances in school and when they like to buy a substance that is not yet regulated, they should have to pass a (not-to-stringent-but-still-scientific) test to prove their basic knowledge about it.
ReplyDelete6.) I also don't think that legalizing and regulating use of psychotropic substances will increase the "couch potato to productive people" ratio(as those probably already use it, because if they don't give a thought about their health, they probably also don't respect any laws), but I think that this problematic use of a lot of people has to be compensated by those who are consuming psychotropic substances and not by those who choose to live abstinent.
7.) I don't think that there should be slaves at all, but I think stealing business from the government(and the licensed vendors) by supplying the black market is a form of theft and going to another country to supply knowledge is free speech. And the damage done by the former behaviour(as long as it happens in the country who provides the same, or probably better, substances) has to be compensated by the criminals and prevented as far as it possible by the DEA(...or any other agency you want to create from non-DEA-people who try to reduce the black market that's left after logic took control...but that would put a lot of families into financial trouble, because one of their parents, or both, would lose their legal jobs). I'm not only talking about the small scale producer(who should also be prosecuted), but about the large scale criminal organizations(e.g. Bloods, Crips, MS-13 etc.) who make their main profit with the Cannabis black market. Monsanto(/GMO) Cannabis should be clearly recognizeable as such, even if I'm really against this Mafia, as I have seen a lot of well researched documentaries(e.g.: "The Case of Percy Schmeiser") about Monsanto, and their tactics are really Mafioso-like, or more accurately absolutely insane! This company should compensate every farmer who is infected with their unwanted GMO pollen, and not the other way around(accusing involuntary victims of their crop infections to be using their products without licenses and trying to sue them)!
Hi VectorNectar,
ReplyDeleteRE:
1) No offense intended. :-) I clicked on your name and found some German-looking text and the first Internet address I see ends in ".de." :-)
I'm afraid I'm ignorant of many popculture references. I saw the Matrix around 10 years after it came out, and only because someone kept on using a reference to it which I didn't understand. But I have to admit I liked it. Although I wonder how many people recognize how many Biblical references there are in it.
2) I agree, medical users (and the more thoughtful users) would prefer to have their buds labeled precisely. But in various scenarios I can imagine, forcing such testing on every plant's produce seems cost prohibitive.
3) I totally agree. And frankly I think much work needs to be done to educate those who are under constant pressure and fear mongering scare-stories from the drug testing community. Subway crash, not drugs, but texting. Underground oil drilling eruption, not drugs, but evil greedy corporations cutting corners. And the list goes on. Frankly I've yet to hear of one workplace accident that's been definitively proven to be due to heroin, cocaine, meth, or marijuana. In fact I read not too long ago that nearly all workplace accidents were caused by tired employees; lack of sleep; being overworked. How's that for "productivity?" Productivity, the mantra of the hypocritical prohibitionist.
4) "I am still for the compensation of potential psychological and physiological damages through direct and indirect(via the licensed vendors etc.) state income."
I guess I don't understand what you mean by this, sorry for being so thick headed.
In any case it's probably best to just not label it as such and call it part of the tax which is collected on its sale.
5) Your bit here addresses quite a few classes of people in just one paragraph. We already know we have adult recreational, religious, and medical users, both novice and experienced. That's a lot of categories already. Then there "school" students.
Personally I think experienced users of any group are the least likely to need education as to its effects.
I agree potential users and new users need honest and accurate information. Specifically the people who might have a bad reaction need to be appraised.
As far as education in schools (you don't mention any age ranges), this is a bit too vague for me to address without knowing what you are specifically saying. I say this as a professionally trained educator, all age ranges have topics which are relevant, aka "age appropriate," and not. Although I admit that age-level is not the main variable one should take into account, local conditions apply.
Me, I didn't know about drugs or that people took them for fun until a cop showed up one day at school with a suitcase (literally) of drugs that somewhat resembled a modern-day traveling salesman's case of wares. Lots of pills, and all sorts of fancy things were like trophies of a biologist, encased behind clear plastic, neatly labeled and very colorful. Like a bunch of butterflies behind glass, all neatly stabbed in the back with pins. (Sorry, thorax. :-)
I think much consideration needs to go into drug education for high school (and/or college) students, and while some Federal GUIDELINES would be useful, many decisions must be left up to the local level. I mean you don't need to teach kids about stuff they are not ready for and shouldn't be told about -- yet. But in some places, it is probably best to tell those same age kids about such and such, because it's part of their lives already.
Continuing from 5…
ReplyDeleteHowever, due to the overwhelming need to end prohibition, I reject the notion to wait until we can figure out a curriculum for high school students. Every day we delay people people can die (or are dying), every day money goes into the hands of the black market, every day we delay people who should not be in prison sit there and we have to pay for it, and every day we delay the black market grows to entice new high-schoolers and adults, and on and on…
And like I've written elsewhere, legalizing drugs sends the right message to teens, it tells them drugs should not be dispensed by gangs, pushers, etc… It also sends the right message of humility and to admitting making a mistake.
6) I guess I don't follow you on this. I've known lots of people (dozens) who have used drugs in their lives and only one of them approached the stereotype of layabout who consumed too much TV. And while I can't praise him as running a successful business, at least he ran a business and did good work.
I know "dozens" is anecdotal and doesn't constitute a scientific study, but I have read a more than a little on this subject and even many heroin users live normal lives, and there have been more than a few famous people who were heroin addicts, and basically no one knew.
Perhaps #6 for you, is a continuation of #3, i.e. tax drugs in an attempt to offset various costs incurred by the percentage of problematic users.
However, again, I completely reject the notion that just because a person uses a drug, even "for fun," they are dirty, contribute less to society because of it, or contribute less to society than the abstinent. In fact the very fact we are trying to end prohibition is because various (supposedly) abstinent people are DESTROYING society. So clearly just because a person doesn't use drugs does not mean they are better people or help society more, because many of them clearly do not!
That said, I agree people can point at others who use drugs and say, "they have gone downhill, they contribute less than they used to," and so forth. However, one must be remarkably careful to avoid calling an associative relationship a cause-and-effect relationship, even when it appears "so obvious."
Also, I would say that no one is abstinent from drugs. Everyone uses drugs. I'm not being facetious, but the fact is that anytime a health claim is made by a vendor, the product must be labeled as a drug. This even includes suntan lotion and many other things people do not normally associate with "drugs."
ReplyDeleteBeing a major fan of healthy food, I would have no problem seeing something involving the people you hint at in #6 as somehow finding themselves in the position as having to raise their own food or get on a bike to generate their own electricity to watch TV, or tend sheep that provide the wool socks that keep them warm, etc… :-)
7) While I can't say I recall seeing The Case of Percy Schmeiser (there you go with your German-sounding stuff again ;-) I have seen some stuff on Bill Moyer's (sadly defunct) show, and perhaps elsewhere, that clearly show how thuggish some of those GMO mega-corps(es) are. I will add your video recommendation to my database.
But I think we have a few disagreements.
Since I don't think the government owns the plants or the planet or even us, I don't think it's accurate to say it's stealing from the govt. when one a private citizens trades with another private citizen. However, I do think it's hypocrisy for someone who is anti-government to use government printed money in the trade.
Paying 20 paramilitary govt. officials to descend on someone selling to friends and family is a gross waste; spend months/weeks investigating a someone who is "stealing" tens or hundreds or in extreme cases thousands of dollars a year? So we hire people at the cost of hundreds of thousands of dollars to prevent the "theft" of (at most) a few thousands of dollars?
… a bit more in my next post …
Here I think you are caught up in a problem of not recognizing what you stand for:
ReplyDeletethe DEA(...or any other agency you want to create from non-DEA-people who try to reduce the black market that's left after logic took control
(Please excuse my inability to fully understand your paragraph, it's a bit compacted for me, so let me pull out one thought at a time.)
Given what I recall from your comments above, I thought you understood the ONLY way to "reduce the black market" was by legalization and regulation.
The DEA, NIDA, ONDCP, military, SAMHSA, NSA, FBI, CIA, etc… all have had their turn at trying to reduce the black market and they have failed spectacularly! And frankly the OPPOSITE of what they claim they are doing, is happening. Why would we ever want to rely on that mindset again?
I'm not only talking about the small scale producer(who should also be prosecuted), but about the large scale criminal organizations(e.g. Bloods, Crips, MS-13 etc.) who make their main profit with the Cannabis black market.
Like many reformers say, legalizing/regulating will not be able to entirely eliminate the black market.
But once we end prohibition we can drive the Bloods, Crips, MS-13, etc… out of business due to being able to undercut them in price with a better product as well! That is how we win. Not by guns or fighting.
Then those who are truly addicted, those who are so desperate as to steal a $30 flute on the subway, will realize they can get their fix from some state licensed place for a pittance of what they are used to paying, and it's a regulated (measured, objective) dose, will gladly go there. While there we can further reach out to them. Slowly but surely word gets around and people who are addicted are won over (trust) and show up at our state licensed clinics, thus drying up funding for the black market. Of course the black market will continue in its non stop efforts to gain new customers, but their desperation will show, and this will likely be a turn off to most people who are not familiar with them.
ReplyDeleteThis company should compensate every farmer who is infected with their unwanted GMO pollen, and not the other way around(accusing involuntary victims of their crop infections to be using their products without licenses and trying to sue them)!
I can't speak to them specifically since I can't quote much, but I am aware that companies behind the GMO push are just flat out evil. Basically, best I can tell, it has to do with patents and govt. patent "protection." Perhaps this is why the word Mafia is chosen.
Someday the U.S. will realize that it's better to have 100 farmers who all have the right equipment, know how to maintain it (or have people around who do), have the knowledge to grow crops, is far better than having all of that knowledge and tools in the hands of one or two people. Disaster inevitably strikes and if only a few people are knowledgeable and they are dead, everyone is worse off.
I saw a documentary on average farmers with their 1950's (guessing) tools rusting away because they were threatened with lawsuits from the GMO pushers. Such a shame so many useful tools are going to waste.
But I think the black market withers as much as possible, not because of the DEA (or other) making some effort to crush them, and not because people suddenly understand the logic of the need to end prohibition (per se), but because we legalize/regulate and offer these commodities as their real prices, not the outlandishly inflated prices they go for now. The black market just plain can't support itself once we legalize. It's built on prohibition, and once we end prohibition, it too must fall apart.
1.) I haven't thought of it as an offense, but some German speaking people could have thought of it as an offense, because due to history(and their remaining arrogance of a lot of their citizens...as I have to do with them a lot in my face-to-face service job at an educational institution) the Germans themselves are not that highly valued outside of the minds of some nationalist and racist German speaking people who are no Germans, but would probably like to be(come) one of them and they still dream of a new Christo-German empire(*puke*) as frontier or fortress against the "multiplying menace of Islamist Terror"(*propagandistic puke*). That's why I've included the author of the quoted line! ;) Yes, I'm aware of this fact and there are also a lot of not-so-obvious Buddhist references in the Matrix! :D
ReplyDelete2.) No, it's not that the licensed vendors' Cannabis should have the THC/CBD etc. ratios, it would be sufficient, if they are labeled with the strain names(and maybe also the THC level, at least in a three degree manner, low, medium, high etc.)
4.) I just thought that a fixed amount of the money should go to the educational, health and social system to compensate any POSSIBLE(and not necessarily already manifested) negative consequences and to improve the overall quality of our society and therefore also our economy.
5.) I would be for informing kids about the consequences of eating too much candies or drinking too much Coke, when they already know it's not good for their stomach and they hurt themselves when they do that and to question their behaviour and bring them some kind of self-discipline from the start of the journey through the overwhelming obstacles of life. They should be slowly informed about their neurotransmitter systems, first more symbolically and then with growing scientific content, so when they arrive at an age appropriate to be informed about drugs, they can relate to them and what they really modify in our bodies and minds, to be critical and not see a lot of beautiful colored pills, but only white powders and biological substances like Cannabis, fungi, etc., so they are not attracted to them by a kaleidoskopic array of luring capsules and pills, but be informed that Prohibition enabled criminals also to sell inpure products in the form of white powders, that even could have been pure rat poison and the customers couldn't tell from looking at it. This would also maybe give them the insight, that the parcel isn't the present and that they shouldn't judge a book by it's cover, but by it's content and that in the Prohibition era you never knew about the actual content, so they understand why they should abstain from any residual shady black market, take the tests when they are adults and get really what they have paid for. Although I'd prefer if kids also get tested about their knowledge of substances in school(naturally without receiving licences), I was actually talking about non-school private or public lessons in the State Centers, where one can go to get infos directly from the people who are giving you the licenses(or their colleagues), where you get tested. These State-supervised Substance Centres which exclusively control and distribute all the non-biological psychoactive substances(and also the ratio-labeled state Cannabis strains), hand out the licenses to people who have proven to have really understood the given knowledge and give them advices, how they can abstain from the self-destructive behaviour of problematic usage.
ReplyDeleteEven if thorough testing costs some money, this generates economic growth, as the technical equipment has to be produced and distributed by companies, personel has to be educated about it's usage and trained for their work, these are all jobs which generate taxes, at least by consumption of everyday products and services(even with the state employees, but I'm refering more to the private companies, whose loan is also taxed).
6.) As I'm also using various substances(although not Heroin or other extremely addicting compounds), studying, being creative in at least 3 forms and got a good part-time job that fits for my universitarian time table, I'm very well aware of that. But I'm also aware of those people who just don't give a single thought about their own lives and even less about others or the whole society. And I think that's the reason, why the costs should be compensated by those who at least potentially could cause it(if their self-discipline crumbles in the future) by using psychotropic substances(while I'm aware that it's not necessary to use anything to become a total loser) and not by those who obviously are not causing these specific problems(while I'm absolutely not denying that some publicly abstinent-modelled people are ruining our states and lives...as there would be no Prohibition without them). "By the state, for the state" equals "by the people, for the people", in my mind, as WE should be the state and we will increase our direct democracy, if we're able to learn from recent history and fill the streets with our rage against their obviously fraudulent schemes(see ECHELON's economic espionage and the EU report released 07/11/01 as an example). It's not so much the state itself as an idea, but the private companies and conglomerates that bought the state through (neo-)liberal lobbyism and kept us as wage slaves, especially since PNAC's "catastrophing and catalyzing effect - like a new Pearl Harbor"["Rebuilding America's Defenses", pg. 51(63 in the PDF), Chapter V, "Creating Tomorrow's Dominant Force", September 2000].
ReplyDeleteIt's not about the wrong mindset, it's about greedy bastards who try to subvert every system as long as it's possible and even while I think the end of the profitable Prohibition Mafia Monopoly will drastically reduce criminal and terroristic organizations(if this insight is applied worldwide), there still should be an agency which cares about these special subversion systems(who often operate on many levels, not only in the substance biz), even if the agencies' budget should be drastically reduced and probably 70-90% of their forces trained to better battle child pornography, corruption, fraud, human trafficking, murder, organ trade, rape, theft etc. instead. I still thinks it's a form of theft of the economic potential of the state, even if the state doesn't own the plant itself, he owns the legal right of distribution which is subverted by the illegal competitors. It would be best if there is a single agency for that purpose, which can use the sources of all intelligence agencies(these "shadow state" should be even much more drastically reduced). I don't think it's good that there are so many agencies that target the same enemies...this decentralization effectively weakens their useful potential through organisatory chaos and prevents a structurally functional surveillance. I don't think that a "laissez-faire" attitude is really helpful when it comes to organized crime, even after the end of Prohibition. But there would be definitely some reorganization and a change of priorities needed, but those will come from logical
ReplyDeleteeffects from Prohibition itself, as nobody wants to pay huge loans for tax-paid DEA LEOs who are privately surfing on the internet(our boss explicitly allowed that kind of behaviour, as long as there's nothing to do, like right now...but with organized crime there's always something to do...if you really want to), because their targets have gone bankrupt.
I think a more general concept of an Organized Crime Agency would be probably better for that purpose, as they can observe the intelligence and personal connections between the various levels and networks of the corruption pyramid.
I think we can say that the repeal of Prohibition will really be a fundamental and giant blow to their profits and organizations, but the substance market is only a single column in this pyramid of perversion and that will not let the whole pyramid break down instantly, even when its structure will be weakend, you still have to go for the other columns in their temple of terror. It's like the King Cobra isn't in a threatening upright position anymore after the end of Prohibition, but then it's the perfect time to stomp on its hissing head and let its blood paint the walls all along the watchtower of our socially secured society, as a warning to everybody who tries to resist and subvert logic and the truth that arises directly from it. [Sorry for the removals...there were some severe spelling errors...I had a long night with finishing a paper and had to get up very soon today to go to work...]
1) Hm, I’d always heard about German precision and high quality.
ReplyDelete4) I’m sure everyone is going to want a slice of that pie; and everyone will say they deserve it. My guess is that some of the organizations (or individuals working for them) who make the loudest noises are probably the ones reeling from having their black market profits removed from them.
I mean, with the black market they can have their cake and eat it too. They can keep up the appearance of being against drugs, but not only take drugs, but also take a hefty cut of the money in the black market, tax free.
Suddenly legalize/regulate drugs and only allows them through licensed entities and they will surely be found out sooner or later, and what about all that money they used to collect? What about all that fear they used to control people?
But I agree with you, I would rather see the proceeds go towards something good, than towards war, pollution, and destruction.
5) I would imagine that most kids (in the U.S.) already understand the consequences of eating too much candy. :-) Or just eating too much of anything in one sitting and getting a bellyache. But I’m not against what you say.
6) If only “‘By the state, for the state’ equaled ‘by the people, for the people.’” Watch this excellent short video and it’s clear how user friendly “the state” could be, but is NOT. TED Talks: Dave Meslin: The antidote to apathy.
Cronyism, corruption, bribery, nepotism, etc… all run rampant from the top to the bottom of our govt I'm afraid. The people ordering around those with the guns put so many obstacles in front of us it's insane. And that's just one example of what is detailed in the Declaration of Independence that the founders hated about King George, yet here we are again.
I also blame many corps(es) like the telcos for this same thing. They all pat themselves on the back as being facilitators and helping others and the economy; but in fact they are causing it to grind to a halt due to their greed and self-enrichment.
7) In general I agree. But what we have now is a cancer. Cancers, from what I know, are an abnormal growth of cells, that's what has happened. Cancers have an huge number of twisted blood veins running through them. That's sure what this looks like: Top Secret America: Network.
ReplyDeleteDon't forget to click on "Find Companies" and "Counter-drug operations."
There had been minor reports of the lastest govt. shutdown a week or two ago. Of course those reports were drowned out by the main stream media trying to lull people with other important news like what kind of shoes to buy, the latest sports scores, court trials that are hardly any of our business, and of course the obligatory stream of reasons to continue to live in a constant state of fear such that we don't question authority. But it seems to me that I glanced quickly at a paragraph that said the govt. decided that FEMA had too much money, so they used the rainy day fund to continue with their addiction to Drug War.
Guess where FEMA sits on the graphic I link to above? It's the least powerful agency. It's the furthest entity on the "less activity" side. Not too far from it is Congress and the White House, sigh.
There is no shortage of govt. agencies and companies that fight stuff.
This whole situation is a cancer as far as I'm concerned. This whole unorganized, metastasized, blood drinking blob needs major surgery. Not only is it rife with corruption, I'm sure, misplacing millions to billions of dollars, like the military in Iraq/Afghanistan, but I'm sure it's completely infiltrated top to bottom with members of the DTOs (and other nefarious orgs).
And not only are the moles in that cancerous plethora of agencies and businesses working to undermine efforts to bring about drug policy reform, they are also seeking to help their own DTO at the expense of other DTO's. Thus huge missing shipments of guns, 16-wheeler trucks of drugs go missing, even while under surveillance, etc…
I don't think this boondoggle can be repaired.
It's not about the wrong mindset, it's about greedy bastards who try to subvert every system as long as it's possible […]
ReplyDeleteHow is greed not a mindset?
Not all greedy subversives are coming from the same place. Therefore, I believe, it is important to recognize it as a mindset, a mindset with nuances, so one can better predict and prepare, as well as react.
1.) Yes, but this "high precision and quality" had been used by the Nazis to invade other German speaking countries and slavic countries with German-speaking regions. This stigmata is still alive and there are a lot of fascist and rascist right-wing scumbags in German speaking countries and whole Europe(->e.g.: "Geert Wilders" in Holland), who try to use PNAC's "new Pearl Harbor" for a clash of cultures against Islam and naturally also their anachronistic abomination called the "War on Drugs".
ReplyDelete6.) A good talk and you're right, there are a lot of obstacles, and I envisioned that "by the people for the people", should equal "by the state, for the state", not that it is like that right now, not even over here. It is the goal to reach, like abolishing prohibition, but I think this can only be done by giving the control to the state and not again trusting shady global conglomerates of private companies who are designing laws through lobbyism. There is absolutely more need for direct democracy, so we design the laws and not the laws design the people to become in favor of the decisions of the rich, by manipulation of the masses through traditional media networks(religions, political parties, newspapers, TV).
7.) Thanks for the very valuable link and you're right, I should have written "not only a mindset issue", but probably that's the core we have to reach first! I just wanted to say that this change also needs institutionalized and structural changes and not only a change of our minds. I also think there is a secret cancer growing in America's governmental heart, but I think it would be better to reduce this de-centralization of organizations fighting crime and terror, while keeping out private companies as far as it possible. An United Organized Crime Agency would operate more efficiently, in contrast to that metastasis that has occurred especially since PNAC's "new Pearl Harbor". A whole lot of agencies, trying to get the most busts, funds and headlines, is like being in a capitalistic competition and I think this is counterproductive for good law enforcement and surveillance operations. There is no annual revenue given for "Xe Services", a company formerly known as "Blackwater", which had a lot of scandals, dating back to the war in Kosovo and even before, allegations of illegal drug, human and weapon trafficking among them, so it is absolutely alarming that exactly this example of prostituting perversion has no annual revenue report that can be freely accessed. I think corruption by DTOs will be decreased, if people realize that they can provide people with quality products for a good wage in a safe job, without the risk of being prosecuted and incarcerated or even killed.
I find it sad that people are still using that old saw:"if we legalise pot we'll have to legalise heroin".Such non-sense.Even if you gave heroin away on the corner of every street you wouldn't get more than 1% of the people trying it.This is a statistic that has borne out over the years.The one thing that has spread drug use like a plague is prohibition.The harder you try to shut it down the worse the criminal you get.The user is just a byproduct.We can educate people but not if we prohibit because that kills real dialogue.In my lifetime drugs have gone from a minor thing that was attacked by nuclear war,to a huge problem that ruins lives by the millions.What we are doing is absolutely the worst of all possible alternatives.
ReplyDelete@VectorNectar, regarding #7.
ReplyDeleteYour comment about a United Organized Crime Agency made me think of a few things. Everything has its pros and cons, whether it’s a centralized agency or flatter, less-hierarchical, decentralized agency.
I’m reminded of a saying: in theory there is no difference between theory and practice. But in practice, there is.
It’s too bad our govt. has been so badly undermined because the long forgotten concept of checks and balances needs to be employed.
Not only that but laws are not applied equally. If in fact corporations are “people” then the “people” who defrauded the U.S. citizens of far greater sums than Bernie Madoff should be stripped of whatever funds they have and put in prison.
I have lots of ideas on how to restore justice to our system, but this isn’t time or place.
But I would add that no matter how ideal a system, from what I’ve learned it really needs protection from an “us vs. them” mentality which seems to develop within “justice” systems, and another very unfortunate practice which happens in a multitude of organizations: hazing.