|
|
| War on Drugs Needs New Direction |
|
Posted by FoM on April 11, 2002 at 08:18:47 PT By Pam Easton, Associated Press Writer Source: Denver Rocky Mountain News 
America's war on drugs should focus more on an individual's actions and less on what substances a person might possess or ingest, officials attending a drug policy conference at Rice University said Wednesday.The two-day drug policy conference taking place at the Baker Institute for Public Policy in Houston concludes Thursday. Besides focusing on the United States' drug policy, attendees will discuss policies in other countries with hopes of eventually making recommendations for policy changes in the United States to "reduce negative consequences of drug use and abuse, including attention to more effective drug education and treatment." "It seems to me that the current (U.S.) drug policy has created strains on both the law and democracy," Ronald Earle, Travis County District Attorney in Austin, told those who gathered at the institute, some of whom traveled from as far away as Switzerland, Australia and Colombia. Earle said the nation must develop a policy which results in no more harm than the use of drugs already causes, addresses the underlying reasons for drug abuse, preserves the public safety without violating people's civil liberties and doesn't stress public resources such as jails and law enforcement agencies. "There are so many harms that we are unnecessarily inflicting on ourselves because of drug prohibition," said James Gray, a superior court judge from Anaheim, Calif. and a former prosecutor who once held a record for the largest number of drug convictions. "There's got to be something wrong here," he said. "It's easier for our children to get illegal drugs than it is a six-pack of beer." Gray suggested that laws need to be restructured and more programs developed, such as drug courts, to help people overcome dependency. When it comes to crime, he says people's actions should be judged not by whether they possess drugs or have ingested an illegal substance. "Where government goes astray is where government tries to protect us from ourselves," he said. "That is where the drug war is going wrong." Gray said state and federal agencies have become too "addicted" to federal funds handed out to fight the war on drugs and that government is sending the wrong message through current drug legislation. The judge said marijuana stays in a person's system for 30 days while cocaine is only present for about 72 hours. The difference results in a message to convicted drug users undergoing drug tests that curbing their habit can be less detectable through harsher drugs. "The message is: 'If you're worried about being caught, take cocaine not marijuana,'" he said. "That is not the message we want to send, but that is the message that is being received." Asa Hutchinson, administrator of the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration, said the nation's drug war has stalled in recent years, but has achieved amazing successes in the past few decades. "One of the greatest myths of this decade is that there is no success in our anti-drug efforts in this country," Hutchinson said. "The facts are that cocaine drug use is down by 75 percent during the last 15 years. "We have reached the optimum level of reducing drug use in our country and we can't do any better than we have done at the present time." Hutchinson said the DEA must now work toward reducing dependency. He said the only way to keep drug usage down is to keep such substances illegal. "I believe it is a wrong conclusion to say that we have not made enough progress and that therefore, we should move in an entirely different policy direction by legalizing harmful drugs," he said. "The fact is you cannot legalize enough, you cannot decriminalize enough to put the cartels and the criminal organizations out of business. "After prohibition ended, did the organized crime element of our country go away? Of course it did not." Hutchinson's declaration that the nation has been victorious in its war on drugs is a sad commentary for a country in the middle of a drug epidemic enhanced by its own policies, said Kevin Zeese, executive director of Common Sense for Drug Policy, a non-profit group focused on expanding discussion about the nation's drug policy. "The price of heroin, cocaine is cheaper today than it was in 1980s," he said. "The purity of heroin, cocaine is greater than it was in 1980. Drugs like crack cocaine, which didn't exist in those days now exist. We are not winning the war on drugs." Complete Title: War on Drugs Needs New Direction, Some at Drug Conference Say Source: Denver Rocky Mountain News (CO) Related Articles & Web Sites: Judge James Gray Baker Institute for Public Policy DEA Chief, Activists Clash Over Drug Policy Drug Laws Need Shift, Experts Say War on Drugs is a Lost Battle, Judges Say Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help |
 |
| Comment #12 posted by FoM on April 12, 2002 at 19:49:53 PT |
| Here's an article from today the 12th from the Houston Chronicle that I can't currently post on Cannabis News.
Experts: Drug-Free U.S. Isn't Likely [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #11 posted by Lehder on April 12, 2002 at 06:58:15 PT |
| After prohibition ended, did the organized crime element of our country go away? Of
course it did not. No, not the next day - it took a long time, and it will again. The conviction of John Gotti more or less marked the last gasp of the Sicilian mafias, some sixty years after the end of alcohol prohibition. The mobs' power and violence were given birth and nurtured by alcohol prohibition and gradually dwindled after repeal. The final blows to the mafia bosses were delivered by the RICO laws - which the government now uses against low level dealers and users of drugs. The mafias have been replaced by even wealthier and more violent drug cartels, empowered and enriched by drug prohibition. Their power and ability to corrupt are far greater than the the former mafias', in proportion to the far greater intensity with which the "war on drugs" has been waged, and in proportion to the resulting far greater profits. When the drug war was intensified under Reagan we saw drug and weapons dealers operating out of the White House, and today we have a violent moron and son of a crime boss as titular head of state. I agree with the author that the power of the cartels is not going to vanish any time soon after re-legalization. The money, power, organization and capability to corrupt businesses and institutions will continue for decades to come - thanks to the War on Drugs. We begin rebuilding society and breaking the power of corruption by ending the War on Drugs and ending the empowerment and enrichment of society's most violent and selfish elements, not by putting millions of upstanding marijuana smokers into cages or by slowly murdering thousands of cancer patients. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #10 posted by CorvallisEric on April 11, 2002 at 23:18:08 PT |
| Maybe this is the story Kaptinemo referred to: http://www.usatoday.com/news/acovthu.htm Guessing from the filename (acovthu.thm = A-cover-thursday), maybe they shuffle links around frequently. Try search for "Leinwand smugglers" (Donna Leinwand is the author). [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #9 posted by goneposthole on April 11, 2002 at 20:51:22 PT |
| It's good to know that a long lineage of crime and corruption has not been abated. The rest of the story... (well worth the read) forgot the 'h' [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #8 posted by goneposthole on April 11, 2002 at 20:49:12 PT |
| It's good to know that a long lineage of crime and corruption has not been abated. The rest of the story... (well worth the read) [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #7 posted by bruce42 on April 11, 2002 at 20:41:29 PT |
| "After prohibition ended, did the organized crime element of our country go away? Of course it did not." No it didn't go away, but iy no longer was a multi million dollar industry in its day that had control over police and government officials. And what fueled this murderous crime spree? Why Alcohol, the very thing prohibition was supposed to stamp out. So Asa, are you in favor of the drug war because you like to fund domestic terror or that you like having murderous criminals dispense unsafe substances to anyone of any age? Or this one: "The fact is you cannot legalize enough, you cannot decriminalize enough to put the cartels and the criminal organizations out of business. Cannot legalize enough? What? What perversion of the language is this? Either something is legalized or it is not. Alcohol no longer serves as a source of income for organized crime in any significant way. Why? Because the government realized the utter stupidity of handing over the alcohol market to mob bosses. I watched a show called The Saint Valentine's Day Massacre on the History channel recently. At one point they broke down Al Capone's yearly income at the pinnacle of his infamous career as a crime lord. Over $105 million per year. That is a lot of money today, but this was the '20s. $60 million dollars of Al's income came from, guess what, illegal alcohol sales. Gambling was a distant second at $25 million. Prostitution, $10 million. Other vice crimes, another $10. Now Asa has the audacity to tell us that by legalizing illegal drugs, we can't put cartels out of business. Well, Assa, you don't see street gangs and drug dealers slaughtering each other on the streets because of LEGAL and REGULATED alcohol sales, do you? The best way to put somebody out of business is to outcompete them. By denying simple economics like this, Asa is almost admitting that the only reason he isn't for legalization is that he will be out of a job and out of money. What a prick. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #6 posted by mayan on April 11, 2002 at 17:31:39 PT |
| They must have pulled it Kap'n, but there I found this article about the Enron executive who supposedly killed himself. It says his suicide note was written in all CAPITAL LETTERS??????? http://www.usatoday.com/money/energy/enron/2002-04-11-suicide-note.htm#more [ Post Comment ] |
|
Comment #5 posted by kaptinemo on April 11, 2002 at 11:32:42 PT:
|
| I suggest that everyone reading this go to USAToday's Website and have a look at what they have to say about the ingenuity of smugglers...and the stability of street prices negating everything Asa has said... I'd do it quickly, as they will probably pull it off line soon... [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #4 posted by E_Johnson on April 11, 2002 at 10:03:38 PT |
| "It seems to me that the current (U.S.) drug policy has created strains on both the law and democracy," Ronald Earle, Travis County District Attorney in Austin, told those who gathered at the institute, some of whom traveled from as far away as Switzerland, Australia and Colombia. I'm so impressed to see a DA who cares more about the democratic system than he does about his own political future. [ Post Comment ] |
|
Comment #3 posted by overtoke on April 11, 2002 at 09:25:01 PT:
|
| Our Military budge is 500 billion a year. (This is before a war even happens. I'm sure they dropped a billion a week since Sept 11.) Our Military budget is 500 billion a year and we have nothing to show for it. Sure we have a large army, perhaps the most powerful army with very powerful weapons. It's a shame we spend so much for something that is 100percent dependent on oil we get from our Apparent enemies. On top of that WE ARE NOT PROTECTED BY OUR MILITARY. We are put at risk by our military. You know what our Armies should be doing when they are not murdering people? They should be sowing, growing and reapoing HEMP. Energy Dependence Eliminated. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #2 posted by p4me on April 11, 2002 at 09:15:35 PT |
| In comment 1 I talked about the national debt. I check this site to see when we will reach the 6 trillion dollar mark. We already have plus about 24 billion on top of that. http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/ Just a few weeks ago we increasing the national debt by 893 million a day. Now we are going in debt 1.111 billion a day. So next year what will be different except the interest on today's debt at 5% will be 55 million more in expenses. What kind of message does this send to the children? Whatever you do, don't smoke. VAAI [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #1 posted by p4me on April 11, 2002 at 08:50:55 PT |
| Here we have people from all over the world wanting to come up with a sensible drug policy and who from the government attended. Certainly not the big boys like DEAth Hutchinson. And what message does that send to the voters? I wish I knew what message it sent to the children so I could pass it along. In my morning reading of yesterday's comments I saw where qqqq wondered if anyone knew how much was being spent on defense. My thinking is that discretionary spending for the period that ended last September 30th was around 700 billion. Of this close to 400 billion was for defense. I remember reading that Busch wanted to bump that to 445 billion this year and wants to bump it again next year. I recall what President Fox said about defense spending in Mexico. He said we need schools and roads and not defense. Who is going to attack us? I do not think that people realize just how much of all discretionary spending goes towards defense. We are going to spend more on border inspections for Canada than Canada spends on national defense. In about a month we will reach 6 trillion in debt. That debt is one thing but the wave of baby boomers is only 5 years away from collecting a stream of social security payments that needs to calculated into national liabilities. So maybe it is good that Asa didn't get on the government plane. He rides around in a plane like the President because of security reasons. That is money that can be pissed away somewhere else like imprisoning a marijuana smoker. VAAI [ Post Comment ] |
| Post Comment |  |
 |  |