cannabisnews.com: Marijuana Policy Just Right





Marijuana Policy Just Right
Posted by CN Staff on May 17, 2005 at 20:26:17 PT
By John Walters
Source: USA Today
Washington, D.C. -- Assertions that our nation's drug policy minimizes cocaine and heroin while focusing on marijuana are misleading. The fallacy involves interpreting drug arrests as signals of changed drug policy, rather than as indicators of drug use. As drug use went down during the 1980s, arrests fell accordingly. When drug use climbed between 1992 and 1997, arrests followed suit. And when the cocaine epidemic struck, cocaine arrests rose steeply, only to drop as the epidemic waned.
The common sense conclusion is that drug use rates and criminal justice responses are linked. Thus, the key to reducing drug arrests is reducing drug use. Important progress has already occurred — youth drug use has declined 17% since 2001.Our drug policy balances prevention, treatment and interdiction. Criminal justice sanctions are sometimes necessary, but we are not locking up low-level marijuana offenders. Rather, drug courts, which use supervised treatment to help users (rather than prison) are a critical component of our approach. President Bush has requested an extra $30 million to expand the program. Snipped:Complete Article: http://www.freedomtoexhale.com/right.htmNewshawk: Taylor121Source: USA Today (US)Author: John WaltersPublished: May 17, 2005Copyright: 2005 USA Today, a division of Gannett Co. Inc.Contact: editor usatoday.comWebsite: http://www.usatoday.com/Related Articles: Drug Czar Blasted Over Pot Storyhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread20676.shtmlDrug Czar Links Marijuana To Mental Healthhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread20620.shtmlGovt: Marijuana Causes Mental Illness http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread20617.shtml 
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #22 posted by FoM on May 19, 2005 at 08:51:13 PT
Taylor
I believe you have a great future ahead. Keep up the good work.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #21 posted by Hope on May 18, 2005 at 23:21:07 PT
Only think I can think...that's for sure!
I kept looking at that and thinking, "Why does that look like 'oink'?"I'm tired. It's nearly one thirty and I've been heading to bed for an hour.Should have read, "Only thing, I can think..."Only think I can think...Duh.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #20 posted by Hope on May 18, 2005 at 23:17:13 PT
Taylor's Blog
Only think I can think is that I must have been devastatingly tired when I first added it to my list....which is waaaay long, except the daily list, which is where it is now.Taylor, I love the way you are able to say things. You're one of the truly gifted. I can't believe I haven't been taking advantage of enjoying this work.I'm so glad to have noticed it...again. God willing that my brain holds out, and now that Libertyindex is on my short list, I won't forget it again.Thank you.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #19 posted by Hope on May 18, 2005 at 23:03:05 PT
Taylor's Blog
It's a great blog, Taylor. I can't believe it's been up since January and I didn't realize it. Surely you'd told us and I must have forgotten to check it out or overlooked your post.No. I just checked my regular bookmarks and it's there under blogs, but I must have forgotten it. Me? Forget? Guess so.Sorry, Taylor. It really is fine work and I've put it in my daily list now, so maybe I won't forget.Everyone should check it out.http://libertyindex.blogspot.com/
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #18 posted by mayan on May 18, 2005 at 16:56:25 PT
Don't Worry
As drug use went down during the 1980s, arrests fell accordingly. When drug use climbed between 1992 and 1997, arrests followed suit. And when the cocaine epidemic struck, cocaine arrests rose steeply, only to drop as the epidemic waned.How did they determine drug usage, by surveys? Folks were probably reluctant to admit anything once Reagan started ratcheting up the drug war (1980's). Once Clinton got in maybe they thought it was cool again (1992 - 1997). By 1997 everyone knew that arrests were soaring under Clinton and again went underground.Considering Bush's approval rating is at an all time low and the Republican controlled Congress has an even lower rating I wouldn't be worried by Walter's propaganda. These bozos have absolutely no credibility and are all guilty of treason and murder. Their days outside of prison are numbered.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #17 posted by Taylor121 on May 18, 2005 at 15:56:57 PT
John Walters in USA Today 
Mr. Walters had a chance to write an editorial to respond to a fairly positive article on the need to change cannabis policy in America found here.Here is Mr. Walters response article:The fallacy involves interpreting drug arrests as signals of changed drug policy, rather than as indicators of drug use. As drug use went down during the 1980s, arrests fell accordingly. When drug use climbed between 1992 and 1997, arrests followed suit. The first thing that popped out at me is why did he choose 1992 to 1997. This is not the only years we have data for usage/arrests. He chose it because it is the clearest example that holds to his reasoning, but it does not hold up when you take all of the data into account (what a surprise, see a trend with this guy?Arrest statistics and usage surveys.) Try from the year 2000 to 2001. This was the sharpest increase in marijuana usage for the 18-25 age bracket, and all other age brackets increased as well. But when you look at the arrest statistics, they dropped from around 646,000 possession arrests to 641,000. With the across the board increase in usage and the largest increase in one of the largest usage brackets, Mr. Walters would hold that marijuana arrests should have dramatically increased that year. However, this is simply not the case. There are blaring inconsistencies with the idea Walters puts forward and it is clear that there was almost a conscious shift to marijuana over the years.Furthermore from NORML's report:
Increased usage, though, is not responsible for increases in marijuana arrest rates. Arrest and usage estimates can be combined to produce arrest rates per 100,000 annual users.(See Table 18, Figure 8.) From 1979 to 1988 the arrest rate per 100,000 users steadily increased: 1,201 in 1979, 1,424 in 1982, 1,578 in 1985, and 1,856 in 1988. After a brief lull the rate began to increase again in 1992, increasing from 1,967 in 1992 to 3,435 in 2001. The arrest rate per 100,000 users has averaged 3,660 during the five years ending in 2001. The figures for 2002 and 2003 are lower because new survey techniques significantly increased the estimate of annual marijuana users, consequently lowering the arrest rate per 100,000 users. Nonetheless, this rate increased 11.5% from 2002 to 2003. As an instrument of policy, law enforcement has gone from arresting 1.5% of marijuana users in 1992 to arresting 3% of users in 2002, an increase of 100%. The increase in the overall marijuana arrest rate indicates that the change is not due to population changes. Changes in all drug arrests do not explain increases in marijuana arrest rates. Increases in the arrest rate per 100,000 annual users suggest that increases in use do not explain increases in marijuana arrest rates. An alternative and likely explanation for increases in marijuana arrest rates is that policy makers and law enforcement decided to increase marijuana arrests.Walters:Criminal justice sanctions are sometimes necessary, but we are not locking up low-level marijuana offenders. Liar. Need only look at the Sentencing Policy report.We are more concerned about marijuana today. Studies long ago established marijuana as a risky substance. 
Risky relative to what? You can't just say it is risky and expect people to buy into prohibiting it. As recognized in the February 2005 issue of the scientific medical journal Current Opinion in Pharmacology, “Overall, by comparison with other drugs used mainly for ‘recreational’ purposes, cannabis could be rated to be a relatively safe drug.” For youth, it is the single largest source of abuse and dependency.
Only because they are arrested and have a choice between treatment or incarceration which Walters then uses to charge that marijuana is addictive. According to the Institute of Medicine, marijuana dependence is at 9%, lower than alcohol or tobacco and cited dependence to be relatively rare and less severe. You don't hear Walters mention that either. The rest of the article is the tired old rheoric about increased potency and the mental illness. Weak cases of causality is all I see, and a big fat fallacy of correlation equals causation. My Blog: http://libertyindex.blogspot.com/
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #16 posted by Hope on May 18, 2005 at 15:56:16 PT
Jose
Low Level OffendersEven though I'm as depressed as...well, I'm depressed about the situation of people in the world today, your comment forced a smile to my lips.Thanks.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #15 posted by b4daylight on May 18, 2005 at 15:56:00 PT
I like it
I really like what he says..He never gives any reason adults should not use the drugs.He tells us he is not locking up anyone for pot. He tells us kids at the most harm.He tells us he sending everyone to drug treament. There were two articles in the usa today. 
this was the second the first basically tore him appat...So if adults are not at risk, why then can they not use pot.We know he is locking people up who can not see that lie.If pot were illegal then kids would be saved from the pusher due regulated sales.and last but not least his latest claim that the number of poeple seeking treatment are up and this my reason for criminal action is because I make them go there instead of them wanting to for dependacy. Seems like to me he just made a clear case for why it should legal.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #14 posted by jose melendez on May 18, 2005 at 13:58:09 PT
low level offenders
Maybe he means if pot smokers hide in their basements like Billl O'Reilly suggests, they get a pass?
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #13 posted by Dankhank on May 18, 2005 at 13:53:34 PT
Liars
Somewhere in the bowels of the ONDCP a CRL should surely be found. I mailed one to McCaffrey, no McCafflockemup. Understand he has a nice position with a pee org. somewhere.I called them and told them it was coming and never heard a peep since.Unless they sent someone to surrepticiously download my hard drive. No matter, as I have copied and pasted surely a thousand articles on our favorite plant. If they print them out and read them surely they would become instant anti-prohibs, or at least sleep less well at night.In deference to Al Swearengen of HBO Deadwood, as he must be causing much grief by reanimating that tired old word, I call the prohibs the C-word that is appropriate to you ... there's a choice of one of two, actually.I'm gonna go sweat and silently scream, now.Peace to all who fight ...
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #12 posted by FoM on May 18, 2005 at 09:00:02 PT
What Is A Low Level Marijuana Offender?
Does that mean if they find a trace amount of marijuana that they won't get locked up. What makes a person a high level marijuana offender in John Walter's book?
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #11 posted by Truth on May 18, 2005 at 08:50:18 PT
Liar
"we are not locking up low-level marijuana offenders."John Walters is a liar.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #10 posted by potpal on May 18, 2005 at 07:05:49 PT
marijuana policy just wrong
shakedown x 700,000 High-way robbery...just as if you're passing through a small rural town and get stopped by a sheriff who throws some trumped up charges at you and hauls you in so the local judge can fleece you...in the name of the law, well that's what we have here, a ringed game to skim off your assets. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #9 posted by Jose Melendez on May 18, 2005 at 07:04:26 PT
sent lte
Wed, 18 May 2005 06:00:29 -0700 (PDT)From:	"Air Jose Melendez"Subject:	letter to editor: I demand relief, or restitution!To:	editor usatoday.com, accuracy usatoday.com, newcase.atr usdoj.gov, info whistleblowerfirm.comEditor, With respect to "Marijuana policy just right", I
allege that Office of National Drug Control Policy
Czar John Walters harms Americans by repeating known
false statements about the dangers of cannabis use. In
the May 17 essay, Walters fails to disclose the
enormous societal harm resulting from incarcerations
for pot use, while companies his office does business
with earn exorbitant and otherwise unlikely profits.The online activist group, Taxpayers Against Fraud
claims that every dollar invested in False Claims Act
health care investigations and prosecutions returns
$13 to the American people.As a cannabis re-legalization activist myself, it has
often irked me to hear John Walters repeat his
outright false mantras on television and radio talk
shows. "Mr. Czar" has consistently acted in deliberate
ignorance of the truth during his many government paid
political speeches to argue against medical marijuana
laws and promote drug testing for marijuana use.Certainly, and with Drug Enforcement Administration
approval, the Office of National Drug Control Policy
and the Partnership for a Drug
Free America work closely with pharmaceutical and drug
testing firms to garner public support through
outright false claims and misleading propaganda that
demonizes and attempts to demoralize cannabis users,
restrict their employment and social standing. In
turn, members of this untaxed "partnership" enjoy
enormous and otherwise unlikely extra profits, not
only via
from increased legitimate sales, but also through
Medicare fraud, and from sales of legal
products diverted to the black market.Consider also that Mr. Walters has long claimed
medicinal marijuana is a "hoax", yet the DEA allows a
monopoly to one Dr. Mahmoud ElSohly of ElSohly
Laboratories, Inc. for clinical cannabis
"manufacturing" and distribution from a 15 acre farm
in Oxford, Missisippi. The False Claims Act (U.S.C. § Title 31,3729) states
that anyone who conspires to defraud the Government by
getting a false or fraudulent claim allowed or paid or
knowingly makes, uses, or causes to be made or used
said false statement is liable to the United States
Government for a civil penalty of not less than $5,000
and not more than $10,000, plus 3 times the amount of
damages which the Government sustains because of the
act of that person.Originally funded by cigarette companies, the
Partnership for a Drug
Free America today lists 15 pharmaceutical companies
as their top donors. Repeatedly, ONDCP or PDFA have
suggested and implied that Prozac, Ritalin, crack and
cigarettes are safer than a joint. Tellingly, while it has long been known that 80 to 90
percent of schizophrenics smoke, no one reasonably
suggests jail is an effective or appropriate treatment
for tobacco abuse.Worse, Walters publicly ignores data from the latest
Monitoring the Future study proving that any decrease
in youth pot smoking was accompanied by a spike in
inhalant abuse!I strongly urge USAToday editors to publish these self
evident truths, and all U.S. Department of Justice
employees to exercise your rights under the Civil
Service Reform Act (5 U.S.C. § 2303) and the
Whistleblower Protection Act (5 U.S.C. §§ 2302(b)(8) &
(b)(9)), and immediately investigate and publicly
disclose any breaches by the ONDCP of restraint of
trade
or monopoly laws.Since war waged on Americans is treason and restraint
of trade increases consumer prices paid for inferior
alternatives, Mr. Walters and his co-conspirators
deserve arrest and asset forfeiture, not paychecks and
a pension.Exposing children to prison rape for the crime of
self-medicating is a crime against humanity itself.Jose Melendez
founder, Concerned Citizens Coalition to Criminalize
ProhibitionDeLand, FL 32724 
386 848-1877
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #8 posted by Nick Thimmesch on May 18, 2005 at 05:00:03 PT:
Huh?
One one hand, Wonk Walters writes:Assertions that our nation's drug policy minimizes cocaine and heroin while focusing on marijuana are misleading.On the other hand, Wonk Walters writes (in the same oped):Coming to grips with new facts, we are focusing on marijuana. As we do so, we respond to a fundamental public health problem in a balanced and responsible manner.Go figure....he's misleading his own assertion!This is your government's employees on dope...
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #7 posted by potpal on May 18, 2005 at 03:35:58 PT
there is jail and then there's jail
What are the implications of being ramdomly pulled over at a sobriety road block and sniffed down by a police dog and the dog alerts the trooper so your car gets searched and they find a seed or two, in otherwords busted with pot...ok now you may not go to directly to jail, oh wait, you do, you get taken in, booked, ends up in the local paper, need a lawyer now, possibly will lose your license, your children, if you have 'em, may learn of it if they are unaware, guess it depends on what age they may be, okay, your employer gets wind of it and those you work with, you're forced into labor, rung through the ringer, everybody gets a piece of you, legal system, fines, drug test you pay for once in 'treatment'[shakedown], social workers/probation officers, wasting their time (and taxpayer's $) on you, cabs, you're marked, forget a govt job (top secret anyway) or with defense contractors, forget college aid if your young, did I leave anything out?And watch out if you trip up during your 'probation' and/or treatment, strike two will make things worst, you get a microchip inserted in your neck that monitors your every move...Yeah, they may not lock up low-level offenders, except that first night, but we'll shake you down every which way and then hound you for the rest of your life, that's all.
What's worst?
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #6 posted by observer on May 18, 2005 at 00:27:40 PT
Nah. We're Not Locking up Pot Smokers
Drug prohibition czar: Criminal justice sanctions are sometimes necessary, but we are not locking up low-level marijuana offenders.Well, there's a whopper for you. I guess this explains why they trot the Drug Czar out for every referendum that might jail a few less pot smokers, because "we are not locking up low-level marijuana offenders." 'We can't stop jailing pot smokers, because we don't jail pot smokers.'I don't think that passes the straight face test. I'm tempted to call Walters a mendacious, politicizing and corrupted toady, but that would just be unfair to toads.Anyway, using the US Lying Government's other official figures:
''In 2003, 45 percent of the 1,678,192 total arrests for drug abuse violations were for marijuana -- a total of 755,186. Of those, 662,886 people were arrested for marijuana possession alone. This is an increase from 2000, when a total of 734,497 Americans were arrested for marijuana offenses, of which 646,042 were for possession alone.'' (Federal Bureau of Investigation, Crime in America: FBI Uniform Crime Reports 2003)
full citation at: http://drugwarfacts.org/marijuan.htm
So, yes, the power-corrupted rulers of the "land of the free" do, in fact, lock up low-level marijuana offenders by the millions. 
http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/propaganda
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #5 posted by observer on May 17, 2005 at 23:52:30 PT
propaganda analysis
[1]
Marijuana policy just right By John Walters Assertions that our nation's drug policy minimizes cocaine and heroin while focusing on marijuana are misleading.
(Sentence 1) re: "our nation" - The health of the "community" (read: government) is assured, prohibitionists explain, because drug users are punished. Jailing drug users is thus painted as upholding society. (Survival of Society (propaganda theme 3) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme3.htm#3 ) 
 
 
[3]
As drug use went down during the 1980s, arrests fell accordingly.
(Sentence 3) re: "drug use" - Prohibitionist propagandists repeatedly assert that "use is abuse." Details about "using" as opposed to "abusing" drugs are ignored. (Use is Abuse (propaganda theme 4) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme4.htm#alluseisabuse ) 
 
 
[4]
When drug use climbed between 1992 and 1997, arrests followed suit.
(Sentence 4) re: "drug use" - The rhetoric of prohibition will assume that "use" and "abuse" are identical. (Use is Abuse (propaganda theme 4) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme4.htm#alluseisabuse ) 
 
 
[5]
And when the cocaine epidemic struck, cocaine arrests rose steeply, only to drop as the epidemic waned.
(Sentence 5) re: "epidemic" - Prohibitionists demonize the use of drugs and claim the use of drugs is "epidemic." Images of "war" are used by the prohibition propagandist to help whip up emotions. (Demonize, War (propaganda theme 6) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme6.htm#6 ) 
 
 
[6]
The common sense conclusion is that drug use rates and criminal justice responses are linked.
(Sentence 6) re: "criminal" - Drugs, claim the prohibitionist, cause insanity, violence, and terrible sickness. (Madness,Crime,Violence,Illness (propaganda theme 2) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme2.htm#2 ) re: "drug use" - Prohibition propaganda claims that all use of any "drug" is abuse. (Use is Abuse (propaganda theme 4) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme4.htm#alluseisabuse ) 
 
 
[8]
Important progress has already occurred  youth drug use has declined 17% since 2001.
(Sentence 8) re: "drug use" - Prohibitionists try to hammer in the idea that 'all use is abuse.' The rhetoric of prohibition needs to deny that many people can use currently illegal drugs without abusing them. (Use is Abuse (propaganda theme 4) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme4.htm#alluseisabuse ) re: "youth" - "Nothing can so excite an adult population as can anything which appears to threaten their own children." [W.White,1979] (Children Corrupted (propaganda theme 5) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme5.htm#5 ) 
 
 
[10]
Criminal justice sanctions are sometimes necessary, but we are not locking up low-level marijuana offenders.
(Sentence 10) re: "Criminal" - Prohibition propaganda rarely misses an opportunity to link crime, violence, and insanity with "drugs". The propagandist insinuates that prohibited drugs cause evil, and if it weren't for "drugs" bad things would not exist. (Madness,Crime,Violence,Illness (propaganda theme 2) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme2.htm#2 ) 
 
 
[15]
For youth, it is the single largest source of abuse and dependency.
(Sentence 15) re: "youth" - Prohibitionist propaganda continually whips up parental fear, invoking lurid images of children corrupted by drugs. (Children Corrupted (propaganda theme 5) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme5.htm#5 ) 
 
 
[18]
Second, kids are using marijuana at younger ages, during crucial periods in their development, and thereby increasing risks that extend into adult life.
(Sentence 18) re: "kids" - "Chemicals have long been inextricably linked in prohibitionist literature with the ... corruption of young people." [W.White,1979] (Children Corrupted (propaganda theme 5) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme5.htm#5 ) 
 
 
[20]
Youth marijuana use elevates risks of depression, psychosis, even schizophrenia.
(Sentence 20) re: "depression", "psychosis" - The rhetoric of prohibition asserts that insanity, crime, and violence are caused by drugs, or are controlled by prohibition. (Madness,Crime,Violence,Illness (propaganda theme 2) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme2.htm#2 ) re: "marijuana use" - "This strategy equates the use and abuse of drugs and implies that it is impossible to use the particular drug or drugs in question without physical, mental, and moral deterioration." [W.White,1979] (Use is Abuse (propaganda theme 4) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme4.htm#alluseisabuse ) re: "Youth" - Drug war propaganda plays on parental fears for the well being of their kids. If drug users are not jailed, says the prohibitionist, then your children will surely suffer. (Children Corrupted (propaganda theme 5) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme5.htm#5 ) 
 
 
http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pot
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #4 posted by Commonsense on May 17, 2005 at 22:27:44 PT
How many lies did he tell...
in this article?
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #3 posted by taylor121 on May 17, 2005 at 21:24:10 PT
Walters did not address the sentencing policy 
His article did lip service to it, but never really tried. If he debated head to head with a reformer on this, he would lose very quickly.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by Taylor121 on May 17, 2005 at 21:23:16 PT
Marijuana use
"When drug use climbed between 1992 and 1997, arrests followed suit."From Sentencing Project Report:There is no indication fromnational drug survey data that a dramatic decrease in the use of other drugs led to lawenforcement agencies shifting resources to marijuana.From 1990 to 2002, daily use of marijuana by high school seniorsnearly tripled from 2.2% to 6%. Notably, the current 6% level is the same as the level in1975.9One study suggests that the rapid increase in low-level arrests, many of whichresult in dismissals or misdemeanor convictions, reinforces a perception that a person can“get away with it.”10Consequently, the frequent use of marijuana arrests provides littleof the deterrent effect necessary to put pressure on the market exchange.Thus, after 30 years of aggressively pursuing marijuana, arrests have grown at a rapidrate while use patterns fluctuate, but remain near the same level. In 1990, 84.4% of high-school seniors responded that it was fairly easy or very easy to get marijuana. Despite arecord number of arrests, this figure actually increased slightly over the 12-year period ofthe study to 87.2%, near 1975 levels.11The continued ease with which users obtain marijuana calls into question the wisdom ofthe national investment of increased law enforcement targeting marijuana users. Recentresearch suggests that raising the price of marijuana has a significant impact on its use;however, law enforcement has not succeeded in raising prices.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by FoM on May 17, 2005 at 20:36:15 PT
Two More Related Articles
Marijuana Becomes Focus of Drug War: 
http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread20619.shtmlMarijuana Behind 45 Percent of U.S. Drug Arrests:
http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread20618.shtml 
[ Post Comment ]


Post Comment