This entry was posted
on Monday, November 12th, 2012 at 11:24 am by Radley Balko
and is filed under General Drug War.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.
C. S. P. Schofield |
November 12th, 2012 at 12:29 pm
“woke up in an alternate, slightly saner universe.”
Don’t count on it. I’m tempted to posit that the quantity of State sponsored bugf*ck insanity is a variable known to be on a rising curve, and therefore any minor reduction in any one area will be offset by a sharper rise elsewhere, but I’m not quite that cynical.
Not quite. I just don’t think Jug Ears who just got reelected is the one to prove the formula wrong.
(sotto voce) Progressivist, interventionist, elitist buttinski that he is *trails of into a hostile mutter*
To expand, (my guess is) accusations of interstate marijuana trafficking will be the rationale for increased DEA raids in CO and WA.
Boyd Durkin |
November 12th, 2012 at 1:37 pm
@JLS #1: I put the over/under at 90 days until CO is the site of a massive Federal MJ raid.
@ #2: My understanding is that employers can still fire you for MJ. And, I agree that they should have that power, but most should not do it. I know the NFL announced that MJ will still get you a strike in their banned substance program.
Considering the DEA is a relatively small federal agency and Colorado’s liberal marijuana law allows personal growing, they’re going to be spread thin. Here in WA we passed a bill that requires licensing to grow, so it is really a de facto hitlist if feds pluck that list from the state department of licensing. I suspect in any case that raids will continue but they’ll make a bigger deal about it to “put the fear of feds” into any others who dare go against the grain. Expect a few more folks getting Charlie Lynched and paraded around in the media like heads on a pike.
Dante at #8, sanity would be no government schools, as education like everything else prospers best in a competitive market, not to mention the injustice wrought by people being “taxed” for a product they don’t use, and yes I’m well aware of the claim of positive overspill. It’s still holding a gun to someone’s head and a clear violation of the NAP.
No argument about private schools being better. I am living proof that private schools can take an ignorant, unwashed, beligerant curr like me and produce something that passes for civilized and reasonably well-groomed.
Omar, dumb ass, it’s hardly a non-seqitir. If you could read with thought, you would have seen that Dante mentioned money going to schools instead of the military, but any good libertarian knows that the WOD and the government running education are part of the same problem.
Boyd @ #11 – I think the NFL is in a slightly different place as far as what to do about marijuana since, like it or not, the players involved are held up as role models for younger children. If we get to a position where marijuana use is much more socially acceptable (which I think it should be), they’d likely change that position, but as long as it’s a “Well, you can do it, but you shouldn’t be proud of it or let anyone know about it.” it’ll stay on the ‘bad’ list.
I can see why you are upset with your public education.
If you could read with thought, you would have seen that Dante mentioned money going to schools instead of the military, but any good libertarian knows that the WOD and the government running education are part of the same problem.
“Part of the same problem” and “The same problem” are two different things. As EH said, “have some perspective”.
Something just tells me that there is more to this…..
C. S. P. Schofield |
November 12th, 2012 at 4:25 pm
Regarding “Schools get all the money hey need” etc.
I HATE that particular, smug, bumpersticker. Set aside, for the moment, the issue of whether what is wrong with the public school system is too little money. Encouraging the military to seek outside funding is a REALLY AWFUL idea. For more details, see the history of any war that involvedthe hiring of independent mercenary companies, with special emphasis on the Thirty Years War.
C. S. P. Schofield |
November 12th, 2012 at 4:27 pm
Antbody who holds up professional football players as role models for young people is misleading the ypung people whether the football players smoke herb or not.
Really, federal agencies like the DEA and so on don’t have the manpower to bungle these operations on their own. That’s largely why things like the federal civil asset forfeiture (money laundering) operation exist – to leverage the cooperation of local police. What states like Colorado and Washington need to do when they enact such laws is to specify that local law enforcement assistance in federal WoD operations is done off-duty and without any of the special legal protections afforded to law enforcement. Basically, if a local/state cop is helping the feds enforce a law against an activity which isn’t illegal under state law then he is doing so as a private citizen, what some might call a vigilante. Among other things, this means that he is not getting paid to do it; he will not have access to his department’s equipment or personnel for the operation; and he is not shielded by qualified, absolute, or other special legal immunity from the civil or criminal consequences of the raid.
I think the prospect of going on a potentially dangerous raid without pay would deter most drug police from helping the feds. And, when a few face civil litigation for destruction of property, injury, and wrongful death during raids that will inevitably go bad, the feds will quickly be stuck conducting these raids on their own. Of course, the feds have never been shy about increasing their payrolls, but the situation will at least help isolate the enemy.
Again, Omar dumb ass. 1) You ignore that it wasn’t a non sequitur. Congratulations on being dense. So, again, you show an inability to read with comprehension. So regardless of where you were educated, you’re a dumb ass.
2) If something is part of the same problem, that means that there is an underlying issue from whence both the WOD and public education stem from. It would be akin to saying that a runny nose and itchy eyes both stem allergies. To say that symptoms are problems, when they are only indicators of something else is fallacious, and indicative of shallow thinking. To say that the WOD is a problem, rather than a symptom is to do the same. That you think in such a manner show you to be a very uneducated individual, no matter what pedigree you may or may not have.
3) Fuck off asshole, I have no respect for some POS that feels a need to start something with someone else, when that person has done nothing to them, whether online or in person. That you seek to ridicule someone who has done nothing to you shows you to be of the same cloth as those who propitiate the WOD. You seek conflict rather peace, and don’t even see your hypocrisy, you stunted little distortion of a human being.
re: NFL and pot smoking
If smoking pot was so detrimental to one’s ability to perform athletically then why make it cause for suspension? I can’t even imagine the premises upon which the argument would rest suggesting that it’s cheating. Oh, and, Michael Phelps…
re: 90-day over/under
CO’s pot law has pretty high recognition at this point. I suspect that the bad press that would result from federal raids would be political suicide. The people don’t want that anymore so I’d actually think that BHO’s thoughts on MJ are, shall we say, evolving.
re: bombers and bake sales
I see war as the most economically destructive behavior possible between two parties. That said, the single greatest role of government, as outlined in the Constitution, is to defend us against our common enemies. While the Nobel Peace Drones are pretty far outside that limitation it’s lawful. The feds mucking about in education policy such as NCLB, not so much.
C. S. P. Schofield |
November 12th, 2012 at 5:44 pm
The problem isn’t WHO were taking potshots at, it’s what else we’re doing. If every time an American citizen or American interests were hurt by some AK47 carrying goat-pesterer with a Q’aran shoved down his pants, we traced the goat molester as best we could, and made the country that harbored him very unhappy AND THEN WENT HOME, there would be far less trouble. Everybody understands “We’re bigger than you are. Don’t bother us or we thump you.”. They may not LIKE it, but they understand it. Make the cause and effect relationship reliably clear, and pretty soon the Islamic world will police their own goddamned radicals, just to get left alone. This used to be called Gunboat Diplomacy. It is messy. It is amoral. It is severely out of favor with Right Thinking People. But it works.
That’d make more sense than what we do. One big problem is, terrorists are almost never actually the government anywhere. Not even in Afghanistan, where the Taliban are truly awful, and the Taliban-run government was apparently connected with AQ, but not quite the same. The further you go from that, the more you get into terrorists who are the enemy of the government, as with the fine fellows who killed our ambassador in Libya. There is no country it makes sense to bomb or invade for that attack.
That gets us to kidnapping, murder, drones, bombs, and all the other lovely parts of our modern war on terror. That may be the only way we have to fight some of these groups, but it’s also expensive and probably involves killing or kidnapping the wrong people a whole lot of the time. (Think how often the police arrest the wrong person or raid the wrong house. Now imagine the police are operating in a foreign country based on informants and official information much less accurate than the ones used here, and with almost no oversight.). My guess is that most of the time, the long-term cost outweighs the benefit of that stuff.
More to the point, I think our huge, gold-plated, extremely powerful military is probably not all that good a tool for dealing with terrorist attacks. Further, I doubt that there are many good tools for dealing with them all that well. So, yeah, thump the countries that involve themselves in attacking the US–that is pretty much the whole purpose to having a powerful military, after all. But a lot of the time, that won’t work–the terrorist will be some loser in Yemen or Libya or Germany or Montana, and after he kills 30 people, we still will be able to kill him only once.
C. S. P. Schofield |
November 12th, 2012 at 7:25 pm
“terrorists are almost never actually the government anywhere.”
That’s the merit AND the amorality of Gunboat Diplomacy; if you can’t get at the bandits (and that’s what terrorists are, at base) you get at the people who should be held responsible for the bandits. See Teddy Roosevelt and “We want Pedicaris alive or the Raisuli dead.”(not; The Wind and the Lion to the contrary, Pedicaris was a man, and may have renounced his U.S. citizenship. Teddy did love to cause a fuss). This puts governments that can’t deal effectively with their bandit problems in a tough spot, but there are answers for that. In any case, as a foreign policy, it seems to me, Gunboat Diplomacy would have the added characteristic of making sense to outside observers. Altruism isn’t very believable, especially as a foreign policy. I have to wonder how many important people stay awake at night trying to figure out what we are REALLY up to.
In Colorado, we have amendment 20 which legalizes marijuana for a dozen or so chronic health conditions. Up to two ounces in possession, and 6 plants may be grown, no more than 3 in flower. Anyone who knows anything knows that as soon as you cut down a plant you are over your limit, and agencies like the South Metro Drug Task Force have been known to use the entire plant, root ball and soil and container, when ‘weighing’ during an arrest or knock and talk. Clones, babies, rooted or not go against the 6 plant count. For medical need, doctors can recommend higher plant counts and possession limits, for example someone who can’t smoke and needs to make edibles. However, A20 only provides an affirmative defense for 6 plants and two ounces. If you get a recommendation for more, you better be able to prove in court medical need for more. I don’t really think it’s possible to prove medical necessity for more than 24 plants in various stages of growth and that’s the limit that most doctors go by. Generally, you don’t have a problem unless you are approaching 99 plants or are a caregiver growing for patients. There is a residency requirement to get a medical card. Dispensaries or Medical Marijuana Centers (MMC’s) are not allowed to sell to anyone without photo ID and medical card.
A64 legalizes an ounce for anyone over age 21, resident or not, but they can’t purchase from MMC’s, so the black market is opening up again. Medical patients are exempt from the tax on cannabis.
There are over 100,000 medical marijuana patients in Colorado. A64 is going to be a gold mine for defense attorneys, it is almost a certainty that there will be a ‘per se’ threshold for ng of thc per ml of blood, laws have been drafted at 5, 8, and 10 ng/ml. However, anyone who uses regularly will be over that limit. Since cannabis is schedule 1, there are no studies on the level at which impairment sets in, and the legislators will make that threshold at a level which makes any regular user over the limit all the time. It’s comparable to drinking alcohol days ago but still getting charged with a DUI. I don’t like the idea that cops will be taking blood roadside.
They are already enforcing DUI(Drugs), anyone admitting use during the 8 hours previous to the traffic stop will be arrested for driving under the influence. I have spoken with officers from no less than 5 metro jurisdictions who have said this is the standard that they go by.
I think state troopers across state lines will be ramping up enforcement and searches of those pulled over for speeding, and the penalties will likely be severe in an attempt to deter other people from ‘pot tourism’.
A64 might be good for the average person who doesn’t smoke much, now they can’t be harassed for a joint when pulled over, but this legislation will likely make most medical users over the limit all the time, because the ng/mL threshold will be so low. But hey, it’s all for the kids right?
Also, A20 and A64 doesn’t allow patients to carry openly. Private entities like landlords, apartment complexes, sports stadiums, are all allowed to treat marijuana as they wish. I had to agree to federal drug laws when I signed my lease at my current apartment, and any state or federal workers also can’t use.
There’s also a question on firearm background checks asking if you use illegal substances, so patients and those who use are not allowed to purchase or carry firearms. And of course, use won’t be allowed on federal land or national parks etc.
November 13th, 2012 at 2:29 pm
“Little strokes, fell great oaks.” ~ Benjamin Franklin
“Will Obama let these initiatives stand or will the us attorneys prosecute weed cases?”
In WA one of the ads FOR passage of 502 had TWO US Attorneys featured in it and pro-502, so I do not think unless those two are replaced we will see any prosecutions as long as the law is followed.
I have already written the legislature (well, 18 of the legislators) to request it address the DUID provision (unscientific and unnecessary) and allow recreational users to grow their own, too (med users are allowed 15 plants, any stage of growth). In WA the legislature is not allowed to tinker with a citizen passed initiative for two years, but I think they can pass related laws that fix problems overlooked by the initiative authors during that time.