Rob Kampia of the Marijuana Policy Project discussed marijuana legalization on Glenn Beck’s show. Crooks and Liars covered it (and has the video):
One person in this conversation was calm, reasonable, had an abundance of facts at hand, and actually made pretty good sense. The other person was incoherent, meandering, silly, made a lot of irrelevant observations from outer space, and relied on dumb stereotypes and non-facts.
And Glenn Beck was not the former. On top of that, his nonstop sneering at Kampia made him look like a real sphincter.
In fact, this entire clip generally makes a convincing argument in favor of the marijuana advocates. If the best the opposition can come up with is this kind of gaping stupidity …
The nonprofit National Academy of Public Administration says the $1.2 million study, which it planned to release Thursday, found that the Office of National Drug Control Policy under President George W. Bush relied on selected data to show progress in combating illegal drug use by youth.
The office did not highlight less positive results among adults or pursue a comprehensive anti-drug strategy across age and demographic groups, the report found.
“It’s as though the patient told the doctor ‘my stomach hurts badly’ … And when he is operated on to remove what was thought to be an appendicitis, an already widespread cancer is found instead,” Calderon told Milenio TV.
Hmmm… doesn’t sound like a very good doctor.
10 years ago, the UN was proclaiming “A Drug Free World – We Can Do It.” Their new slogan seems to be “Hey, after 100 years, the drug problem has been contained, so we’re winning.” Apparently “contained” is a flexible term (Yup – we’ve got that problem contained, all right. It’s no bigger than it is.) and the damage caused by these “containment” efforts isn’t something to worry our pretty little heads over.
If you haven’t already, please check out our own Allan Erickson’s OpEd “Legalize It,” published in the Eugene Weekly. Very nicely done – even though he did kind of ruin the punch line surprise of my stop sign joke by reversing it.
Recently there has been some terrific news, it is now legal to smoke medical marijuana in New Jersey, you can now smoke legal medical marijuana in 13 states. I am sure more and more US states will follow as it is high time that the government helps its…
The headline itself is a generous interpretation of AG Holder’s comments, but it’s a great thing to see in “print,” because it establishes, as a sort of reality, the truth of how the U.S. can extricate itself from this whole marijuana mess — merely yield marijuana jurisdiction to the states, and let them try their own different approaches in the laboratories of federalism.
In interviews with The Associated Press, Calderon and his top prosecutor said the violence that killed 6,290 people last year — and more than 1,000 in the first eight weeks of 2009 — is a sign that the cartels are under pressure from military and police operations nationwide, as well as turf wars among themselves.
Oh sure, there were the Crusades, the Inquisition, the destruction of science (Galileo), silence during the Holocaust, coverup of pedophiles, and the direct responsibility for millions of deaths to AIDS due to opposing safe sex practices (particularly in third world countries).
But NO, that’s not nearly enough for the Vatican. Surely there’s more evil that they can promote, more people they can kill in the name of God the Pope.
Oh yes, how about drug users. Let’s kill some of them, too.
You see, the United States finally, finally, finally, came to its senses and the Obama administration sent a new message through its representatives to the United Nations — that needle exchange as a harm reduction approach would be acceptable. While that was not even close to addressing all the harm reduction approaches that are needed, it was at least an opening, and even the most rabid global drug warriors agreed that needle exchange was now probably a sure thing to be included in the new global drug policy.
The Vatican has been accused of putting the lives of thousands at risk by attempting to influence UN drugs policy on the eve of a major international declaration.
The Vatican’s objection to “harm reduction” strategies, such as needle exchange schemes, has ignited a fierce debate between the US and the EU over how drugs should be tackled.
A new UN declaration of intent is due to be signed in Vienna on 11 March. However, there are major disagreements between member countries over whether a commitment to “harm reduction” should be included in the document, which is published every 10 years.
Now the Vatican has issued a statement that claims that using drugs is “anti-life” and “so-called harm reduction leads to liberalisation of the use of drugs”. The Vatican’s last-minute intervention appears to have led to Italy withdrawing from the EU consensus on the issue and thrown the talks over the declaration into confusion. [Guardian, UK]
Now, just to be clear, is there any doubt as to the actual truth about Needle Exchange Programs? No.
Seven federally funded studies during the 1990s, conducted by the Government Accountability Office (GAO), the CDC and the National Academy of Sciences among others, all reached similar conclusions that NEPs work in reducing HIV’s spread among IV drug users, their partners and children, and that they do not encourage increased drug use. Furthermore, a more recent study by the World Health Organization compiled the results of over 200 such reports from around the world and came to the same conclusions. [emphasis added]
The Vatican knows this, and yet they oppose needle exchange. Dr. William Martin, Professor Emeritus of Religion and Public Policy at Rice University says:
When the science is clear, when we know that something will help save lives and choose not to do it that is not only pigheaded, it is immoral.
There is no doubt that the Vatican is immoral.
I am no stranger to spirituality. I was raised in church (my father is a minister). But religion does not own, beget, nor bestow morality. And some of the most moral people I’ve known are atheists.
In fact, when a group of people claim to be the holders of religious truth and use that ill-gotten power for destruction rather than for the good of the people, then they are terrorists, whether they reside in caves in Pakistan, or high in the Holy See.
Nate Silver in his post Americans Growing Kinder to Bud brings us this pretty chart regarding polling data on marijuana legalization over the past 40 years.
It’s a fascinating chart. You see the clear temporary reversal of opinion trends during the Reagan “Just Say No” era, but since then the trend toward legalization has moved inexorably forward, even despite some of the most virulent anti-pot government propaganda during the past 8 years. (I credit the growing drug policy reform movement for defanging that particular effort).
Nate notes the political difficulties associated with legalization and says:
My guess is that we’ll need to see a supermajority of Americans in favor of decriminalizing pot before the federal government would dare to take action on it. If the upward trend since 1990 holds (and recall my earlier caution: it might not), then legalization would achieve 60 percent support at some point in 2022 or 2023. About then is when things might get interesting.
If marijuana criminalization was simply a matter of federal law, I’d agree. But the states add another element that could speed up the process in some ways (as more and more move to medical marijuana, decrim, or outright legalization, making federal law approach irrelevancy) or slow it down in others (some states may not be ready for legalization even in 15 years).
And I also think, as one commenter over there said, that the trend may not be flat – that we would be reaching a critical mass that would create a dramatic increase in support for legalization.
Attorney General Eric Holder in a press conference today about the arrest of members of the Mexican Sinaloa Cartel, with DEA head Michele Leonhart standing next to him, was asked about the medical marijuana raids and the fact that Obama had promised to end them during his campaign (scroll to the 25 minute mark in the video).
His reponse:
“What the President said during the campaign, you’ll be surprised to know, will be consistent with what we’ll be doing here in law enforcement. [...] He is formally and technically and by law my boss now, and so what he said during the campaign is now American policy.”
[thanks, Tom!]
Note: This doesn’t mean that there will be no more raids on medical marijuana dispensaries at all. Certainly, the State of California could conduct a raid on a dispensary that it claimed was violating state law (and any resulting cases would likely be tried in state court where you could mention state medical marijuana law).
Also, theoretically, the State of California, believing that a dispensary was violating state law, could ask for help from the DEA, but I would imagine Holder would find that to be politically unpleasant and would ask why the state is incapable of doing it themselves.
What does seem clear from Holder’s statement is that there will be no more DEA raids of dispensaries that are operating legally under state law, but not under federal law. This should also mean no more Charlie Lynch trials. I hope the judge sentencing Lynch takes that important point into account.
Anti-drug groups are anything but amused by the idea of California collecting a windfall from the leafy herb that remains illegal under federal law.
“This would open another door in Pandora’s box,” said Calvina Fay, executive director of Save Our Society From Drugs. “Legalizing drugs like this would create a whole new set of costs for society.”
Next to it, you should see a poll: Should the state tax and regulate marijuana?
The International Narcotics Control Board (INCB) is the “quasi-judicial control organ monitoring the implementation of the United Nations drug control conventions” (makes me queasy just writing it). It is also the most out-of-touch hard-core international drug warrior body out there. Unfortunately, it has, for way too long, had significant influence in determining international drug control efforts. However, its rabidly ridiculous approaches are getting more and more obviously irrelevant as time goes by. Eventually, there will be a clash as governments refuse to be taken in by this charlatanism.
Well, the INCB has come out with its new report and it’s the same garbage as always. Pages and pages of dreck, covering every country in the world, with such nonsense as:
The Board is concerned that in the United States, the disagreement between the Government and several states regarding the use of “medical cannabis” continues. [...] The Board calls upon the authorities of the United States to continue its efforts to stop that practice, which is in contradiction to national law and is in violation of article 23 of the 1961 Convention. [not true, by the way]
Or with the Netherlands:
The Board has longstanding concerns regarding certain policies adopted by the Government of the Netherlands, in particular the policy that allows small amounts of cannabis to be sold and abused in so-called “coffee shops”.
Note the “abused” word.
Of course, the INCB never addressed one very important question related to the coffee shops. A question asked by Dr. Frederick Polak. It’s a simple question that he has asked the head of the UNODC (Costa) four times, and each time Costa refused to answer it. (I witnessed one of those times in New Orleans a little over a year ago.) Here’s the question:
How do you explain that in the Netherlands, where cannabis is legally available for adults, the level of cannabis use is lower than in most other EU countries and in the US?
Good question, Mr. Costa. Why won’t you answer it?
Dr. Polak has now created a website — Dare to Act — based solely on asking this question, and giving you the opportunity to help him ask the question. Give it a shot.
Rob Kampia of the Marijuana Policy Project discussed marijuana legalization on Glenn Beck’s show. Crooks and Liars covered it (and has the video):
