Two kids were suspended from school in Lodi, California this week for making the letter “T” in their prom picture. The worry? It could possibly be confused with slang for “thizzin” which refers to - gasp - using MDMA.
Dr. Albert Hoffman has died. Hoffman was the discoverer of LSD.
This is an issue that affects all of us. We spend billions of dollars enforcing marijuana laws, and distract good cops from enforcing real crimes. Almost a million people are arrested for marijuana possession each year. Many of them end up with permanent criminal records and are barred forever from receiving federal student aid. People don’t just have their lives ruined; some have even died as a result of marijuana law enforcement (e.g. shot to death in paramilitary style raids - yes, it happens.)
The criminalization of marijuana was pure foolishness driven by racism, hysteria and corporate special interests.
You’ll remember my post about jury nullification in the drug war. The TIME article sparked some fascinating conversation among some lawyers, prosecutors and others over at Mark Bennett’s blog.
Years ago, I read Pinchbeck’s Breaking Open the Head, and found it to be a good and interesting book, even if somewhat inconclusive.
Somehow I missed Rolling Stone’s profile of him over a year ago. It’s a really interesting story - his influences and where they took him. I saw Pinchbeck on the Colbert Report a few months ago talking about his new book, 2012: The Return of Quetzalcoatl and I was quite confused.
The lead writers for HBO’s show The Wire wrote a great piece in TIME this week railing against the War on Drugs. Their suggested approach: jury nullification. They say,
“If asked to serve on a jury deliberating a violation of state or federal drug laws, we will vote to acquit, regardless of the evidence presented. Save for a prosecution in which acts of violence or intended violence are alleged, we will — to borrow Justice Harry Blackmun’s manifesto against the death penalty — no longer tinker with the machinery of the drug war. No longer can we collaborate with a government that uses nonviolent drug offenses to fill prisons with its poorest, most damaged and most desperate citizens.
Great commercial from Sweden…
[h/t David]
Good IHT piece on the stupidity regarding crack cocaine sentences (which, thankfully, are slowly beginning to change);
“There’s no scientific justification to support the current laws,” said Dr. Nora Volkow, director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse.
Article in LA Daily News about David and Jean Fleming and the War on Some Drugs. While I hate the sycophantic tone about what a “big shot” he is - clearly Brent Hopkins felt he wasn’t worthy - it’s obvious that Fleming has had a great deal of time to reflect on the issue.
The Washington Post’s Tom Shroder wrote a beautiful piece about MDMA trials that have been underway since the FDA approved my friend Rick Doblin’s research protocol in 2004. This is the first time a journalist was permitted to interview a participant in this groundbreaking study.
This is no different from taxing cigarettes and alcohol.
What remaining chance there might have been of me supporting Hillary Clinton has evaporated in the last 48 hours. Going after a guy for being honest is about as low as you can go. Today they rolled out their “no surprises” attack line, and it makes me sick to my stomach. So let me get this straight - since we already know what your issues are (and boy, do you have issues) the Dems should be less afraid of you? This, despite the fact that Obama is more honest and authentic, on the right side of the Iraq issue, much more likable, and probably far more likely to win in the general?
First of all, there will be surprises. Believe it or not, there are Clinton stones yet unturned, too. While I don’t think it’s necessarily relevant to compare Obama’s honesty to President Clinton’s, I do think it’s now fair to ask Hillary about her own recreational drug use. It’s hard to imagine she got through the sixties - and Wellesley - without LSD, marijuana, and who knows what else. And as far as I’m concerned, that’s OK - it’s an issue we are still far too hysterical about - but the media cannot responsibly play ride-along with this double-standard.
Based on two sources I spoke with today, the word inside the Clinton camp is that Mark Penn is increasingly seen as too “politically mechanical” and there is a serious internal sense that Iowa is going to be lost if Penn’s old-time strategy is followed to the end. Apparently [as reported by Glenn Thrush in Newsday this morning] Penn is poll and focus group-driven and is watering down what little authenticity she has left at a time when Obama is surging. This, while Penn and his team are simultaneously doing back-channel dirty work - such as the drug-hit Shaheen came out with yesterday - that some staffers feel is doing them more harm than good by making them look desperate.
Me babbling in an Iowa newspaper (far prouder than my “top tier” babbling, which has gotten me into much more trouble) - and the Clinton camp desperately jumping on Obama for same.
And, some morsels of eye candy:
One baby step at a time, I guess.
“Officers said they found Korpita’s four-door sedan stopped at a traffic light on Route 46 West, where a passing motorist reported seeing someone passed out behind the wheel of the car. Korpita’s car also didn’t move through the traffic signal, despite several light changes, police said. Edmunds wrote that he sounded his siren, which caused the judge to pull into a nearby driveway on Mount Arlington Road. The officer then approached the car on foot and found Korpita, who had rolled down the window alone and slouched toward the passenger side front seat.”
More here.
Thank you for having the courage to say the right, sensible thing tonight on the issue of marijuana decriminalization. You took a bold stand on a risky issue, and that’s (sadly) rare, even among the candidates for high office and most especially on the gravest of issues. You deserve kudos (and web traffic.)
When Tim Russert asked the candidates who among them disagreed with Dodd - Biden, Edwards, Clinton and Richardson raised their hands. Obama seemed to - however unenthusiastically and only about a quarter of the way - raise his hand. What did that mean? I’d like to hear Obama speak out more clearly on this issue and encourage you all to ask him about it.
Edwards said that he was against decriminalizing marijuana because it “sends the wrong message to young people.”
Dodd said,
“We’re locking up too many people in our system here today. We’ve got mandatory minimum sentences that are filling our jails with people who don’t belong there. My idea is to decriminalize this, reduce that problem here - we’ve gone from 800,000 to 2 million people in our penal institutions in this country. We’ve got to get a lot smarter about this issue than we are, and as President I would try to achieve that.”
I’m glad it was brought up tonight. The decriminalization issue and the penal system rot of our young people is an urgent matter that begs open, mainstream discussion.
“Give me liberty or give me death,” she said.
See Andrew Sullivan’s piece today about the War On Some Drugs. I’ve long said it should be the conservatives out in front of this issue, so it’s great to see the bright ones such as Andrew and Jonah Goldberg bringing the issue to the fore again.
Of Jonah’s position, Andrew says,
“Jonah Goldberg is not what most would call a drug-legalizer (with the possible exception of pot). But neither is he a defender of the current ‘drug war.’ (I don’t know how anyone with a base-line intelligence and concern for individual liberty could be.)”
Neither do I.
The Court felt her Constitutional rights were shit, because it was possible that she might be hiding Advil. Writing for the majority (and scripting another step in our descent into civil liberties hell), Judge Richard Clifton said that there was “good reason to be extra vigilant” in looking for drugs. Story here.
In similar developments, pick up that cake, “nappy-head”.