Author Topic: War on Drugs  (Read 107462 times)

Offline WhoHe

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,309
Re: War on Drugs
« Reply #240 on: April 17, 2012, 02:31:56 pm »
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9208815/Former-MI6-deputy-joins-calls-to-end-war-on-drugs.html

Ex-MI6 deputy also thinks we need a change of direction, seems lately to be getting up some support - but I have heard that before.

Sorry for the link to the Torygraph but the original interviews was in the S** according to the article.

Offline Corkboy

  • Sworn enemy of Bottlegirl. The Boston Toilet Mangler. Grauniad of the Cidatel. Into kinky S&M with the Lash.
  • RAWK Scribe
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 32,382
  • Is it getting better?
Re: War on Drugs
« Reply #241 on: April 17, 2012, 02:37:10 pm »
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9208815/Former-MI6-deputy-joins-calls-to-end-war-on-drugs.html

Ex-MI6 deputy also thinks we need a change of direction, seems lately to be getting up some support - but I have heard that before.

Sorry for the link to the Torygraph but the original interviews was in the S** according to the article.

Basically, anyone who used to work in any field dealing with drugs supports decriminalisation whereas anyone who still works in those fields has fuck all to say.

Offline scatman

  • Slutty enough to make Jordan blush - and hard enough to piss in the wrong bush! Missing a shift key.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 18,087
  • This is my world, you just WORK here :D
    • directions to football stadiums
Re: War on Drugs
« Reply #242 on: April 17, 2012, 03:10:38 pm »
wont happen until the old men of parliament and the lords die
Would sacrifice Fordy in a sacred Mayan ritual to have him as the next Liverpool manager
Football stadiums in England

Offline Corkboy

  • Sworn enemy of Bottlegirl. The Boston Toilet Mangler. Grauniad of the Cidatel. Into kinky S&M with the Lash.
  • RAWK Scribe
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 32,382
  • Is it getting better?
Re: War on Drugs
« Reply #243 on: April 17, 2012, 03:13:28 pm »
wont happen until the old men of parliament and the lords die

Sorry, don't agree. It's public opinion, as manufactured by certain elements of the media, and the fact that politicians (of whatever age) are in thrall to it.

Offline -Q-

  • What's the Q for? The workhouse for the poor and the gallows for the left.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 5,972
Re: War on Drugs
« Reply #244 on: April 18, 2012, 12:50:12 am »
If they were to legalise drugs, every single social problem no matter how tangential to drugs would be attributed to legalisation, whether it was a contributing factor or not, often ignoring that the problems pre-dated the change in drug policy.  Similar to the way in which any slight problem with the NHS for the next five years will be attributed to Lansley's reforms whether or not it had anything to do with it.
Welcome to Liverpool Brendan Rodgers
Quote from: Brendan Rodgers
Liverpool Football Club is the heartland of football folklore...     Liverpool are one of the dynasties of the game...     I will fight for my life for the supporters and the people of this city

Offline pantbash

  • is single and likely to remain that way
  • Kopite
  • *****
  • Posts: 922
  • A Bacchanalian - Still persecuted since BC
Re: War on Drugs
« Reply #245 on: April 18, 2012, 07:10:46 am »
If they were to legalise drugs, every single social problem no matter how tangential to drugs would be attributed to legalisation, whether it was a contributing factor or not, often ignoring that the problems pre-dated the change in drug policy.  Similar to the way in which any slight problem with the NHS for the next five years will be attributed to Lansley's reforms whether or not it had anything to do with it.

Possibly, however it will depend on who is making the profit from the legalisation & whether they have any influence on the general media line.
Atheism (from Greek, "athos" meaning 'hell', "eios" meaning 'demon' or 'Satan', and "ismos" meaning Liberal, literally "Satan's Liberal Helldemon")

Offline scatman

  • Slutty enough to make Jordan blush - and hard enough to piss in the wrong bush! Missing a shift key.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 18,087
  • This is my world, you just WORK here :D
    • directions to football stadiums
Re: War on Drugs
« Reply #246 on: April 18, 2012, 02:48:08 pm »
I'm all for all drugs being legalised but monopolised and controlled by the state through a proxy, whether that's the Royal Drug Company or the NHS.
Undercut the black market and destroy it in one go, and also ensure that the quality of drugs is better than those currently floating around on the street. The impurity of which is mostly down to prohibition.
Would sacrifice Fordy in a sacred Mayan ritual to have him as the next Liverpool manager
Football stadiums in England

Offline doc_antonio

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,801
  • Always look on the bright side of life
Re: War on Drugs
« Reply #247 on: April 18, 2012, 03:32:47 pm »
I'm all for all drugs being legalised but monopolised and controlled by the state through a proxy, whether that's the Royal Drug Company or the NHS.
Undercut the black market and destroy it in one go, and also ensure that the quality of drugs is better than those currently floating around on the street. The impurity of which is mostly down to prohibition.

yeah, the stuff (weed) floating about near me is all sprayed, which add's weight to the bag.. and lets be honest it really can't be that good for ya.
"When I’ve got nothing better to do, I look down the league table to see how Everton are getting along." - Bill Shankly

Offline scatman

  • Slutty enough to make Jordan blush - and hard enough to piss in the wrong bush! Missing a shift key.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 18,087
  • This is my world, you just WORK here :D
    • directions to football stadiums
Re: War on Drugs
« Reply #248 on: April 18, 2012, 03:44:35 pm »
yeah, the stuff (weed) floating about near me is all sprayed, which add's weight to the bag.. and lets be honest it really can't be that good for ya.
i'd say quality of skunk and weed in terms of purity has gone down the shitter past 5/6 years and keeps getting worse. Cocaine is even worse, you have to be so careful who you buy from
Would sacrifice Fordy in a sacred Mayan ritual to have him as the next Liverpool manager
Football stadiums in England

Offline doc_antonio

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,801
  • Always look on the bright side of life
Re: War on Drugs
« Reply #249 on: April 18, 2012, 04:05:34 pm »
i'd say quality of skunk and weed in terms of purity has gone down the shitter past 5/6 years and keeps getting worse. Cocaine is even worse, you have to be so careful who you buy from

yeah, i had a pretty bad year when i was hooked on coke, i try and stay clear of it no matter what (i dabble in it still if its about and im not paying :D), but even 3 years ago when i was taking it by the bag full, i did notice it going a bit down hill to be honest. although now-a-days i dont even know who i would call a reputable person to get it off, for all i know they could be selling me something different (crushed pills etc.) as for the weed, when i buy it i usually buy it off a friend who grows it, so i know its good/decent quality, but i ran out last night and got a 20bag to do me over and to say it was a pathetic bag was putting it nicely, it's awful, even tastes awful... although get's ya stoned i guess thats what you pay for now-a-days.
"When I’ve got nothing better to do, I look down the league table to see how Everton are getting along." - Bill Shankly

Offline Corkboy

  • Sworn enemy of Bottlegirl. The Boston Toilet Mangler. Grauniad of the Cidatel. Into kinky S&M with the Lash.
  • RAWK Scribe
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 32,382
  • Is it getting better?
Re: War on Drugs
« Reply #250 on: April 20, 2012, 03:34:23 pm »
When Forbes magazine starts saying it...

Let's Be Blunt: It's Time to End the Drug War

April 20 is the counter-culture “holiday” on which lots and lots of people come together to advocate marijuana legalization (or just get high). Should drugs—especially marijuana—be legal? The answer is “yes.” Immediately. Without hesitation. Do not pass Go. Do not collect $200 seized in a civil asset forfeiture. The war on drugs has been a dismal failure. It’s high time to end prohibition. Even if you aren’t willing to go whole-hog and legalize all drugs, at the very least we should legalize marijuana.

For the sake of the argument, let’s go ahead and assume that everything you’ve heard about the dangers of drugs is completely true. That probably means that using drugs is a terrible idea. It doesn’t mean, however, that the drug war is a good idea.

Prohibition is a textbook example of a policy with negative unintended consequences. Literally: it’s an example in the textbook I use in my introductory economics classes (Cowen and Tabarrok, Modern Principles of Economics if you’re curious) and in the most popular introductory economics textbook in the world (by N. Gregory Mankiw).The demand curve for drugs is extremely inelastic, meaning that people don’t change their drug consumption very much in response to changes in prices. Therefore, vigorous enforcement means higher prices and higher revenues for drug dealers. In fact, I’ll defer to Cowen and Tabarrok—page 60 of the first edition, if you’re still curious—for a discussion of the basic economic logic:

The more effective prohibition is at raising costs, the greater are drug industry revenues. So, more effective prohibition means that drug sellers have more money to buy guns, pay bribes, fund the dealers, and even research and develop new technologies in drug delivery (like crack cocaine). It’s hard to beat an enemy that gets stronger the more you strike against him or her.

People associate the drug trade with crime and violence; indeed, the newspapers occasionally feature stories about drug kingpins doing horrifying things to underlings and competitors. These aren’t caused by the drugs themselves but from the fact that they are illegal (which means the market is underground) and addictive (which means demanders aren’t very price sensitive).

Those same newspapers will also occasionally feature articles about how this or that major dealer has been taken down or about how this or that quantity of drugs was taken off the streets. Apparently we’re to take from this the idea that we’re going to “win” the war on drugs. Apparently. It’s alleged that this is only a step toward getting “Mister Big,” but even if the government gets “Mister Big,” it’s not going to matter. Apple didn’t disappear after Steve Jobs died. Getting “Mr. Big” won’t win the drug war. As I pointed out almost a year ago, economist and drug policy expert Jeffrey Miron estimates that we would have a lot less violence without a war on drugs.

At the recent Association of Private Enterprise Education conference, David Henderson from the Naval Postgraduate School pointed out the myriad ways in which government promises to make us safer in fact imperil our safety and security. The drug war is an obvious example: in the name of making us safer and protecting us from drugs, we are actually put in greater danger. Without meaning to, the drug warriors have turned American cities into war zones and eroded the very freedoms we hold dear.

Freedom of contract has been abridged in the name of keeping us “safe” from drugs. Private property is less secure because it can be seized if it is implicated in a drug crime (this also flushes the doctrine of “innocent until proven guilty” out the window). The drug war has been used as a pretext for clamping down on immigration. Not surprisingly, the drug war has turned some of our neighborhoods into war zones. We are warehousing productive young people in prisons at an alarming rate all in the name of a war that cannot be won.

Albert Einstein is reported to have said that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. By this definition, the drug war is insane. We are no safer, and we are certainly less free because of concerted efforts to wage war on drugs. It’s time to stop the insanity and end prohibition.

source

Offline doc_antonio

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,801
  • Always look on the bright side of life
Re: War on Drugs
« Reply #251 on: April 20, 2012, 03:43:33 pm »
that's a pretty good article, and many good point's.

Can i ask (although it may have been asked before) why is there a war on drugs in the first place? now i completely understand that there are drugs that are horrible and i wish they were never found. but surely it's costing the government alot more money fighting the "war on drugs" that the actual profit they would make for simply legalising marijuana.. maybe i'm not looking at the big picture.
"When I’ve got nothing better to do, I look down the league table to see how Everton are getting along." - Bill Shankly

Offline scatman

  • Slutty enough to make Jordan blush - and hard enough to piss in the wrong bush! Missing a shift key.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 18,087
  • This is my world, you just WORK here :D
    • directions to football stadiums
Re: War on Drugs
« Reply #252 on: April 20, 2012, 04:44:42 pm »
that's a pretty good article, and many good point's.

Can i ask (although it may have been asked before) why is there a war on drugs in the first place? now i completely understand that there are drugs that are horrible and i wish they were never found. but surely it's costing the government alot more money fighting the "war on drugs" that the actual profit they would make for simply legalising marijuana.. maybe i'm not looking at the big picture.
I think it started with opium coming from china and some sort of international agreement
Would sacrifice Fordy in a sacred Mayan ritual to have him as the next Liverpool manager
Football stadiums in England

Offline RojoLeón

  • Brentie's #1 fan
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 3,773
Re: War on Drugs
« Reply #253 on: April 20, 2012, 06:05:44 pm »
If anyone is interested in a little light reading:

As regards drugs and mankinds usage of them - also the empire/economic factors of drug production

http://www.maya-ethnobotanicals.com/media/Terence%20McKenna%20-%20Food%20of%20the%20Gods.pdf

Quote
SUGAR AS ADDICTION
Is it stretching a point to discuss sugar in a history of human drug use? It is not. Sugar abuse is the world's least discussed and most widespread addiction. And it is one of the hardest of all habits to kick. Sugar addicts may be maintenance users or they may be binge eaters. The depths of serious sugar addiction are exemplified by bulimics who may binge on sugar-saturated food and then induce vomiting or use a laxative purge to enable them to eat more sugar. Imagine if a similar practice were associated with heroin addictionhow much more odious and insidious the use of heroin would then seem! As with all stimulants, ingestion of sugar is followed by a brief euphoric "rush," which is itself followed by depression and guilt. Sugar addiction rarely occurs alone as a syndrome; mixed addictions-for example, sugar and caffeine-are more common.

...


SUGAR AND SLAVERY
The distortion and dehumanizing of human institutions and human lives caused by crack cocaine today is nothing compared with what the European desire for sugar did in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. One may argue that something approaching slave labor is typical of the early stages with cocaine production but the difference is that it is not slavery sanctioned by mendacious popes and openly pursued by corrupt but legitimate governments. A further difference must be noted: brutal as it is, the modern drug trade is not involved in anything resembling the wholesale kidnapping, transporting, and mass murder of huge populations as was done to further the process of sugar production.

...

SMOKING INTRODUCED TO EUROPE
Tobacco is native to the New World, and so is the custom of smoking plant material to obtain narcotic effects from it. Smoking may have been known in the Old World during the Neolithic period; scholarly opinion differs. However, there is no evidence of tobacco smoking being a practice known to any of the historical civilizations of the
Old World until Columbus introduced it following his second voyage to the Americas. Less than a hundred years later, small packets of tobacco were being placed into the graves of Lapland shamans! This gives some notion of how quickly tobacco was able to assert its traditional pattern of usage, even in a society that was completely unfamiliar with it. Tobacco—chewed, snuffed, and smoked—has been with us ever since. By the nineteenth century, tobacco use had been culturally classified in Europe as a "man's prerogative." Successful men were judged by the quantity and quality of cigars they smoked. And tobacco was added to the long list of male dom-inator privileges which included nearly all alcohol (brandies for the ladies, please), control of finance, access to prostitutes, and control of political power (recall those "smoke-filled rooms"

...

THE OPIUM WARS
It was the prohibition of tobacco smoking in China by the last emperor of the Ming Dynasty (1628-1644) that led frustrated tobacco addicts to experiment with smoking opium. Before that time the smoking of opium was not known. Thus it is that the suppression of one drug seems inevitably to lead to involvement with another. By 1793 opium and tobacco were being routinely smoked together throughout China.
Beginning in 1729 the Chinese had strictly prohibited the importation and sale of opium. In spite of this, opium imports, brought by the Portuguese from plantations in Goa, continued to rise, until by 1830 more than 25,000 chests of opium were being illegally imported into China. English financial interests that felt threatened by the prohibitions manipulated the situation into the so-called Opium Wars of 1838-1842:
The East India Company and the British government rationalized the opium trade with the kind of bland hypocrisy which has made the English establishment a byword for three centuries. There was no direct connection between the opium trade and the East India Company which, of course, had a monopoly position in the British tea trade until 1834. . . . The opium was sold at auction in Calcutta. After this the Company abjured all responsibility for the drug.
The incident that triggered this episode of capitalistic terrorism and true drug enslavement on a mass scale was the destruction of 20,000 chests of opium by Chinese authorities. In 1838 the emperor Tao-Kwang sent an official emissary named Lin to Canton to end the illegal trade in opium. Official orders were issued to the British and Chinese drug dealers to remove their goods, but the orders were ignored. Commissioner Lin then burned the Chinese warehouses on land and the British ships awaiting unloading in the harbor. More than a year's supply of opium was sent up in smoke; chroniclers who witnessed the event recalled that the aroma was incomparable."
The controversy dragged on, but eventually, in 1840, war was declared. The British took the initiative, secure in the power and preeminence of the Royal Navy. The Chinese did not have a chance; the war was short and decisive. In 1840 Chusan was captured, and the following year the British bombarded and destroyed forts on the Canton River. The local Chinese commander, Ki Shen, who had succeeded Commissioner Lin, agreed to cede Hong Kong and pay an indemnity of 6 million Chinese silver dollars, worth about F-300,000. When the news reached Peking, the emperor was left with no course but to agree. Thus the Chinese suffered considerable losses in money and territory. 15
Fifteen years later a second war broke out. This war, too, ended unsuccessfully for China. Shortly afterward the Treaty of Tientsin legalized the Chinese opium traffic.
In many ways this incident was to be the model for much larger forays into international drug trading on the part of twentiethcentury governments. It showed clearly that the potential marketability of new drugs can and will overwhelm institutional forces that oppose or appear to oppose the new commodity. The pattern established by England's nineteenth-century opium diplomacy has been repeated, albeit with some new wrinkles, in Central Intelligence Agency collusion in the international heroin and cocaine trade of our own time.

...

taken from page 92-105

Anyone who doubts the idea that wholesome and trustworthy agencies like the CIA would profit from illegal drugs should read Dark Alliance by Gary Webb.

http://books.google.com/books?id=CwijfdYbkC0C&pg=PA1&source=gbs_toc_r&cad=4#v=onepage&q&f=false

Is whole book in google books - can't copy and paste from there unfortunately

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Webb

Quote
Webb was best known for his 1996 "Dark Alliance" series of articles written for the San Jose Mercury News and later published as a book. In the three-part series, Webb investigated Nicaraguans linked to the CIA-backed Contras who had allegedly smuggled cocaine into the U.S. Their smuggled cocaine was distributed as crack cocaine in Los Angeles, with the profits funneled back to the Contras. Webb also alleged that this influx of Nicaraguan-supplied cocaine sparked, and significantly fueled, the widespread crack cocaine epidemic that swept through many U.S. cities during the 1980s. According to Webb, the CIA was aware of the cocaine transactions and the large shipments of drugs into the U.S. by Contra personnel. Webb charged that the Reagan administration shielded inner-city drug dealers from prosecution in order to raise money for the Contras, especially after Congress passed the Boland Amendment, which prohibited direct Contra funding.

Webb's reporting generated fierce controversy, and the San Jose Mercury News backed away from the story, effectively ending Webb's career as a mainstream media journalist. In 2004, Webb was found dead from two gunshot wounds to the head, which the coroner's office judged a suicide. Though he was criticized and outcast from the mainstream journalism community, his reportage was eventually vindicated as many of his findings have since been validated: since Webb's death, both the Los Angeles Times and the Chicago Tribune have defended his "Dark Alliance" series. Journalist George Sanchez states that "the CIA’s internal investigation by Inspector General Frederick Hitz vindicated much of Gary’s reporting" and observes that despite the campaign against Webb, "the government eventually admitted to more than Gary had initially reported" over the years.[1]


http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/04/world/americas/us-drug-agents-launder-profits-of-mexican-cartels.html?_r=3

Quote
WASHINGTON — Undercover American narcotics agents have laundered or smuggled millions of dollars in drug proceeds as part of Washington’s expanding role in Mexico’s fight against drug cartels, according to current and former federal law enforcement officials.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-06-29/banks-financing-mexico-s-drug-cartels-admitted-in-wells-fargo-s-u-s-deal.html

Quote
The smugglers had bought the DC-9 with laundered funds they transferred through two of the biggest banks in the U.S.: Wachovia Corp. and Bank of America Corp., Bloomberg Markets magazine reports in its August 2010 issue.

This was no isolated incident. Wachovia, it turns out, had made a habit of helping move money for Mexican drug smugglers. Wells Fargo & Co., which bought Wachovia in 2008, has admitted in court that its unit failed to monitor and report suspected money laundering by narcotics traffickers -- including the cash used to buy four planes that shipped a total of 22 tons of cocaine.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/global/2009/dec/13/drug-money-banks-saved-un-cfief-claims

Quote
Drugs money worth billions of dollars kept the financial system afloat at the height of the global crisis, the United Nations' drugs and crime tsar has told the Observer.

Antonio Maria Costa, head of the UN Office on Drugs and Crime, said he has seen evidence that the proceeds of organised crime were "the only liquid investment capital" available to some banks on the brink of collapse last year. He said that a majority of the $352bn (Ł216bn) of drugs profits was absorbed into the economic system as a result.


It is a very dirty but profitable world. The War on Drugs is a racket.

Offline scatman

  • Slutty enough to make Jordan blush - and hard enough to piss in the wrong bush! Missing a shift key.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 18,087
  • This is my world, you just WORK here :D
    • directions to football stadiums
Re: War on Drugs
« Reply #254 on: April 20, 2012, 07:48:13 pm »
Good read and thanks, but surely legalisation would be more profitable for the government and banks?
Would sacrifice Fordy in a sacred Mayan ritual to have him as the next Liverpool manager
Football stadiums in England

Offline RojoLeón

  • Brentie's #1 fan
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 3,773
Re: War on Drugs
« Reply #255 on: April 20, 2012, 08:30:06 pm »
Good read and thanks, but surely legalisation would be more profitable for the government and banks?

The banks get the money either way so they don't care really. In fact, they would seem to prefer the massive injections of hard currency, compared to the more electronic or varied methods of transaction that occur in legal business dealings. They look the other way when it suits them to do so - I am pretty sure that there is plenty of that cash being used to oil the process in bribes and 'transaction fees'.

If you are interested, look for stuff online about BCCI and Riggs Bank. Massive global banking institutions that were known conduits for the drugs and illegal arms trade.

The government gets to redirect tax revenues into the police and military. Stir up the hornets nest of public opinion when there is a legislative or funding crisis and your money goes to the DEA/Met Serious Crime Squad instead of schools or hospitals. Is a bit more complicated than that but the point is that anti drug legislation means more money for policing, foreign military spending (like the US in central and south America): it also means more investigative powers for checking your financial records, listening/reading your calls/emails etc.. Incidentally, The War on terror doubles down on all of this. (not that it's a fake assed excuse for funneling public money into the military corporations. Like Cheney's Halliburton or Betchel..)

Yes, legalisation would be better quality and protection for drug users, mean a less violent society for those unfortunate to live in high drugs crime areas (are off licences tooled up and having turf wars with the pub down the street?), mean more tax revenue income to spend on schools and hospitals and much less outgoings to pay for bloated (and corrupt) drugs police, less people in jail at tax payer expense - being raped and or taught criminality by the experts inside...

But then again, there are too many folk with a vested interest in keeping things the way they are. That's my take on it anyhow
 

Offline kavah

  • the Blacksmith. Definitely NOT from Blackpool!
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 19,715
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: War on Drugs
« Reply #256 on: April 21, 2012, 07:38:22 am »
Good read and thanks, but surely legalisation would be more profitable for the government ...

on CNN tonigth and I think they said these were conservative figures ( re. Marijuana sp ? )  7 billion a year is spent right now in the U.S to combat it but if it was legalized they'd make at least 7 in taxes.

so I think it's fair to say they'd make 20 Billion Plus if the marketing was done properly ( is that a lot ? - i thought it would be more ?)


fuck it legalize everything


Offline pantbash

  • is single and likely to remain that way
  • Kopite
  • *****
  • Posts: 922
  • A Bacchanalian - Still persecuted since BC
Re: War on Drugs
« Reply #257 on: April 24, 2012, 12:45:45 pm »
From Russel Brand's evidence to the "Commons home affairs committee about drugs."

The link is here and I have included the Q&A's below as I think Brand makes some decent points coming from the angle of an ex addict.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/blog/2012/apr/24/theresa-may-abu-qatada-politics-live


Quote
11.37am: Russell Brand is about to start. He is giving evidence with Chip Somers, chief executive of the Charity Focus12 which helped Brand deal with his addiction.

Brand starts with a cheery "hello" to members of the public who are in the room.

Keith Vaz, the committee chairman, starts the questioning.

Q: You say in your written evidence that you do not agree with legalisation because it is necessary to have a deterrent effect. Is that right?

Brand says he considers drug use more of a health issue than a legal issue. In some respects there may be a case for decriminalisation, he says. But he thinks the criminalisation of addicts is not helpful.

Q: You are a former heroin addict. Can you say how you became an addict, and how you got off it?

Brand said a "spiritual malady" was to blame. He was sad, lonely and unhappy. Drugs and alcohol seemed an answer. Once he addressed the underlying problem, he was able to get off drugs. He was treated at Focus12 where they promote "abstinence-based recovery".

Q: You were arrested roughly 12 times.

It was rough, says Brand.

Q: When you were arrested, did you have the support you needed?

Brand says there is "confusion and ignorance" around addiction. Lots of drug addicts are anti-social. They are a nuisance. When he was arrested, he felt the police were doing what they had to do.

Q: What do you think about legal highs? Are they the drug of choice for young people?

Brand says he does not know because he is not young enough any more. But he knows that young people will always want to get high.

We need to address the mental and spiritual problems leading people into taking drugs, he says.


Michael Ellis, a Conservative, goes next.

Q: Is addiction self-induced? And does it involve victims?

Brand says the victims of drug-related crimes need to be taken care of. He says he met a senior police officer recently who argued that addiction should be seen as an illness. Brand says he committed crimes when he was an addict. Chip Somers was an armed robber.

Q: So does there need to be a carrot and a stick?

Brand says there is no need for a carrot or a stick. Addicts need love and compassion.

Q: Celebrities play a role that is not insignificant.

Brand says he would argue their role is insignificant.

Q: Would you like to be a role model?

Brand says he has no control over the way his image is used in the media.

Q: But your behaviour affects how you are reported.

Brand says different papers will report the same event in different ways. He says celebrity is a "vapid, vacuous concept used to distract people from what is important".

Vaz intervenes.

Q: Do people need to know more about where drugs come from?

No, says Brand. People do not care about matters like this.


Bridget Phillipson, a Labour MP, goes next.

Q: Focus12 has three high profile patrons: Brand, Devina McCall and Boy George. Does that show more understanding of addiction? Or does that mean drug use has become socially acceptable?

Somers says some celebrities have made the situation worse by appearing to condone drug use.

Somers says children need more honest information about drugs.

It is no use going into schools and just saying drugs are bad, he says.

You have to give both the positive and the negative side of it ... Unless you're honest, people won't listen.


Julian Huppert, a Lib Dem, goes next.

Q: Do abstinence treatements work for all drug addicts?

Somers says abstinence would be a good aim for everyone. People on methadone do not lead stable lives, he says.

Q: Should there be less money spent on the policing of drug possession?

Brand says that is a "brilliant idea". He was arrested several times for possession. It would be better to spend the money on treatment.

Somers says an awful lot of money is wasted on small-time possession. Minor possession "is just part of the everyday life of being an addict".

There is a massive difference between legalisation and decriminalisation, he says. He is not in favour of legalisation.


Lorraine Fullbrook, a Conservative, goes next.

Q: Are you in favour of decriminalistion?

Yes, says Brand.

Somers says he is in favour of decriminalisation. But he does not support legalisation, because there is no justification for the use of most drugs.

Q: What about cannabis?

Somers says that might be the one drug where you could make a case for legalisation. But he says he is not advocating its legalisation.


Michael Ellis goes next.

Q: If you ignore minor offending, won't that lead to more serious offending?

Brand says being arrested is not a lesson. It is just an "administrative blip", he says.

Calling Ellis "mate", he says he needs to show some compassion. He says he can tell Ellis is a Tory from his question.

Keith Vaz says the committee is running out of time.

Brand says you can never run out of time. Theresa May might not show up. She might not know what day it is.

Labour's David Winnick tells Brand this is "not a variety show".



12.23pm: The Press Association have also reported Russell Brand's response to the Labour MP David Winnick, who accused Brand of treating the hearing like a variety show. (See 12.04pm.)

You're providing a little bit of variety though, making it more like Dad's Army.

I did particularly like this

Keith Vaz says the committee is running out of time.

Brand says you can never run out of time. Theresa May might not show up. She might not know what day it is.
Atheism (from Greek, "athos" meaning 'hell', "eios" meaning 'demon' or 'Satan', and "ismos" meaning Liberal, literally "Satan's Liberal Helldemon")

Offline Trada

  • Fully paid up member of the JC cult. Ex-Tory boy. Corbyn's Chief Hagiographer. Sometimes hasn't got a kloop.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 22,815
  • Trada
Re: War on Drugs
« Reply #258 on: April 24, 2012, 01:25:31 pm »
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/LRz8w6vKI5Q?version=3&amp;amp;hl=en_US" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="bbc_link bbc_flash_disabled new_win">http://www.youtube.com/v/LRz8w6vKI5Q?version=3&amp;amp;hl=en_US</a>

Don't blame me I voted for Jeremy Corbyn!!

Miss you Tracy more and more every day xxx

“I carry them with me: what they would have thought and said and done. Make them a part of who I am. So even though they’re gone from the world they’re never gone from me.

Offline scatman

  • Slutty enough to make Jordan blush - and hard enough to piss in the wrong bush! Missing a shift key.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 18,087
  • This is my world, you just WORK here :D
    • directions to football stadiums
Re: War on Drugs
« Reply #259 on: April 24, 2012, 01:59:53 pm »
everytime that Brand opens his mouth, I like him more and more, was a few years back that I despised him, he's a clever lad
Would sacrifice Fordy in a sacred Mayan ritual to have him as the next Liverpool manager
Football stadiums in England

Offline pantbash

  • is single and likely to remain that way
  • Kopite
  • *****
  • Posts: 922
  • A Bacchanalian - Still persecuted since BC
Re: War on Drugs
« Reply #260 on: April 24, 2012, 02:28:02 pm »
everytime that Brand opens his mouth, I like him more and more, was a few years back that I despised him, he's a clever lad

Yeah, it's just a shame that the ITN news clip has removed all the answers of substance.
Which is probably one of the reasons we are stuck in this drug war in teh first place.

Ignore the serious points, concentrate on the druggie making funnies at the MP's!!!


The bbc has a better link

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-17822801
« Last Edit: April 24, 2012, 02:33:43 pm by pantbash »
Atheism (from Greek, "athos" meaning 'hell', "eios" meaning 'demon' or 'Satan', and "ismos" meaning Liberal, literally "Satan's Liberal Helldemon")

Online Hudson66

  • The Kia Ora Man - too orangely for RAWK
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,393
Re: War on Drugs
« Reply #261 on: April 27, 2012, 10:36:31 am »
Just watched this and thought it was a very good speech

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/zFbnPjbdEzI" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="bbc_link bbc_flash_disabled new_win">http://www.youtube.com/v/zFbnPjbdEzI</a>

Offline Anywhichwayicant

  • Clique member #2,367, #FakeNews. Banned Closet Bluenose. "Captain, I am sensing the bleeding obvious!"
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 36,603
  • I'm too moist and tender to retire.
Re: War on Drugs
« Reply #262 on: May 9, 2012, 03:31:29 pm »
Money spent so far, this year, fighting the War on Drugs -

http://www.drugsense.org/cms/wodclock

Offline Anywhichwayicant

  • Clique member #2,367, #FakeNews. Banned Closet Bluenose. "Captain, I am sensing the bleeding obvious!"
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 36,603
  • I'm too moist and tender to retire.
Re: War on Drugs
« Reply #263 on: May 9, 2012, 03:56:54 pm »
April 18 2012


The Obama administration released its 2012 National Drug Control Strategy and accompanying 2013 Drug Budget Tuesday, but while the administration touted it as a "drug policy for the 21st Century," it is very much of a piece with anti-drug policies going back to the days of Richard Nixon.

The federal government will spend more than $25 billion on drug law enforcement under the proposed budget, and despite the administration's talk about emphasizing prevention and treatment over war on drugs spending, it retains the same roughly 60:40 ratio of law enforcement and interdiction spending over treatment and prevention training that has obtained in federal drug budgets going back years.

The administration is high-lighting a renewed emphasis on drugged driving and is encouraging states to pass "zero tolerance" drugged driving laws. It is also emphasizing the massive increase in non-prescription use of opioid pain pills.

While the strategy calls for lesser reliance on imprisonment for drug offenders, it also calls for increased "community corrections" surveillance of them, including calling for expanded drug testing with "swift and certain" sanctions for positive tests. But drug testing isn't just for parolees and probationers; the drug strategy calls for expanded drug testing in the workplace, as well.

The drug strategy acknowledges the calls for recognition of medical marijuana and marijuana legalization, but only to dismiss them.

"While the Administration supports ongoing research into determining what components of the marijuana plant can be used as medicine, to date, neither the FDA nor the Institute of Medicine has found the marijuana plant itself to meet the modern standard for safe or effective medicine for any condition," the strategy said. "The Administration also recognizes that legalizing marijuana would not provide the answer to any of the health, social, youth education, criminal justice, and community quality of life challenges associated with drug use."

This year's drug strategy looks like last year's drug strategy, which looked like Bush administration drug strategies, which looked like Clinton administration drug strategies. When it comes to the federal drug war, it's more of the same old same old.

http://stopthedrugwar.org/chronicle/2012/apr/18/obama_releases_2012_national_dru

Offline doc_antonio

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,801
  • Always look on the bright side of life
Re: War on Drugs
« Reply #264 on: May 17, 2012, 01:50:43 pm »
Growing small amounts of cannabis should be decriminalised, according to the charity Release.
It campaigns for reform of the drug laws and says arresting people who grow fewer than 12 plants, for personal use, is a waste of police time and effort.

The Association of Chief Police Officers (Acpo) admits that tackling small growers is not a priority.

Medical experts say it can cause psychological problems and smoking it can lead to diseases like lung cancer.

Release, though, wants growing cannabis to be treated like breaking the speed limit or parking on double yellow lines.

'Getting by'
 
That would make it punishable with a fine but no criminal record.

Lee, who wouldn't give his surname, says he has seven cannabis plants in a specially-designed growing tent in his spare bedroom.

Full of powerful lights, water trays, extractor fans and with an overpowering smell of strong cannabis Lee freely admits to breaking the law.

"It's a way to make ends meet," he admits.

"I've worked since I was 16, paid my taxes and [now] is the first time I've been unemployed in 15 years.

"It's just a way of making money because of the cost of fuel, food and living.

"It's just a way of getting by."

Release doesn't believe selling cannabis for money should be decriminalised.

But it does want small-scale growing for personal use or passing the drug on to friends for free to be made a civil offence.

Dangerous drug
 
Niamh Eastwood, executive director of the charity, says: "We are criminalising thousands of people every year and that has to end.

"Small-scale growing of cannabis for personal use or social supply (passing onto friends for free) means that people are not part of the black market which is driven by organised crime and violence.

"Secondly it reduces the risk of young people being exposed to harder drugs.

"Thirdly, arresting people who do it is a waste of police time, effort and money."

Medical experts though, like Dr Owen Bowden-Jones from the Royal College of Psychiatrists, say cannabis is a dangerous drug and can cause severe psychological problems.

"It doesn't matter if people are growing one or 1,000 [plants]," he says.

"The issue here is the strength of the cannabis.

"It's the strength of the cannabis that determines the risk and the risks include anxiety, paranoia, hearing voices and of course emphysema and lung cancer."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/18079562

That, would be just swell!
"When I’ve got nothing better to do, I look down the league table to see how Everton are getting along." - Bill Shankly

Offline Corkboy

  • Sworn enemy of Bottlegirl. The Boston Toilet Mangler. Grauniad of the Cidatel. Into kinky S&M with the Lash.
  • RAWK Scribe
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 32,382
  • Is it getting better?
Re: War on Drugs
« Reply #265 on: May 24, 2012, 11:51:51 am »
Saying No to Costly Drug Laws
By ALEKSANDER KWASNIEWSKI. Former Polish President
Published: May 10, 2012
   
WARSAW — In the year 2000, as the president of Poland, I signed one of Europe’s most conservative laws on drug possession. Any amount of illicit substances a person possessed meant they were eligible for up to three years in prison. Our hope was that this would help to liberate Poland, and especially its youths, from drugs that not only have a potential to ruin the lives of the people who abuse them but also have been propelling the spread of H.I.V. among people who inject them.

We assumed that giving the criminal justice system the power to arrest, prosecute and jail people caught with even minuscule amounts of drugs, including marijuana, would improve police effectiveness in bringing to justice persons responsible for supplying illicit drugs. We also expected that the prospect of being put behind bars would deter people from abusing illegal drugs, and thus dampen demand.

We were mistaken on both of our assumptions. Jail sentences for the possession of illicit drugs — in any amount and for any purpose — did not lead to the jailing of drug traffickers. Nor did it prove to be a deterrent to drug abuse.

What the law did do, however, was enable the police to increase their arrest numbers by hauling in droves of young people caught with small amounts of marijuana. More than a half of all arrests under the law were of people aged 24 and younger. Criminalization of drug users resulted in a dramatic increase in the number of identified cases of drug possession: from 2,815 in 2000 to 30,548 in 2008.

The vast majority of those individuals were not drug dealers. Some of them, however, were adolescents whose prospects for careers as lawyers, public officials or teachers were suddenly blighted.

The law also proved to be very expensive for taxpayers. A cost-benefit analysis by a Polish think tank, the Institute of Public Affairs, showed that the statute cost about €20 million a year, with no positive effect.

Significant numbers of professionals working in the criminal justice system, including prosecutors and judges, when asked whether they believed the law worked as it was supposed to, concluded that it was not an effective tool in combating drug trafficking.

It is my hope that political and community leaders in other countries, especially in Eastern Europe, will learn from Poland’s experience in criminalizing drug possession, a move that clearly fell short of its goals. Such a policy failure should not be repeated anywhere else in the world.

For this reason, I decided to join the Global Commission on Drug Policy, an effort by former heads of state — including César Gaviria of Colombia, Fernando Henrique Cardoso of Brazil, Ruth Dreifuss of Switzerland and Ernesto Zedillo of Mexico — to advocate for reform of ineffective drug laws. I feel honored to have become the first former president of a country from Eastern Europe to join this body. I very much encourage political leaders from other regions of the world to sign on and show their support for policies that actually protect citizens.

The Global Commission offers a set of policy recommendations that should be the cornerstones of drug laws around the world. One of the main approaches that the commission supports is the decriminalization of drug use and possession of drugs for personal use.

I was one of the supporters of the effort in Poland to revise the drug possession law of 2000. It now protects users from prosecution for having small amounts of drugs for personal use and allows prosecutors to discontinue legal proceedings against drug users.

I then began to champion the idea that drug dependence ought to be treated as a disease rather than a criminal justice problem. Poland can and should improve its treatment programs for people dependent on opiates. At present, substitution treatment — with methadone — is available to only about 8 percent of Polish patients.

Despite the recommendations of the World Health Organization, and largely as a result of mistaken assumptions, methadone and other opiate substitution treatments are illegal in Russia and overregulated in Ukraine. In Poland, Russia and Ukraine, needle exchange programs are still small-scale and do not reach all those needing help. But such programs are one of the most effective and inexpensive ways to prevent infection among people who inject drugs.

East European leaders should press for a halt to incarcerating people for possessing small amounts of drugs for personal use and should start treating drug addiction as a public health issue. Taking more effective action to end the H.I.V. epidemic driven by the abuse of injected drugs is vital. The spread of H.I.V. among people who inject drugs in Russia and Ukraine is a grave concern even beyond their borders, and it is also my responsibility to advocate for these much-needed policy shifts.

Political leaders these days have ample evidence as to which approaches to drug policy actually help societies function better, and rigorous scientific investigation should always form the basis of policy making. Our role as politicians is to protect our communities and improve the functioning of our states. This may mean that we have to admit to having made mistakes. Fortunately now we know how to correct them.

Aleksander Kwasniewski was president of Poland from 1995 to 2005.

source

Offline -Q-

  • What's the Q for? The workhouse for the poor and the gallows for the left.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 5,972
Re: War on Drugs
« Reply #266 on: May 24, 2012, 06:25:25 pm »
Saying No to Costly Drug Laws
By ALEKSANDER KWASNIEWSKI. Former Polish President
Published: May 10, 2012

Absolutely brilliant.  Incredible to see a politician accept that they were wrong.  I wonder how many people will accept that the same logic of unintended consequences applies across the board.
Welcome to Liverpool Brendan Rodgers
Quote from: Brendan Rodgers
Liverpool Football Club is the heartland of football folklore...     Liverpool are one of the dynasties of the game...     I will fight for my life for the supporters and the people of this city

Offline Corkboy

  • Sworn enemy of Bottlegirl. The Boston Toilet Mangler. Grauniad of the Cidatel. Into kinky S&M with the Lash.
  • RAWK Scribe
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 32,382
  • Is it getting better?
Re: War on Drugs
« Reply #267 on: May 25, 2012, 10:05:47 am »
Newark Mayor Cory Booker Declares Drug War ‘A Failure,’ Endorses Medical Marijuana

By Judd Legum on May 24, 2012

Newark Mayor Cory Booker delivered a harsh critique of America’s war on drugs in a series of tweets last night. Booker described the war on drugs as a multi-billion dollar failure. Booker highlighted the disproportionate impact the drug war has on African-Americans and suggested the need to move away from incarceration as our policy response. Booker stopped short of endorsing full legalization of any drug. He did, however, call on New Jersey to legalize medical marijuana:

Full article

Offline scatman

  • Slutty enough to make Jordan blush - and hard enough to piss in the wrong bush! Missing a shift key.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 18,087
  • This is my world, you just WORK here :D
    • directions to football stadiums
Re: War on Drugs
« Reply #268 on: May 25, 2012, 10:40:06 am »
Absolutely brilliant.  Incredible to see a politician accept that they were wrong.  I wonder how many people will accept that the same logic of unintended consequences applies across the board.
Agreed, the world needs to change, some people are finally finding the light and more and more is being published on the failures on this long war against drugs.
Would sacrifice Fordy in a sacred Mayan ritual to have him as the next Liverpool manager
Football stadiums in England

Offline RojoLeón

  • Brentie's #1 fan
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 3,773
Re: War on Drugs
« Reply #269 on: June 17, 2012, 05:16:26 pm »
This is what happens when the legal lines are blurred. Effectively, some state agencies are effecting a very profitable shakedown, along the same profitable business lines that has enabled the 'War on Drugs' to grow out of the Nixon era political drive, to become the parasitic, multi million (billion?) dollar behemoth it is today.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-0617-pot-retail-20120617,0,372401.story

Some Southern California 'nonprofit' pot shops make big money
Documents show a cash-infused retail world bearing little resemblance to the one pitched to voters for the 1996 Compassionate Use Act for 'seriously ill Californians.'

In the first raid, Orange County sheriff's detectives hit a Dana Point marijuana storefront, the San Clemente home of its director and a "stash house" he allegedly maintained nearby.

In the two homes, they found cash stuffed everywhere: in buckets in the garage and attic, in an Igloo cooler in a bedroom, under a mattress, on an ironing board, in a dresser. According to a search warrant affidavit filed in November, they recovered more than $700,000.

At the shop, investigators found spreadsheets showing sales over 10 months totaled $3.17 million, according to the affidavit, with $2.47 million "cash on hand." Paperwork indicated that a silent partner, a convicted drug dealer named John M. Walker, controlled the shop and six others in Orange and Los Angeles counties.

A subsequent raid of one of Walker's properties recovered a Beretta handgun, a shotgun, a Chinese AK-47 with a bayonet and grocery bags filled with four dozen rubber-banded bundles of cash; one of the bags contained a note with calculations totaling $99,324.

The discoveries and many others like them across California are starkly at odds with the image presented by medical marijuana providers, who label themselves as "compassionate caregivers" and say they work on slim margins, give away cannabis to the poor and comply with the law.

Many medical marijuana dispensaries have been making huge sums of money even as they claim to be nonprofit, according to court and law enforcement records, industry insiders, police and federal agents. The Times found a cash-infused retail world unlike the one pitched to voters who passed the Compassionate Use Act for "seriously ill Californians" in 1996.

Few would suggest that everyone in the industry is making huge profits; many dispensaries do struggle to stay afloat. Nor do the court cases capture the relief truly ill patients ascribe to high-quality marijuana they might have difficulty getting if these shops did not exist.

One reason for the vast disparities within the medical marijuana trade is that the regulations governing it are hazy. The 1996 initiative and a law the state Legislature approved in 2003 never made clear how patients were supposed to get marijuana, much less whether sales were legal. Attorney general guidelines issued in 2008 allow only for fees "that are reasonably calculated to cover overhead costs and operating expenses." Dispensaries decide to abide by that or not.

Records from a Granada Hills dispensary showed sales revenue topping $10,000 on many days.

Spreadsheets from a Long Beach operation indicated the owners bought $247,040 worth of marijuana and sold it in the next five months for $776,589. A state Board of Equalization investigator testified that the pair sold a total of $1,672,206 that year and reported only $206,980 to the tax agency.

A Venice-area dispensary's bookkeeping revealed it did about $5.1 million in sales in just over a year. One month's total was $468,331 — with $154,493 in "total profit." Another's profit was $116,625, after a $25,382 payment to the owner.

In North Hollywood, the two partners behind NoHo Caregivers emailed encrypted messages estimating they would each make $194,000 a month in profit, according to a federal indictment.

The state Board of Equalization gives a very rough estimate that it collects up to $105 million a year in sales tax from stores that are doing up to $1.3 billion a year in sales.

There is no way to know what the average dispensary earns because they are unregulated, aside from those in a few cities, including Oakland, Berkeley and West Hollywood. That void has allowed operators to sell huge amounts of pot at giant mark-ups, seeding public mistrust of the industry and giving law enforcement ample incentive to crack down.

"Some people are abusing the system and raking in profits," said Don Duncan, operator of a West Hollywood dispensary and director of the California chapter of Americans for Safe Access. "That draws the credibility of the field of medical cannabis into doubt."

He and fellow leaders of the movement are pushing for a bill to better regulate the business. But the legal challenges to growers and dispensaries are mounting.

The federal government, which considers all marijuana use illegal and has signaled it will target any commercial operations, has launched a multi-pronged campaign to put this all back in the bottle. And local authorities throughout California, led by the Los Angeles Police Department and Los Angeles County Dist. Atty. Steve Cooley, are going after them too, based on the notion that nothing in the medical marijuana law permits sales or profits.


::

On July 31, 2008, the DEA and Culver City police raided a dispensary called Organica, on the border of Venice and Culver City. After seizing about half a million dollars' worth of weed and $16,379 in cash, the agents expected the shop to stay closed.

They were wrong. Organica's owner Jeffrey K. Joseph said he had an obligation to his "collective of patients."

The dispensary stayed open and continued to make money.

"Those patients still need their medicine," he said in a Web interview recorded after the raid, even though two other dispensaries were still operating within 1,000 feet of his.

On April 17, 2009, the California Highway Patrol stopped Joseph on his way to the Coachella music festival and found $92,352 in his car. Federal and local agents executed a second search warrant on the shop four months later and seized about a million dollars' worth of weed and accounting records for seven months.

Those spreadsheets revealed how quickly business sprang back after the first raid. In December 2008, the dispensary made $468,331 in revenue and $154,493 in "total profit," they said. The next month's profit was $129,620. Over the six months documented, the dispensary made $610,301 in profit — in addition to $82,066 in payments directly to Joseph.

And the marijuana vendors selling to Organica (growers or their brokers) were making even more. One of them, "Vendor S," made $524,776 in two months.

With that much money flowing, the second raid failed to shut the shop down as well. In February, after a third raid, prosecutors charged Joseph with 24 felony counts of drug sales and money laundering — to which he would ultimately plead no contest to four counts and serve 41 days in jail — and the city attorney sought a preliminary injunction to close Organica.

Joseph fought the closure, arguing that Organica was a fully compliant, nonprofit collective, despite having repeatedly used the word "profits" in its own bookkeeping. Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge James Chalfant didn't buy it. "There is no evidence that Organica is a nonprofit entity," he wrote in granting the injunction, and he called it a "multimillion-dollar retail operation."

Joseph appealed that decision and lost again this April, when appellate judges ruled that the medical marijuana law "does not cover dispensing or selling marijuana."

::

What California's medical marijuana law does allow is "qualified patients" and their "designated primary caregivers" to associate "collectively or cooperatively to cultivate marijuana for medical purposes."

What that means has been debated since it was written, spawning a side boom for attorneys and consulting firms.

In particular, prosecutors and defense attorneys spar over one section of the law that notes: "Nothing in this section shall authorize … any individual or group to cultivate or distribute marijuana for profit." Prosecutors say that clearly bans any profit. Defense lawyers say the language is neutral, neither allowing nor prohibiting it.

Dispensaries largely call themselves "collectives" and "nonprofit" and label sales as "donations."

Many operators privately concede that the language isn't completely accurate. "There's people making lots of nonprofits," quipped the owner of several Orange County collectives, past and present. "It's the American way."

He asks why they can't make money when liquor, tobacco and pharmaceutical companies do.

In April, an entrepreneur looking to open a new marijuana store in downtown Los Angeles told The Times his plan was to buy from growers for about $3,200 a pound, divvy it up and sell it over the counter for more than twice that. Because many shops sold a pound a day, he expected to make at least $3,000 a day in gross profit.

The 32-year-old former mortgage broker had run a dispensary before, until the city shut it down, and knew the potential. With overhead, he still thought he could clear half a million dollars his first year, easy.

But he'd had to be creative with that money because his lawyer counseled him to take a salary of no more than $50,000. So he planned to invest any excess proceeds into opening new shops, from which he could also draw salaries.

"I believe marijuana really helps people," he said. "But I'm not doing this for free."

William Panzer, who helped write the state's medical marijuana initiative, said there is no hard figure on how much someone in the business should make.

"What I tell my clients is this: I got a guy on the jury, 45 years old, busting his butt, moonlighting to pay his mortgage and put his kid through school. My client is a 23-year-old, running a dispensary and making $200,000 a year. How do you think that's going to go?"
::

LAPD Det. Robert Holcomb instructs smaller agencies with a simple message: "Sales are not authorized anywhere in the medical marijuana laws."

In the last three years, his team of detectives in the Devonshire Division got rid of all 38 dispensaries in their turf, whether they were barely getting by or brimming with cash.

He scoffs at the notion that they were collecting donations. He said he has found signs at dispensaries that read, "Do not haggle over the donation amounts" and "Sales tax will be added to all donations."

On March 26, 2009, police searched the luxury downtown loft of Marlene Miller, director of Caregivers Earth Ordinance in Granada Hills, and found $16,410, mostly under a bed, according to court papers. They raided the store and took her pot.

Miller reopened within days, and they searched again, this time recovering $20,686 from her car and $9,000 from her office, according to police. They also found a spreadsheet on her computer that they contend listed daily sales from the previous September. The average daily sales on the sheet were $9,533.

Miller reached a deal with prosecutors Wednesday that will allow her to plead no contest to a misdemeanor if she stays out of the pot business. Her attorney, Allison Margolin, would not comment except to say there was no evidence of "profit."

Many times, it's not clear who is getting the money. The Orange County Sheriff's Department launched the investigation of Dana Point Safe Harbor Collective when it got an anonymous letter saying John Walker, 56, silently controlled that shop, Belmont Shore Natural Care in Long Beach and others. He was not listed on any of the incorporation papers.

Walker, who lives in a sprawling Tuscan-style home on a hillside in San Clemente, had criminal convictions going back to 1976 for marijuana possession and sales, selling and transporting a controlled substance and carrying a loaded firearm in a public place. Paperwork seized at the Dana Point store suggested he was to get 60% of the profit from the shop.

In November, detectives raided the other storefronts and 16 connected properties. Inside a nearby Long Beach duplex owned by Walker, detectives found 14 flat-screen televisions, according to a report from the search. Inside the garage of another Long Beach house, they found the AK-47, other guns and bags of cash, along with Walker's wedding album.

The affidavit alleges that Walker used a prominent Long Beach attorney, Richard Brizendine, "to give the dispensaries the cover of legitimacy." Brizendine incorporated all seven shops. Records show that six days after the raid of Walker's home, the attorney was briefly granted trust deed to it as security for a loan.

The case is still open and no one has been charged. Brizendine would not discuss the allegations, citing attorney-client privilege. Walker could not be reached.

::

Tax may be the biggest cudgel the feds have against medical pot. Increasingly, the IRS is applying an obscure provision of the tax code, 280E, which prohibits drug traffickers from claiming routine business deductions, for costs like wages and rent, when federal agents are trying to get back-taxes from them. Already dispensaries were in a quandary: Pay the IRS and literally document your federal crime to the federal government, or don't report it and risk going down for tax evasion. Now they face 280E, and potentially crippling tax bills.


At the same time, city authorities and the U.S. Justice Department are besieging pot shops with civil litigation and threats of asset forfeiture.

This is pushing the big money seekers underground. "They run sort of hit-and-run operations, make as much money as they can for six months and close down before they get caught," said Damian Nassiri of the Cannabis Law Group in Orange.

The founder of Avalon Wellness Center in Long Beach says she has tried to do the opposite. Valerie Crist, 56, was a Realtor when the housing market collapsed. Her husband's income in car sales was not enough, and they worried about their mortgage and their 10-year-old son's future college education. She and her sister decided to open a dispensary to make a modest income and do some good, Crist said. They paid a $15,000 permit fee to the city.

They retrofitted a warehouse to grow on the premises to comply with a city guideline, borrowing and investing half a million dollars. The first crop failed because construction disturbed the atmosphere in the rooms. And when they opened seven months ago, they realized their industrial location was too remote. They had to offer deep discounts.

"We're struggling just to make payroll," she said.

Crist said she pays state and federal taxes, workers' compensation and liability insurance for employees, as well as attorney fees to keep her store open. She just draws a wage when she can, she said, not even the highest in the shop; that's the bookkeeper's, at $20 an hour.

At her counter, a newcomer to the shop, a 23-year-old man nicknamed Junior, inhaled the aroma of various pot strains in jars. Between each, he sniffed a little shaker filled with coffee beans to cleanse his olfactory palate.

"How did you hear about us?" the bud tender asked him.

"Through a buddy at the hospital," he said.

He said he was on chemotherapy for non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, and the marijuana restored his sense of taste, tamped down the nausea and got him off the couch. He showed lesions on his tongue from the chemo. He said he'd come to the pot shop because he'd heard the prices were good. "I go all around, really," he said.

In downtown L.A., the former mortgage broker with the big plans began having doubts about starting a pot business. With the feds threatening to seize property, the few landlords who would lease to him demanded exorbitant rents.

At the end of May, he heard that the City Council was considering a ban. Did he really want to wade into this?

"I think I'll put this on hold," he said.

Offline Corkboy

  • Sworn enemy of Bottlegirl. The Boston Toilet Mangler. Grauniad of the Cidatel. Into kinky S&M with the Lash.
  • RAWK Scribe
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 32,382
  • Is it getting better?
Re: War on Drugs
« Reply #270 on: June 20, 2012, 11:05:30 am »
NY GOP Kills Marijuana Decriminalization Reform

Extract:

"The New York Senate Republicans are doing what Republicans do best at the federal and local level -- they are obstructing progress and paralyzing government. The Republican Conference in the State Senate is completely out of touch with our communities of color in New York City and because of their inaction, tens of thousands more of our young people of color will be arrested before the end of this year, saddling them with a criminal record," said Mark-Viverito. "The governor, our mayor, the police commissioner, the city council, five district attorneys and criminal justice advocates are all on the same page here. Marijuana was decriminalized in 1977; all we are trying to do is close the 'in public view' loophole that is allowing thousands of unjust arrests of black and Latino youth in our communities."

source

Offline Corkboy

  • Sworn enemy of Bottlegirl. The Boston Toilet Mangler. Grauniad of the Cidatel. Into kinky S&M with the Lash.
  • RAWK Scribe
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 32,382
  • Is it getting better?
Re: War on Drugs
« Reply #271 on: June 21, 2012, 12:17:07 pm »
Hilarious.

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/ykwaXsQY6Eg&amp;list=PL2E816A51355A8C97&amp;feature=plpp_play_all" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="bbc_link bbc_flash_disabled new_win">http://www.youtube.com/v/ykwaXsQY6Eg&amp;list=PL2E816A51355A8C97&amp;feature=plpp_play_all</a>

Offline scatman

  • Slutty enough to make Jordan blush - and hard enough to piss in the wrong bush! Missing a shift key.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 18,087
  • This is my world, you just WORK here :D
    • directions to football stadiums
Re: War on Drugs
« Reply #272 on: June 21, 2012, 03:27:54 pm »
I saw an article about Cannabis Coffee Shops in the UK, apparently there's one in Stockport and another one due to open soon in Portsmouth i think,
Would sacrifice Fordy in a sacred Mayan ritual to have him as the next Liverpool manager
Football stadiums in England

Offline Crimson_Tank

  • Rhyming Slang. RAWK Virgil. Knows a proper spit-roast when he sees one.....something to do with the law of the bi.....Is truly a giant amongst the short staff.
  • RAWK Scribe
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 16,766
  • "Time is an illusion, Lunchtime, doubly so." F.P.
Re: War on Drugs
« Reply #273 on: June 21, 2012, 04:25:44 pm »
BBC just put up an article on Uruguay working on passing a bill to legalize marijuana.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-18529993
I watched a YouTube video and decided that Paul Konchesky looked like a player.
A dead animal is a dead animal. And a piece of meat is a piece of meat.

Offline Corkboy

  • Sworn enemy of Bottlegirl. The Boston Toilet Mangler. Grauniad of the Cidatel. Into kinky S&M with the Lash.
  • RAWK Scribe
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 32,382
  • Is it getting better?
Re: War on Drugs
« Reply #274 on: July 2, 2012, 04:50:05 pm »
Colombia Decriminalizes Cocaine and Marijuana, As Latin American Momentum for Drug Policy Reform Continues

Colombia's Constitutional Court Friday approved the government's proposal to decriminalize the possession of small amounts of cocaine and marijuana for personal use. Anyone caught with less than 20 grams of marijuana or one gram of cocaine for personal use may receive physical or psychological treatment depending on their state of consumption, but may not be prosecuted or detained, the court ruled.

source

Offline Solomon Grundy

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 45,474
  • LFC - Living rent-free in the heads of our rivals
Re: War on Drugs
« Reply #275 on: July 4, 2012, 06:11:59 am »
Hilarious.

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/ykwaXsQY6Eg&amp;list=PL2E816A51355A8C97&amp;feature=plpp_play_all" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="bbc_link bbc_flash_disabled new_win">http://www.youtube.com/v/ykwaXsQY6Eg&amp;list=PL2E816A51355A8C97&amp;feature=plpp_play_all</a>


Wow. She comes across a right clueless bitch.

Offline Corkboy

  • Sworn enemy of Bottlegirl. The Boston Toilet Mangler. Grauniad of the Cidatel. Into kinky S&M with the Lash.
  • RAWK Scribe
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 32,382
  • Is it getting better?
Re: War on Drugs
« Reply #276 on: July 5, 2012, 02:54:44 pm »

Wow. She comes across a right clueless bitch.

Ya think?

DEA head: A thousand dead children means we’re winning war on drugs

Michele Leonhart, our top drug cop, has a funny definition of victory

By Alex Pareene

Producing and distributing illegal drugs is a profitable business, because there will always be a lot of demand and because illegality allows you to charge a great deal of money. That illegality also means that the people who produce and distribute the drugs are generally not responsible corporate citizens. So thanks to our expensive, terribly ineffective and endless war on drugs, lots of people are dying.

The Washington Post recently reported that the victims of Mexican drug cartel violence increasingly include children, who are being specifically targeted in order to terrorize people and intimidate potential business rivals:

    The children’s rights group estimates that 994 people younger than 18 were killed in drug-related violence between late 2006 and late 2010, based on media accounts, which are incomplete because newspapers are often too intimidated to report drug-related crimes.
    [...]
    Government figures include all homicides of people younger than 17, capturing victims whose murders might not have been related to drugs or organized crime. In 2009, the last year for which there is data, 1,180 children were killed, half in shootings.

This article is actually almost a week old, but I did not notice, until it was highlighted by Jonathan Blanks, this astounding quote from America’s top drug warrior:

    U.S. and Mexican officials say the grotesque violence is a symptom the cartels have been wounded by police and soldiers. “It may seem contradictory, but the unfortunate level of violence is a sign of success in the fight against drugs,” said Michele Leonhart, head of the Drug Enforcement Administration. The cartels “are like caged animals, attacking one another,” she added.

It seems “contradictory” because that is absolutely appalling spin. For one thing, these “caged animals” are actually attacking civilians and children. And they are doing so because the drug war has made their chosen industry both profitable and dangerous enough to make murder and brutality effective means of winning competitive advantages. If this is a sign of success, maybe we should reconsider waging this war.

source

Offline scatman

  • Slutty enough to make Jordan blush - and hard enough to piss in the wrong bush! Missing a shift key.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 18,087
  • This is my world, you just WORK here :D
    • directions to football stadiums
Re: War on Drugs
« Reply #277 on: July 5, 2012, 02:58:18 pm »
They should send her to Mexico to be shot. shes probably a feminist
Would sacrifice Fordy in a sacred Mayan ritual to have him as the next Liverpool manager
Football stadiums in England

Offline doc_antonio

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,801
  • Always look on the bright side of life
Re: War on Drugs
« Reply #278 on: July 5, 2012, 03:22:24 pm »
Is this the same woman who couldn't answer a few simple questions (base questions about the DEA) in an interview a few weeks back?
"When I’ve got nothing better to do, I look down the league table to see how Everton are getting along." - Bill Shankly

Offline Corkboy

  • Sworn enemy of Bottlegirl. The Boston Toilet Mangler. Grauniad of the Cidatel. Into kinky S&M with the Lash.
  • RAWK Scribe
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 32,382
  • Is it getting better?
Re: War on Drugs
« Reply #279 on: July 5, 2012, 03:23:47 pm »
Is this the same woman who couldn't answer a few simple questions (base questions about the DEA) in an interview a few weeks back?

Yes. It's about four posts up on this very page.