Marijuana Policy

Mark Kleiman, who we've often criticized for generally supporting drug prohibition, deserves credit for his recent discussion of the merits of a "grow-your-own" marijuana policy. Kleiman's main concern with legalization is that a legitimate marijuana industry will be incentivized to market their products and work to sustain high usage levels within the population. His solution is to let people form co-ops and grow their own pot.

In response, Pete Guither has an ingenious post noting that marijuana genetics are remarkably diverse, thus creating inevitable consumer demand for a variety of options. Indeed, the war on marijuana and the exhausting, often redundant debate surrounding it have largely obscured the fascinating psychopharmacological diversity of the plant itself.

Experienced marijuana consumers delight in exploring the unique psychoactive properties of particular strains and individual users often develop preferences for certain varieties when they're available. This is especially true with regards to medical use, wherein it's widely understood that some strains are better for specific symptoms than others. Potency is just one of many factors that impact the popularity of a given strain. Sativa strains, for example, are known for being more energetic and stimulating, while indicas are typically more relaxing.

Explaining all of this to people who hate marijuana will surely just freak them out even more, but it still bothers me that the discussion of marijuana tends to present the drug as a one-dimensional substance when, in fact, it is anything but. There are many things worth knowing about this plant that won't fully be revealed and understood until we end the vicious war against it.

So far, Obama's favorite thing about being president is getting to read all the marijuana-related questions on his website. If it weren't, then he'd surely have stopped inviting us to submit questions, right? He loves you. Each and every one of you.

That's why WhiteHouse.gov is now accepting your questions on the economy. It's broken down into several categories, but multiple sections are utterly dominated by marijuana reform questions. Apparently, Americans' #1 economic concern is that marijuana is illegal.

As we've done several times now, let's make damn sure the new administration sees the potency of our movement by keeping drug policy reform questions in top position. The site also encourages you to vote against questions you're less interested in, so feel free to do that too.

The point isn't that marijuana laws are necessarily the top economic issue right now, but rather that the drug war went over budget a long, long time ago. It's one bad program that needs to go immediately if we're serious about making responsible decisions in tough times. Filling our prisons with non-violent drug offenders was bad enough when we still had the money to do it. Those days are behind us and no excuses remain for the political culture that has long championed the grand fiasco that now festers before our eyes.

At this moment of grave economic uncertainty, the obligation of our leaders to justify their programs and expenditures has never been greater. Unless or until Obama can come forward and confidently defend every damn dollar that is poured into the war on drugs, these questions will continue to dominate every public forum he holds.

From our friends at SSDP, here's video of former drug czar Barry McCaffrey sounding strangely agnostic about the marijuana debate:



It's really a remarkable statement from a guy who presided over a massive escalation of the war on drugs. He says now that he's "not in public life" he doesn't care anymore. So I guess as drug czar he was just doing his job? Unbelievable.

Whether you love Ron Paul, hate Stephen Baldwin, or just like to watch videos on the internet, this is for you:

Pete Guither points out that police don't just enforce harsh drug laws. They actively try to convince legislators to support laws that give them more power to put people in jail. Something to keep in mind the next time police say they're "just enforcing the law."

guest column by Dr. Douglas Young, Prof. of Pol. Sci. & History at Gainesville College, Gainesville, GA The news of Olympic gold medalist Michael Phelps smoking pot should re-energize the marijuana legalization debate because America should be a free marketplace of ideas where ALL perspectives joust. Yet to even consider legalization is often unacceptable in polite company. But, because all public policy should be rationally debated, let's at least look at some legalization arguments. I wish no one used any recreational drug (and I avoid them all). But if we must outlaw everything potentially dangerous, then we need a federal 30 mph speed limit and a ban on fatty foods greasing the obesity epidemic killing over 300,000 Americans annually (CBS News). Somehow we survived legal marijuana until 1937. It actually helped finance our revolution, clothe the Continental Army, and provide the paper for our Declaration of Independence and Constitution. Washington and Jefferson grew it, and the latter even risked smuggling it out of Europe. In fact, before 1870, hemp oil ranked second only to whale oil in creating light around the world. During World War II, the feds pushed hemp production to make rope for the war effort. Dope got banned because federal cops wanted to keep their jobs (alcohol prohibition was repealed in 1933), cotton farmers wanted to end hemp competition, and whites linked pot to Mexican immigrants and black jazz musicians. Louis Armstrong never performed without it, and a later user, Beatle Sir Paul McCartney, still calls joints "herbal jazz cigarettes." But Caucasians feared white girls would "go crazy" on dope and become intimate with minority males. So, to avert "Reefer Madness," the weed got outlawed instead of the cancer sticks, liver poison, and "Mother's Little Helper" pills preferred by the ruling class. Today over 12 percent of federal and state inmates are doing time for pot, costing taxpayers over $1 billion annually (In These Times). A record 872,000 Americans were arrested for it in 2007 alone -- 89 percent just for possession (the FBI). In fact, an attorney on "The O'Reilly Factor" revealed a few years back that there were more lifers in California prisons for pot than for murder, rape, and kidnapping combined. So pot-smokers get locked up with and brutalized by our most violent felons. How's that for "rehabilitation"? Then their criminal records deny them student loans, good jobs, and even voting rights. Does our abuse of drug-users resemble how we used to mistreat the mentally ill? The medical evidence shows drug addicts are unwisely self-medicating a dopamine deficiency in the brain. They need treatment, not an 8 x 10 cell. How do you think future generations will judge us? William F. Buckley, Jr. noted that 400,000 police can't go after violent crimes and theft due to the endless "War on Drugs." There's also epidemic vice squad corruption with drugs since their price is so inflated precisely because they're illegal. Psst: The folks most against legalization -- are drug dealers! Why not tax our biggest cash crop and let cops chase violent felons? Doesn't prohibition fuel the forbidden fruit syndrome? The 1920s' alcohol ban criminalized a huge percentage of decent Americans, created organized crime in the US, and corrupted thousands of police and officials (even President Warren Harding and Chief Justice William Taft secretly drank). Though none is healthy, is pot remotely as bad as alcohol or cigarettes? CBS News reported that half of US hospital beds are filled by folks with alcohol-related problems, and we have 110,000 alcohol-lubricated deaths every year. Also, the Justice Department admits that alcohol was the only drug found in 36 percent of all convicted criminals and is a factor in over 40 percent of murders. Cigarettes are as addictive as heroin (former Surgeon General C. Everett Koop), do far more bodily harm than any opiate (addiction medicine specialist Dr. Drew Pinsky), and kill 430,000 Americans a year (CDC). My hygienist says they can even cause teeth to fall out in your thirties. Though pot is psychologically addictive for some, no one ever overdosed, got cancer, or died from marijuana. Nor do people get violent on it (as Bill Maher says, "Forgetting to kill your wife on pot, okay"). Also, studies show most pot-smokers do not graduate to harder illegal drugs. Legalization doesn't mean more pot smoking. In Holland, where marijuana is tolerated, just 12 percent of Dutch aged 15-24 said they used pot in 2005. But, in nearby France, where it's illegal, 24 percent of French youths admitted smoking it that year. And, in the U.S., almost 28 percent of Americans 18-25 said they used marijuana in 2004-5. Yet, with effective health classes and ad campaigns, U.S. tobacco and alcohol consumption have gone way down in recent years. Better education can lower pot use as well. Though 12 states have passed referenda liberalizing marijuana laws, the feds keep vetoing our constitutional democratic states' rights. Ultimately, either we're for less government or we're not. Is it really state business what consenting adults do in their own home? Must we have a national nanny state with Big Brother jailing citizens for a weed? And wouldn't our libertarian Founding Fathers be appalled at this gross encroachment on our privacy rights? Let's at least debate returning to our roots and finally standing up for freedom for a change. Exactly why not?

So, I’m checking out High Times' Top 10 News Articles of 2008 (the stories that got the most traffic on their site) and noticed that I wrote two of them (#1 and #9). Both are crazy marijuana stories that never brought us the traffic I expected, but seem to have done well on the HT site. We allow our material to be reprinted as long as StoptheDrugWar.org is credited, so this is totally legit. I guess it kinda sucks for us that they pulled more traffic from our content than we did, but it’s fun to know that I rule the High Times news archive.

Anyway, since you cool dudes at High Times are obviously reading my blog, I’d like to be perfectly clear about the fact that I will write even better articles for you if you give me some money.

President-elect Obama’s Change.gov website has opened a new round of questions, providing us yet another opportunity to push drug policy reform into the political mainstream. We won the last round of voting, making a marijuana legalization question the top vote-getter on the entire site.

Simply click here and create an account. Scroll through to find drug policy-related questions and vote them up. You can also submit your own. This time, the questions are broken into categories, so I assume the top question in each will get a response. Currently, there’s a drug war question in 2nd place in the "national security" section, so please start by voting for that (it’s our best chance). The "additional issues" section has several good ones as well and I'm sure there are questions in other categories that I've missed.

Keep in mind that you can vote against questions as well, so feel free to use the down-vote in a way that reflects your personal political priorities. Finally, please send your friends the link and encourage them to participate as well. Seeing consistent support for drug policy reform on his own site might give Obama exactly the cover he needs to maybe actually do something.

I haven’t yet discussed last week’s news that a major head stash of marijuana was found in the tomb of an ancient Chinese shaman. It’s significant because the stuff was clearly well grown, with an apparently decent THC content. My analysis: awesome.

Unfortunately, researchers couldn’t get the seeds to germinate, which sucks for breeders because the ‘Tomb Raider’ strain would’ve taken Amsterdam by storm. Of course, it would’ve been even cooler if it had been seedless to begin with, proving that even cavemen could grow better pot than the nauseating schwaggy sawdust being sold on the streets of D.C. and New York as we speak.

Regardless, this is another reminder that the cannabis plant has been with us from the beginning. The logical assumption is that its properties are intended to be useful to mankind, especially after those properties are revealed to be unique and widely regarded as beneficial by the population. Trying to eradicate it is as stupid as it is impossible. It was here 3,000 years ago, and it will still be here 3,000 years in the future. Unless, of course, the drug war has completely destroyed the earth by then.