Showing posts with label War on Drugs. Show all posts
Showing posts with label War on Drugs. Show all posts
12.10.2007
9.10.2007
"Experts" Discuss Gangs
Experts in perpetuating gang violence had a little meeting on the 8th. Everyone is very serious and concerned.
Did you hear that? Its official, ITS AN ISSUE!
What should we do, oh wise "experts"?
That should definitely solve the problem, more cops in schools. We all know that gangs are primarily a fun schoolyard activity. Bloods all over the Baltimore area are literally packing their bags because the local middle school is getting another rent-a-cop.
"Gangs" are not a problem created out of nothing. They are the product of poverty, weak family units, and the massive profitability of criminal enterprise, particularly the illegal drug trade. Was the drug trade mentioned ONCE is this meeting of supposed "experts"? Perhaps, but it seems any discussion it warranted was not worth printing. Can we really take this analysis of gangs seriously when it discounts such a large component of gangs and gang violence? I think not.
Frank Clark, director of the Gang Intervention and Investigation Unit for the Maryland Department of Juvenile Services, told his audience at a Catonsville library to be aware of large groups of young adults wearing red or blue colors, and that graffiti with five- or six-point symbols and numbers arranged in a certain order are generally signs of gang activity.
...
"We do have a growing problem in the state, and my biggest concern is the kids that it's affecting," Clark said. "We've got kids aspiring to be gang members. We've got gang members in Maryland as young as 7 years old. It's an issue."
Did you hear that? Its official, ITS AN ISSUE!
What should we do, oh wise "experts"?
In city schools, officials have formulated a safety plan that includes initiatives to combat gangs, primarily in middle and high schools. Last spring, officials identified about 30 city schools that have gangs in them. This year's school budget includes an additional $1 million for more school police officers and $1.8 million for more hall monitors, along with a Gang Resistance Education and Training program in schools identified as having gang problems.
That should definitely solve the problem, more cops in schools. We all know that gangs are primarily a fun schoolyard activity. Bloods all over the Baltimore area are literally packing their bags because the local middle school is getting another rent-a-cop.
"Gangs" are not a problem created out of nothing. They are the product of poverty, weak family units, and the massive profitability of criminal enterprise, particularly the illegal drug trade. Was the drug trade mentioned ONCE is this meeting of supposed "experts"? Perhaps, but it seems any discussion it warranted was not worth printing. Can we really take this analysis of gangs seriously when it discounts such a large component of gangs and gang violence? I think not.
8.15.2007
CATO: Equal Justice?
Ugh.
AKA: Winning the war on drugs while losing the war on murder.
Mary Winkler is out of jail. She served 67 days after her conviction for shooting her husband in the back as he lay in bed and killing him. Now she’ll go back to work at the dry cleaners in McMinnville, Tennessee, and seek to regain custody of her children.
Meanwhile, Will Foster was sentenced to 93 years for using marijuana to relieve the pain of his acute rheumatoid arthritis. An appeals court reduced the sentence to 20 years, and Gov. Frank Keating made him serve more than four years before granting him parole.
AKA: Winning the war on drugs while losing the war on murder.
8.13.2007
The Baltimore Hating Continues at Red Maryland
The new hater over at backwoods Maryland is yet another concerned citizen, Chet Dembeck. He is terribly upset that "gentrified" areas of Baltimore, like (get this) Locust Point and Hampden will be "hurt" by the election of Mayor Dixon.
First, Hampden is GENTRIFIED? Ok then, I suppose I will continue, though I once again doubt whether this critic of Baltimore has actually entered the city.
Of course there is the not so subtle endorsement of Keiffer Mitchell because he has uttered the words "zero tolerance." Crime policy that leads to the illegal arrest of thousands of (black) citizens is like candy to GOP'ers. Despite the policy barely affecting murder stats in the city, and the faced with a police department that is known for fudging numbers, I have less faith in zero tolerance than our unknown critic, Last Reporter. It might also be good to point out, that despite his support of zero-tolerance policing and the civil rights violations it causes, Last Reporter DESPISES it's Maryland architect, Martin O'Malley, as well as his surveillance plans. Seems to me that citywide surveillance is all part of the police state Last Reporter so gleefully advocates.
Really though, how can you tear down the idea of "strong government" in on paragraph and advocate authoritarian police strategies in the next? I would posit that it is because Last Reporter cares nothing about Baltimore City beyond making political points about Democratic policy in general.
Finally, as my previous post shows, there is absolutely nothing that will stop the violence caused by drug prohibition besides legalization in some form. The people who advocate zero tolerance policing are the farthest from affecting any real change in Baltimore. They are much more concerned about protecting "gentrified" (white) Baltimore, than actually saving the whole city.
First, Hampden is GENTRIFIED? Ok then, I suppose I will continue, though I once again doubt whether this critic of Baltimore has actually entered the city.
Of course there is the not so subtle endorsement of Keiffer Mitchell because he has uttered the words "zero tolerance." Crime policy that leads to the illegal arrest of thousands of (black) citizens is like candy to GOP'ers. Despite the policy barely affecting murder stats in the city, and the faced with a police department that is known for fudging numbers, I have less faith in zero tolerance than our unknown critic, Last Reporter. It might also be good to point out, that despite his support of zero-tolerance policing and the civil rights violations it causes, Last Reporter DESPISES it's Maryland architect, Martin O'Malley, as well as his surveillance plans. Seems to me that citywide surveillance is all part of the police state Last Reporter so gleefully advocates.
Really though, how can you tear down the idea of "strong government" in on paragraph and advocate authoritarian police strategies in the next? I would posit that it is because Last Reporter cares nothing about Baltimore City beyond making political points about Democratic policy in general.
Finally, as my previous post shows, there is absolutely nothing that will stop the violence caused by drug prohibition besides legalization in some form. The people who advocate zero tolerance policing are the farthest from affecting any real change in Baltimore. They are much more concerned about protecting "gentrified" (white) Baltimore, than actually saving the whole city.
8.10.2007
3,200 Vials in Half a Day
This is what counts for "progress" in the drug war. Just look at the video on the Sun's website. Like I always say, this is a joke.
Imagine for a moment that the government was trying to stem the flow oranges into the country. Well, this would be the equivalent of seizing 20 crates of Oranges, while billions still make into supermarkets across the nation.
Will this arrest in any way reduce the availability of heroin in Baltimore? Of course not, not even for half a day.
Will another distribution operation, one that is even smarter and more secretive than before, pop up in the next few days. Of course it will.
Will these criminals be kept in jail, unable to peddle drugs for at least a few years?
Who can be sure?
After more than a MONTH of extremely expensive surveillance and thousands of man hours, the police have effectively done NOTHING.
Such is progress.
Update: By the way, if anyone in Baltimore, Annapolis, or DC want to really do something about drugs and violence associated with their illegal status, try legalization.
(image and caption originally posted at EH.net encyclopedia)
Imagine for a moment that the government was trying to stem the flow oranges into the country. Well, this would be the equivalent of seizing 20 crates of Oranges, while billions still make into supermarkets across the nation.
Will this arrest in any way reduce the availability of heroin in Baltimore? Of course not, not even for half a day.
Will another distribution operation, one that is even smarter and more secretive than before, pop up in the next few days. Of course it will.
Will these criminals be kept in jail, unable to peddle drugs for at least a few years?
Hill pleaded guilty to an intent-to-distribute charge in 2004, and received a suspended sentence with probation. The year after, he violated his probation and was ordered to spend a year in prison, electronic court records show.
Burton was charged with drug possession last June and was given one-year probation by a city District Court judge. That probation ended July 24.
Who can be sure?
After more than a MONTH of extremely expensive surveillance and thousands of man hours, the police have effectively done NOTHING.
Such is progress.
Update: By the way, if anyone in Baltimore, Annapolis, or DC want to really do something about drugs and violence associated with their illegal status, try legalization.
Roughly speaking, therefore, there have been two periods with high homicide rates in U.S. history, the 1920-1934 period and the 1970-1990 period (Friedman 1991). Both before the first episode and between these two episodes, homicide rates were relatively low or clearly declining. Prima facie, this pattern is consistent with the hypothesis that alcohol prohibition increased violent crime: homicide rates are high in the 1920-1933 period, when constitutional prohibition of alcohol was in effect; the homicide rate drops quickly after 1933, when Prohibition was repealed; and the homicide rate remains low for a substantial period thereafter. Further, the homicide rate is low during the 1950s and early 1960s, when drug prohibition was in existence but not vigorously enforced, but high in the 1970-1990 period, when drug prohibition was enforced to a relatively stringent degree (Miron 1999).
(image and caption originally posted at EH.net encyclopedia)
7.25.2007
7.23.2007
7.02.2007
Just a quick note or two
1. I can only hope that if/when I get convicted of perjury and obstruction of justice, I have a buddy in the White House to commute my sentence and group of wacko followers to pay my $250,000 fine.
This guy certainly didn't.
Neither did this lady, despite her "poor memory."
Am I saying these people deserved commutations? Hell no. They deserve to be in jail, just like Scooter Libby.
2. I found the research paper I referred to in the UN post below. I only have a hard copy, but I am going to try to either type it out again (and make some much needed edits and updates), or find a digital copy.
For starters, any conservative UN haters should enjoy reading the Introduction to the Controlled Substances Act, where it states:
Thats right, even if the US wanted to change our drug laws, we would be constrained by this wonderfully inept treaty.
Anyone who knows squat about globalization and international relations will certainly enjoy this:
Its just hilarious to think that any sort of "international law" is going to constrain criminal organizations or even legal multi-national corporations when so much profit is involved. Multi-national corporations comply with international law, treaties, and trade agreements because in most cases because those laws cater, or at least do not significantly restrict their ability to do business. Its also important to note that many signatories to said treaty, including Peru, Columbia and Bolivia, are significant drug exporting nations. In 1987, over 15 years after signing the treaty, cocaine accounted for over 50% of Bolivia's export economy. Of course, back here in the US, citizens are buying drugs like hotcakes. Then, there are the nations that simply didn't sign the treaty, or have no interest in obeying it. Afghanistan makes a lot of heroin, particularly since the Taliban fell (even a dictatorship can't fully destroy the drug trade). Many nations serve as havens for drug money, such as Panama or the Cayman Islands, some individual syndicates are known to be hold over $10 billion in drug trafficking assets. It is hard to tell whether the criminals became multi-national drug operations, or the multi-national drug operations became criminal. However, with international and national law as it is now, the existence of these criminal operations, will be guaranteed for the foreseeable future.
And Mayor Dixon is talking about beefed up foot patrols. Others are talking about shutting down blocks and stopping and frisking and arresting and paroling and arresting and clearing the corner and arresting and three strikes and your are out and .. and.. and.. and doing the same thing over and over and over again and expecting a different result is a sign of mental defect.
Though he hasn't a chance in hell, the socialist candidate for Mayor has a good idea. It doesn't go far enough though.
I want the profitability taken out of the drug game in Baltimore. I want real jobs and better schools to take the place of the drug game and the violent mindset it has played the largest part in inspiring. I want drugs like heroin and cocaine to be produced by hospitals and sent to licensed locations for their sale/distribution. I want the drug dealers to be left on the corner with no one left to sell to be because down at the hospital, or the drug distribution center, the drugs are safer, cheaper and more consistent is better.
And yeah, I want the "drug war" to continue for a few more years, but it will be more of a war against illegal sale of drugs (which of course, will no longer be profitable). Possession of all drugs should be legal. Impairment while driving or operating machinery is still illegal, and the consumption of these substances, much like alcohol must occur on private property or inside of a licensed business. Drugs such as hallucinogens, party drugs such as MDMA, and marijuana, should in my opinion be fully legalized, heavily regulated, heavily taxed, and be sold only at licensed locations.
Would illegal dealers continue to try to sell their product, possibly to the many who may at first be distrustful of the legal distribution process? Of course. Would police and the community have a significant hand up in cleaning up the streets? If the state and the government are truly effective in severely reducing the profitability of the drug trade, then the answer is most definitely yes.
This became more than a quick note, and for that I am truly sorry.
This guy certainly didn't.
Neither did this lady, despite her "poor memory."
The judge increased her sentence because her testimony substantially interfered with justice at Perry's trials and because she testified falsely at her own trial, when she claimed her earlier testimony was a mistake caused by poor memory, the statement said.
Am I saying these people deserved commutations? Hell no. They deserve to be in jail, just like Scooter Libby.
2. I found the research paper I referred to in the UN post below. I only have a hard copy, but I am going to try to either type it out again (and make some much needed edits and updates), or find a digital copy.
For starters, any conservative UN haters should enjoy reading the Introduction to the Controlled Substances Act, where it states:
The United States has joined with other countries in executing an international treaty, entitled the Convention on Psychotropic Substances and signed at Vienna, Austria, on February 21, 1971, which is designed to establish suitable controls over the manufacture, distribution, transfer, and use of certain psychotropic substances. The Convention is not self-executing, and the obligations of the United States thereunder may only be performed pursuant to appropriate legislation. It is the intent of the Congress that the amendments made by this Act, together with existing law, will enable the United States to meet all of its obligations under the Convention and that no further legislation will be necessary for that purpose.
Thats right, even if the US wanted to change our drug laws, we would be constrained by this wonderfully inept treaty.
Anyone who knows squat about globalization and international relations will certainly enjoy this:
The Congress has long recognized the danger involved in the manufacture, distribution, and use of certain psychotropic substances for nonscientific and nonmedical purposes, and has provided strong and effective legislation to control illicit trafficking and to regulate legitimate uses of psychotropic substances in this country. Abuse of psychotropic substances has become a phenomenon common to many countries, however, and is not confined to national borders. It is, therefore, essential that the United States cooperate with other nations in establishing effective controls over international traffic in such substances.
Its just hilarious to think that any sort of "international law" is going to constrain criminal organizations or even legal multi-national corporations when so much profit is involved. Multi-national corporations comply with international law, treaties, and trade agreements because in most cases because those laws cater, or at least do not significantly restrict their ability to do business. Its also important to note that many signatories to said treaty, including Peru, Columbia and Bolivia, are significant drug exporting nations. In 1987, over 15 years after signing the treaty, cocaine accounted for over 50% of Bolivia's export economy. Of course, back here in the US, citizens are buying drugs like hotcakes. Then, there are the nations that simply didn't sign the treaty, or have no interest in obeying it. Afghanistan makes a lot of heroin, particularly since the Taliban fell (even a dictatorship can't fully destroy the drug trade). Many nations serve as havens for drug money, such as Panama or the Cayman Islands, some individual syndicates are known to be hold over $10 billion in drug trafficking assets. It is hard to tell whether the criminals became multi-national drug operations, or the multi-national drug operations became criminal. However, with international and national law as it is now, the existence of these criminal operations, will be guaranteed for the foreseeable future.
And Mayor Dixon is talking about beefed up foot patrols. Others are talking about shutting down blocks and stopping and frisking and arresting and paroling and arresting and clearing the corner and arresting and three strikes and your are out and .. and.. and.. and doing the same thing over and over and over again and expecting a different result is a sign of mental defect.
Though he hasn't a chance in hell, the socialist candidate for Mayor has a good idea. It doesn't go far enough though.
I want the profitability taken out of the drug game in Baltimore. I want real jobs and better schools to take the place of the drug game and the violent mindset it has played the largest part in inspiring. I want drugs like heroin and cocaine to be produced by hospitals and sent to licensed locations for their sale/distribution. I want the drug dealers to be left on the corner with no one left to sell to be because down at the hospital, or the drug distribution center, the drugs are safer, cheaper and more consistent is better.
And yeah, I want the "drug war" to continue for a few more years, but it will be more of a war against illegal sale of drugs (which of course, will no longer be profitable). Possession of all drugs should be legal. Impairment while driving or operating machinery is still illegal, and the consumption of these substances, much like alcohol must occur on private property or inside of a licensed business. Drugs such as hallucinogens, party drugs such as MDMA, and marijuana, should in my opinion be fully legalized, heavily regulated, heavily taxed, and be sold only at licensed locations.
Would illegal dealers continue to try to sell their product, possibly to the many who may at first be distrustful of the legal distribution process? Of course. Would police and the community have a significant hand up in cleaning up the streets? If the state and the government are truly effective in severely reducing the profitability of the drug trade, then the answer is most definitely yes.
This became more than a quick note, and for that I am truly sorry.
6.26.2007
The UN's War on Drugs
If you didn't know already, the UN, not the USA, has played the largest part in criminalizing drugs in our Country, and around the world. Not until the UN codified their drug provisions did the US follow in kind. I only know this because I wrote a research paper on the international laws that truly dictate our drug laws in the USA. Hopefully I can dig it out of my closet and post some links/excerpts.
Either way, this story is interesting. Now, the article claims that drug use and production is "down", however the truth is that is has simply not grown at as large a rate. Its static.
Basically, nothing is changing. Drugs aren't disappearing, they are experiencing the same multi-billion dollar market as usual. This story makes for some fun propaganda though.
Does anyone else find this paragraph disturbing?
Clearly national sovereignty is no issue for the UN. But its sad to see such a large group caught in such delusion. A "society free of drug abuse" is such a joke I makes me sick. Reality isn't important to these folks, apparently.
Their "Youth Charter for a Twenty-First Century Free of Drugs" could be a textbook in delusion.
Drugs are chemicals and plants that people take to get high. "Drugs", the simple substances, cause no violence. The ILLEGAL DRUG TRADE causes crime and violence, and overzealous police action causes violations of our rights.
Of course, this could be different in other nations, particularly in drug producing nations. But isn't that just why this UN policy is so stupid in the first place? Every nation has their own situation, and should be free to make laws without fear of international retribution by the UN.
Maybe this is just some angry screed against those who claim that "drugs" imprison people. In fact, it is completely stupid international and federal laws which are imprisoning people for taking liberty with their own bodies.
Either way, this story is interesting. Now, the article claims that drug use and production is "down", however the truth is that is has simply not grown at as large a rate. Its static.
"For almost all drugs – cocaine, heroin, cannabis and amphetamines – there are signs of overall stability, whether we speak of production, trafficking or consumption," he said, commenting on the agency's annual drug report that was released Monday.
In a telephone interview from the agency's Vienna headquarters, Mr. Costa said, "The general message of this report is that we have some pretty robust evidence that containment, a word we first used in 2004, is becoming a trend, though we need in the next few years to prove that it is statistically and logically strong."
"It still could be a fluke," he said, "but we hope to prove that it's now cyclical."
Basically, nothing is changing. Drugs aren't disappearing, they are experiencing the same multi-billion dollar market as usual. This story makes for some fun propaganda though.
Does anyone else find this paragraph disturbing?
The release of the new drug report coincides with the International Day Against Drug Abuse and Illicit Trafficking, a day created by the UN "as an expression of its determination to strengthen action and cooperation to achieve the goal of an international society free of drug abuse." In recognition of the awareness day, nations from around the world have renewed their pledge to continue fighting illegal drugs.
Clearly national sovereignty is no issue for the UN. But its sad to see such a large group caught in such delusion. A "society free of drug abuse" is such a joke I makes me sick. Reality isn't important to these folks, apparently.
Their "Youth Charter for a Twenty-First Century Free of Drugs" could be a textbook in delusion.
Considering that we live in a world in which drug trafficking and drug use constitute a threat to the development and progress of our societies, that drugs engender ever more violence, crime, exploitation and other violations of our rights, we urge our countries to combat these threats and, to this end, to guarantee peace, freedom, democracy, solidarity, justice, protection of the environment and access to employment,
Drugs are chemicals and plants that people take to get high. "Drugs", the simple substances, cause no violence. The ILLEGAL DRUG TRADE causes crime and violence, and overzealous police action causes violations of our rights.
Of course, this could be different in other nations, particularly in drug producing nations. But isn't that just why this UN policy is so stupid in the first place? Every nation has their own situation, and should be free to make laws without fear of international retribution by the UN.
Maybe this is just some angry screed against those who claim that "drugs" imprison people. In fact, it is completely stupid international and federal laws which are imprisoning people for taking liberty with their own bodies.
Hamm: "Drug dealers in Baltimore are finally getting the message..."
So Baltimore police arrested 7 men involved with what we are told is a "large" heroin operation. Thats all well and good I suppose, despite the fact that every junkie in the city will still get high tonight and by now another crew has probably already taken over the territory vacated by these men.
Let me cut right to the bullshit, as it were. Commissioner Hamm had this to say:
Is anyone else horribly disturbed at how delusional this man is? Finally getting the message? Hamm, and all those who follow his drug control strategy are ignoring reality. If Hamm and his department seriously think for a second that they have taught anyone in the drug game a "lesson" with these arrests, they are more than delusional, they should be up for retirement.
For those dead set on getting a piece of that $20,000 a day, jail is an afterthought, or even a necessary consequence. Its a poisonous mindset, one that combines the worst elements of criminality and capitalism. Its not to say that introducing government oversight and regulation and creating a legal market would remove all of the corruption, but would certainly remove the criminality, and violence and blight that comes with it.
This is why Hamm's comments are so disturbing. At best, he is trumpeting bullshit knowingly, at the behest of the Mayor. At worst, he lacks an understanding of the very people that make up the criminal element in the city he is sworn to protect.
Let me cut right to the bullshit, as it were. Commissioner Hamm had this to say:
Baltimore Police Commissioner Leonard Hamm said he hoped “that drug dealers in Baltimore are finally getting the message that if they continue plying their deadly trade, they will be caught and severely punished.”
Is anyone else horribly disturbed at how delusional this man is? Finally getting the message? Hamm, and all those who follow his drug control strategy are ignoring reality. If Hamm and his department seriously think for a second that they have taught anyone in the drug game a "lesson" with these arrests, they are more than delusional, they should be up for retirement.
For those dead set on getting a piece of that $20,000 a day, jail is an afterthought, or even a necessary consequence. Its a poisonous mindset, one that combines the worst elements of criminality and capitalism. Its not to say that introducing government oversight and regulation and creating a legal market would remove all of the corruption, but would certainly remove the criminality, and violence and blight that comes with it.
This is why Hamm's comments are so disturbing. At best, he is trumpeting bullshit knowingly, at the behest of the Mayor. At worst, he lacks an understanding of the very people that make up the criminal element in the city he is sworn to protect.
6.25.2007
Drugs! OH MY!
Check out this hilarious Examiner article. Its a great example of a "Freak out the Parents" puff peice.
Well, actually, many of them do. Do some of them put Marijuana in it? Perhaps, though my experience has been that users find preparing a hookah for marijuana use is both too time consuming and rather wasteful. Of course, that doesn't stop Mike Gimble from making his "point". I dunno, any teenager who can both buy a hookah (nearly $100 I think, and only available to those over 18) and keep it hidden from parents (they can be rather large and produce a huge amount of smoke) is already most likely showing some more prominent warning signs of drug use/addiction.
Yeah kids, stay away from stimulants. Mommy needs her coffee and three cigarettes to wake up in the morning, and yeah, your brother Joey needs his Adderall so he can get straight A's in college, and every sports star around is jocking some sort of energy drink, but you stay away from those stimulants. Wait, take this sudafed for your stuffy nose and wash it down with this Dr. Pepper.
Gimble finally gets around to saying something MEANINGFUL in the final paragraph.
Agreed. Though perhaps treatment would be easier to focus on if we all simply accepted the prevalence of drug use in our society and moved forward from there.
There is a reason for inane specialty products like this (and I can guarantee you that "teens" are the big buyers):
America, and more specifically, humans, like drugs. We enjoy (often OVERENJOY) mind altering experiences, from a cup of coffee, a runners high after a few miles, a shot and beer, a puff from a joint, an orgasm, a snort of cocaine, a mainline of heroin.
Gimbel is right, these kids will be addicted for the rest of their lives. But aren't we all slaves to our own addictions and fancies? Some addictions are more troubling than others, both for the addicted person and for the society around them.
We are left then with the choice of how to deal with both the addiction and with the addictive substance. When we realize that elimination of the addictive substance (the product), in a truly free and democratic society, is impossible, and that even a reduction in product levels does not seem to reduce demand, we must leave behind any strategy associated with criminalizing the possession or sale of the product. These strategies have proven to be ineffective, as extreme addiction and the ills associated with it have not been reduced, and have in fact increased.
We must turn to a harm reduction strategy which legalizes both the production and sale of the addictive substances. We must redirect our efforts to making the substance available to addicts in legal markets, thus reducing the violence associated with any trade in illegal products so high in demand. Any and all profits from this effort must be funneled, along with billions in federal and state funding, into numerous effective treatment programs aimed at all levels and segments of society. Programs should be available to all on a walk in basis for free.
Reducing the harm from trade in illegal goods and from addiction should be the main thrust of any drug policy interested in really improving the lives of the largest number of Americans. Until then, we can continue to twiddle our thumbs and fret over hookahs, flask sandals, and the kids drinking all of our caffeine and liquor.
Update: I think I should expand on what I meant by "But aren't we all slaves to our own addictions and fancies?"
Drug addiction is often seen as the most damaging of addictions. Illegal drug addicts are normally portrayed in the media as poor, criminal, dysfunctional, nonfunctional, unprofessional, and singularly driven by their addiction. In some cases, this mirrors reality. However, in many cases it does not.
Just think, can a multi-billion dollar industry survive by only selling to the poor and destitute? Selling only to those who must beg on the corner or steal to support their habit? Of course not. Someone is spending this money, and chances are that you know at least one or two of them.
But forget illegal drug addiction for a moment and think about what America seems to be addicted aside from billions of dollars in marijuana, cocaine, speed, psychotropics, and heroin.
Prescription drugs are a good place to start. Millions of Americans use amphetamines and narcotics legally every day. These drugs are distributed through pharmacies with the knowledge of Doctors. Often both the Doctor and the Pharmacist are complicit in serving the needs of an addict with a "recurring back problem." Yet we hear again and again how "immoral" it would be to "create a generation of addicts". Well, take your complaints to the "pain management" industry, keeping citizens filled to the gills with legal opiates. We don't hear about it because it doesn't lead to shootouts in the streets (only in a pharmacy, every once and a while).
What about sugar, or should I say, High Fructose Corn Syrup. Ask any "low carb" diet adherent about this one. One of the most highly addictive substances around, its in almost everything, and it is heavily subsidized by the government. If only diabetes and obesity got the same coverage as gang murders, you might see this made "illegal".
And of course, blogs can talk all they want, when it comes to shares of the internet, pornography wins, hands down. Another billion dollar industry, SEX is certainly something you never hear drug opponents decry as addictive, despite the serious chemicals released in the brain during orgasm. Well, the PORNO is feeding a rather pervasive ORGASM addiction (Buzzcocks anyone?) in the USA.
Of course, its silly to think the last two of these compare to the drug war in any real way, but I think they do serve to show that addiction is way of life for humanity, at least I believe it is. Acting as if it can be eliminated, or that simply by avoiding illegal drugs that these kids will avoid addiction for life is just silly.
Maybe its time for schools to introduce a class on identifying and treating addictive behavior of all kinds. Did this post make sense to anyone? I sure hope so.
Update 2: The current consensus in the medical community is that addiction is a disease, both mental and physical. Interesting. Lets go back to Gimbel's words.
I have a feeling we will all be addicts of some kind for the rest of our lives. Drug addicts? That is another story. However, in our current discourse, the term addiction seems only reserved for those who use drugs, who eat too much, or who enjoy gambling a bit too much.
Other addictions get funny names, I suppose to lighten the blow that most of us are suffering from them. If you spend 80 hours a week at work, you are a workaholic. If you have sex with numerous random people, you are a player (it helps to be male in this case). Maybe you just like to sit in front of the TV after dinner, and for 5 hours straight, watch all of your favorite shows in order, or TIVO'ing them to watch later. In this case, you are just a normal American! Don't get me wrong, I watch a lot of TV, but the stimulus is easily addicting and hypnotizing at the same time. Lets not even talk about the ever present need to remove all of the bold from my google reader.
Of all of our daily repetitive behaviors, how many contain some form of addictive behavior? I would wager a good bit. I must conclude that we are all diseased, with the distinct possibility of things getting worse before they get better. Now, who should we call, a doctor or a police officer?
Describing one of the latest trends in substance abuse, Baltimore County drug expert Michael Gimbel pulled out a pink-tinted hookah, its snaking hose dangling behind it.
“You think kids are sitting and smoking this for hours ... without [putting] marijuana in it?” he asked a roomful of Baltimore County school counselors Friday.
Well, actually, many of them do. Do some of them put Marijuana in it? Perhaps, though my experience has been that users find preparing a hookah for marijuana use is both too time consuming and rather wasteful. Of course, that doesn't stop Mike Gimble from making his "point". I dunno, any teenager who can both buy a hookah (nearly $100 I think, and only available to those over 18) and keep it hidden from parents (they can be rather large and produce a huge amount of smoke) is already most likely showing some more prominent warning signs of drug use/addiction.
He also said the Baltimore region has seen a surge in stimulant abuse, ranging from cigarettes to cocaine.
“Stimulants are probably the most popular drug going on with kids today,” Gimbel said.
He warned against the use of herbal supplements and caffeine drinks, such as Red Bull and Mountain Dew Amp, and said Adderall is the No. 1 prescription drug abused in the region.
Yeah kids, stay away from stimulants. Mommy needs her coffee and three cigarettes to wake up in the morning, and yeah, your brother Joey needs his Adderall so he can get straight A's in college, and every sports star around is jocking some sort of energy drink, but you stay away from those stimulants. Wait, take this sudafed for your stuffy nose and wash it down with this Dr. Pepper.
Gimble finally gets around to saying something MEANINGFUL in the final paragraph.
To address teen drug abuse and addiction, Gimbel said, more treatment options are needed.
“We don’t have enough treatment for people in Maryland. ... The hardest thing for kids to realize is they are going to addicts for the rest of their lives,” he said.
Agreed. Though perhaps treatment would be easier to focus on if we all simply accepted the prevalence of drug use in our society and moved forward from there.
There is a reason for inane specialty products like this (and I can guarantee you that "teens" are the big buyers):
Gimbel showed the counselors marijuana pipes concealed as lipstick containers and markers, Reef flip-flops with flasks embedded in the sole and a mini beer bong meant for quick drinking.
America, and more specifically, humans, like drugs. We enjoy (often OVERENJOY) mind altering experiences, from a cup of coffee, a runners high after a few miles, a shot and beer, a puff from a joint, an orgasm, a snort of cocaine, a mainline of heroin.
Gimbel is right, these kids will be addicted for the rest of their lives. But aren't we all slaves to our own addictions and fancies? Some addictions are more troubling than others, both for the addicted person and for the society around them.
We are left then with the choice of how to deal with both the addiction and with the addictive substance. When we realize that elimination of the addictive substance (the product), in a truly free and democratic society, is impossible, and that even a reduction in product levels does not seem to reduce demand, we must leave behind any strategy associated with criminalizing the possession or sale of the product. These strategies have proven to be ineffective, as extreme addiction and the ills associated with it have not been reduced, and have in fact increased.
We must turn to a harm reduction strategy which legalizes both the production and sale of the addictive substances. We must redirect our efforts to making the substance available to addicts in legal markets, thus reducing the violence associated with any trade in illegal products so high in demand. Any and all profits from this effort must be funneled, along with billions in federal and state funding, into numerous effective treatment programs aimed at all levels and segments of society. Programs should be available to all on a walk in basis for free.
Reducing the harm from trade in illegal goods and from addiction should be the main thrust of any drug policy interested in really improving the lives of the largest number of Americans. Until then, we can continue to twiddle our thumbs and fret over hookahs, flask sandals, and the kids drinking all of our caffeine and liquor.
Update: I think I should expand on what I meant by "But aren't we all slaves to our own addictions and fancies?"
Drug addiction is often seen as the most damaging of addictions. Illegal drug addicts are normally portrayed in the media as poor, criminal, dysfunctional, nonfunctional, unprofessional, and singularly driven by their addiction. In some cases, this mirrors reality. However, in many cases it does not.
Just think, can a multi-billion dollar industry survive by only selling to the poor and destitute? Selling only to those who must beg on the corner or steal to support their habit? Of course not. Someone is spending this money, and chances are that you know at least one or two of them.
But forget illegal drug addiction for a moment and think about what America seems to be addicted aside from billions of dollars in marijuana, cocaine, speed, psychotropics, and heroin.
Prescription drugs are a good place to start. Millions of Americans use amphetamines and narcotics legally every day. These drugs are distributed through pharmacies with the knowledge of Doctors. Often both the Doctor and the Pharmacist are complicit in serving the needs of an addict with a "recurring back problem." Yet we hear again and again how "immoral" it would be to "create a generation of addicts". Well, take your complaints to the "pain management" industry, keeping citizens filled to the gills with legal opiates. We don't hear about it because it doesn't lead to shootouts in the streets (only in a pharmacy, every once and a while).
What about sugar, or should I say, High Fructose Corn Syrup. Ask any "low carb" diet adherent about this one. One of the most highly addictive substances around, its in almost everything, and it is heavily subsidized by the government. If only diabetes and obesity got the same coverage as gang murders, you might see this made "illegal".
And of course, blogs can talk all they want, when it comes to shares of the internet, pornography wins, hands down. Another billion dollar industry, SEX is certainly something you never hear drug opponents decry as addictive, despite the serious chemicals released in the brain during orgasm. Well, the PORNO is feeding a rather pervasive ORGASM addiction (Buzzcocks anyone?) in the USA.
Of course, its silly to think the last two of these compare to the drug war in any real way, but I think they do serve to show that addiction is way of life for humanity, at least I believe it is. Acting as if it can be eliminated, or that simply by avoiding illegal drugs that these kids will avoid addiction for life is just silly.
Maybe its time for schools to introduce a class on identifying and treating addictive behavior of all kinds. Did this post make sense to anyone? I sure hope so.
Update 2: The current consensus in the medical community is that addiction is a disease, both mental and physical. Interesting. Lets go back to Gimbel's words.
..the hardest thing for kids to realize is they are going to addicts for the rest of their lives.
I have a feeling we will all be addicts of some kind for the rest of our lives. Drug addicts? That is another story. However, in our current discourse, the term addiction seems only reserved for those who use drugs, who eat too much, or who enjoy gambling a bit too much.
Other addictions get funny names, I suppose to lighten the blow that most of us are suffering from them. If you spend 80 hours a week at work, you are a workaholic. If you have sex with numerous random people, you are a player (it helps to be male in this case). Maybe you just like to sit in front of the TV after dinner, and for 5 hours straight, watch all of your favorite shows in order, or TIVO'ing them to watch later. In this case, you are just a normal American! Don't get me wrong, I watch a lot of TV, but the stimulus is easily addicting and hypnotizing at the same time. Lets not even talk about the ever present need to remove all of the bold from my google reader.
Of all of our daily repetitive behaviors, how many contain some form of addictive behavior? I would wager a good bit. I must conclude that we are all diseased, with the distinct possibility of things getting worse before they get better. Now, who should we call, a doctor or a police officer?
6.15.2007
6.07.2007
City Councilman Young Dares to Tell the Truth
We’re losing the war on drugs,” said Young, D-District 12. “When teenagers are getting gunned down on the street because of the drug business, then we have to rethink our approach.
(hat tip to commenter matt.)
Not since Kurt Schmoke has the city seen such honesty from it's politicians. Of course, the city is handcuffed by federal, and though most do not acknowledge it, international law through the UN and other trade agreements. There is no way the city could truly legalize drugs, however it is voices such as Young's and Schmoke's before him which will dissuade this country from our folly.
But can't we even discuss it like adults? Apparently not.
“Mayor Sheila Dixon is opposed to the decriminalization of drugs,” spokesman Anthony McCarthy said.
City Council President Stephanie Rawlings-Blake also disagreed.
“She understands that the drug trade is 99 percent of the root cause of violence,” said Shaun Adamec, her spokesman. “But it’s an idea that needs to be addressed on a national level.”
Yeah, lets discuss the next crime plan that won't work at all. Mr Young, have you considered a Mayoral run?
6.05.2007
Citywide Candidates, Where do you Stand on Decriminalization?
Sheila Dixon and Keiffer Mitchell have no comment. Taking a stand against the war on drugs is nothing new for Baltimore pols. Former Mayor and current Dean of Howard University, Kurt Schmoke had the courage to tell the truth and call a bad idea a bad idea, despite the political ramifications (which as I recall, were two successful terms as Mayor).
Update: This is bit old now, but Gregory Kane had a great editorial on Dixon's crime plan, and how it was absent even a mention of treating drug addiction or decriminalizing drugs and treating them as a public health crisis. Why?
Will any viable Democrat dare utter the "D" word? I share in Kane's doubts, but I value his normally conservative voice advocating a radical change in perspective.
Update: This is bit old now, but Gregory Kane had a great editorial on Dixon's crime plan, and how it was absent even a mention of treating drug addiction or decriminalizing drugs and treating them as a public health crisis. Why?
Decriminalizing drugs and treating addiction as a health problem were notably absent from Dixon's list of proposals. I can't blame her. Suggesting bold, risky and innovative proposals is no way to get elected mayor.
Will any viable Democrat dare utter the "D" word? I share in Kane's doubts, but I value his normally conservative voice advocating a radical change in perspective.
5.30.2007
Police Reaction to Drug Deaths is Laughable
As usual, the police reaction to drug related murders in Baltimore makes me laugh. The police just cannot understand why men who make money off of trading in illegal goods would not want to bring their business disputes to the authorities. I can't imagine it has anything to do with the fact that these disputes arise out of illegal actions. Why would a criminal risk incarceration to make a complaint to police. If they have lived in Baltimore for more than a few months, they should know how quickly police respond to the complaints of black citizens in bad neighborhoods. Even if the police did have the power to say, question Drug dealer A about his theft of Drug Dealer B's stash, or to take enforcer A to task for his assault of runner B for messing up the count on that morning's pull without having to arrest both for drug activity, it would probably not happen efficiently enough in a city where overtime and unsolved cases are the norm.
Anyway, onto the article:
Only somewhat? To what else do the police attribute these regular slaughters of young black men in our city? Perhaps we should find this "other" and declare war on it.
I am so tired of hearing new crime plans and new initiatives. None of them will work.
Baltimore's death toll will continue to rise until we end the war on drugs and divert our resources to a war on poverty and addiction. I hope someone can prove me wrong, perhaps someone currently running for Mayor, or maybe even President. I doubt it.
Anyway, onto the article:
Two men were killed in separate incidents last night and early this morning, pushing the pace of homicides in Baltimore to an average of one a day in May.
Law enforcement officials attribute at least part of the violence to drug turf battles and an increase in gang rivalries. In many cases, police and prosecutors complain that victims and witnesses are reluctant to cooperate with investigators, and instead settle scores outside of the city's criminal justice system.
Only somewhat? To what else do the police attribute these regular slaughters of young black men in our city? Perhaps we should find this "other" and declare war on it.
I am so tired of hearing new crime plans and new initiatives. None of them will work.
Baltimore's death toll will continue to rise until we end the war on drugs and divert our resources to a war on poverty and addiction. I hope someone can prove me wrong, perhaps someone currently running for Mayor, or maybe even President. I doubt it.
5.29.2007
Andrew Smith for Mayor?
I am not even sure if third party mayoral candidate Andrew Smith has gotten himself on the ballot yet, or if he ever will.
I don't know what he looks like, who he voted for in the past three elections, where he lives, anything beyond the 4 simple points on his website, yet I find him to be the most appetizing mayoral candidate for Baltimore yet.
Why? From Smith's website.
Simple facts, but powerful in the vacuum of talking points from city pols. One word, REEVALUATE just makes my day. Now whether Smith means this in modest or radical terms, I am not concerned. Here is a man who sees the status quo is no longer working, and that a fundamental change in our THINKING about the "drug war" is necessary before any changes happen.
Its a shame the only one saying it has little chance to win in Baltimore, where the Democratic Primary picks the next Mayor.
I don't know what he looks like, who he voted for in the past three elections, where he lives, anything beyond the 4 simple points on his website, yet I find him to be the most appetizing mayoral candidate for Baltimore yet.
Why? From Smith's website.
Education
Baltimore's failure to invest in our children is a failure to invest in our future. The sorry state of our school system has created generations without hope who see the only way out as a life filled with drugs and guns.
Crime
Baltimore's infamous homicide rate is the direct result of the drug war that rages in our neighborhoods. Until we reevaluate the War on Drugs we will never get rid of the gunmen that terrorize our streets.
Simple facts, but powerful in the vacuum of talking points from city pols. One word, REEVALUATE just makes my day. Now whether Smith means this in modest or radical terms, I am not concerned. Here is a man who sees the status quo is no longer working, and that a fundamental change in our THINKING about the "drug war" is necessary before any changes happen.
Its a shame the only one saying it has little chance to win in Baltimore, where the Democratic Primary picks the next Mayor.
5.21.2007
If I may Direct your Attention
This post could have easily been posted here as well. Some folks in Baltimore City are so desperate for solutions I think they have stopped considering the effectiveness and legality of their suggestions.
5.10.2007
O'Malley: "Drug Dealing is a Violent Crime"
O'Malley doesn't want to sign the drug sentencing reform that passed in the legislature this year. What an idiot. The Governor has no excuse not to sign this bill, aside from preserving his own ambitions for federal office. Mayor O'Malley would have signed this bill. Governor O'Malley "has reservations".
Instead of deliberation, we get a sound bite that could have been written by Karl Rove.
Drug dealing a violent crime eh? As I have said before, the Governor DOES NOT GET IT. Well, then perhaps the Governor should re-consider sending DRUG DEALERS to JAIL, where ILLEGAL DRUG USE AND SALE IS RAMPANT.
Yet O'Malley thinks we should send small time drug dealers, often addicts as well, to prison as a punishment. Sounds like we are sending them to the party (not really, but acting as if prison will "clean these folks up" is a JOKE).
The fact of the matter is, O'Malley is not a judge, neither is the legislature. Judges should not be constrained by mandatory minimum sentences, particularly when dealing with such an important population, criminals with the possibility to be reformed. These addicts could receive treatment, therefore, slightly negating their reason for selling drugs in the first place. The profit motive remains, but at least treatment would give these men and women a chance for redemption, as well as open space for the more violent members of the massive drug market in Maryland.
All of this said, I find O'Malley's position disgusting and out of character. I also find his waffling insulting. Its almost as if O'MALLEY WANTS TO MAKE A BIG DEAL OUT OF THIS VETO, hence his apparent publicity tour discussing it. He made his comments on Sirius satellite radio, but was sure to let the Washington post know.
I hope the Governor comes to his senses and signs this modest, but important reform into law. If he vetoes it, we will know it has everything to do with O'Malley's desire to look "tough on crime", and nothing to do with actually preventing it.
Instead of deliberation, we get a sound bite that could have been written by Karl Rove.
"I'm not sure that I can sign a bill that would do away with the penalties we have in Maryland -- or lessen the penalties -- for second-time drug dealers," the governor said on the Bill Press Show on Sirius satellite radio. "I think drug dealing is a violent crime."
Drug dealing a violent crime eh? As I have said before, the Governor DOES NOT GET IT. Well, then perhaps the Governor should re-consider sending DRUG DEALERS to JAIL, where ILLEGAL DRUG USE AND SALE IS RAMPANT.
The 1990 Census revealed that 7 out of 8 institutions conduct urine tests on inmates to detect drug use. Of the tests conducted between July 1, 1989, and June 30, 1990, evidence of drug use among State prison inmates was detected in about--
* 1 in 16 tests for marijuana
* 1 in 28 tests for cocaine
* 1 in 50 tests for methamphetamines
* 1 in 75 tests for heroin.
Among tests conducted among Federal prison inmates, positive test results were found in approximately--
* 1 in 100 tests for marijuana
* 1 in 250 tests for cocaine
* 1 in 250 tests for heroin
* 1 in 1,000 tests for methamphetamines.
Yet O'Malley thinks we should send small time drug dealers, often addicts as well, to prison as a punishment. Sounds like we are sending them to the party (not really, but acting as if prison will "clean these folks up" is a JOKE).
The fact of the matter is, O'Malley is not a judge, neither is the legislature. Judges should not be constrained by mandatory minimum sentences, particularly when dealing with such an important population, criminals with the possibility to be reformed. These addicts could receive treatment, therefore, slightly negating their reason for selling drugs in the first place. The profit motive remains, but at least treatment would give these men and women a chance for redemption, as well as open space for the more violent members of the massive drug market in Maryland.
All of this said, I find O'Malley's position disgusting and out of character. I also find his waffling insulting. Its almost as if O'MALLEY WANTS TO MAKE A BIG DEAL OUT OF THIS VETO, hence his apparent publicity tour discussing it. He made his comments on Sirius satellite radio, but was sure to let the Washington post know.
I hope the Governor comes to his senses and signs this modest, but important reform into law. If he vetoes it, we will know it has everything to do with O'Malley's desire to look "tough on crime", and nothing to do with actually preventing it.
5.01.2007
Dixon's Crime Plan will Fail
Mayor Dixon, in association with your local media, has rolled out another plan to stop crime in Baltimore City. I am sure this one will fail as miserably as every other plan brought forward by "experts" called criminologists.
The particular criminologist in this case is David Kennedy. You may remember his failed "crime plans" from the 1980's or his study in 1997 which came to the stunning and revolutionary conclusion that "criminals commit crimes". Thats right, it took a few years of study for this expert criminologist to find out that most violent crime in Baltimore is committed by a core group of 4,000 criminals. Groundbreaking, really. I was under the impression that crime was a product of each and every Baltimore citizen performing at least one crime a year.
There are some positive aspects to the program, but they are afterthoughts, not central points. Drug treatment and community involvement is mentioned. Quality of life arrests are no longer the focus, and arrests without charges are down.
However, the Mayor's plan in no way addresses the root of the violence in Baltimore City, in exorbitant profits that can be made in the illegal drug trade. Because of this, criminals are organized, powerful, and their ranks are CONSISTENTLY REPLENISHED. Programs to dissuade young men from joining gangs or slinging will be grossly ineffective as long as much of the city remains in poverty and the drug trade is so easily accessible and so very profitable.
Gangs are responsible for many of the killings recently in the city. And of course, this program apparently will "target gangs". But will it really? This program does nothing to address the root of gang violence in Baltimore City, the illegal drug trade. I mean, these gangs make money somehow, and I have a feeling most of it is coming from selling heroin, as well as other drugs.
Of course the solution then, seems to be to target heroin dealers, and shut them down. I would argue that stopping the flow of illegal drugs into America, therefore, into Baltimore, therefore into Park Heights, while preserving civil liberties at all levels is completely impossible. A joke, really.
Instead of presenting more of the same the City, the Mayor could do the right thing (political suicide or not). She could send a letter, along with community activists and city police, to the Governor and the Legislature, to the Congress and the President. In this letter, she must admit the complete impossibility of continuing the federally and state mandated Drug War to a successful conclusion. Dixon could join with the Mayor's of every major US city, all of which are gripped with drug related violence.
She should ask the congress and the President to consider revisiting our drug laws, and re-writing them in a way that allows for the removal of the profit motive from the illegal drug trade. This could be done in numerous ways, from the creation of monopolized market, to the wholesale legalization of controlled substances. The key must be to REMOVE THE PROFIT MOTIVE from illegal sale. IMO, I think it would be unjust to reintroduce that profit motive into the legal market for things such as heroin, cocaine, or meth. For this reason, the creation of a monopolized narcotics, cocaine, and methamphetamine market would be ideal. Addicts need to be able to get their fix in a safe, non-violence encouraging environment. Treatment is also important, but ending the violence relies on removing the illegal profit motive and nothing else.
There is NOTHING that would end the violence faster than the removal of the profit motive from the illegal drug trade, short of a comprehensive and effective plan to revitalize the urban poor in our cities. Poverty is a great contributor to violence, and the reason that poor urban areas become such havens for drug activity.
Drug legalization cannot be a replacement for a war on poverty. Poverty has played a major part in this cycle, and must be addressed.
Still, I cannot hold my tongue when the people of Baltimore are being fed the same line, over and over on crime prevention. Don't get me wrong, I am completely aware that the ideas prescribed here are well outside of the mainstream, and not likely to be proposed by anyone interested in having a political career in most of America in the next 15 years.
So when it comes to crime fighting plans in Baltimore City, we can expect more of the same for some time to come. I will assume that those who disagree with me on drug legalization will herald this as a good thing. I must remind them that the murders will not stop either, or be reduced considerably for a long time. That doesn't sit well with me, and it shouldn't sit well with Baltimore politicians who continue to rely on tactics that do not work.
Update:To be clear, GANG ACTIVITY IS A DIRECT OUTGROWTH OF THE ILLEGAL NARCTOTICS TRADE. Eliminate this trade, you eliminate the reason for these gangs' existence.
Yep.
Update 2:While reading the article I posted in the update, it is clear that the Drug Trade is more than a get rich quick scheme. For many, it is a conscious career choice. Gangs in Baltimore are highly organized in their recruitment, much like a powerful corporation. They seek employees in likely areas, prison blocks and blighted city blogs, places where hopelessness is all around. Those who join are set for life, and are expected to remain for that period of time. Drug dealing for gang members is a career, living. Older gang members see their gangs as community organizations.
Don't be naive. These groups are most likely funneling money into the coffers of Maryland and Baltimore politicians. What intelligent and successful multi-million dollar local business wouldn't be doing so?
The particular criminologist in this case is David Kennedy. You may remember his failed "crime plans" from the 1980's or his study in 1997 which came to the stunning and revolutionary conclusion that "criminals commit crimes". Thats right, it took a few years of study for this expert criminologist to find out that most violent crime in Baltimore is committed by a core group of 4,000 criminals. Groundbreaking, really. I was under the impression that crime was a product of each and every Baltimore citizen performing at least one crime a year.
There are some positive aspects to the program, but they are afterthoughts, not central points. Drug treatment and community involvement is mentioned. Quality of life arrests are no longer the focus, and arrests without charges are down.
However, the Mayor's plan in no way addresses the root of the violence in Baltimore City, in exorbitant profits that can be made in the illegal drug trade. Because of this, criminals are organized, powerful, and their ranks are CONSISTENTLY REPLENISHED. Programs to dissuade young men from joining gangs or slinging will be grossly ineffective as long as much of the city remains in poverty and the drug trade is so easily accessible and so very profitable.
Gangs are responsible for many of the killings recently in the city. And of course, this program apparently will "target gangs". But will it really? This program does nothing to address the root of gang violence in Baltimore City, the illegal drug trade. I mean, these gangs make money somehow, and I have a feeling most of it is coming from selling heroin, as well as other drugs.
Of course the solution then, seems to be to target heroin dealers, and shut them down. I would argue that stopping the flow of illegal drugs into America, therefore, into Baltimore, therefore into Park Heights, while preserving civil liberties at all levels is completely impossible. A joke, really.
Instead of presenting more of the same the City, the Mayor could do the right thing (political suicide or not). She could send a letter, along with community activists and city police, to the Governor and the Legislature, to the Congress and the President. In this letter, she must admit the complete impossibility of continuing the federally and state mandated Drug War to a successful conclusion. Dixon could join with the Mayor's of every major US city, all of which are gripped with drug related violence.
She should ask the congress and the President to consider revisiting our drug laws, and re-writing them in a way that allows for the removal of the profit motive from the illegal drug trade. This could be done in numerous ways, from the creation of monopolized market, to the wholesale legalization of controlled substances. The key must be to REMOVE THE PROFIT MOTIVE from illegal sale. IMO, I think it would be unjust to reintroduce that profit motive into the legal market for things such as heroin, cocaine, or meth. For this reason, the creation of a monopolized narcotics, cocaine, and methamphetamine market would be ideal. Addicts need to be able to get their fix in a safe, non-violence encouraging environment. Treatment is also important, but ending the violence relies on removing the illegal profit motive and nothing else.
There is NOTHING that would end the violence faster than the removal of the profit motive from the illegal drug trade, short of a comprehensive and effective plan to revitalize the urban poor in our cities. Poverty is a great contributor to violence, and the reason that poor urban areas become such havens for drug activity.
Drug legalization cannot be a replacement for a war on poverty. Poverty has played a major part in this cycle, and must be addressed.
Still, I cannot hold my tongue when the people of Baltimore are being fed the same line, over and over on crime prevention. Don't get me wrong, I am completely aware that the ideas prescribed here are well outside of the mainstream, and not likely to be proposed by anyone interested in having a political career in most of America in the next 15 years.
So when it comes to crime fighting plans in Baltimore City, we can expect more of the same for some time to come. I will assume that those who disagree with me on drug legalization will herald this as a good thing. I must remind them that the murders will not stop either, or be reduced considerably for a long time. That doesn't sit well with me, and it shouldn't sit well with Baltimore politicians who continue to rely on tactics that do not work.
Update:To be clear, GANG ACTIVITY IS A DIRECT OUTGROWTH OF THE ILLEGAL NARCTOTICS TRADE. Eliminate this trade, you eliminate the reason for these gangs' existence.
Sgt. Ted Friel runs a four-officer gang intelligence unit in the Eastern District, the first such mini-unit in the city. Other districts have begun to create their own.
"For the most part, the existing drug territories and the gang stuff goes hand in hand," Friel said. "The drug organizations have become the gangs."
Yep.
Update 2:While reading the article I posted in the update, it is clear that the Drug Trade is more than a get rich quick scheme. For many, it is a conscious career choice. Gangs in Baltimore are highly organized in their recruitment, much like a powerful corporation. They seek employees in likely areas, prison blocks and blighted city blogs, places where hopelessness is all around. Those who join are set for life, and are expected to remain for that period of time. Drug dealing for gang members is a career, living. Older gang members see their gangs as community organizations.
Don't be naive. These groups are most likely funneling money into the coffers of Maryland and Baltimore politicians. What intelligent and successful multi-million dollar local business wouldn't be doing so?
4.20.2007
Cocaine Seizure a Drop in the Bucket
I suppose a $3 million seizure of cocaine at the Port of Baltimore is newsworthy. I guess I just feel that someone need to provide some context. The article itself makes this seizure seem like a great victory in the drug war. Not even close.
The 310 pounds of cocaine found in a container downtown is drop in the bucket, a grain of coca in the nose of Baltimore's hipsters. From The White House's own drug enforcement page:
Seizures like this are good things, and they do reduce, though minimally, the amounts of illegal drugs on our streets. But they don't affect the bottom line of drug importers, or disrupt the domestic drug trade in any way.
It makes me wonder why this story is being reported in such an uncritical way. Its freedom from context, in my opinion, makes it more of a propaganda press release from State police in support of their misguided drug war.
It would be like reporting on a story of police preventing one murder in Baltimore, without mentioning the 79 that have not been prevented this year. The seizure of $3 million of cocaine is enough to draw readers' attention, its just a shame that nothing is done with that attention in the story beyond further cementing support for a failing policy.
The 310 pounds of cocaine found in a container downtown is drop in the bucket, a grain of coca in the nose of Baltimore's hipsters. From The White House's own drug enforcement page:
Cocaine is extracted from the leaves of the coca plant, which is indigenous to the Andean highlands of South America.24 It is estimated that the amount of pure cocaine that could have been produced in the Andean region increased from 640 metric tons in 2004 to 780 metric tons in 2005.
....
During FY 2003, Federal agencies seized 245,499 pounds of cocaine under the Federal-wide Drug Seizure System (FDSS). FDSS contains information about drug seizures made within the jurisdiction of the United States by the DEA, Federal Bureau of Investigation, U.S. Customs Service, U.S. Border Patrol, and U.S. Coast Guard.
Seizures like this are good things, and they do reduce, though minimally, the amounts of illegal drugs on our streets. But they don't affect the bottom line of drug importers, or disrupt the domestic drug trade in any way.
It makes me wonder why this story is being reported in such an uncritical way. Its freedom from context, in my opinion, makes it more of a propaganda press release from State police in support of their misguided drug war.
It would be like reporting on a story of police preventing one murder in Baltimore, without mentioning the 79 that have not been prevented this year. The seizure of $3 million of cocaine is enough to draw readers' attention, its just a shame that nothing is done with that attention in the story beyond further cementing support for a failing policy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
