Reefer Madness: Legalizing pot in no way makes us safer

James Capra: Legalizing pot in no way makes us safer | Dallas Morning News | News for Dallas, Texas | Opinion: Viewpoints
James L. Capra is special agent in charge of the Dallas Field Division of the Drug Enforcement Administration. He may be reached through piodallas@yahoo.com.

Special Agent Capra, It’s a Wonderful Life for you, because you’re the subject of today’s Reefer Madness.  Thanks also for providing us with your personal email address at piodallas@yahoo.com.  I’m certain our listeners will enjoy corresponding with you at piodallas@yahoo.com

The column last week by the local CEO of Mothers Against Teen Violence once again highlights the misguided understanding and myths about marijuana legalization. Joy Strickland is on point when she writes, “every child deserves a safe and supportive home, school and community.” But how does decriminalizing marijuana ensure that this will happen?

There is absolutely no evidence to suggest that legalization or decriminalization would reduce crime in our communities. However, ample evidence suggests that such action would result in more users and health costs.

First, notice the casual interchangeability between “legalization” and “decriminalization”.  “Legalization” to most people means “legal for the general public without restrictions”, like carrots.  “Decriminalization” means still illegal, just not something we’ll jail you for.  Capra knows “legalization” is a scare word and he’ll use it to defuse “decriminalization” at every opportunity.

Aside from that, Capra’s just got A Hole in the Head.  No evidence to suggest that decrim reduces crime?  Well, if you take something that was once a crime and make it no longer a crime, doesn’t that reduce crime right there by definition?  Other than the crime of buying, selling, and possessing, marijuana use isn’t linked to other crimes, so why should we expect the crime rate to decline?

More users and health costs, though, are some things we do have evidence on, but it suggests the opposite of Agent Capra’s claim.  Dozens of government and independent studies over the past 25 years have all concluded the opposite about marijuana decriminalization, including The National Academy of Sciences Institute of Medicine, who in 1999 concluded “In sum, there is little evidence that decriminalization of marijuana use necessarily leads to a substantial increase in marijuana use.” (National Academy of Sciences, Institute of Medicine (IOM). 1999. Marijuana and Medicine: Assessing the Science Base. National Academy Press: Washington, D.C., 102.)

Many advocates of decriminalization or legalization consistently point to The Netherlands and other European nations as an effective model for nirvana-like drug control. But these statements border on fantasy. Officials in The Netherlands blame the rise in crime in the past several years on their lax drug policy. Addicts are blamed for 80 percent of all property crime, and Amsterdam’s burglary rate a few years ago was twice the rate of Newark, N.J.

You know, I was just looking for the statistics on Dutch crime, Agent Capra, when lo and behold, I’m on the Google and It Happened One Night.  According to Statistics Netherlands, crime in large municipalities in the Netherlands (where the coffeeshops are) decreased more than the rest of the country and theft and burglary rates declined dramatically.

Amsterdam does rank as the city in the Netherlands with the most overall crime, at 170 incidents per 1,000 residents.  But according to the same database, between 1997-2004 (is that “a few years ago”?), the overall burglary rate in “highly urbanised areas” (>2500 addresses / sq km) of Holland ran from a high of 4.1% of the population 12 and older down to 2.5% in 2004.  Compare the same period in Newark, NJ, where the burglary rate was 7.5% of the population in 1994 and declined down to 4.7% in 2004, which is still higher than rate in Holland (and would be even higher if the Newark stats were only counting population 12 and older like Holland.)

The Dutch National Committee on Drug Prevention stated that marijuana use among students increased 250 percent in eight years. Most Dutch towns have adopted a zero-tolerance policy toward coffee shops that sell marijuana due to growing opposition to the idea that it is a relatively innocent soft drug. The Dutch have instituted new policies requiring 27 coffee shops in Rotterdam that sell marijuana within 200 meters of schools to close down by 2009.

Agent Capra, when Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, you might remind him that according to the European Monitoring Center on Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA, the EU’s ONDCP) latest report entitled, THE NETHERLANDS DRUG SITUATION 2006, the “last-year prevalence (%) of cannabis use” in the 15-24 age group was 14.3% in 1997 and had dropped to 11.4% (page 26) by 2005.  In the Dutch National School Surveys on Substance Use for pupils aged 12-18, the lifetime prevalence of cannabis use in 1996 was 22% and monthly prevalence was 11%, and those figures dropped to 19% and 9% respectively by 2003.

And Agent Capra, for a dose of American Madness, we should note that the lifetime prevalence and last-month prevalence of cannabis use among American teens in that same time period were no less than twice as high as the Dutch figures.

The decrease in coffee shops owes a lot to new regulations aimed to curb abuses by tourists, not the Dutch.  Also, new regulations forbidding tobacco smoking and forcing establishments to choose between liquor or cannabis are causing some businesses to stop selling cannabis or to close their operations.

The other myth intimated by Ms. Strickland is that the prisons are filled with drug users, in particular, marijuana users. This is an illusion that has been perpetuated by drug advocacy groups seeking to relax or abolish our marijuana laws.

The vast majority of inmates in state and federal prison for marijuana offenses have been found guilty of much more than simple possession. Some were convicted for drug trafficking and some for marijuana possession along with one or more other offenses. Also never mentioned is that many of those serving time for marijuana have plea-bargained down to possession in order to avoid prosecution on much more serious charges. Most criminals are repeat offenders with a lengthy history of other crimes.

This is a red herring argument by Agent Capra.  Whether someone goes to prison or not, the arrest for marijuana is unjust and a waste of police resources.  Marijuana arrests bring the collateral damage to one’s reputation, loss of student financial aid, loss of government assistance, loss of certain licenses, endangerment of one’s career, refusal of security clearances, addition of one’s DNA and fingerprints to a criminal database, possibility of losing child custody, loss of privacy while on probation, and so much more, including the time being locked up in a holding cell.

Furthermore, Agent Capra forgets to mention the Pocketful of Miracles used by prosecutors to lock up non-violent pot smokers for “crimes” other than possession: tacking on the crime of “intent to distribute” because you kept your stash of two different strains in two different baggies; adding “trafficking” because you handed a joint to a friend or had weed in a car; concocting specious “conspiracy” charges because you called a friend to share some reefer; enhancing penalties with “mandatory minimums” for possession of a firearm, even if it was your legal hunting rifle, or living with 1000′ of a school, which includes most city-dwellers; charging gardeners with “manufacture of a controlled substance” for their pot plant.

In fact, unless the police catch you smoking a joint by yourself, it’s hard to end up with only a charge of “simple possession”.

For Ms. Strickland to suggest that she “is not aware of one single death directly caused by marijuana” or that it “is irrational to lock up an individual because of what he chooses to put into to his own body” as justification to decriminalize is disturbing logic. Ongoing scientific research continues to prove the harmful effects of marijuana on the body. More young people seek treatment for marijuana abuse than for any other substance.

In addition, many serious motor vehicle accidents and fatalities have occurred where the drivers have been charged with being under the influence of marijuana.

After pointing out that marijuana doesn’t kill anyone and it’s wrong to lock people up who do no harm to others, you have to wonder what kind of logic wouldn’t send Agent Capra over the Lost Horizon.  It makes me wonder if it is even worth my time to point out to him that ongoing research has shown marijuana is excellent for treating neuropathic pain, has promise as a treatment for cancer, causes no lasting harm to mind or body even among chronic users, and that proving more teens need drug treatment by arresting teens for smoking pot and then forcing them to seek treatment is like proving that more kids became healthier eaters if Reagan succeeded in declaring ketchup a vegetable for school lunch.

And when Capra gets serious about locking up people for using prescription sleep aids, anti-histamines, anti-psychotics, and pain relievers, text messaging, eating fast food, and talking on their cell phone, I’ll be happy to talk with him about the serious motor vehicle accidents caused by pot smoking, since all the aforementioned have been considered the cause of many serious motor vehicle accidents.

The United States has had tremendous success in our fight against drug use and abuse:

• According to the most recent survey, 860,000 fewer teenagers are using illicit drugs now than in 2001 – a 24 percent decline.

The Monitoring the Future surveys in 2007 from the University of Michigan show that 14% of 8th, 31% of 10th, & and 41% of 12th graders reported they had used marijuana once in their lives.  In 2001 those figures were 20%, 40%, and 49% respectively.  But look a little farther back in time and you realize that the rates today are now back where they were in the early nineties.  So if Capra wants the credit for a 24% decline in teen drug use since 2001, will he be willing to accept the blame for a 24% increase in teen drug use from 1993-2001?  Marijuana was just as Forbidden in the nineties, Agent Capra.

The facts are that punitive drug policies, short of absolute tyrannical dictatorship, have little effect on the rates of drug use.  As a report by the World Health Organization recently concluded, “The U.S., which has been driving much of the world’s drug research and drug policy agenda, stands out with higher levels of use of alcohol, cocaine, and cannabis, despite punitive illegal drug policies. … The Netherlands, with a less criminally punitive approach to cannabis use than the US, has experienced lower levels of use, particularly among younger adults. Clearly, by itself, a punitive policy towards possession and use accounts for limited variation in nation level rates of illegal drug use.”

• Between 2001 and 2007, marijuana use by teens dropped by 25 percent. Methamphetamine use by teens plummeted 64 percent. The current use of Ecstasy has been slashed by 54 percent.

And barbiturate use is up among 12th graders since 2001, Vicodin, OxyContin, and Percocet use are up, ecstasy use is back up over the past three years after declining since 2001, inhalant use is climbing among 10th graders, and none of this means squat anyways, because, like most drug discussions, we cannot demonstrate a causality here.  Are fewer kids using drugs?  Sure, but is that a function of arresting adults for marijuana use, or does it owe to, let’s say, twelve states passing medical marijuana laws since 1996?  Does it mean 830,000 marijuana arrests in 2006 made kids scared to try drugs, or does it mean that a declining economy since 2001 equals less disposable income to spend on drugs?

If the rate of teenage use of drugs is the litmus test for criminalizing drug use, you’d better be prepared to outlaw cigarettes and alcohol.  Oh, wait, we tried that last one and it didn’t work out so well, did it?  Rain or Shine, prohibition or no prohibition, people still got their liquor, Agent Capra.

• Overall, drug use among workers is at its lowest levels in 19 years. Since 1988, positive work place drug tests have fallen by 72 percent, from 13.6 percent in 1988 to 3.8 percent in 2007.

Or, more likely, in twenty years 10% of the workforce has figured out how to beat a workplace pee test.  Consider also that according to the American Management Association, “the percentage of employers with testing programs has dropped steadily since 1996, from 81% to 62% in 2004“, so workers who’d fail a pee test at one company now have more more places to work that won’t pee test, so fewer workers are forced to have to cheat and fewer still will get caught.  Really, when it comes to work and drugs, workers know You Can’t Take It With You, but do workplace drug tests really eliminate drug use?  If Agent Capra told you that not one person failed a workplace drug test last year, would you believe that nobody with a job ever took drugs?

We would do well to continue our comprehensive drug enforcement strategy, to ensure that the next generation of Americans are free from the trappings of drug use and abuse and that they are afforded the blessings of liberty that are rightfully theirs. Legalizing or decriminalizing marijuana would hamper this progress and cause great harm to our schools and neighborhood communities.

All the blessings of liberty, except for Riding High on your free choice of socially-safer recreational intoxicants.  The next generation of Americans are rightfully allowed to consume alcohol and tobacco despite the hundreds of thousands of deaths in our neighborhood communities.  Taxing and controlling marijuana would certainly cause great harm to the teenage marijuana dealers in our schools unable to compete with a legitimate regulated business that checks IDs.

James L. Capra is special agent in charge of the Dallas Field Division of the Drug Enforcement Administration. He may be reached through piodallas@yahoo.com.

Make sure you drop Agent Capra a note at piodallas@yahoo.com, and let him know we want to protect our kids even more than he does; that’s why we oppose letting criminals and children control the lucrative cannabis market.  That’s Why We Fight.

Apologies to Frank Capra and all his fine movies that I used as terrible puns and non-sequiturs.