On Tuesday morning police were called to an elementary school in Meriden, Connecticut, after a four-year old special needs student brought nine bags of marijuana to school with him.

The boy, who attends the grade school in a pre-kindergarten class, took out nine individually wrapped bags for marijuana from his pocket at snack time to share with the other kids, telling them he brought everybody snacks.

In response to the incident, the Meriden Schools Superintendent, Mark Benigni, held a press conference at 4:30pm, saying that the teacher noticed the incident right away, and it was handled quickly by staff and police. It is obvious that the child did not know what he was bringing to school.

Police said that the bags looked like they were portioned out for sale, and as of this afternoon said that they did not know where the child got the marijuana. Both the Department of Children and Families, and the Meriden Police have both opened an investigation.

External Links:
http://easthaddam.patch.com/articles/four-year-old-found-with-marijuana-at-meriden-school

"Don't do something stupid, dude!"

We continue our 2011 Year-End Retrospective with a look at The Top Ten “Stupid Stoner Stories” of 2011.  (Yesterday we looked at The Top Ten Cannabis Science Stories of 2011 and we began on Tuesday with The Top Ten “Reefer Madness” Stories of 2011.  We end tomorrow with The Top Ten People in Marijuana of 2011.)  It’s a segment I’ve done for years now and it still bothers some people.  I always remind listeners that “smoking marijuana does not make one stupid; however, some stupid people do smoke marijuana”.  The point is to learn from the misfortune of others and to teach valuable lessons to the audience (like not wrapping your weed in aluminum foil to take through the airport, or speeding at 3am while smoking blunts in a car with expired tags and no insurance, and so on.)

Stupid exists in all sectors of society.  I want to make clear that the vast majority of cannabis consumers are not these people, any more than most everyone is not a Darwin Award winner.  In many of these stories, the stupid is someone simply wanting police help and wouldn’t even merit a ticket if pot weren’t illegal… so don’t forget that the biggest stupid is prohibiting adult use of marijuana in the first place.

The Top Ten “Stupid Stoner Stories” of 2011 (audio mp3)

10. Man’s dog throws out hash stash for cops

It’s almost unfair of me to classify poor Joel Dobrin as “stupid” for this story.  Except that I always counsel tokers to store their weed in the trunk when they’re on the road, which might have prevented this unfortunate traffic stop.

(The Dalles Chronicle) Joel Dobrin, 32, of San Diego, Calif., …was stopped at around 11 a.m. Feb. 9. Sherman County [Oregon] Sgt. John Terrel, while pulling Dobrin over on a routine traffic stop, reportedly spotted a sock being thrown from Dobrin’s 1998 GMC pickup. According to a sheriff’s office report, the traffic stop yielded some marijuana and hashish.

During the traffic stop Dobrin explained that when Terrel was stopping him, Dobrin attempted to stash his controlled substance. While doing this, Dobrin’s large dog grabbed the sock the controlled substance was stored in and began playing tug-a-war with the drug laden sock. Dobrin and the dog struggled for the sock, but the dog won and ultimately tossed the sock full of drugs out the window. Found in the sock was a user amount of marijuana and some hashish.

9. Note to marijuana smugglers: Make sure your trailer tags are current!

If I had an ounce for every time I’ve read a story about someone getting busted with weed because they were driving a car with expired tags (or a busted taillight, or were speeding), I could replace the weed that was seized in this traffic stop.  Is there not enough profit in smuggling to afford registration renewals?

(Brownsville Herald) An expired license plate caught the attention of a Cameron County sheriff’s deputy, who ended up making one of the largest drug busts so far this year for the sheriff’s department.

The deputy pulled over a tractor-trailer rig Saturday evening on Expressway 77 near Combes. During the routine traffic stop, authorities found 3,103 pounds of marijuana hidden under loads of papayas, Sheriff Omar Lucio said Monday.

The marijuana has an estimated street value of $2.5 million.

8. Locksmiths don’t check warrants or care about your marijuana… but cops do!

Trust me. My brother was a locksmith. They aren’t interested in your “failure to appear” bench warrants and your nickle bag of weed. When you lock your keys in the car, locksmiths are more worried you will freak out at the cost of your careless mistake.

A North Charleston woman called police for help but ended up in jail after being arrested for failure to appear in court and marijuana possession last week.

North Charleston police say 20-year-old Clarissa Johnson called them on Thursday afternoon at 5:20 p.m. after locking her keys in her car in the 3300 block of Goldenrod Road.

When police arrived to help, they discovered that the woman had an outstanding warrant for failure to appear in court.  After arresting Johnson, police then discovered that she was carrying 1.5 grams of marijuana.

7. Man fails drug test for cocaine, offers pot bribe to test taker to ignore it

Perhaps this is better classified as a “Crazy Cokehead” story…

(Orlando Sentinel) A Deltona man who failed a drug test at a pain-management clinic Thursday tried to bribe a medical assistant with marijuana to keep his cocaine-positive test results under wraps, authorities said.

Jeffrey Hoydic, 40, was charged with possession of marijuana with intent to sell after the Central Florida Pain Management clinic in DeBary contacted the Volusia County Sheriff’s Office about his alleged pot bribe, reports show.

At the clinic, Hoydic was told he tested positive for cocaine and had failed his drug test. After he was told he wasn’t allowed to take any drugs other than what was prescribed to him by the clinic, he allegedly asked the female medical assistant if she smoked and he pulled out five bags, each with a small amount of marijuana.

6. Don’t call 911, trust NORML: Growing pot will get you busted

I am just stunned that this guy didn’t get the memo that growing pot is illegal.  Just so none of you feel the urge to call 911 for grow crime information…

Connecticut Marijuana Laws:  Growing one marijuana plant = Felony, 7 years prison, $25,000 fine.

Federal Marijuana Laws: Growing one marijuana plant = Felony, 5 years prison, $250,000 fine.

(MSNBC) FARMINGTON, Conn. — Police say a Connecticut man called 911 to ask a dispatcher how much trouble he could get into by growing one marijuana plant, then was arrested.

Officers went to [Robert] Michelson’s house and seized a small amount of marijuana and drug paraphernalia. Michelson has admitted he bought seeds and equipment for growing.

5. Dad Tells Cops 14-Year-Old Stole Weed From His Son

The “stupid stoners” that bother me the most are the parents who involve their kids with marijuana.  It is the worst possible portrayal of our community and “What About the Children?!?” is one of the few powerful propaganda messages that prohibitionists have left.  So remember, this only exists because marijuana is illegal (and therefore insanely profitable) and not bought and sold in regulated stores that check ID.

(The Arizona Republic) An Arizona man was arrested after he told police a 14-year-old neighbor took $400 worth of marijuana from his 16-year-old son and refused to pay for it.

Police in Surprise, Arizona (yes, that’s really the name of the place) found Sean Corwin, 35, beating on the front door of a residence, reports Taylor Hill at The Arizona Republic. He told the cops that an occupant of the home had taken marijuana from his son, according to Sgt. Mark Ortega.

Police said they suspected Corwin had used his son to sell marijuana to the 14-year-old at a nearby park. Cops believe the 14-year-old boy grabbed the cannabis and ran home without paying, leading Corwin to drive to the home to demand payment.

Police found marijuana at the 14-year-old’s home, as well as two more bags of pot at Corwin’s home on West Central Street, Ortega said.

4. Parents arrested for video of 2-year-old smoking marijuana

Remember that this time of year, parents all across North America will consume beer and wine and spirits, often leaving their bottles and glasses in easy reach of the children.  Many pictures will be taken and videos will be filmed – and you won’t read any headlines about those parents going to court.

(Digital Journal) Hesperia – A California couple were arrested after San Bernadino County Sheriff’s department received a tip from an individual who had a video of the parents allegedly allowing their 23-month-old child to smoke from a marijuana pipe.

“(The video) depicts the child placing the (pipe) up to his mouth and he sucks on it, pulls it away, sucks on it, pulls it way. And it’s done about three times,” said Deputy Lisa Guerra of the Hesperia station. “And the pipe does have some marijuana residue in it,” according to the Victorville Daily Press.

Sheriff’s Department Deputy Lisa Guerra, of the Hesperia division, received a tip Saturday that 20-year-old Melanie Soliz and 24-year-old Blake James Hightower were abusive to their child and had given the toddler marijuana. The police were able to confirm the allegations that the child was indeed smoking what appeared to be drug pipe after viewing the video and were then able to locate the pipe after a search of the residence, reports the Daily Press.

I’m having difficulty pinning the stupid in this story – do I mock the stupid that leads a young couple to get their 2-year-old a pipeful of pot to smoke or do I mock the stupid that leads them to video record it or do I mock the stupid that has them giving this video recording to a third party who narcs them out?  It’s like a triple scoop of stupid on this sundae.

3. Wandering toddler on road with bag of weed gets national coverage

LOCH SHELDRAKE, N.Y. — Authorities have charged a 30-year-old New York woman with endangering the welfare of a child after police say her toddler wandered into an upstate road clutching a bag of marijuana.

Police in the Sullivan County hamlet of Loch Sheldrake say Lakeisha Owens was sleeping in her apartment around 5 p.m. Saturday when her 3-year-old daughter was nearly struck by a motorist on Route 52.

Officials say the motorist pulled over, removed the child from the road and called police. Authorities say the child was holding a bag containing 15 grams of marijuana.

Now, if this were just a toddler-wanders-into-road story, it would just be local Hudson Valley news.  It’s the bag of weed that spreads the story across the country, the implication being that here’s a no-good slacker stoner mom who can’t take care of her kids.  Certainly, leaving the half-ounce bag within reach of the child while you’re napping isn’t the most responsible act.  But we are talking about a toddler; it’s not as if there’s any danger of the kid whipping out some Zig Zags and twisting up a spliff. The danger to the kid was in wandering unsupervised on the road.  The kid could have been carrying a bag of potato chips and it would have been just as germane to the story.

2. Rhode Island lawmaker who ripped pot smokers busted for marijuana possession

Rep. Robert Watson, the leader of the Rhode Island House Republicans, drew fire in February when in the General Assembly he said, “I suppose if you’re a gay man from Guatemala who gambles and smokes pot, you probably think that we’re onto some good ideas here.” Watson refused demands to apologize.  Karma’s a bitch, dude.

nydailynews Republican House Minority Leader Robert Watson was arrested in East Haven, Conn., on Friday at a police checkpoint and was also charged with driving under the influence.

“Trace evidence of marijuana was discovered and I was charged with operating under the influence, a charge I vehemently deny,” Watson told the Providence Journal.

The 50-year-old smelled like alcohol and pot, he slurred his words, and his eyes “were extremely glassy and bloodshot,” according to the police report. Authorities found a “small plastic sandwich bag containing a green leafy plantlike substance and a small wooden marijuana pipe.”

His blood-alcohol level was 0.05%, which is below the state’s 0.08 limit.

1. Hotel explosion exposes danger of solvent-based marijuana hashish extraction

Butane hash oil, or BHO, is made through a process of forcing liquid butane through a tube filled with cannabis.  The butane strips the cannabinoids and oils from the plant material, where it collects in a container.  The butane evaporates away and the remaining oil is a very potent, very profitable, easily smuggled preparation of hashish.

Unfortunately, it is not always trained professionals following common-sense safety procedures who are making this BHO.  Sometimes it is a “stupid stoner” who doesn’t understand evaporated butane is a heavier-than-air gas that pools on the floor near pilot lights, switches, and electric heaters.

NEWBERG, OR (KPTV) - Police said a man suffered severe burns early Thursday morning in an explosion involving drugs inside a Newberg hotel room.

Investigators said Newberg-Dundee police officers were called before 3 a.m. to the Best Western Newberg Inn at 2211 Portland Road.

Police said officers found 29-year-old Christopher Thomas Heidt, of McMinnville, inside the hotel with serious burns. Heidt told authorities he was cooking hashish in the room just before the explosion, officers say.

The force of the explosion blew out the windows of at least one hotel room.

Andrea Marie Goe, 26, of McMinnville, and a 2-year-old girl were sleeping inside the room at the time of the blast, investigators said.

No, no, we said marijuana consumption by pregnant women! You need to chill for about 21 years, mini-Cheech!

A recent article by Storm Crow sheds light on a study that demonstrates a dramatic decrease in infant mortality rates for babies born testing positive for cannabinoids:

A total of 2,964 babies were drug-tested at birth to see if they were positive for drugs – cocaine, opioids or cannabis were studied. 44% of the infants tested positive for all varieties of drugs, including the 3 being studied. During the first two years of their lives, 44 babies from the original group died. Since statistics are a drag to slog through, I’ll cut right to the chase – the deaths per thousand live births – the numbers tell the story.

“No drugs at birth” deaths……. 15.7 deaths per 1000 live births

“Cocaine positive” deaths…….17.7 deaths per 1000 live births

“Opiate positive” deaths…….18.4 deaths per 1000 live births

“Cannabis positive” deaths…. 8.9 deaths per 1000 live births [5]

The cocaine and opiate babies have a higher death rate than the “No drugs” babies – that was to be expected. But look at the “cannabis” babies! Having extra cannabinoids in their bodies at birth (and likely later, from 2nd-hand exposure, or breast milk) seems to have some sort of a protective effect. The “cannabis” infants have a mortality rate almost half of what the “No drugs” infants have!

The study raises many interesting questions.  As I read, these are some of the first questions that came to mind, along with my current research on the topics.  I would have waited to post this until I could find more concrete information, but unfortunately, prohibition interferes with sound science on these issues, so I am just going to share my own thoughts and research with the hopes that it encourages more public outcry for further scientific study.  Much of this is conjecture and guesses, but it is worth asking these questions and evaluating the information currently available and pursuing further research:

1.  What further verification of this study can I find?  Much as I like the info, I know I need to find a credible source for verification and so that others will believe the information.

A credible source was found to document the truth of the data presented by Storm Crow:

Pediatrics:  Official Journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics, published July 1, 1997;

The above source only contained the summary of the study, and I wanted to see more of the data.  I have learned that statistics and percentages can be very misleading.  Before long, I found the complete study using student access to PSU , and found even more surprising numbers than the above quote by Storm Crow reveals.  The following table itemizes each category of test result; for instance, a positive test for cannabis could also include a positive test for opiates and/or cocaine, so this table further breaks out the categories into cannabis only, morphine (opiate) only, cocaine only and the “total” of all positive cannabis, morphine and cocaine tests (click links to view table and chart):

Infant Mortality Chart

The most interesting thing that stands out to me is that the drug-negative babies were technically MORE likely to die in the first two years of life.  This illustration helps shed light on why the study concludes that there is no significant difference between babies that test positive and those that test negative for maternal drug use, as there isn’t much of a difference between the 13.7 and 15.7 deaths per 1000 live births.

However, in this view of the information, the stark difference between the two cannabis categories and “morphine only” category as compared to the remaining categories is notable.  As a mother who is familiar with at least some of the drugs given at birth, I suspect that the “morphine only” category are those mothers that received some sort of drug during childbirth and/or pregnancy.  The presence of this drug only would most likely indicate proper drug use and not illicit drug use, since this drug is administered by a licensed physician – which could be why the mortality rate of these children is much lower than the other categories.

And the cannabis positive children are definitely in that same range with the morphine only infants.  However, when the two categories of cannabis-positive infants are divided into “cannabis only” and “cannabis positive” (indicating either opiates or cocaine were also present with the cannabis), the information is astonishing.  Of 338 infants born with cannabis in their systems at birth, only 3 total died in the first two years.  All three of those infants had either opiates or cocaine in their system as well, and not a single death was found in the two years after birth in the 157 infants that tested positive for ONLY cannabis!  These deaths include homicide, SIDS, illness, etc.  Not ONE death!

2.  Are infants born to cannabis-consuming mothers less likely to die in the first two years of life, or are the results of this study an anomaly?

I wish I could answer this question conclusively, but this information definitely indicates the need for further study!  I sought out more research on this subject, and could not find much.  I did find an article on the importance of endocannabinoids on pediatric development and disease, the critical role of the endogenous cannabinoids system on mouse pup suckling and growth, and a study on cannabis and breastfeeding that seems to use some good data to make some bad points.

3. Are pregnant mothers less likely to continue their use of marijuana when becoming pregnant, compared to other drugs?

I also noticed that a substantial difference is noted in the positive test results, compared to the usage rates suggested in a study by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.  According to their data for 2002-2009, marijuana has much higher usage rates than all other drugs (ie in 2008, 41% of the study used marijuana in their lifetime, and 10.3% had used it in the past year; contrast that with the total for all drug use (including marijuana) of 47% in their lifetime, and 14.2% in the past year.  Cocaine use was 14.7% in their lifetime and 2.1% in the last year and all other drugs, excluding marijuana, was 30.3% in their lifetime and 8.0% in the last year).  For comparison’s sake, I merged that data into the earlier table side by side with the comparable number (although it is worth noting that the SAMHSA data is both male and female, whereas the Meconium Drug Screen data is only pregnant females, so any gender variances would not be taken into account, as well as other confounding factors).  However, this data is still rather enlightening:

It is complete conjecture, but it appears that pregnant mothers are more likely to give up marijuana than cocaine.  The total positive and negative percentages of drug use, however, were quite comparable.  But cocaine was far more dominant in pregnant mothers than marijuana – unlike the overall usage statistics which seem to show the inverse (a much higher usage rate for marijuana than cocaine).

While this is just conjecture based on these data, it could be concluded that marijuana was not as addictive and mothers were likely to significantly reduce their use and/or quit smoking marijuana all together, as compared to cocaine.  I presume the higher percentage of cocaine positive tests in the pregnant mothers’ results as compared to the general population is probably linked to more risky behaviors resulting in pregnancy among cocaine-addicted women – resulting in a larger percentage of pregnant cocaine users than the general population of cocaine users – but again this is pure conjecture.

4. What is the overlap in concurrent drug use, ie how many cocaine-using mothers were also using opiates and/or cannabinoids?

The first table above gives two categories for each drug, ie cannabis positive and cannabis only.  The cannabis only number is included into the cannabis positive category.  For an easier interpretation of the data, I created another chart using the same mortality rate data, but with more information from the student access of the study.  Some of these numbers are calculated based on the percentages noted in the study, so the “exact” numbers given here may not be as precise as it appears (for instance, the total participants in the study was 2964, but these numbers add to 2961 – these are just rounding errors):

5.  For babies born to cannabis-using mothers, who did not use any other drugs, what is the mortality rate?

I was amazed that I was finally able to access this data, and even more astonished that my initial conjecture that there would be zero deaths among the cannabis only infants is correct.  Not a single death in the first two years of life for the babies that tested positive for cannabis.  Using the data for the drug-negative babies, it would be reasonable to see 3 deaths among this group.  It is possible that this is just coincidence, but it could also indicate a protective effect of cannabis, particularly when considering some of the other studies mentioned above.

6. Should cannabis be included in such a study to evaluate mortality rate in the first two years of life of “drug exposure?”  Or does cannabis skew the results?

Cannabis appears to seriously skew the results of the above study.  Clearly cannabis is starkly different than the other drug categories tested for, and while I wouldn’t throw cannabis out of the studies, I would certainly be looking at cannabis from a different perspective, inquiring about the potential BENEFITS for mothers.  Indeed, cannabis was used for centuries for morning sickness, cramping, and birthing pain – and with the above study in mind – it is definitely worth considering the potential benefits of cannabis in light of scientific advances and understanding.

An Akron woman has been charged with endangering the welfare of a child after a sheriff’s deputy reported she had taken her baby to a party early Friday where people were smoking marijuana, Erie County sheriff’s officials said.

Would there be endangerment charges if she took her baby to a party where alcohol was consumed?  What if there were no marijuana or alcohol, but people were smoking cigarettes?

The only real danger from marijuana use

No studies have shown any hazard from secondhand marijuana smoke, but plenty have shown damage from secondhand tobacco smoke; that baby is in greater danger in the tobacco-filled room.  Marijuana smokers (at least in my experience) tend to be peaceful and relaxed, whereas alcohol parties are almost guaranteed to end up with a fight or something broken; that baby is in greater danger in the alcohol-filled room.

Oh, wait, I forgot.  In an alcohol-filled or tobacco-filled room, body-armored assault-weapon-armed law-enforcement aren’t likely to break down the door, throw in loud flash-bang grenades that could permanently damage a baby’s hearing, and shoot and kill the mother while the baby is in her arms.

TAMPA, Fla. (AP) — Olympic great Michael Phelps has acknowledged ”regrettable” behavior and ”bad judgment” after a photo in a British newspaper showed him smoking marijuana.

In a statement released to The Associated Press, the swimmer who won a record eight gold medals at the Beijing Games conceded the authenticity of the exclusive picture published Sunday by the tabloid News of the World.

Phelps said: ”I engaged in behavior which was regrettable and demonstrated bad judgment. I’m 23 years old and despite the successes I’ve had in the pool, I acted in a youthful and inappropriate way, not in a manner people have come to expect from me. For this, I am sorry. I promise my fans and the public it will not happen again.”

via Phelps Apologizes for Marijuana Use – NYTimes.com.

Youthful and inappropriate.  Childish things, as our president might say.  ”It will not happen again.”  Not to get all Clintonian on you, Mike, but does “it” refer to “smoking marijuana” or does “it” refer to “photos surfacing in newspapers showing you smoking marijuana”?

I’ll never understand the mindset that accepts as rational the idea that these world class athletes – Michael Phelps, Ricky Williams, Ross Rebagliati, those Russian sumo, etc. - can dedicate their entire lives to eating right, working out, honing their bodies and minds to the pinnacle of their sport, but should they wish to relax and unwind, they’re forced to ingest a hard liquid drug that has noticably deleterious effects on health and athletic ability (Max McGee notwithstanding) rather than a mild herb that doesn’t seem to  have affected their abilities whatsoever.

Even more perplexing is the notion that, in the name of “sports medicine”, these athletes are accustomed to taking all manner of narcotic pain killers and other pharmaceutical cocktails that aid performance or mitigate injury, but are addicting (Brett Favre, *cough*,) and wreak havoc on the liver and kidneys, yet if we catch them smoking weed we have to mete out severe punishment (Santonio Holmes, notwithstanding).

As I look at the coverage on Huffington Post (admittedly, a liberal website) almost all comments are “it’s well past time to legalize it” and “so what” and “didn’t hurt Phelps’ performance any”.  Oh, an Obama brother pot bust and an eight-time gold medalist bong photo following ten days of growing drumbeat over President Obama’s non-response to the Tahoe Raid… somebody really did get me a swell birthday present!

“You express a great deal of anxiety over our willingness to break laws. This is certainly a legitimate concern. Since we so diligently urge people to obey the Supreme Court’s decision of 1954 outlawing segregation in the public schools, at first glance it may seem rather paradoxical for us consciously to break laws. One may well ask: “How can you advocate breaking some laws and obeying others?” The answer lies in the fact that there are two types of laws: just and unjust. I would be the first to advocate obeying just laws. One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. I would agree with St. Augustine that “an unjust law is no law at all.”

Now, what is the difference between the two? How does one determine whether a law is just or unjust? A just law is a man made code that squares with the moral law or the law of God. An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law. To put it in the terms of St. Thomas Aquinas: An unjust law is a human law that is not rooted in eternal law and natural law. Any law that uplifts human personality is just. Any law that degrades human personality is unjust.”

Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
Letter from a Birmingham Jail
April 16, 1963

Today our nation honors what would’ve been this week the eightieth birthday of the Reverend Martin Luther King Jr., on the eve of the inauguration of Barack Hussein Obama as the 44th president of these United States.  I was sixty-four days old when an assassin’s bullet cut down Dr. King in the prime of his life.  Today I am six-hundred forty days older than Dr. King when he was killed.  Tomorrow I will see something few people my age and older thought we’d ever see, yet something Dr. King had dreamed from the start.

There remains a grave injustice to be battled, the most unjust of laws to be disobeyed, a law that by its definition is not rooted in eternal law and natural law: the man made code that declares nature itself to be illegal, the prohibition on cannabis.  Yet when I mention marijuana law reform in the context of the great civil rights struggles in America, so many are quick to dismiss me with snickers of derision.  ”You just want pot legal so you can get high!” is a common refrain.

Marijuana law reform is a civil rights struggle.  I will not attempt to equate this struggle to those of minorities, women, or gays and lesbians; however, there are some parallels among our fight and theirs and, indeed, some threads of drug law injustice are woven directly into the struggles of these groups.  The prohibition of drugs was one of the tools of oppression – the “Negroes” for their cocaine, the “Chinamen” for their opium, and the Mexicans for their marihuana.  It remains so today – while people use drugs at about the same rate regardless of race, African-Americans and Hispanics are disproportionately arrested, convicted, and serve longer sentences for drug use than white people.

Aside from the racist nature of the origins and applications, cannabis prohibition itself is an unjust law.  First consider that it isn’t merely against the law to possess, cultivate, traffic, buy, and consume marijuana – it is against the law to be marijuana.  Federal and state law enforcement spend millions of dollars and thousands of hours flying helicopters attempting to spot cannabis growing out in the wild.  Ninety-eight percent of what is seized is known as “feral hemp”, which is wild ditchweed with unsmokably-low levels of THC.  Officials rip up and destroy every plant they see whether it is owned or tended by any human, whether or not it could possibly intoxicate any human.   Logically, then, the ultimate goal of marijuana prohibition is not to simply stop humans from using it for intoxication, but to eradicate the species cannabis sativa L. from the earth!

Think of that: our official policy is the extinction of a species of life.  Certainly that’s not entirely new.  We’re dedicated to the extinction of all manner of microscopic life, after all, but that is a justifiable policy for self-preservation – we kill bugs that kill us.  I cannot think of another plant or animal we treat like cannabis.  Deadly plants like nightshade and belladonna are legal, annoying plants like poison ivy and poison oak are legal, even intoxicating plants like coca and poppy are legal when cultivated for prescription medications.  But the cannabis plant, the plant that cannot kill you is completely illegal*.  The plant that can provide the food, clothing, shelter, and medicine humans need to survive is illegal.  Nature itself is illegal.  How much more contrary to eternal law and natural law could this unjust prohibition law be?

The fight against cannabis prohibition, against this unjust law, is a civil rights fight.  This declaration will offend some people who will point to four centuries of slavery and Jim Crow, to lynchings and cross burnings, and to beatings and firehoses and condemn my declaration as making light of the plight of those who were truly oppressed.  I do not make light of those struggles, but I also recognize that civil rights are not a zero sum game and the degree and manner in which one is being oppressed are not what make the fight against oppression a just one.  Dr. King dreamed of a day when children would be judged by not by the color of their skin but the content of their character; I dream of a day when workers are judged not by the metabolites in their urine but the quality of their work.

Later in King’s Letter from a Birmingham Jail, he writes:

Let us consider a more concrete example of just and unjust laws. An unjust law is a code that a numerical or power majority group compels a minority group to obey but does not make binding on itself. This is difference made legal. By the same token, a just law is a code that a majority compels a minority to follow and that it is willing to follow itself. This is sameness made legal. …

I hope you are able to see the distinction I am trying to point out. In no sense do I advocate evading or defying the law, as would the rabid segregationist. That would lead to anarchy. One who breaks an unjust law must do so openly, lovingly, and with a willingness to accept the penalty. I submit that an individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for law. …

The unjust law of marijuana prohibition is difference made legal.  The majority compels our minority to forgo our intoxicant, but does not bind itself to forgo their intoxicant.  The majority compels our minority forgo our medicine, but does not bind itself to forgo their medicine.  The majority compels our minority to forgo their religious sacrament, but does not bind itself to forgo their religious sacrament.  The majority compels our minority to forgo our source of food, fuel, and fiber, but does not bind itself to forgo their sources.

The majority may argue that they do not prohibit intoxication, medication, religious sacrament, or food, fuel, and fiber cultivation, so long as it doesn’t involve marijuana.  This to me sounds like the argument against same-sex marriage rights, that gays and lesbians are just as free to marry someone of the opposite sex as everybody else.  If we are given a right, but then proscribed from exercising that right in the manner that benefits us without a valid reason from the majority, it is not really a right.  When intoxication, medication, and sacrament are legal rights, but we are proscribed from using a demonstrably safer intoxicant, medicine, and sacrament, that is difference made legal.

No, we do not face the firehoses and the dogs and the lynchings, nor do we suffer in as great of numbers as did the African Americans Dr. King so graciously led in the years before my birth.  Our oppression is more subtle and codified into laws that restrict our housing, employment, and educational opportunities.  We do not tremble in fear of the midnight ride of white-robed vigilante Klansmen; our terror comes in the form of midnight no-knock raids of body-armored SWAT teams.

Like the civil rights struggles of the past, we work to change laws that oppress people, laws that enjoy support from the majority and are rationalized by tradition, religion, and junk science.  Unlike the civil rights struggles of the past, our constituency is an invisible group defined by lifestyle, not genetics.  That choice to use cannabis should not disqualify our fight to be treated as equals under the law.  After all, the choice to worship the God of your understanding is not genetic, it is a lifestyle choice as well, and our law recognizes that one cannot be discriminated against for that choice.  In fact, it is a bit ironic that one’s choice of God, a belief that cannot be proven by science to beneficial, is a protected right, yet one’s choice of cannabis, a plant that can be proven by science to be beneficial, is a federal crime.

The freedom to worship, of course, is an explicit right recognized by our First Amendment, but its foundation is in the inalienable rights given to us by our Creator, among them being Life, Liberty, and The Pursuit of Happiness.  If that last one – the Pursuit of Happiness – doesn’t give me the right to smoke a joint so long as I don’t affect anyone else’s Life and Liberty, then the Constitution isn’t worth the hemp paper on which it was drafted.

Also from King’s Letter from a Birmingham Jail, he writes:

We should never forget that everything Adolf Hitler did in Germany was “legal” and everything the Hungarian freedom fighters did in Hungary was “illegal.” It was “illegal” to aid and comfort a Jew in Hitler’s Germany. Even so, I am sure that, had I lived in Germany at the time, I would have aided and comforted my Jewish brothers. If today I lived in a Communist country where certain principles dear to the Christian faith are suppressed, I would openly advocate disobeying that country’s antireligious laws.

Today’s freedom fighters are the people like Eddy Lepp and Charles Lynch, providing aid and comfort to the sick and dying by growing and supplying them with medicine, only to face the rest of their natural lives behind bars because what they did was “illegal”.

Today’s “whites-only” establishments are the “drug-free” workplaces keep cannabis users confined to low-paying part-time or temp service jobs, while the rest of the workers are allowed all the alcohol, nicotine, and prescription medications they desire.

Today’s lynchings are the Rachel Hoffmans and Jonathan Magbies who are murdered by police negligence, solely over their use of cannabis.  Today’s institutionalized discrimination is the over 20 million in my lifetime whose lives are marked with the scarlet letter of a drug conviction, affecting their child custody, government assistance, college financial aid, employment opportunities, professional licenses, voting rights, and liberty.

The prohibition of cannabis ultimately degrades human personality and is against moral law.  It is an unjust law that cannot stand, and we have a moral responsibility to disobey it.  In doing so, we express the highest respect for the law.  On this day when we recognize the greatness of Dr. Martin Luther King’s Dream, and on tomorrow, when we see part of that dream fulfilled, remember that we don’t fight to “make pot legal so you can get high”; we fight because the Pursuit of Happiness is our right and caging us for our method of pursuit is unjust.

Smoking pot is our civil right!

Let us all hope that the dark clouds of racial prejudice will soon pass away and the deep fog of misunderstanding will be lifted from our fear drenched communities, and in some not too distant tomorrow the radiant stars of love and brotherhood will shine over our great nation with all their scintillating beauty.

Yours for the cause of Peace and Brotherhood,
Martin Luther King, Jr.

* I recognize that marijuana is legally grown at ElSohly’s lab at the University of Mississippi.  But consider that marijuana’s two purposes – to supply five people grandfathered in to the IND program and to provide marijuana for studies to prove how awful marijuana is to justify its prohibition.  In this metaphor it would be akin to saving a few vials of polio virus so you could use them to make vaccines.