Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.
Sunday, November 8th, 2009 at 10:15 am | By: Radical Russ
(Guardian UK) “I first took coke when I was 18 and at university. I remember two friends who did chemistry told me I should get really drunk first because it would mix into this new chemical in my blood and make me even higher,” a 30-year-old woman who works in publishing told the Observer yesterday.
What her friends did not tell her is that the combination of cocaine and alcohol in her then teenage body will have left a highly toxic chemical in her liver called cocaethylene.
For not only is cocaethylene toxic in the liver, it is also blamed for heart attacks in the under-40s and a surge in social problems. But because so little is known about the drug, few experts can agree on the nature of the threat to users, and indeed society as a whole.
Cocaine-related deaths are also increasing in the US. The US National Household Drug Survey estimated that around five million people used alcohol and cocaine each month.
Yes, but five million people also realize that they can have a great Friday or Saturday night out on the town, dancing and drinking til the wee morning hours, with a bump of coke every now and then, sleep it off Sunday, and unless their workplace random drug testing pops them early on Monday morning, they can probably pass a urine screen.
But if 14 million people wanted to have a fun weekend with a toke of a natural, herbal social relaxant shared communally among friends, knowing it is non-toxic to their liver and far safer to themselves and society than alcohol or cocaine or mixing the two, a workplace random drug test anytime in the next week to a month means chugging nasty-tasting body flushes and water or mixing up freeze-dried urine, strapping it to their thighs along with a chemical hand warmer and maybe even wearing a prosthetic penis to be certain they can beat the pee test and continue to pay their mortgages and feed their families.
When it comes to the use of illegal drugs overall, there’s no real correlation. But that changes when we look at marijuana and cocaine. Both are significantly and positively related to Obama states. The converse is true of McCain states, where the correlations are negative. Let me reiterate that these are provisional results which point to general relationships–or should I say associations–which could have many causes.
Does that mean you had to have been high to vote for Obama? Just kidding. There are far more variables at work here to explain this relationship. For example, maybe McCain voters under-report their marijuana and cocaine use. Maybe people that can afford marijuana and cocaine tend to vote for Obama. Maybe it’s just geography and culture; the South, Midwest, and Intermountain West just don’t use marijuana and cocaine.
Tuesday, April 28th, 2009 at 10:20 am | By: Radical Russ
96% of BEST drug seizures at the Mexican border are marijuana
(Counterpunch.org) DHS says the new initiative will be based on a “risk-based decision-making process.” All the various DHS initiatives that are part of its SBI umbrella program contend that they are “risk-based.” DHS contends it is protecting the homeland against “dangerous goods and people.”
In practice, however, its array of border control and immigration enforcement programs casts a wide net—with most of the arrests being immigration violators and drug law offenders rather than dangerous criminals. Marijuana leads, by far, the list of illegal drugs seized, even though there is widening consensus, even in the criminal justice community, that marijuana is not a “dangerous good,” especially when compared with cocaine, heroin, and methamphetamines.
The achievements of the existing [Border Enforcement Security Taskforce] BEST teams don’t support ICE declarations that their investigation and prosecutions are “risk-based.” The existing 95 members of BEST teams in the Southwest were responsible for 1,000 criminal arrests in 2008, but most of its arrests—1,256—were for administrative violations, presumably transgressions of immigration law. Marijuana seizures topped the list of drugs confiscated. BEST seized 42,400 lbs. of marijuana, 1,803 lbs. of cocaine, and 66 lbs. of heroin.
Do you feel safer now? When President Nixon declared the war on drugs, one of the first programs on the Mexican border was “Operation Intercept“. Then, too, the idea was that we’d stop those Mexicans from supplying weed to our youth. The massive crackdown was called off after Mexican officials complained about how badly this backed up legitimate business traffic at the border.
In this case, it’s not just business traffic inconveniences to worry about, it’s potential terrorists and explosive or radioactive materials we’re worried about. Every time border cops have to spend time busting truckloads of pot is an opportunity for a terrorist to go unnoticed.
Tuesday, April 28th, 2009 at 8:20 am | By: Radical Russ
THE CRAFT FIRST surfaced like something out of a science-fiction movie. It was November 2006, and a Coast Guard cutter spotted a strange blur on the ocean 100 miles off Costa Rica. As the cutter approached, what appeared to be three snorkels poking up out of the water became visible. Then something even more surprising was discovered attached to the air pipes: a homemade submarine carrying four men, an AK-47 and three tons of cocaine.
This kind of vessel — a self-propelled, semisubmersible made by hand in the jungles of Colombia — is no longer quite so mythic: four were intercepted in January alone. But because of their ability to elude radar systems, these subs are almost impossible to detect; only an estimated 14 percent of them are stopped. And perhaps as many as 70 of them will be made this year, up from 45 or so in 2007, according to a task-force spokesman. Made for as little as $500,000 each and assembled in fewer than 90 days, they are now thought to carry nearly 30 percent of Colombia’s total cocaine exports.
Building a fully submersible submarine is complicated and indiscreet, requiring highly skilled workers and a manufacturing facility that’s too big to be easily hidden. The alternative: semisubmersibles that, though considerably smaller than the sub found in the warehouse, can carry five times as much cocaine as a common fishing vessel. Nimmich said the rise of semisubs has been traced to two unnamed men, a Pakistani and a Sri Lankan, who in early 2006 provided plans to the Colombians for building semisubs quickly, stealthily and out of cheap, commonly available materials. One of the biggest concerns when making a drug sub is that a laborer will reveal its location before the work is done. For this reason, the 15 or 20 people brought in to build a craft remain on site for the duration. They set up a campsite in the dense brush, relying on generators for electricity and make the ships by hand. When I asked Nimmich if he was impressed by their craftsmanship, he arched a brow and said: “You ever try to build something in your backyard? They’re building these in the jungles.”
There is nobody as creative as a smuggler. We want it, they have it, and the lure of easy profit will always find a way to get it to us. If we found a foolproof way to stop every submarine, boat, airplane, cargo container, tunnel, and human being carrying drugs into our country, I swear drug runners would invent Mr. Scott’s transporter from Star Trek and just beam the drugs into America.
This story is about one of the drugs that doesn’t grow here in America. If we can’t stop cocaine because suppliers will go to the extreme of building half-million dollar clandestine jungle subs to transport it, what makes anybody think we have the slightest chance of stopping marijuana that can be grown in a college dorm room or rural yard? Prohibition of marijuana is the greatest “make work” jobs program ever for the criminal justice system; there will always be plenty of people to arrest and prosecute and the “crime” can never be eradicated.
Monday, April 27th, 2009 at 1:20 pm | By: Dudemaster
A new Time article entitled, “Drugs in Portugal: Did Decriminalization Work?” examines the practical theory of how decriminalization and use, when applied to a society properly, can have resounding success; and that is exactly what is being praised for the country of Portugal.
First, let me explain the Portugal model and put it into perspective. As we all know, with the exception of thirteen states that have medical Marijuana laws, the sale and cultivation of marijuana is illegal in the United States under both state laws and federal laws. The laws may vary from state to state, but typical first time possession varies from a civil fine to a year of incarceration.
Contrary to what one might hear in the news, in The Netherlands marijuana is also a crime. The difference in The Netherlands is the Dutch have decided not to enforce those laws because it’s in contrast what the people desire. However, when the Dutch decide to go after a particular grow operation or cannabis shop, they have full charge of the law behind them to do as they please.
The Portugal model is the only one of it’s kind in Europe because they were the first European country to remove all criminal penalties for personal possession of drugs including marijuana. And they have been completely legal since 2001!
Portugal
Compared to the European Union and the U.S., Portugal’s drug use numbers are impressive. Following decriminalization, Portugal had the lowest rate of lifetime marijuana use in people over 15 in the E.U.: 10%.
The most comparable figure in America is in people over 12: 39.8%.
According to the Time article, a CATO study concludes that Portugal’s legalization program is a resounding success having reduced overall drug use, HIV cases, and cutting addiction rates by half across the board with all hard (addictive) drugs.
This is an extremely unique report because Portugal, unlike other countries, didn’t just “dabble” in decriminalization for a select group or demographic, they simply LEGALIZED EVERYTHING.
If an individual is caught in possession of a modest quantity of drugs (below ten daily doses), and police have no further suspicions or evidence that more serious offenses such as sale or traffic are involved, the drug will be seized and the case transmitted to a local Commission composed of 3 members (a lawyer, and two from a range of doctors, social assistants, and psychologists), supported by a technical team. The Commission meets the person in order to evaluate his/her situation and with the aim of eventually diverting the person from prosecution or sending them to treatment. If the user presents evidence that use is occasional or regular, but not habitual (addicted), the proceedings are dropped”.
By embracing the idea that a nation’s drug problem is a health and human services issue, not a law enforcement problem, Portugal helped to reallocate financial resources from law enforcement to address the underlying issues of the health effects of addiction. By doing so, Portugal removed the criminal element behind their illicit drug industry.
In contrast, The Netherlands still experiences a measurable amount of crime related to the illicit cannabis (Europeans refer to marijuana as cannabis) market because they still have laws against the manufacture and sale of cannabis. California also isn’t exempt, the state still sees crime as a result of marijuana being an illegal substance (federally and state without proper authorization). As long as the United States has a Prohibition in place, we will continue to battle cartels and crime on all fronts.
Although Portugal is a smaller country, initiatives like those Portugal put into place could also be put into place in this country within our communities.
Like removing a pot of boiling water from the stove; if you remove crime from Marijuana, you wouldn’t have any crime to fight.
Could Portugal’s solution serve as a model to the United States?
Recently, Senators Jim Webb and Arlen Specter proposed that Congress create a national commission, not unlike Portugal’s, to deal with prison reform and overhaul drug-sentencing policy. As Webb noted, the U.S. is home to 5% of the global population but 25% of it’s prisoners”.
Let me simplify Senator Jim Webb’s proposal:
It asks for a National Commission to discuss and propose policy for prison reform.
It’s that simple.
I think it’s finally time to have this conversation. Don’t you? Contact your representative and affirm your support for Senator Webb’s proposal today.
Friday, March 6th, 2009 at 12:05 pm | By: Radical Russ
Next week ministers from around the world gather in Vienna to set international drug policy for the next decade. Like first-world-war generals, many will claim that all that is needed is more of the same. In fact the war on drugs has been a disaster, creating failed states in the developing world even as addiction has flourished in the rich world. By any sensible measure, this 100-year struggle has been illiberal, murderous and pointless. That is why The Economist continues to believe that the least bad policy is to legalise drugs.
“Least bad” does not mean good. Legalisation, though clearly better for producer countries, would bring (different) risks to consumer countries. As we outline below, many vulnerable drug-takers would suffer. But in our view, more would gain.
After pointing out the evidence of the Drug War’s failure to achieve “A drug free world by 2008″ as the UN’s general assembly crowed in 1998, The Economist points out:
This is not for want of effort. The United States alone spends some $40 billion each year on trying to eliminate the supply of drugs. It arrests 1.5m of its citizens each year for drug offences, locking up half a million of them; tougher drug laws are the main reason why one in five black American men spend some time behind bars. In the developing world blood is being shed at an astonishing rate. In Mexico more than 800 policemen and soldiers have been killed since December 2006 (and the annual overall death toll is running at over 6,000). This week yet another leader of a troubled drug-ridden country—Guinea Bissau—was assassinated.
The Economist then explains how legalization won’t be a tough sell at all in the producer countries, but it is faced with major political hurdles in the consumer countries:
That fear is based in large part on the presumption that more people would take drugs under a legal regime. That presumption may be wrong. There is no correlation between the harshness of drug laws and the incidence of drug-taking: citizens living under tough regimes (notably America but also Britain) take more drugs, not fewer. Embarrassed drug warriors blame this on alleged cultural differences, but even in fairly similar countries tough rules make little difference to the number of addicts: harsh Sweden and more liberal Norway have precisely the same addiction rates. Legalisation might reduce both supply (pushers by definition push) and demand (part of that dangerous thrill would go). Nobody knows for certain. But it is hard to argue that sales of any product that is made cheaper, safer and more widely available would fall. Any honest proponent of legalisation would be wise to assume that drug-taking as a whole would rise.
Here at NORML we promote the legalization of cannabis. Other drugs should require other measures that take into account the addictiveness and socially destructive capabilities of those drugs. I personally don’t believe those measures should include locking up addicts — prison is a lousy rehab — but I also don’t think a regulatory scheme that treats marijuana similar to alcohol would be appropriate for, say, cocaine, meth, or heroin.
But when you say the word “Legalization”, immediately people conjure visions of “Maui Wowie”, “Colombia Flake”, “Crystal Energy”, and “Super Smack” sold on convenience store shelves next to the 24-oz beers and junk food snack cakes. “Legalization”, though, can mean marijuana in adults-only stores with IDs checked for age 21 and limits placed on amount purchased while it can also mean much more stringent restrictions on other drugs like prescriptions and pharmacies and tight controls.
When quizzed on the state’s reliance on sin taxes — video poker is the latest targeted cash cow — the discussion turned to legalizing marijuana and prostitution, regulating it, taxing it and, for lack of a better word, benefiting from it.
When asked directly if we should legalize pot, Brennan began talking about separating violent from nonviolent offenders in prison and the other legislators seemed to like the direction that would take them — into talking about prison funding. That’s not what you were asked, I interrupted. Would you support the legalization of marijuana in order to pour more tax money into the state budget?
Freeman’s voice took on a suddenly high pitch and he went off on cocaine addicts running through the streets — I can only assume he meant if marijuana were legalized. Reefer madness, I guess. It sounded like something out of sixth-grade health class. Better to scare than make aware.
I know a bit about gateway drugs and how they become gateway drugs. You can consider this a true story. You’re buying dope from a friend who has been pretty reliable and you’re not shy about dumping some bucks on an ounce or two a month. You get to know the guy, you hang out some and he says at a party that hey, you want to try some coke? It’s a friendly exchange. No money switching hands. Sure, you say. Why not? So you do. And once you try coke, marijuana seems pretty boring. And it can go from there.
Anyway, the point is the gateway was the dealer, not the initial drug. You tried it because he made it available. You probably wouldn’t have gone looking for it. And for someone with an addictive personality, a drug such as coke can make you pretty crazy.
Consider the alternative. You go into a state store and you buy your ounce of premium pot. It costs a bit more, because it’s taxed and regulated, but it’s purity isn’t in question. And while the clerk may suggest a nice Merlot for the bong instead of water, he’s probably not going to suggest cocaine. It’s not on the menu and the guy likes his state job with all its perks.
Monday, January 19th, 2009 at 11:59 am | By: Radical Russ
“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.”
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.
Friday, January 16th, 2009 at 2:12 pm | By: Radical Russ
As the Texas Legislature begins its session, a Houston judge is again arguing to end jail time for criminals caught with small amounts of cocaine and crack, but this time he has the support of 15 colleagues.
State District Judge Michael McSpadden on Wednesday sent a letter to the state’s top officials and Houston’s senators and representatives asking for a change in what he called “draconian” laws.
In his letter, McSpadden suggested reducing the charge and mandating drug treatment. He also recommended funding misdemeanor drug courts.
McSpadden said 25 percent to 30 percent of Harris County’s 22 criminal district court dockets are felony charges for less than 1 gram of a controlled substance.
McSpadden said his concerns come from fielding complaints about the system from juries and residents.
“The ‘War on Drugs’ isn’t working, and we as judges realize it,” McSpadden said. “And the public realizes it.”
Harris County District Attorney Pat Lykos said the problem is multifaceted, and she is studying the best ways to solve the problems associated with drug abuse, including pre-trial diversion and residential treatment centers.
Lykos also pointed out that any drug user contributes money to criminal empires, including drug lords in Mexico and terrorists worldwide.
“Anyone who uses illicit drugs has blood on their hands,” she said.
Ms. Lycos, can you explain to me how the marijuana I smoked from the plant I grew in Oregon from a cutting of an outdoor plant in Oregon given to me for no charge contributed one penny to drug lords and terrorists? You do know that marijuana grows perfectly well here in America, right?
Anyone who supports marijuana prohibition has blood on their hands, Ms. Lycos. We’d be more than happy to put Mexican drug gangs out of the business of marijuana. Just let us.
RevRayGreen: MASS TWEET THIS -@ChuckGrassley Truth is Chuck you follow Nixon's CSA full of reefer sadness. btw Chuck, Marijuana is not a drug.
RevRayGreen: @ChuckGrassley http://bit.ly/55Ejsi Truth is Chuck you follow Nixon's CSA full of reefer madness. btw Chuck, Marijuana is not a drug.
SneakerPimp: one last thing Puff puff pass to any one who wants it
SneakerPimp: i wanna here about the imminent MiniSpof sounds like time for some
SneakerPimp: im estatic and excited for NSL today.
SneakerPimp: mountain time wake n bake
SneakerPimp: oh yea also wake n bake
SneakerPimp: its central im high as a kite everybody
SneakerPimp: ill grab that WUD
WakeUpDead: @Russ, I dont think that wireless is going to work out for the show, it was choppy and studdered just like last week. Hardline may be the only way. Puff [...]
WakeUpDead: A MINI Spof, Lock up your Weed, in 18 years that is. Really Man congrats! Greatest days of my life when my kids were born, hell yeh, great news [...]
BenJaMin: Late night Stash!!!
SneakerPimp: heres a bong rip for spof
RevRayGreen: errr test over....
RevRayGreen: on hold..
RevRayGreen: @RR I'll try and lob a call to you.....
SneakerPimp: where is the first field of cannabis gonna be?
SneakerPimp: !
Radical Russ: Breaking News: MrSpof's wife's water just broke! A MiniSpof is imminent!
SneakerPimp: oh russ its not my fault that i dont understand choppy word:stoned:
SneakerPimp: @Mrspof congratulations tell us all about it tommrow
Radical Russ: OK, test over. Sorry. Only needed a half hour. Be back tomorrow afternoon.
slash5city: don't forget to watch CCS live on u-stream 8 pm west
thaistik: Local Crime Stoppers notice.
Thursday, November 19, 2009
Pot shop burglars sought
Crime Stoppers is looking for information on the suspects who police say burglarized a medical marijuana dispensary and stole cash, drugs [...]
Marijuana-Related Health Costs Minimal Compared To Those Of Alcohol, Tobacco; California Medical Association Says Pot Prohibition Is A "Failed Public Health Policy"; Oregon: State NORML Affiliate Opens First 'Cannabis Café'. […]
American Medical Association Calls For Scientific Review Of Marijuana's Prohibitive Status; Dutch Marijuana Use Lower Than European Average, Study Says […]
"Truth In Trials Act" Reintroduced In Congress; Maine: Voters Approve Medical Marijuana Dispensaries Measure; Colorado: Breckenridge Voters Overwhelmingly Decide To End Pot Penalties. […]
Some of the nation’s top athletes discuss why today's pros are turning to cannabis — and away from alcohol and painkillers — off the field, and question why pro sports leagues are continuing to sanction those who do. Moderator: Steve Bloom, Author, Pot Culture; editor, celebstoner.com * Toby Grear, MMA fighter * Sean Neumann, Documentary Filmm […]
Cannabis Law Reform's Missing Link: Law Enforcement Former Seattle Police Chief Norm Stamper; LEAP and NORML Advisory Board; Author of Breaking Rank Putting the Mexican Cartels Out of Business Mexican drug cartels now employ over 100,000 soldiers and are responsible for nearly ten thousand deaths per year. Their largest source of income is marijuana. […]
Stash for Mon, Nov 9, 2009
Just kidding. There are far more variables at work here to explain this relationship. For example, maybe McCain voters under-report their marijuana and cocaine use. Maybe people that can afford marijuana and cocaine tend to vote for Obama. Maybe it’s just geography and culture; the South, Midwest, and Intermountain West just don’t use marijuana and cocaine. 
sounds like time for some 
mountain time wake n bake 
don't forget to watch CCS live on u-stream 8 pm west 
Fresh Stash V RSS Feed
Loading ...
, or can...
