Don't blame me! I'm evolved to smell things and please humans.

In an analysis of three years worth of data from suburban Chicago, the Chicago Tribune discovers that only 44% of all roadside searches following a K-9 alert for cannabis or drugs turned up any cannabis or drugs or paraphernalia.  Shockingly but not surprisingly, that success rate drops to 27% for Hispanic drivers.

We are using the drug dog alert to justify a warrantless search that turns up no crime 56% of the time and the justification is “clearly” a crime once happened there?

Then there is that bias of the dog to react to the master’s unintentional cues that we told you about:

(Urbana-Champaign Independent Media Center) But even advocates for the use of drug-sniffing dogs agree with experts who say many dog-and-officer teams are poorly trained and prone to false alerts that lead to unjustified searches. Leading a dog around a car too many times or spending too long examining a vehicle, for example, can cause a dog to give a signal for drugs where there are none, experts said.

Plus the lack of any sort of legal standard for performance and accuracy:

The dog teams are not held to any statutory standard of performance in Illinois or most other states, experts and dog handlers said, though private groups offer certification for the canines.

Add to that what some consider to be not so unintentional cues based in racial profiling:

Civil rights advocates and Latino activists say the findings support complaints that police unfairly target Hispanic drivers for invasive and embarrassing roadside vehicle searches.

The state’s data — in which drivers and officers aren’t identified — show that the average false alert led to a stop lasting nearly a half-hour. One Crystal Lake search led to a three-hour stop for a Hispanic man in 2007. He was stopped for a license plate/registration violation, according to the data.

Dogs do not have the human failings that have led to the targeting of minorities, but [Virginia Martinez, a Chicago-based staff attorney for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund,] worries that an officer’s bias can translate through the dog leash. She fears drug-sniffing dogs are another tool to justify roadside searches of innocent drivers, the unfair consequences of what she called “driving while Mexican.”

Well, gentlemen, we didn't find any pot, but we did find six stale French fries, two empty pop cans, a novelty stripper ballpoint pen, and almost nine dollars in change, mostly pennies. But my dog thinks you smell like Bob Marley's ass, so we're taking your car to impound for further search. Officer Jenkins ate your fries, we recycled the cans, and you can get your ninety cents in change back at the station.

Police justify these failing grades and racially-biased figures by pointing out their dogs’ noses are so sensitive that they are often detecting the residue of cannabis or drugs even as the suspects have no actual cannabis or drugs on them.

Dog-handling officers and trainers argue the canine teams’ accuracy shouldn’t be measured in the number of alerts that turn up drugs. They said the scent of drugs or paraphernalia can linger in a car after drugs are used or sold, and the dogs’ noses are so sensitive they can pick up residue from drugs that can no longer be found in a car.

Since September 2008, Deputy Jeremy Bruketta has handled Sage, one of the McHenry County department’s two drug-sniffing German shepherds. Officers sometimes come up empty-handed in searches of vehicles that clearly once contained drugs, he said, recalling a traffic stop in which a man, reeking of pot, had a marijuana stem stuck to his shirt but no drugs were found in the car.

[Alex] Rothacker, who works with some 60 area police dogs and handlers at TOPS Kennels in Grayslake, rubbed a bag of marijuana against a cinder block in the wall. Two German shepherds he trained alerted on the block with little hesitation, earning sessions of play with handlers who control the dogs’ beloved chew toys.

That’s your defense?!?  Your dogs are alerting and you’re throwing people’s stuff out of their cars on the side of the freeway because maybe somebody just smells like a crime?  Somebody might have had pot on them when they were in the car, so the driver needs to stand on the side of the road as the rubberneckers stream by passing judgment while two or three police cars arrive to dismantle the Hyundai?

What if someone were to rub freshly harvested buds on state representatives’, police captains’, and city councilpersons’ personal cars, and at random on luxury cars in jewelry store parking lots?  Eh, don’t bother – the police are never going to send a K-9 unit out to check those cars out in the first place.

(Ohmidog) Three-time Iditarod champion Lance Mackey may have to mush without marijuana in next year’s race.

Iditarod Trail Committee officials have announced plans to test mushers for drugs and alcohol in March. Officials haven’t decided who will get tested, or when, where and how it will be done. “It might be random. It might be a group of mushers at a specific checkpoint,” said Stan Hooley, executive director of the committee.

Alaska law allows for personal possession of up to one ounce of marijuana, provided the use occurs at home. In addition, Mackey, as a throat cancer survivor, has a medical marijuana card that entitles him to use the drug legally for medical purposes.

Mackey admits marijuana has helped him stay awake and focused through the 1,100-mile race, but he insists it doesn’t give him an edge.

“It isn’t the reason I’ve won three years in a row,” Mackey told the Anchorage Daily News. ”I think it’s a little bit ridiculous,” he said of the new policy. ”It is a dog race, not a human race. It doesn’t affect the outcome of the race.”

Now wait just a minute, Mr. Mackey!  It is vitally important that we insure that the 175lb human dead weight being towed by these dogs isn’t impaired by marijuana.  What kind of message do you want to send to the puppies?  You want the little Husky puppies thinking that it’s OK to drag a stoned human across barren ice and snow, in the wind and subzero temperatures, for a distance equal to Milwaukee to Tampa?  Think about the puppies!  My God, what about the puppies?!?

What valid reason could there be for drug testing a dog sled musher for pot, aside from a moral angle?  Marijuana use isn’t putting the athlete at risk of injury, like they’d argue for mixed martial arts.  Marijuana use isn’t giving the athlete an unfair advantage, like they might argue for the Nathan’s Famous Hot Dog Eating Contest.  Marijuana isn’t even a factor for creativity, like they might argue for dancers, or fearlessness, like they might argue for snowboarding.

This is a guy standing on a sled for days in the cold!  The only way marijuana may be helping is in alleviating boredom.  Maybe that’s it.  Like the pro golfers insist riding in a golf cart takes away the walking that is a part of the sport, maybe the weed takes away the boredom that is integral to the Iditarod.

Download link: NORML Daily Audio Stash for 2009-06-19

Download audio file (NORML_Daily_AudioStash_2009-06-19.mp3)

Hemp Headlines

1. California’s EPA rules cannabis smoke is a carcinogen
2. Gun battle over marijuana plants leaves grower dead, two police wounded
3. Garden Grove, Calif. spends a quarter million dollars over eight grams of medical marijuana

Celebstoner Entertainment Report with Steve Bloom

• Report on MPP Party at the Playboy Mansion, the Los Angeles THC Expo, and a Santonio Holmes update

Daily Toker Tunes by Marijuana Music Awards

• It’s a Rap Friday – ‘Toke’ by Prophecy

Cannabis Conversations

• Exclusive interview with Corina Amato of Baltimore, Maryland, victim of a police terror raid where her dog was murdered in her bedroom and her entire home was demolished.  No marijuana was found, but police were told there would be some by a snitch, and a judge signed off on the warrant.

Who doesn’t love a good dog story?

SEATTLE – It could be said that Jack, an 11-year-old black Lab mix, has learned to say no to drugs. “He was just… stoned,” said owner Jen Nestor Waddell.

Jack ran off the main trail during a visit May 12 to Seward Park on the southeast end of Lake Washington, said Nestor Waddell, but he came back in about 3 minutes. About 3 hours later at home, Jack started exhibiting, well, strange symptoms.

“His eyes were kind of glossed over, very out of touch, I mean, he didn’t seem to recognize me at first,” Nestor Waddell said. “When he was trying to walk, he was looking at his paw, and then looking at the ground and then trying to get his paw to reach the ground, but was unsuccessful.” Concern for Jack turned to relief when she heard the vet’s diagnosis: Jack had swallowed a large amount of dried, harvested marijuana.

Some medication to induce vomiting, charcoal to absorb the chemicals, and a night of rest had Jack back to normal.

“I don’t want this to happen to anyone else’s dog, because it’s scary and expensive – or a child? – so we did call the police,” said Nestor Waddell, who joked: “I was going to tell the cops that they could borrow him, if they pay my vet bill, to find the marijuana, but they weren’t that into chatting with me about it.”

That vet bill, they said, also turned out to be a $1500 lesson in keeping their dog on-leash while walking in the park, something they say the plan to do from now on.

Roscotelli "Smelly Felly" "Semicolon Puckerbutt" "Nutstomper" "Boobsquisher" Sanchez-Gomez-Rodriguez-Ramirez Coltrane (a.k.a. "Roscoe P. Coltrane"), official dog of the Stash

For those stashers who have K9 friends, Marijuana can be toxic to dogs. Our furry friends don’t metabolize the chemicals in Marijuana like humans and it can be toxic. I’ve spoken with various organizations and veterinarians over the years and there hasn’t been a threshold level established due to the various potency levels of Marijuana, and the different types and sizes of dogs. Some appear to have more of a tolerance than others, but this is certainly a field that needs to be studied more.

Just remember, what’s good for you, isn’t necessarily good for your dog.

“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.