SF Mayor: End The War On Drugs And Crime Will Drop By 70 Percent

CBS 5 San Francisco:

San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom proclaimed the nation's war on drugs a total failure and insisted the crime rate would go down if the government spent money on treatment as opposed to jailing people with drug problems.

"If you want to get serious, if you want to reduce crime by 70% in this country overnight, end this war on drugs," he told reporters at City Hall on Thursday. "You want to get serious, seriously serious about crime and violence end this war on drugs."

Read the whole story: CBS 5 San Francisco

Comments

[whomung]

Ya Know.... I can get really involved in what I'm doing, and completely forget to eat --always been that way.... If I'm intellectually absorbed by what I'm doing --hunger doesn't show up the foreground of my thought, and that's just how MY BODY works....

For me... Mental Interest trumps "need for food"....

Conversely, I know people who, if they don't eat on schedule, will experience dramatic mood alteration... get no.shit cranky, and even lash out at people --if they don't eat LUNCH on time... They are Hypoglycemic --they experience a seriously altered mood, just from LOW BLOOD SUGAR.......

Obviously, Their body chemistry and mine are not identical

Although I'm not an "eater".. People who need to eat on schedule to manage their mood aren't bad people... they just need a *fricken sandwich* to feel OK!!!! ... I don't... so what?

Usually, after an "eater" gets their "fix".... they're cool..... "Sorry I was cranky, back to work"

It's all fricking.NeuroChemstry, eh?

GENETICS....

FWIW: I'm the kinda guy.... If we're kicking it, and you're body chemistry says you need to eat, let me know, and we'll find you a fucking sandwich... no big deal... happy to do it.... specially if it keeps you level.....

I'd rather give you what you're body needs than deny you, judge you, condemn you, arrest you, jail you -- or even just have you feeling all tied up and cranky and being pissy at me....

It's only a damn fucking sandwich.... I'd get you glasses if you need vision correction, too... Hell, I'll stop the car if you need to take a piss...... I'm easy

Make sense? All our bodies are different, and to impose a "universal standard" on them.... it's too fucking weird... then to PUNISH PEOPLE?

THE MOST DISGUTING PEVERSION... Punishment for bio-genetic needs

Lota money involved in this Police State BS... and not a lot of GOD... so there ya go

--
whomung

[ohiomark]

Looks like Gavin "any twosome" Newsome is following the old liberal saying, "if it feels good, do it". Laws.......we don't need no stinking laws!!!!

Did you ever notice that crime and poverty are the highest in large cities? Did you also notice that most large cities are run by Democrats? Coincidence? I don't think so!!!

[watchingthings]

Mr. Mayor, you do that and you will have to close down many penitentiaries, thereby putting many prison guards out of work. They will have to turn to crime to support themselves....not much they are qualified for....unless some go after your type of jobs.

[mikegoodyearaz85338]

If we make everything legal, we could reduce crime by 100%.

[amanda85]

It's so ironic to see an American politician in line with the world's progressives and for this considered a looney extremist by the vast majority of people in his own country.
Every modern democracy is in the process of decriminalizing drugs. But then again, the US is no longer a democracy and every day less and less a modern country...

[aahpat]

America stopped being a democracy when it adoped the drug war.

[aahpat]

Arianna Huffington quantified this issue in an Op/Ed in the LA Times in March of 2007, The War On Drugs' War On Minorities
http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v07/n371/a07.html?79584

"A 2000 study found that 1.4 million African American men -- 13% of the total black male population -- were unable to vote in the 2000 election because of state laws barring felons access to the polls. In Florida, one in three black men is permanently disqualified from voting. Think that might have made a difference in the 2000 race? Our shortsighted drug laws have become the 21st century manifestation of Jim Crow."

(There is a date typo in there but it is in the original so I left it. The point remains valid.)

[aahpat]

The drug war is not only the subversion of the Voting Rights Act but the successful subversion of American democracy by the right-wing that imposes the drug war with the same "law and order" agenda used by Adolph Hitler to take over Germany.

Hell it even coerces the "liberals" into capitulating to it and participating in it against their own best interests.

More from Ira Glasser the former head of the ACLU.

"That many liberals have been at best timid in opposing the drug war and at worst accomplices to its continued escalation is, in light of the racial politics of drug prohibition, a special outrage. It is also politically self-destructive, serving to keep in power white conservatives opposed to everything liberals stand for. Liberals especially, therefore, need to consider attacking the premises upon which this edifice of racial subjugation is based. If they do not, who will?" http://aleftindependent.blogspot.com/2007/08/legalized-racial-discrimination-in.html

The perfect weapon when the intended political targets actually turn the weapons on themselves.

[aahpat]

The purpose of the drug war is and always has been the subversion of the Voting Rights Act.

"[President Nixon] emphasized that you have to face the fact that the whole problem is really the blacks. The key is to devise a system that recognizes this while not appearing to." H.R. Haldeman's diaries.

The drug war was then and is now that "system". the rejuvination of Jim Crow.

Last year, in his essay "Drug Busts = Jim Crow" the former head of the American civil Liberties Union, Ira Glasser, was more forthright in naming the culprit.

"The fact is, just as Jim Crow laws were a successor system to slavery, so drug prohibition has been a successor to Jim Crow laws in targeting blacks, removing them from civil society and then denying them the right to vote while using their bodies to enhance white political power. Drug prohibition is now the last significant instance of legalized racial discrimination in America."

[bookish]

I thought the purpose of the drug war was to generate mounds of untraceable cash. But I see your point. Excellent, informative post. Thank you.

[aahpat]

The Prison Policy Initiative and other groups have done some excellent research into how the drug war has subverted American democracy by manipulating apportionment to facilitate Gerrymandering and undermine the electoral viability of pluralistic urban legislative districts in favor of rural white conservative prison districts.

The people taken from cities to rural prisons are counted in the census but have no vote in those rural districts. Their home districts are weakened by this in several ways. As the districts are redrawn for lower urban populations more rural white constituencies are drawn into the districts. This forces even liberal politicians to craft their platform to entice the rural white voter while ignoring the interests of their core urban constituencies.

Barack Obama is a classic example of this. He has been dragged into support of social justice issues one at a time. And then only in superficial ways.

Democrats have ignored this issue which, to me, proves that they are just as much a bunch of white Dixie-crats today as they were in 1970.

[rabun666]

The purpose of the war on drugs is to create criminals for the prison industrial complex and to undermine constitutional rights, along with the usual graft and corruption.

[1will]

Why not go one step further and decriminalize murder, rape and assault? Imagine how low the crime rates would go then.

As someone who has seen both Crack babies and babies born to mothers using Meth I can say that you do not want to do anything that would increase the use of either substance.

[Loonie]

Then why support prohibition?

[aahpat]

Since you have seen the mythical "crack babies" I have to ask, what did the drug prohibition do to keep the drugs out of the hands of their mothers? NOTHING.

26 May 2004
Source: Reuters (Wire)
http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v04/n779/a02.h...

"CRACK BABIES DO NOT HAVE LOWER IQ: STUDY

NEW YORK ( Reuters Health )- Children born to mothers who used cocaine heavily during pregnancy do not seem to have lower IQ scores than their peers, although they may have problems with specific skills, according to a report released Tuesday.

Placing these so-called "crack babies" in foster care or adoptive homes, however, seems to compensate for some of those problems, the study findings suggest.

During the cocaine epidemic in the US in the late 1980s and early 1990s, many experts predicted that children exposed to cocaine in the womb would suffer lasting developmental impairment.

"It's important to dispel the myth of the crack-exposed baby that condemned them to hopeless status," lead author Dr. Lynn T. Singer, of Case Western Reserve University in Ohio told Reuters Health.

"Cocaine-exposed children are not as devastated as preliminary reports proposed, and can benefit from stimulating caregiving environments," she added."
---

http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v04/n1310/a05....
Crack hit the streets in 1984, and by 1987 the press had run more than 1,000 stories about it, many focusing on the plight of so-called crack babies. The handwringing over these children started in September 1985, when the media got hold of Dr. Ira Chasnoff's New England Journal of Medicine article suggesting that prenatal cocaine exposure could have a devastating effect on infants.

Only 23 cocaine-using women participated in the study, and Chasnoff warned in the report that more research was needed. But the media paid no heed. Within days of the first story, CBS News found a social worker who claimed that an 18-month-old crack-exposed baby she was treating would grow up to have "an IQ of perhaps fifty" and be "barely able to dress herself."

[1will]

Actually I have some "White Trash" in my family that apparently never heard that Crack is bad for you. They had a Crack baby several years ago. I also dated a woman years ago whose best friend used Crystal Meth while pregnant. She gave birth to a baby with severe birth defects. I pity her trying to explain that to her kid. My wife teaches and also has to deal with these former Crack Babies when they reach their teens.
What did the War On Drugs do to keep these babies safe? Nothing. Perhaps it has kept other babies safe though. You cannot possibly believe that if drugs were legalized there would less use. You cannot cut out all drug use but you can make it more costly and harder to get. Face it, Americans are lazy and if you inconveniance us enough we'll move on to something else.
If you want to use drugs then so be it. I really don't care about pot but you don't hear many "I smoked Crack and Meth and it turned my life around and made me a success" stories.

[aahpat]

1will:

If crack babies actually exist they are your fault.

As long as drugs are illegal addict dealers and gangsters will be happy to sell to pregnant mothers to be.

Medicalize and prescribe addictive substances and there will be doctors and other clinicians in between the user and the drugs. Medical professionals who, unlike addict drug dealers and gangsters, will guide pregnant mothers to be and others who are problematic users to healthier decisions.

It is the drug war that gives the addictive substances business to addict drug dealers and gangsters who are happy to seel to pregnant woment. If there is such a thing as "crack babies" it is because drug warriors impose the legal system that hands those women to addicted social predators without any social support at all.

[1will]

What a total load of crap. Do you really believe that if drugs were legalized that there would less use? You can find Oxycontin everywhere despite it being a prescription drug. Explain that.
Your little fantasy about having a team of caring doctors between a drug user and the drugs is just that, a fantasy.
If you want to use drugs then fine. Just don't be enough of a hypocrite to think that legalizing drugs will lead to less use and healthier mothers and babies.

[Blutus]

So much horse shit.

Where do crime rates statistics come from?
Arrest rates.

Are they the same?
No.
And most crime is not even reported.

But wait a minute..........

San Fran is also a sanctuary city??

Time for a drug cartel right on the
California coast!

Brilliant!

[leftLibertarian]

Prohibition creates a black market economy, whether the product is.

The black market economy breeds crime and corruption.

All one needs to look at is the prohibition of alcohol in the early 20th century.

[askmeificare]

Make it legal to do everything and the crime rate will drop to zero.

Crime problem solved.

[Horus]

Thats a very good use of propaganda speech. Its the old "Whats true of the parts is true of the whole" and a great use of simplification that almost makes you want to turn your brain off as soon as you read it. Plus it has the benefit of being true as a stand-alone and yet obviously wrong in context. Short and to the point it gets someone and just injects that ridiculous idea into their head and a good percentage will actually walk way without thinking of it further. Really well done. I'm a fan of this sort of well-crafted message.

[askmeificare]

Yes, I always look in my propaganda book before making any post here.

You got me.

[KoolBreez]

Askme:

Your comment has as much intellectual value as "Make everything illegal".

[askmeificare]

So does the comments in your profile.

[aahpat]

Here is yet another component of America's world record drug war induced over-crowded prison population. http://aleftindependent.blogspot.com/2007/09/seeds-of-insurrection-in-americas-field.html

According to the newly released New York City Police Department report, "Radicalization in the West: The Homegrown Threat" by Mitchell D. Silber and Arvin Bhatt Senior Intelligence Analysts NYPD Intelligence Division, prisons are "A Radicalizing Cauldron".

"Prisons can play a critical role in both triggering and reinforcing the radicalization process. The prison’s isolated environment, ability to create a “captive audience” atmosphere, its absence of day-to-day distractions, and its large population of disaffected young men, makes it an excellent breeding ground for radicalization."

[pa104inf]

As I stated in a previous post, I am a conservative Republican who believes that drugs should be legalized as well as prostitution mainly because I believe, "if enough people want something and are willing to pay enough for it, somebody will provide it", but I have to say that I also believe that most people who oppose the legalization of drugs have an honest belief that legalization is wrong. I read about all these conspiracy theories on this blogg that big business is against it, that Geoerge W. is somehow behind a plot to prevent legalization and I have to say that these theories are insane. Honest people can differ on this issue without being in the pocket of somebody else.

Steorn the solution to Global Warming can be found at http://www.steorn.com

[freespeach]

pa104inf

It is rare to see a "right winger" at this site who isn't insane or just here to raise hell.

To your comments. I agree that many decent people who oppose legalization (favor stiff penalties etc.) do have that honest belief you speak of.
But why do they have it, and from whom do they get this crazy idea?

They have the belief because big pharmaceutical companies want this to be the case and lobby heavily for it to be so. Our mass media rakes in billions from them in advertising, and sells the lie to people who no nothing about drugs.

The well informed commenter aaphat has spelled out the voter suppression component of the deal in spectacular fashion.
There is a growth industry booming at the moment who want it too.....the prison industry.

There are several key industries who are behind this insane war on drugs and the Republicans are tight with all of them.

And pa104inf don't forget that the reason pot is illegal in the first place goes to the business interests of the Dupont family and nylon rope vs. hemp rope. The Hearst family was developing timber for their infamous yellow journalism newspaper business and hemp was bad for biz.
Google this stuff, and don't assume for one minute that the war on drugs is not political and swimming in old boys conspiracies.

Seriously, smoke a joint and think about it.

Peace.

[pa104inf]

Strangely enough, the reason I support legalization is because of my conservative/libetarian roots. I have always held the belief that if somebody wants to kill themselves using drugs then that is there right. All I ask is that they do it without involving me in it. If somebody is caught driving stoned then I think the book should be thrown against them because they could hurt me.