Cops Say to Legalize Drugs

President Obama drew a slew of criticism recently when he derisively dismissed a drug reform question during a town hall meeting. Here was the "crazy" question that warranted such a disrespectful response:

"With over 1 out of 30 Americans controlled by the penal system, why not legalize, control, and tax marijuana to change the failed war on drugs into a money making, money saving boost to the economy? Do we really need that many victimless criminals?"

This was the top ranked question on Whitehouse.gov, and yet Obama treated the query as if it came from a pack of giggling stoners. The president chuckled, "I don't know what that says about the online audience...The answer is no, I don't think that is a good strategy to grow our economy." As is so often the case when discussing the War on Drugs, the president offered no proof of this claim. He doesn't have to. The room applauded, while laughing at his little joke. Stupid stoners. Always thinking about their pot.

But what Americans may not know is that many former law enforcement officers have recently stepped forward to speak against the failed War on Drugs. I was recently contacted by members of LEAP (Law Enforcement Against Prohibition,) including Jack Cole, a 26-year veteran of the New Jersey State Police where he served 14 years undercover in the Narcotics Bureau. Cole is the executive director of LEAP. Cole explained to me his first epiphany when he realized something was wrong with the War on Drugs.

It occurred to me that I liked a lot of the people I was working on more than some of the people I was working for. I discovered nearly all of the 114 million people in the US above the age of twelve whom DEA says have used an illegal drug (46% of that population) were basically just like me. The only difference was they wanted to put something in their body that I don't want to put in my body.

And Cole doesn't seem impressed by drug czar Gil Kerlikowske's new idea to rebrand the War on Drugs. Cole writes, "A rose by any other name. This is not a war on drugs, it is a war on people; a war on our children, our parents, ourselves. Rebranding won't change things. A new policy is needed to change things; ending drug prohibition."

The War on Drugs isn't failing because of mismanagement. It's failing because the war was hopeless at its creation. When the war began to escalate under Nixon in 1970, "people were less likely to die as a result of the drug culture than from falling down the stairs in their on homes or choking to death on food at their own dinner tables," explains Cole. America was at war with a boogyman -- an expensive boogyman.

We nor our bosses had any idea of how to fight a war on drugs. Our bosses did know one thing though; they knew how to keep that federal cash-cow being milked in their personal barnyard. To accomplish that they had to make the drug war appear to be an absolute necessity. So early on we were encouraged to lie about most of our statistics and lie we did.

When the evidence didn't support their claims, the cops lied, Cole explains. "We exaggerated the amount of drugs we seized by adding the weight of any cutting agents we found (lactose, mannitol, starch, or sucrose) to the weight of the illegal drug. So we might seize one ounce of cocaine and four pounds of lactose."

As Cole and associates continued to lie, the effects on their community worsened over time. The War on Drugs actually brought drugs to the attention of youth, who then saw drugs as a way to escape the realities of their lives. "Many poor young people in the centers of our larger cities looked to the drug dealer as a role model -- and the only way out of the poverty and misery of the ghetto. The dealer was the one person in their communities with the hot cars, hotter women, "money to burn," and leisure time in which to burn it."

Another consequences of the war was the destruction of the African-American community. Cole and his fellow officers began arresting drug users and charging them as drug dealers, and drug users tended to be poor African-Americans. In fact, 13.5% of all drug users in the United States are black. Many more black males have been incarcerated under drug prohibition in the United States than were jailed in South Africa during apartheid. "There are more black and brown men in prison in the United States today than the total number of male slaves populating this country in 1840," Cole says, and adds that "blacks are now serving an average of six years for drug offenses, while whites are serving only four, and 81% of federal drug offenders are black."

The War on Drugs has shattered any trust that existed between African American and Hispanic citizens and police officers. Racial profiling became a constant byproduct of drug-hunting. "Two niggers, two chinks, two greasers or I don't stop the car. Why bother?" were the words of Howard Wooldridge's colleague in the Bath Township Police Department. Wooldridge is another veteran of the War on Drugs. "I believe my profession is no more or less prejudice than others. However, we have a badge a gun and arrest powers. The War On Drugs gives the racists an easy hook to hurt people they don't like. And they do."

There's one area where officers like Cole marked a fair degree of success: the vast amounts of arrests for marijuana possession. Though, even that had unintended consequences. "[It] caused many marijuana dealers to switch to harder drugs that were less detectable and far more profitable, pound for pound." Dealers switched to pushing heroin, methamphetamine, and cocaine, far deadlier drugs.

But the solution isn't shifting the focus of the war from marijuana to heroin and meth. The War on Drugs was doomed to fail at its inception because drug crime doesn't function like regular crime. Cole explains,

"[W]hen officers arrested a robber or rapist the number of rapes and robberies declines...But when I arrested a drug dealer the number of drug sales didn't change at all. I was simply creating a job opening for a long line of people more than willing to risk arrest for those obscene profits. It was actually worse than that. I wasn't just creating a job opening; I was creating a safe job opening because it they tried to get the job while the dealer was still on the corner he would probably shoot them. I would suggest to you that whole armies of police cannot stop drug trafficking when the profits are this immense."

Cole's solution to the mess left in the wake of the War on Drugs is simply to end drug prohibition. Legalize and regulate is his mantra. But won't that cause everyone to use drugs? Cole dismisses that theory. "Drugs were not illegal in this country until 1914 and we seemed to get through the first 200 years without that occurring."

An immediate result of ending drug prohibition would be an enormous relief on the US prison system. "[W]e wouldn't have to arrest 1.9 million [citizens] every year for nonviolent drug offenses," says Cole.

In his plans, Cole goes one step further than some drug legalization advocates. "The US government should important or produce the drugs and control them for quality, potency, and standardized measurement." This policy, Cole claims, would virtually end drug overdoses. Just as individuals died during alcohol prohibition by attempting to concoct "bathtub gin," so individuals now die by experimenting with different potencies of drugs. If drugs were monitored by the FDA much like prescription pills overdoses would vastly decline. Once the drugs are made legal, Cole says, the government can tax their sales. That would be one way out of this economic depression.

The benefits of ending the War on Drugs are vast, but one of the most urgent is that no one would be killed by police during drug raids. Cole cites one example, Accelyne Williams, a 75-year-old retired black Methodist minister, who was sitting in his living room reading the Bible when a dozen police - dressed entirely in black - stormed in. The terrified minister ran for his bedroom, but the police tackled him. During the ensuing struggle, Williams experienced a heart attack. That's when police realized they were in the wrong apartment. If police weren't busy harassing innocent people, they could build trust, and start the healing process with the African American community.

Drug legalization isn't just a domestic security issue, Cole emphasizes. It also has international implications.

In 1997 ten kilograms of Reactor-grade plutonium (enough to make an atomic bomb) was valued at $56,000. The "average terrorist" makes his living selling illegal drugs. Heroin, which at the beginning of the war on drugs in 1970 was valued at $400,000 per kilogram, is still worth $70,000 per kilogram today, despite the immense drop in price caused by the glut of supply created by 37 years of a failed war on drugs. That means the "average terrorist" would have to sell about eight kilograms of pure heroin for every ten kilograms of pure weapons-grade Plutonium he wishes to buy. That is not a major problem for the terrorist, as long as we continue the policy of drug prohibition.

But if drug prohibition ended tomorrow, and the government worked to regulate the drugs, terrorists couldn't sell heroin at the inflated market price.

The benefits of legalizing drugs are now undeniable, and everyone from Obama's most zealous supporters to former drug enforcement officials are demanding legalization be considered a valid option. It seems like everyone except the very people elected to shape US policy have awoken to the reality that the War on Drugs is a total failure.

The LEAP promo can be seen here. Video testimony from cops against the War on Drugs is here and here.

Cross-posted from Allison Kilkenny's blog. Also available on Facebook and Twitter.

Comments

[Areyoukiddingg]

Law enforcement knows, you can't legislate social habits or morals. Just look at the crime alcohol prohibition created....it didn't work, neither does drug prohibition. We have such a train wreck of broken lies....too bad Obama won't take the time to look into it.

[leonel]

INTERNET VIDEOS CAN EDUCATE THE PUBLIC BY SHOWING DIFFERENT EFFECTS OF DRINKING BEER, LIQUOR AND USING MARIJUANA. ALSO TO DISCUSS SIDE EFFECTS OF LEGALIZING ON CHILDREN, SCHOOLS, OBESITY, ADDICTIONS AND SO ON.

Most of us do not smoke or use alcohol but some of us may also see that more rational laws are needed. If advocates would use internet videos as educational tools, the entire world would quickly get to be better informed. If a few people sat around with cocktails, beer and marijuana, it is obvious who would soon pass out or become disabled.

The bigger issues may turn on what would be effect on children as it would be so much easier to abuse than liquor, which is not totally under control. A big part of the problem with health and medical expenses is obesity, how would legalizing drugs effect?

Reforming of laws is inevitable and use of the media would really promote progress.

[Sarah Katherine]

Conservative judge, Jim Brown says to legalize too:
http://patients4medicalmarijuana.wordpress.com/time-to-legalize-marijuana-judge-jim-gray/

[Earl Brown]

somone needs to get the banks on board for this. they already own congress, if we can get them aboard for legalization we'll have won the "war" by the end of next week.

[Earl Brown]

fantastic read, wish you could get it on the front page though. were never gonna get this done if we dont get it done now. nows our opportunity.

[TheFobster]

Thank you for posting this Allison, it was a very good read, and I agree with everything you said.

[worldlyhick]

I would like to be able to find out how candidates stand on legalization of cannabis before I vote or support anyone next time.

Some years ago Obama had indicated he favored decriminalization of cannabis. That was in part why I supported him during the last election.

I believe this issue is as important as any issue today. I don't see how anyone can expect much progress to be made in any policies as long as the abuse and criminalization of some of our citizens are tolerated. If the political will is not there to correct this problem, it's not there for anything else of benefit to most people.

[BusGreg]

Ron Paul has in the past stood up for ending this insanity. I voted for Pres. Obama and too had hoped that he'd put an end to this foolishness. Also considering the way he continues with Gitmo and the whole torture issue, he appears more of the same bin there done that crowd. Congress, however is where the real change needs to be made. It is time to put members of the Libertarian and Green Party in both chambers and break up the two party stalemate.

[Swooper420]

Congress needs to change parts of the Controlled Substances Act before any real change can happen.

Don't believe me? Read this analysis by Pete Guither, from Drug War Rants:

http://blogs.salon.com/0002762/stories/2007/10/09/theDrugCzarIsRequiredByLaw.html

According to Title VII Office of National Drug Control Policy Reauthorization Act of 1998: H11225:
"Responsibilities. --The Director-- [...]
(12) shall ensure that no Federal funds appropriated to the Office of National Drug Control Policy shall be expended for any study or contract relating to the legalization (for a medical use or any other use) of a substance listed in schedule I of section 202 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 812) and take such actions as necessary to oppose any attempt to legalize the use of a substance (in any form) that--
A. is listed in schedule I of section 202 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 812); and
B. has not been approved for use for medical purposes by the Food and Drug Administration;"

[Swooper420]

Continuing,

From Pete Guither's article:

Now, let's take as a simple example, the issue of medical marijuana. If the government finds that marijuana Has "currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States" or "accepted safety for use of the drug under medical supervision," then by law, marijuana cannot remain in Schedule 1 of the Controlled Substances Act, which would immediately legalize it for medical purposes.

But by law, the drug czar must oppose any attempt to legalize the use (in any form).
Therefore, despite the fact that there is extensive evidence of medical marijuana's safety and effectiveness (including the fact that even the federal government supplies it to patients), and clearly the drug czar would know about all this information, he is required by law to lie about it.

The job description also means that since he must oppose any attempt to legalize, he has no choice but declare that the drug war is working, that legalization would fail, etc., regardless of any... facts.

[Aquarius]

I also thought Obama would make a difference concerning the legalization of cannabis. It appears he will not.

[Stirner]

The primal and defining religious culture of our nation was established by, and continued by, Old Testament Christians. The Pilgrims and the Puritans, just as today's "Evangelicals" were set upon correcting "fallen human nature". The struggle against "the world, the flesh, and the devil" has been from the foundation of our nation, militant and unrelenting. When it comes to enforcing this paranoiac vision of a sinful world, what an angry God ("Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God") cannot accomplish on his own, is accomplished by the angry activity of his many followers -- from witch hunting and "shunning" to imprisonment and fines. The "War against Drugs" is fundamentally driven by religion, which finds further expression in all of our wars to "save" the world... as with our present "Crusade" against Islam. It won't stop until this national fixation upon a long dead tribal god vanishes (you know, the old "Judeao-Christian Heritage"). Don't hold your breath.

[BusGreg]

How sad and true.
But at the same time the fight to end this stupid waste of money and people needs to continue. To throw in the towel will only prolong this insanity.

[mlang52]

Then why is it that there is a group of interfaith people involved in getting the drug laws changed? You should think before yo make blanketed claims about "groups" There are plenty of Christians who support the cause you endorse! The changes you refer to are not in the Bible. They were established by people like Pope Innocent, who declared, in the late 1400's, that cannabis was "illegal", or the prohibitionists, who grew out of the temperance movement. Temperance is the responsible use of alcohol. It did not call for the elimination of its use.

The Old Testament was for the Jews. It has a recipe for anointing oil that contains a substance called "konobos". (look familiar?) The New Testament was for the Christians. I have read both testaments, all of the way through, and neither prohibit alcohol or drugs.

And don't put the drug war on the "religious" groups alone. Granted, many Christians support the war on drugs. But, there are many agnostics and atheists who, ignorantly, support the drug war as well!

[caligyrl74]

I don't see this ever happening. Why?

Because the pharmaceutical industry would crumble. Our government has no problem with people being addicted to drugs, they just want everyone using the legal kind that can be profitted from - they will never legalize anything that can be grown, manufactured and sold by regular individuals.

[BusGreg]

All valid arguments, but at the same time, drugs in one form or another have always been used - responsibly by some - and abused by many. Prohibition never has - is not now - or will it ever work. For Anything!
How much longer do you think the prison state mentality can be maintained financially for one, but more importantly, how much longer do we as nation allow the destruction of people in this idiotic prison driven society without addressing the underlying causes and educate ourselves and those around us about drugs on a science based level, focussing on the truth, rather than the tried and untrue.
This has to apply to all drugs including the "legal" ones, which are more often than not highly addictive, health problem causing and in some cases lethal!
Drug use by itself should never be a crime, as it is fort some an escape mechanism ore more importantly an addiction. Addiction is a medical problem, not a crime! We treat illness in a medical setting, not a criminal. If you apply this logic in reverse, would you call your doctor when your property is vandalized???

[Coltrane1234]

And this is why no progress has been made, you admit defeat before anything happens.

[BluePrideStephen]

For all the liberties afforded a smart, progressive and popular president, Obama is certain that the first AA president will not be the one to legalize drugs. Even if he wants to, he has tremendous constraints placed upon him. His plate isn't full, his platter is overflowing. It has become frustrating for all those with such high hopes on so many fronts to have to actually wait in line. The pent-up demand is tremendous. I'm confident he's the man who convinced me to vote for him. I want him to end DADT andI trust he'll do right as soon as practicable. He's building his base of support right now. We'll see great things from this great man.

Remember Motown, Mr. President. It starts with The Supremes. Make them and they'll make you.

[GreatNews27]

Sorry, too many drug gangs paying too much money to too many politicians. Legalization won't even make it past the dream stage. You thought the banksters owned congress? Wait till you see the pull of the Crips and Bloods not to mention the Mexican cartels. Besides, all they have to do is torture and murder one Senator and the rest will run screaming like little girls to do their bidding. IOW, never gonna happen.

[BusGreg]

That's accusing legislators of taking bribes. Any names to back up that statement?? If any one has Congress in their pockets it is the Prison Industrial Complex. Cops, Correction Workers, their Unions, and of course the many privately owned prisons, staffed and operated on your and my tax dollar.

[Jordan Conaway]

if they wanna fight for it well i guess they can go up against the US army.... just cause they are "gangsters" and drug lords doesnt mean they can shoot a gun... well anyway. oh and bankers did have congress by the balls cuz they had money... we cant just make that, anyone can make crack. So legalization might not happen but not for the reasons your saying

[bknott]

Let's move this further. I called LEAP and asked for a bumper sticker a month or two ago. I received it, and it was nice, but I wasn't too impressed. I think LEAP could use a little more PR. Anyone willing to donate some time or talent?

[newsmctado]

HuffPost's Pick

Great article, especially considering the source (retired drug enforcement and law enforcement). If this is a "war on drugs" as we have been told for the past 40 years, why not treat it like a war. We have seen time and time again in military combat that the best advice and best strategy comes from the bottom up and not the top down. We listen to our military commanders on the ground, but continually refuse to listen to the law enforcement officials who are seeing the problems with narcotic prohibition firsthand. Instead, we have seen a "war on drugs" that targets the individuals instead of the product, has encouraged a systemically race and poverty biased legal system and continually incarcerates non-violent American's for recreational use or chemical addiction (using the medical definition). It is a failed war, a failed policy and a failed system that must be changed instead of being ridiculed, dismissed and derided.

[RoloTomassi]

Well, just like all pointless and hopeless US wars, we won't give up on it until we have no choice--probably by virtue of bankruptcy.

[NedFlanders19]

It's all about money and control, not what's best for the citizens and the country. Until we get our priorities straight, this mess will continue. Profits before people means the end of the country - death by 1000 cuts.

Politicians are too afraid of losing their power and are slaves to the lobbies that get them into office, so the right and best thing for the masses gets caught up in lies and obfuscation.

Hey Barack, what happened to "Yes we cannabis!"

[wndrwrthg]

If only it could come about. But, being the cynic that I am, the money that the pharmaceutical companies, the alcohol industry, tobacco industry and the prison industry spend to buy congress, makes me think it will never happen. Rather than spend money to eradicate crops in foreign countries, why not buy the crops? For what we spend for interdiction and suppression we could buy every crop every year.