Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

"Canada is exporting to us the crack of marijuana." --JOHN WALTERS, White House drug czar
Full Text: COPYRIGHT 2004 Time, Inc. ^ | August 23, 2004 | Anita Hamilton

Posted on 12/22/2004 1:56:04 AM PST by Gorons

Time, August 23, 2004 v164 i8 p36 This Bud's For The U.S. Canada's relaxed drug laws may be fueling a boom in marijuana exports to America. (Society/Crime) Anita Hamilton. Full Text: COPYRIGHT 2004 Time, Inc.

Byline: Anita Hamilton Reported by Ben Bergman/Blaine, Laura Blue/New York, Chris Daniels/Toronto, Deborah

It was the bus driver who noticed something suspicious. According to school officials, a driver for Blaine High School in northwestern Washington State thought something was strange about students' carrying unusually full bags to school and then never taking them back home. He alerted U.S. authorities, who boarded the bus on the morning of Feb. 20 and allegedly found 8 lbs. of marijuana, valued at $25,000, hidden inside a teenage girl's backpack. Prosecutors allege that the minor, 16, was getting paid $300 a trip to work as a drug mule for smugglers moving marijuana into the U.S. from Canada. The teen's home, in Point Roberts, Wash., borders British Columbia in an area with relatively light border patrol, which would have made it easy for her to get the drugs from Canada before getting on the bus.

Expelled from school and charged with possessing marijuana with intent to deliver, the girl has a hearing scheduled for Aug. 23 in Bellingham, Wash. Deputy prosecutor Thomas Verge has said he will probably ask for an exceptionally long sentence that would put the teen behind bars until her 21st birthday. The controversy has upset the community. "She was a wonderful young girl," says her principal, Dan Newell. "I wouldn't have ever thought that if anyone was going to haul marijuana across the border, it would be this lady."

Nor would anyone have thought that the cross-border traffic of illegal drugs would become one of the knottiest areas of disagreement between the U.S. and its northern neighbor. An estimated 880 to 2,200 tons of marijuana are grown in Canada, according to a new report from Canadian police. About 90% of the commercial crop winds up in the U.S., where its street value ranges from $5 billion to $25 billion. Although only 5% of pot in the U.S. comes from Canada, the trade is flourishing because of high demand in the U.S. and the comparatively mild punishments in Canada for growers and traffickers.

The U.S. seized more than 48,000 lbs. of marijuana along the Canadian border last year, nearly double the 26,000 lbs. it retrieved in 2002, according to a U.S. State Department report. There have been seizures all along the border, in Montana, North Dakota, Michigan, Ohio and other states. Canadian pot has cachet in the U.S. because of its reputation for being especially potent. The featured brand is BC Bud--which is grown in British Columbia and has become synonymous with the high-grade marijuana grown throughout Canada. Once in the U.S., the pot is exchanged for cash, and sometimes cocaine or guns, which are then smuggled back to Canada.

Although the actual potency of BC Bud varies from batch to batch, depending on how it's grown, the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration says that as much as 25% of BC Bud is made of the psychoactive drug tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). In contrast, the pot that the hippie generation smoked in the 1970s had only 2% THC content, and most pot consumed in the U.S. today averages about 7% THC.

White House drug czar John Walters blames BC Bud in part for the increased number of pot-related emergency room incidents, which have more than doubled, from 54,000 in 1996 to 119,000 in 2002. Those incidents range from accidents and injuries to unexpected reactions to the drug. "Canada is exporting to us the crack of marijuana," Walters told reporters in April. Others dispute Walters' claims. "Domestic American marijuana is probably a little bit better," says Richard Stratton, editor in chief of High Times, a magazine that covers marijuana issues. But the BC Bud name is so well regarded that some dealers pass off other varieties as Canadian to fetch the $3,000-to-$10,000-per-lb. price. And BC Bud seems to be everywhere. "It's hella easy to get," says "Angelo," 22, a Seattle resident who asked to be identified by a pseudonym. "You can usually go to [a convenience store] between 1:30 a.m. and 3:30 a.m. and ask people who you think smoke bud," he says.

On the Canadian side, the drug is even more ubiquitous. At the popular New Amsterdam Cafe in downtown Vancouver, customers openly smoke marijuana. "People come with pot. We are a business, though, so we have a $2 minimum cafe charge [for snacks and drinks]," says cafe manager Scott Heardy. Inspector David Nelmes, who is in charge of drugs for the Vancouver police department, tells TIME, "I can't remember the last time a member of the Vancouver police department arrested someone for smoking a joint. Frankly, who's got time?" If passed within the year, as seems likely, new Canadian legislation would decriminalize possession of less than 15 grams of marijuana, meaning that offenders would be slapped with only the equivalent of a traffic ticket. That approach is a far cry from the one that is taken in U.S. states like Oklahoma, where a person caught smoking dope could get up to a year in prison, although probation is more common.

Canada's attitude toward small-scale toking up has led some U.S. officials to blame the northerners for the influx of BC Bud in America. "If the perception is that it will be easier to get marijuana in Canada ... then it creates problems at the border," Paul Cellucci, U.S. ambassador to Canada, said at a Toronto Board of Trade dinner in February. Indeed, the trade has led to an increase in drive-by shootings in Canada by rival dealers, and to "grow-rips," in which competing clans break into growers' houses to steal their crops, according to Canadian police. The body of the suspected ringleader of a trafficking group was found stabbed in the neck in a ditch in Coeur d'Alene, Idaho, in November 2002. "It's still a dangerous drug," says James Capra, the DEA's chief of domestic operations. "People are killing each other over it."

Currently, a grower in Canada who has been convicted can expect less than two years of house arrest and a trafficker anywhere from three months to five years, served either at home or in prison, compared with the minimum punishment of five to 10 years that most convicted traffickers and growers receive in U.S. federal court. But as the violence has increased and cultivation of the crop has moved into residential areas, Canada has begun cracking down on its estimated 50,000 commercial pot growers. Over the past four years, police in Vancouver have seized $288 million worth of marijuana and $8.7 million worth of growing equipment. In Barrie, Ont., in January, police confiscated 30,000 marijuana plants, worth $23 million, inside a former Molson brewery.

One hot, muggy morning in July, a TIME reporter accompanied the Vancouver police as an officer thumped on the door of a two-story brick-and-panel house on a leafy street of manicured lawns. Inside, officers discovered a basement filled wall to wall with more than 300 glossy female cannabis bushes. That bust is pretty routine, but the BC Bud keeps flowing. In the past four years, Vancouver police have made more than 1,500 others, or about one a day.

--Reported by Ben Bergman/Blaine, Laura Blue/New York, Chris Daniels/Toronto, Deborah Jones/Vancouver and Elaine Shannon/Washington

[QUOTE:]

"Canada is exporting to us the crack of marijuana." --JOHN WALTERS, White House drug czar

Article A120683522


TOPICS: Heated Discussion
KEYWORDS: drugwar; freedom; law; marijuana; wod; wodlist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-74 next last
Hope we can post articles from Time like this for free discussion - Am somewhat aware of copyright laws but am just taking a stab here.
1 posted on 12/22/2004 1:56:04 AM PST by Gorons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Gorons
"It's still a dangerous drug," says James Capra, the DEA's chief of domestic operations. "People are killing each other over it."

Well, there's DEA logic for you. People kill each other over something, must mean that it's a very dangerous thing. Well people kill each other over money. Is money dangerous? I guess I should no longer carry any cash on me, someone might kill me for it.

2 posted on 12/22/2004 6:34:10 AM PST by bird4four4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gorons
I think the real question is whether James Capra, the DEA's chief of domestic operations, would have a job if cannabis were legalized. The conventional wisdom is, never take counsel for the continuation of a policy from those who depend on its continuance for their livlihood.

They're liable to make rash claims and ridiculous statements.

3 posted on 12/22/2004 6:43:44 AM PST by William Terrell (Individuals can exist without government but government can't exist without individuals.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gorons

"50,000 commercial pot growers"

How free can you be if you can't plant a seed for a flower?


4 posted on 12/22/2004 9:02:44 AM PST by PaxMacian (Gen 1:29)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bacon Man; humblegunner; Hap
"The crack of marijuana."

That's a lot like Tuna of the Dirt chicken. And Turkey of the Jungle bananas. And Pork of the Orchard apples.
5 posted on 12/22/2004 9:04:50 AM PST by Xenalyte (Surf's up, space ponies! I'm making gravy without the lumps!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Xenalyte; humblegunner; Hap
That's a lot like Tuna of the Dirt chicken. And Turkey of the Jungle bananas. And Pork of the Orchard apples.

Dont' forget Toilet Paper of the Outhouse Writing Paper.

6 posted on 12/22/2004 9:23:39 AM PST by Bacon Man (Everyone thinks it's funny until someone gets hurt. Then it's hilarious!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Gorons
Walters is a professional liar hired by those that want to preserve a fraud know as cannabis prohibition. The guy needs to be shown some justice and sentenced accordingly.

There is a story gathering steam about the Canadian prohibition laws being struck down by the courts. I am one that says the laws on cultivation, trafficking, and possession of laughing grass is legal in Canada. There is a thread on it that will explain the situation- http://www.commongroundcommonsense.org/index.php?showtopic=6332&st=60

Sativex will receive market authorization in Canada as early as January. This is a big development also- http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread20050.shtml

The prohibitionists really are wearing out their favorite chant- Pot is stronger now. Can't they go back to "It causes mental illness" and "Think of the children"?

I do wonder if they did a focus group to see if "crack of marijuana" was the most demonizing term they could come up with. Good bud might be comparable to hash, but cocaine? Walters sounds stupid using such a term.
7 posted on 12/22/2004 11:34:35 AM PST by poodle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: William Terrell
"James Capra, the DEA's chief of domestic operations, would have a job if cannabis were legalized."

It's the DEA not the MEA.

I'm sure he would.

8 posted on 12/22/2004 7:39:45 PM PST by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen
Since the users of cocoa and opium derivatives are such a small percentage of the pop, and cannabis users are such a large percentage of the pop, dropping cannabis from the rolls would lose Mr. Capra and the DEA virtually all its power. Perhaps it would be merged into the BATF making it the BADTF.

9 posted on 12/22/2004 8:49:05 PM PST by William Terrell (Individuals can exist without government but government can't exist without individuals.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Gorons

If we can drug test transportation workers coast to coast because of safety concerns why can't public school students/teachers be tested for health and safety in education/work place?? Drug testing has cleaned up a lot of work places. It's obvious to the most casual observer the public schools are a huge market place for the sale and distribution of illegal drugs and undermining our kids future. Just last week a story was running on CNN.. the US was at the bottom of the heap in science and math skills..can't do numbers if your dizzy on dope...


10 posted on 12/22/2004 9:34:54 PM PST by IGBT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: IGBT
why can't public school students/teachers be tested for health and safety in education/work place? How would you feel if the school sent a letter home saying something like this. "Dear Sir or Madam, We, in our infinite wisdom have decided that your son or daughter is probably a dope fiend. We base this judgement on the fact that they are under eighteen and they go to school. Because we have reason to believe they are hooked on some sort of illegal drug, we are going to randomly test them for drug usage. They will be required to produce urine samples on command and may be required to give other bodily fluids. We don't really need your permission for this, we just thought you should know." You can't drug test every student in a school because it's a violation of the 4th Amendment. Students, unlike job applicants, are not making a choice. They have to be in school whether they like it or not. Furthermore, do you really want to get the government involved in drug testing large segments of the population?
11 posted on 12/22/2004 11:56:47 PM PST by rommy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: William Terrell
"a small percentage of the pop"

Of what? I don't understand "pop".

A small percentage of DEA arrests? Of convictions? Of incarcerations? Of tons of seizures? Of dollars of seizures?* Of their overall focus/effort?

99% of marijuana arrests are made at the state or local level. Look at the DEA budget and you'll see that about half of it is for drug awareness/education and anti-drug advertising and the other half is for drug interdiction at our borders and overseas.

You can pull marijuana out and it wouldn't change a thing at the federal level.

If marijuana were legalized and regulated, I would posit that the number of DEA agents would increase to prevent marijuana exports to other countries. In addition, I agree the BATF would expand -- to the BATFM to monitor marijuana retail licensing and growing operations.

Financed by marijuana taxes, of course. But those agencies will grow.

* Marijuana represents about 15% of what Americans spend on illegal drugs.

12 posted on 12/23/2004 6:06:00 AM PST by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen
Pop=population.

A small percentage of people who are taking cocoa and opium derivatives, between 6% and 8% last I saw the numbers.

99% of marijuana arrests are made at the state or local level. Look at the DEA budget and you'll see that about half of it is for drug awareness/education and anti-drug advertising and the other half is for drug interdiction at our borders and overseas.

Then why are greater than half of people in federal prisons there for those offenses?

Ah, so the DEA budget doesn't allow pursuit and prosecution of cannabis related offenses, there being no money in the budget for them?

You can pull marijuana out and it wouldn't change a thing at the federal level.

LOL

15% of America's drug money goes to cannabis? And 8% are using cocoa and opium derivatives? And The taxpayer is spending billions on this "war", gouging the constitutions, corruption of law enforcement agencies with "funding" from asset seizures, destroying families, killing people, escalating costs for incarceration and filling the prisons for that?

13 posted on 12/23/2004 8:10:42 AM PST by William Terrell (Individuals can exist without government but government can't exist without individuals.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: William Terrell
"Then why are greater than half of people in federal prisons there for those offenses?"

I would hazard a wild guess that they were either trafficking or dealing illegal drugs, that's why.

The DEA focuses on federal drug offenders, the majority of which end up in federal prison. Unlike local law enforcement, where a drug arrest will end up, most likely, in a probation.

"Ah, so the DEA budget doesn't allow pursuit and prosecution of cannabis related offenses, there being no money in the budget for them?"

If the DEA had the money and the manpower to go after cannabis users, they'd be all over California, arresting people by the thousands. They go after the marijuana traffickers and dealers.

"The taxpayer is spending billions on this "war", "

About 1% of the budget is spent on the WOD, about half of that at the border where they can use the additional help anyway.

14 posted on 12/23/2004 8:46:26 AM PST by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: rommy

...the government is already involved in large scale drug testing ie.transportation,military,air traffic control,police-fire commerical truck drivers..the mechanics at the dealer I do biz.with tests all his mechanics and tech's. I'am not willing to give the drug dealers a "safe place to hide" in our public schools or else where. The supreme court handed down language to the feds years ago that allowed the testing of safety sensitive workers, " diminished expectation of privacy" due to the responsibility they have to the public to provide a safe and reliable service or product to the public. We can continue to fool our selves and allow drug dealers to thrive and profit off our kids..or we can make the necessary changes needed to provide a safe and reliable learning environment by employing the tools at hand and available with a proven track record in the work place. After all..aren't we supposed to be preping and training kids for entry into the work place?? How are they going to get a job if they can't pass a pre-employment drug test?? Or worse yet..because we didn't provide a drug free learning enviroment and they ended up in trouble with the law and now have a criminal record..they may never qualify for any worth while job. I've seen the positive life saving effect of drug testing and know from first hand experience it works. We need to change with the times..the drug dealers are taking full advantage of our williness to resist change consequently providing criminals..sellers and users a place to hide in our learning institutions and school yards. I'am not willing to ignore the obvious...


15 posted on 12/23/2004 11:04:40 AM PST by IGBT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen
The DEA focuses on federal drug offenders, the majority of which end up in federal prison. Unlike local law enforcement, where a drug arrest will end up, most likely, in a probation.

What's a "federal drug offender" that is not a state drug offender, except those actually captured coming on the American shores?

Probation or not, over half of the space in federal prisons is wasted by cannabis offenders. That, right there is a money drain. Then we have the entire due process course from investigation to sentencing that costs money.

About 1% of the budget is spent on the WOD, about half of that at the border where they can use the additional help anyway.

I'd think it would be a lot more. Got a source?

I doubt seriously that if cannabis were dropped from the schedule, we would have a DEA as such.

16 posted on 12/23/2004 5:08:12 PM PST by William Terrell (Individuals can exist without government but government can't exist without individuals.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Xenalyte

"The crack of marijuana."

That's a lot like Tuna of the Dirt chicken. And Turkey of the Jungle bananas. And Pork of the Orchard apples.



I would have said, "Like chicken of the sea", bu that's just me talkin'.


17 posted on 12/23/2004 5:12:20 PM PST by superskunk (Quinn's Law: Liberalism always produces the exact opposite of it's stated intent.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: William Terrell

I say decriminalize it all! Let adults do what they want and give life in prison to anyone who supplies a kid. If we do this, some will do till they die, literally. For others, being legal will ruin the appeal. Problem solved. We can spend the money on the deficit and the military.


18 posted on 12/23/2004 5:16:40 PM PST by superskunk (Quinn's Law: Liberalism always produces the exact opposite of it's stated intent.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: superskunk

Did you hear about Jessica's original problem with "Chicken of the Sea"? That's what the SNL sketch is taking off on.


19 posted on 12/23/2004 8:10:20 PM PST by Xenalyte (Surf's up, space ponies! I'm making gravy without the lumps!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Gorons
Back when I was in high school, my state rep (a DEM by the way) came and gave a talk about this "more potent" form of Marijuana that was hitting the street.

Every few years, we keep hearing about this more potent ganja that will supposedly corrupt our minds. Well, I've tried everything sourced from cannabis and, no, I have never become a dope fiend.

20 posted on 12/23/2004 8:14:00 PM PST by Clemenza (Morford 2008: Not that there's anything wrong with it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Xenalyte

Did you hear about Jessica's original problem with "Chicken of the Sea"? That's what the SNL sketch is taking off on.


No. I just skimmed the article real quick. Not much there worth my time.


21 posted on 12/23/2004 8:40:00 PM PST by superskunk (Quinn's Law: Liberalism always produces the exact opposite of it's stated intent.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: superskunk

This article is a joke. Marijuana isn't more potent, it's about the same. In fact, 2% THC marijuana is good for one thing...a killer headache. In the olden days the study of potencies only had access to Mexican ditchweed(poor mexicans growing pot in whatever little piece of exposed dirt they could find) that crossed the border. Even today, this ditchweed is good for a headache.

Today they intercept more high-grade American, Canadian, and European pot. Legalization would solve so much. It'd eradicate gangs, save money, and it would atone for reefer madness...the early-to-mid 1900's campaign that basically said all marijuana users were evil mexicans who wanted to rape your wife, mother, and little sister...it's ridiculous.


22 posted on 12/23/2004 9:36:56 PM PST by GregW8705 (I wanna be sedated)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Clemenza
Well, I've tried everything sourced from cannabis and, no, I have never become a dope fiend.


You've got to admit, at any strength it has a negative affect on ability to concentrate and short term memory. That's why I gave it up years ago.
23 posted on 12/23/2004 9:39:51 PM PST by superskunk (Quinn's Law: Liberalism always produces the exact opposite of it's stated intent.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: GregW8705
I agree with your arguments, but we both know that quite a few fellow conservatives would disagree. I personally don't care what people do for recreation. Having said that, I don't think we should have a free for all either. I think there are many drugs that should be regulated, but I'd rather see a junkie get his fix from a doctor or a med-tech than have him steal and kill to buy street junk. It's not a perfect solution, but I think it's a more viable one.
24 posted on 12/23/2004 9:46:32 PM PST by superskunk (Quinn's Law: Liberalism always produces the exact opposite of it's stated intent.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: superskunk
I think there are many drugs that should be regulated, but I'd rather see a junkie get his fix from a doctor or a med-tech than have him steal and kill to buy street junk. It's not a perfect solution, but I think it's a more viable one.

There is actually a positive correlation between the harshness of drug laws and the percentage of heroin addicts.

Iran has the highest rate of heroin addiction in the world and they've executed around 10,000 heroin traffickers over the last decade or so.

In 1996, Singapore had proportionally slightly more heroin addicts than the US. And Holland has a lower rate of heroin addiction than the US, using late 90's figures for both. These were the latest government figures I could find.

It does not mean that harsh laws cause higher rates of heroin addiction.

It means lenient laws don't necessarily lead to more of it.

25 posted on 12/23/2004 10:12:43 PM PST by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: IGBT
If we can drug test transportation workers coast to coast because of safety concerns why can't public school students/teachers be tested for health and safety in education/work place??

It's called the ACLU/NEA, and they won't stand for it.

26 posted on 12/23/2004 10:20:43 PM PST by concretebob (If you won't defend my liberty, who's gonna defend yours?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: superskunk
I'm for personal psossesion of 4 plants or less than 1 pound, of cannabis. Anything more constitutes intent to distribute.
Get caught outside your property line with it, you pay a serious fine. 2nd time you go to jail.
Just let me grow it, like tomatos, and I'll be content.
27 posted on 12/23/2004 10:26:49 PM PST by concretebob (If you won't defend my liberty, who's gonna defend yours?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Ken H

Actually I agree. When prohibition was passed in this country, there was an explosion of alcoholism. I'd rather see the DEA eliminated or greatly downsized and spend the money on better things. The current system certainly isn't working that well.


28 posted on 12/23/2004 10:27:56 PM PST by superskunk (Quinn's Law: Liberalism always produces the exact opposite of it's stated intent.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: concretebob

Don't really care if you grow enough for your friends and family too. Keep it out of the hands of kids and I'm happy.

These days, about all I bother with is a couple of beers, but to each his own.


29 posted on 12/23/2004 10:30:47 PM PST by superskunk (Quinn's Law: Liberalism always produces the exact opposite of it's stated intent.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: superskunk

I'm with you.


30 posted on 12/23/2004 10:57:20 PM PST by concretebob (If you won't defend my liberty, who's gonna defend yours?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: concretebob
It's what makes us conservatives. We don't feel the need to impose our will on everyone the way the liberals do. I always considered them hypocrites for being such burned out druggies, then years later pushing for stricter drug enforcement. Just about everything those atheist scum do offends me.
31 posted on 12/23/2004 11:20:58 PM PST by superskunk (Quinn's Law: Liberalism always produces the exact opposite of it's stated intent.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: superskunk

Yep. Haven't touched the stuff in 6 years.


32 posted on 12/24/2004 3:05:24 AM PST by Clemenza (Morford 2008: Not that there's anything wrong with it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: William Terrell
"Probation or not, over half of the space in federal prisons is wasted by cannabis offenders."

First, the space is not "wasted". These are scumbag drug traffickers and drug dealers. Good riddance to bad garbage. Second, the statistic is for all drug offenders, not just marijuana. Third, we have 2 million people in prison (state and federal) in the U.S. 77,000 of them are drug offenders in federal prison. Let's put things in perspective here, Chicken Little.

"I'd think it would be a lot more. Got a source?"

The federal budget is about $2 trillion. The federal WOD is about $20 billion (ie., 1%).

Under the 2003 WOD budget, a number of enforcement agencies were included. This skews the "supply/demand" budget split to 2/3 - 1/3. The 2004 WOD budget transfers some of the enforcement budget to other federal agencies, resulting in a "supply/demand" budget split of about 50-50.

This restructuring (detailed in the link) also reduces the ONDCP budget from $20 billion to $12 billion. The largest reduction, $5 billion, came from the removal of 10 accounts in the DOJ, the largest of which, $3 billion, was for the incarceration of federal prisoners.

33 posted on 12/24/2004 7:13:15 AM PST by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: GregW8705
"Legalization would solve so much. It'd eradicate gangs, save money, and it would atone for reefer madness ..."

Pot legalization would not eradicate the gangs -- of all the money Americans spend on illegal recreational drugs, marijuana represents about 15%. That still leaves a huge illegal market for the gangs.

Save money? Not at the federal level. Some money would be saved at the state and local level in reduced incarceration costs. But I believe it would actually cost society money due to increased usage (health, accident, treatment, etc.).

Currently, marijuana usage is about 6% of the population over 12. It was as low as 4.7% in 1993. It was as high as 13% in 1979.

So we know that it can go pretty high even when it's illegal. Legalizing marijuana could result in use as high as 20%, half of that number under 21 years of age. Would that also increase the use of hard drugs? I would think so, especially since the gangs are now focused on nothing but.

Legalize marijuana to "atone for Reefer Madness"? Nice try.

Besides, the film has now achieved "cult" status, and is a favorite among teens. So look on the positive side.

34 posted on 12/24/2004 7:39:03 AM PST by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: concretebob
"Just let me grow it, like tomatos, and I'll be content."

Not like those plants wouldn't attract every teen in a ten miles radius like bees to nectar.

35 posted on 12/24/2004 7:45:39 AM PST by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen
If all I have to worry about is teenagers, I can deal with that and I didn't say outside.
Besides, it doesn't grow in baggies. I'll bet you half the kids don't know what a plant looks like.
I've had friends who KNOW, walk into my garden, and not see it.
36 posted on 12/24/2004 7:52:29 AM PST by concretebob (If you won't defend my liberty, who's gonna defend yours?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: superskunk
"When prohibition was passed in this country, there was an explosion of alcoholism."

Well, there was an explosion of drinking, yes.

Per Capita Consumption of Alcoholic Beverages (Gallons of Pure Alcohol) 1910-1929

But that only brought the consumption level back to what it was before Prohibition (actually lower).

There is no relationship to drugs. Drug use declined when we got serious about enforcing the Controlled Substances Act.

37 posted on 12/24/2004 8:02:19 AM PST by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen
But that only brought the consumption level back to what it was before Prohibition (actually lower).

There is no relationship to drugs. Drug use declined when we got serious about enforcing the Controlled Substances Act.

It's possible that my opinions are wrong. I'm just saying that the DEA seems a lot like the public schools - we keep dumping money into improving the situation and it just keeps getting worse. In my home county, Butler county PA, we're seeing something we've never seen before - kids addicted to heroin (I've heard as young as 13). I have a young cousin who nearly died from that garbage. It's got to stop and it's got to stop now! I'm open to any realistic option. If we make dealing on any level a capitol crime, fine! We need to do something different.
38 posted on 12/24/2004 8:14:12 AM PST by superskunk (Quinn's Law: Liberalism always produces the exact opposite of it's stated intent.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen
Currently, marijuana usage is about 6% of the population over 12. It was as low as 4.7% in 1993. It was as high as 13% in 1979.

So the decline started halfway through Jimmy Carter's term and continued falling until the WOD was elevated to cabinet level status. Since then, it's gone up. Plus the WOD has utterly failed on the supply side, assuming the goal is to reduce supply..

So we know that it can go pretty high even when it's illegal. Legalizing marijuana could result in use as high as 20%, half of that number under 21 years of age.

Not necessarily. The rates of mj use in the Netherlands is in the same ballpark as the US, maybe slightly lower.

Would that also increase the use of hard drugs? I would think so, especially since the gangs are now focused on nothing but.

Not necessarily. Using the latest government figures I could find (1999), the rate of heroin addiction in the Netherlands was about half that of the US.

39 posted on 12/24/2004 8:29:00 AM PST by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: concretebob
"I can deal with that and I didn't say outside."

You currently grow tomatoes inside? And if marijuana were legal to grow, just how many people would choose to grow it indoors? Besides you.

"I'll bet you half the kids don't know what a plant looks like."

Perhaps. Legalize the growing of marijuana and I'd bet that percentage would increase to about, oh, 100%.

If all I have to worry about is teenagers, I can deal with that ..."

Here's the problem. We'd all have to worry about the teenagers if marijuana were legalized for adult use in the home -- as they found out in Alaska. Teen use was double that of the lower 48.

Personally, I'm not willing to take the chance of teen drug use doubling in order to legalize marijuana so that some irresponsible, selfish, individualistic, immoral, hedonistic doper can smoke at home. Like they would restrict their usage to home.

They don't now.

40 posted on 12/24/2004 8:43:13 AM PST by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen
Drug use declined when we got serious about enforcing the Controlled Substances Act.

Did we get serious in 1979 under Jimmy Carter, when drug use began its decline?

Did we get unserious after the creation of a cabinet level drug czar in 1989, when drug use began to rise after falling for 10 years?

41 posted on 12/24/2004 8:44:08 AM PST by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen
Then lets ban alcohol, cause I don't want some irresponsible, selfish, individualistic, immoral, hedonistic, alcoholic endangering my children.

Like they would restrict their usage to home.They don't now.

42 posted on 12/24/2004 9:03:03 AM PST by concretebob (If you won't defend my liberty, who's gonna defend yours?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Ken H
"So the decline started halfway through Jimmy Carter's term"

It reached its peak halfway through Jimmy Let's-Federally-Decriminalize-Marijuana Carter's term, yes.

And it continued to fall until the events at Waco, Texas. What does Waco, Texas have to do with the low point in drug use? Absolutely nothing, the same as elevating the WOD to cabinet level.

You sure do have a weird way of connecting events.

"assuming the goal is to reduce supply."

Assuming that were the goal.

"The rates of mj use in the Netherlands is in the same ballpark as the US"

Is that a valid comparrison? Could there be cultural differences? Can I then compare the rates of mj use in Singapore? Tanzania? China?

43 posted on 12/24/2004 9:04:44 AM PST by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: concretebob
Go for it.

But keep in mind that we tried that once -- 13 short years later it was repealed.

44 posted on 12/24/2004 9:08:32 AM PST by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen
as they found out in Alaska. Teen use was double that of the lower 48.

I'm sure living in Alaska is reason enough to be stoned as much as possible.

Probably a lot of drinking going on too.

So you're one of those who wants to regulate what an adult is allowed to do in the privacy of their home?

Funny, you don't LOOK like a fascist.

45 posted on 12/24/2004 9:14:06 AM PST by concretebob (If you won't defend my liberty, who's gonna defend yours?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen
Just read your about page.

A line from the movie Roadhouse poped into my head.."Opinions vary"

46 posted on 12/24/2004 9:24:56 AM PST by concretebob (If you won't defend my liberty, who's gonna defend yours?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: concretebob
"I'm sure living in Alaska is reason enough to be stoned as much as possible."

Hard to explain then why Alaskan teen marijuana used dropped to the national average when marijuana was made illegal again.

"So you're one of those who wants to regulate what an adult is allowed to do in the privacy of their home?"

No, I'm one of those who wants to regulate what an adult is allowed to do anywhere.

You don't? Funny, you don't LOOK like an anarchist.

47 posted on 12/24/2004 9:27:23 AM PST by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: concretebob

The good, the bad, and the ugly.


48 posted on 12/24/2004 9:29:07 AM PST by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen
So the decline started halfway through Jimmy Carter's term

It reached its peak halfway through Jimmy Let's-Federally-Decriminalize-Marijuana Carter's term, yes.

Yep, if you're going to claim "getting serious" caused the decline, then Jmmy Carter gets credit for the onset of the 10 year decline.

And it continued to fall until the events at Waco, Texas. What does Waco, Texas have to do with the low point in drug use? Absolutely nothing, the same as elevating the WOD to cabinet level.

The WOD was elevated to cabinet level status to better fight the WOD. If demand increases after falling for 10 years and supply explodes, it's a failure.

49 posted on 12/24/2004 9:30:33 AM PST by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Ken H
"If demand increases after falling for 10 years and supply explodes, it's a failure."

Let's look at a chart of marijuana "Past Month" use so you know exactly where I'm coming from:

First of all, marijuana use fell 65% in the period from 1979 to 1993. It then remained relatively flat for 8 years. It is up slightly (NOT explosively) in the last few years.

Why is it up? My guess is that the increased calls for medical marijuana and decriminalization have a lot to do with it, just as it did in Jimmy Carter's days.

50 posted on 12/24/2004 9:49:17 AM PST by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-74 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson