Obama Says Treating Drug Use As a Criminal Problem Is "Counterproductive"

Huffington Post ^ | jan 22, 2015 | Tony Newman

[balch3]

President Barack Obama continues to speak out against mass incarceration, the devastating impact of our drug policies on communities of color and his expectation that marijuana legalization will continue to spread.

Obama's comments came today during his YouTube interviews with YouTube bloggers, Bethany Mota, GloZell Green and Hank Green.

Some Obama nuggets from today's interview include this on marijuana:

"What you're seeing now is Colorado, Washington through state referenda, they're experimenting with legal marijuana," the president said in response to a question from host Hank Green.

"The position of my administration has been that we still have federal laws that classify marijuana as an illegal substance, but we're not going to spend a lot of resources trying to turn back decisions that have been made at the state level on this issue. My suspicion is that you're gonna see other states start looking at this."

Obama also addressed how we should treat people who are not violent drug offenders.

"What I am doing at the federal level," Obama responded, "is asking my Department of Justice just to examine generally how we are treating nonviolent drug offenders, because I think you're right."

"What we have done is instead of focusing on treatment -- the same way we focused, say, with tobacco or drunk driving or other problems where we treat it as public health problem -- we've treated this exclusively as a criminal problem," the president said. "I think that it's been counterproductive, and it's been devastating in a lot of minority communities. It presents the possibility at least of unequal application of the law, and that has to be changed."

[DiogenesLamp]

Millions of our tax dollars go to foreign governments...then into the pockets of crooked officials. There's gotta be a better way.

What you aren't grasping is that this spending has nothing explicitly to do with the war on drugs, it is all about funneling money towards increasing the power and control of their political allies.

I.E. political kickbacks. Everything in government is costing far more than it should. Everything is bloated, not just Law enforcement and the drug interdiction efforts.

For the people in Washington, it's a feature, not a bug.

[DiogenesLamp]

Have any evidence for this claim? Seems to me that many legal things are rarely done.

Abortion. 50 million since 1973. And this is another reason why people think you are an idiot.

[SZonian]

Why did Coke have the “coke” removed?

http://wings.buffalo.edu/aru/preprohibition.htm

[DiogenesLamp]

What "debacle"?

Homeless moving in, DWI for pot arrests have almost doubled, revenue only 1/3rd of what they expected, black market surging because "legal" product costs too much.

I expect there are more, but I personally think it's too early to start arguing cause and effect.

[DiogenesLamp]

Only according to your personal definition.

No, it's objective. You have admitting to supporting the legalization of all drugs.

[ConservingFreedom]

Yep, the legality of abortion (which doesn't have the practical consequences of drug abuse) has made it much more common; on the other hand, the legality of many other acts has left them rare. The evidence is weak at best that people who have been responsible enough to avoid drug use because it was illegal won't continue to be responsible and not let legal drug use drive them out of employment or onto welfare rolls.

[stephenjohnbanker]

” Homeless moving in, DWI for pot arrests have almost doubled, revenue only 1/3rd of what they expected, black market surging because “legal” product costs too much. “

CV sees no problem with this, right CV?

[DiogenesLamp]

Do you support or oppose Obama's policy of terminating the Justice Department’s "Equitable Sharing" civil asset forfeiture program?

There is no fifth amendment justification for seizing assets prior to a conviction in a court of law. I have no real idea what will be the consequences of Eric Holder's termination of the program. It may just be that the Feds keep all the money, which would still be wrong.

But if it should happen that Eric Holder (and we have no idea if President Idiot is even in the loop on this.) gets one right, all I can say is that even a blind squirrel finds an acorn once in awhile.

[The_Media_never_lie]

He is so much smarter than the rest of us.

[ConservingFreedom]

addiction was low and declining in post-Civil War America: "In 1880 [...] there were over 400,000 opium addicts in the U.S. [...] By 1900, about one American in 200 was either a cocaine or opium addict." (http://web.archive.org/web/20110529221013/http://www.justice.gov/dea/demand/speakout/06so.htm) 400,000 in a population of 50M is one in 125 - ergo, between 1880 and 1900 addiction declined.

Why did Coke have the “coke” removed?

Not because of any epidemic of cocaine addiction (whatever nanny-staters of the day may have claimed).

[ConservingFreedom]

Homeless moving in,

Colorado's loss is the other 49's gain.

DWI for pot arrests have almost doubled,

Pot tests show positive weeks after the effects are gone; meanwhile, Colorado traffic fatalities have dropped.

revenue only 1/3rd of what they expected,

So? Each penny of that is one more than they were getting before legalization.

black market surging because “legal” product costs too much.

I've seen no evidence that the black market has "surged" - at worst, not displaced as quickly as it could have been with lower taxes.

[onedoug]

And an enemy islamist liar to boot.

[KoRn]

Drug USE isn’t a criminal problem no more than alcohol USE is.

Does throwing a drug USER in jail really accomplish anything, other than wasting tax payer’s money? Addiction is more like a disease than anything else. We were stupid for criminalizing addictions.

I don’t know if I’ve ever agreed with the Administration on anything, but this might come close, because it makes sense. I haven’t seen the ‘fine print’ though.

[ConservingFreedom]

even a blind squirrel finds an acorn once in awhile.

My sentiments exactly.

[stephenjohnbanker]

” Homeless moving in,

Colorado’s loss is the other 49’s gain. “

But if we legalize all drugs, like you desire, according to your reasoning, the WHOLE COUNTRY LOSES. Can’t have it both ways, troll.

[DiogenesLamp]

All in all, Colorado’s economy is broadly growing at a healthy clip, and so it comes in as the overall winner.

The two couples are among the 31,195 people the U.S. Census Bureau estimates relocated last year to Colorado from other states, after subtracting out those who left. The figures don't include immigrants moving to the state from outside the U.S.

Among 25 to 44-year-olds, Colorado is the most popular state for those relocating, with many citing outdoor activities like skiing for moving.

Colorado ranked fifth among states for domestic net migration, in total numbers, after Texas, Florida, North Carolina and Washington.

That's an improvement from the state's 10th-place ranking from 2001 to 2009.

Money's moving in. Was happening before they made their dope law. Would have happened anyway. Lot of people fleeing the horrible mess that California has become.

[DiogenesLamp]

I have evidence, you have claims. I'm not interested in whether that interests you - just pointing it out for sane, honest readers.

You don't have any evidence. You have rehashed assertions from various libertarian dope pushing organizations. And don't even suggest you have any honesty. I catch you lying or misleading people *ALL*THE*TIME*.

[SZonian]

Then if cocaine isn’t addictive, why was it removed? It was purported to have medicinal value. Why remove it then?

Did you read the “Note”, especially the last sentence, contained in the link?

Deleterious effects even though they were used by “law abiding” citizens and sold by “law abiding” businessmen...

You keep chucking the “nanny stater” ad hominem around at anyone who disagrees with your legalization position.

[ConservingFreedom]

Homeless moving in,

Colorado’s loss is the other 49’s gain.

But if we legalize all drugs, like you desire, according to your reasoning, the WHOLE COUNTRY LOSES.

No, because there will be no "other" states for homeless to move from. Better brush up on this "reasoning" stuff.

[ConservingFreedom]

You have rehashed assertions from various libertarian dope pushing organizations.

In this case, the DEA. You truly are funny.