Mar 30

Which came first the law or the crime?

Which came first the law or the crime? Have you ever wondered what crime or horrendous act could have possibly been committed to warrant the prohibition of marijuana? I’ve been searching for the answer for a while now and simply can’t seem to find a credible answer to that question.

What I did find was that Hemp was a widely used and highly traded product in America for over 160 years. Our fore fathers, including George Washington and Thomas Jefferson cultivated it and recognized its potential for industrial and medicinal uses. Aside from its medicinal and soothing qualities, Hemp was used to make rope, paper, clothing and multitudes of other products. It was a staple product in American culture and competed with many industries including timber and cotton producers.

Hemp has amazing qualities as a textile. Up until the early 1800’s all linen was made of hemp or flax. Benjamin Franklin built one of the first paper mills which produced hemp paper. Henry Ford designed a car that was made constructed of resin stiffened hemp fibers. He also used hemp to create ethanol.

Over all hemp is an amazing plant. Its fibers are longer and stronger than cotton. It also blocks more UV rays than cotton and even resists molding. In 1938 Popular Mechanics published an article that labeled hemp as a “New Billion Dollar Crop.” Essentially pot has been a building block of American culture and industry from the day Columbus landed on Plymouth Rock. It is difficult to fathom that such a vibrant natural resource has been outlawed due to propaganda.

So where is the crime which constitutes such harsh laws that border infringing upon our civil rights? There must be something that triggered the witch hunt like campaign to criminalize marijuana. The truth is that no crime has ever existed. The criminalization of marijuana is purely driven by propaganda and hatred.

The marijuana witch hunt began during the prohibition era. To truly understand the motives behind marijuana criminalization you must look at the prohibition era’s American way of thinking. This is the period which America was experiencing a great deal of progressive change and prejudice. The motivation for this change partially began in the mid 1800’s

After the civil war Americans seemed to go a bit wild. The west was forming and it was an untamed country at heart. There was a rise in the consumption of alcohol and there where many lawless and free for all atmospheres in the untamed states. Many religious and political sects saw the need for control and order. A great campaign to tame the wild America had begun and it was called “The Temperance movement”.

By the early 1900’s the idea of taming America became an evangelist playground. America was at a turning point of economic depression wrought with uncontrolled drinking and bad habits. In an effort to gain stability the idea of prohibition was initiated by protestant church groups and women’s organizations. Alcohol was rooted out as the cause of America’s downfall and became the target prohibition activists.

By 1917 American legislators ratified the 18th amendment, banning the sale, manufacturing and distribution of alcohol. It was a disastrous attempt by government to control individual rights of consumption. The demand for alcohol did not go away. Instead of controlling the problem, prohibition created crime environments that further united criminal organizations. A government agency called the Bureau of Prohibition was created to combat these crime syndicates. After the repeal of prohibition the Bureau of Prohibition was later absorbed into the Federal Bureau of Investigation and called the Alcohol Beverage Unit. In 1973 Richard Nixon created an agency similar to the Bureau of Prohibition called the Drug Enforcement Agency.

Aside from temperance movement, another factor that contributes to this pig pile of prejudice was the immigration of Mexicans into the U.S. in the early 1920’s. American culture was a pig headed monster that discriminated against anyone who did not fit the bill or took away a natural citizens job. Americans associated smoking marijuana with the Mexican culture and used the plant to single them out as crime causing bandits.

Hatred campaigns used marijuana as a fall guy to instill fear into society about immigrating Mexican nationals. It became a popular excuse to denounce Mexican integration into a prejudice American society. Marijuana smear campaigns did not only target Mexicans, it also was used to create fear of black communities. It’s an ugly truth but a truth none the less. Marijuana was a scape goat for American prejudice. It wasn’t long before marijuana became a propaganda label for violent crime even though no crimes where actually committed because of its use.

In the sixties pot became very popular amongst the Hippie community. America was struggling with internal conflicts fueled by antiwar movements. Once again pot became a scape goat that labeled protesters as Hippie and drug controlled radicals. Finally in 1970 The Controlled Substances Act was established classifying marijuana as a Schedule I drug on the basis that it has a high potential for abuse. The passing of the controlled substance act was blatant hypocrisy. Alcohol which has far more potential for abuse and addiction was never mentioned or added to the schedule one list.

Lawmakers and government agencies like the DEA and FDA continue to maintain that marijuana has no medicinal or industrial use despite its history and continuous medical studies proving otherwise.

So you see there is no real crime involved in the use of marijuana. The only true crime is hiding from the ugly truth of American history. No one was ever killed by marijuana. Nor has any crime ever been committed in the name of marijuana that would warrant its criminalization. The hard fact is that the only reason it is criminalized is due to hate and propaganda.

Mar 28

The real gateway

The theory that marijuana is a gateway drug is distraction from the real gateway that propagates illicit drug use. It is true that if you are prone to use one substance then you just may be willing to try another.  That’s just human nature. Additionally, it is not true that if you try one substance you will go out and seek other substances to experiment with. If you rationalize this then you’ll see that it is the will to experiment that is the issue not the substance itself.

Aside from the individuals will to experiment with mind altering substances one must also explore the illicit environment which makes it all possible. Experimental drug use is also enabled by environments that allow drug abuse to flourish not solely by a substance itself.  These environments can be called “Gateway environments”.  The factors that create these environments directly contribute to alternative drug use and experimentation.

For years the DEA and other government bodies have maintained that marijuana consumption is a gateway to experimental drug use. As a result policies that incarcerate users and dealers have been established to combat the use of substances labeled as gateway drugs. In retrospect this tactic is full of holes. What the DEA and other bodies have failed to acknowledge is that these policies are a greater detriment to their purpose than the substances they strive to combat.

Perhaps a better way to look at the gateway drug theory is to consider that people make their own decisions about what they consume despite judicial control over their bodies.  Bad decisions about experimenting with alternate drugs are more likely to be made when the user is presented with choices that are easily attainable.  Drug war policies that combat public supply & demand fail to keep drugs out of the public hands and in turn promote gateway environments for alternative drug use.

In effect, the real gateways to drug abuse are drug war policies that criminalize substances instead of regulating and controlling them. Laws that incriminate and incarcerate drug users do not curb the public demand for illicit substances. Instead of asserting control they conversely institute free for all black markets of drugs that are purchased out of average homes in average neighborhoods.

To further prove this point one only must look into the home of the local drug dealer.  Many drug dealers expose their families and children to the business of marketing illicit drugs.  At a young age these children are taught via their environment how the drug hustling business works.  Their parents deal and consume substances in front of them making it a normal part of their everyday life.

Children in these environments learn several key skills and values that they will keep for a lifetime. Aside from how to use drugs they will learn how to avoid getting caught. Along with this skill they will eventually develop a skewed perception of law enforcement. Children in gateway environments are taught from observation that the police are the bad guys who want to put you away for doing something they view as normal part of their environment. It is very likely that these kids will grow up as part of the drug using community.

Criminalization policies create gateway environments like this for every generation in which they exist.  Until drug war polices are repealed these gateway environments will continue to be the trend. The only true solution that allows for corrective action is decriminalization and regulation.

Decriminalizing and regulating such substances will create an immediate gap in the formation of gateway environments. Reform and educational programs would also be far more effective . It is easier to create effective drug awareness programs when you can actually account for and regulate the drug itself. Remember that you cannot change the human nature but you can change the human mind.

End the war on drugs

 

Mar 27

Some potheads are Stoopit

I read a lot of blogs about legalization and it always amazes me when I see someone’s hard work thwarted by ignorant comments. It really sucks when you read something of substance and below it is a comment which totally mocks the credibility of the subject as a whole. Often the comment is posted by someone who sympathizes with the author. I have to wonder if the commenter knows what he or she is doing when posting such insightful comments

There are some pretty smart pot heads out there. Sadly there are a lot more “stoopit” ones.  I am talking about the ones who have no clue that there is a war on drugs and act like thugs.  Not everyone is educated to the same level but we all deserve the same respect so long as we pay it forward. It doesn’t take an education to do this; it just takes a little effort.

Let me explain myself. If you believe in championing a cause then you must also believe in doing anything it takes to prevail. It requires discipline, sacrifice and self-restraint. Nothing difficult is achieved without these virtues.  One must put aside personal vendettas and be conscious of petty actions when presenting an argument before those with the power of decision.

Let’s say for example that a group of people with the power to lock you up have determined that you are an imbecile. If you were given a chance to refute the charges, how would you present yourself? It would be in your best interest to present yourself astutely.  Rebellion and provocation would most likely cause you to lose your case.  Keep your head cool and your tongue on a leash.

You are more likely to be taken seriously if you present yourself as mentally and emotionally competent. Avoid cussing at all costs when representing yourself and the cause you are championing. The use of vulgarity and profanity is a sure sign of intellectual deficiency.  Those you are trying to convince will not take you seriously if they think you have no self-control.

Do not react ignorantly when provoked. Remember that you’re a human with a very large brain not a wild animal.  Thinking about what comes out of your mouth before speaking is important.  Statements like “Fuck da pigs” will not get you anywhere. It only makes you look stupid and ruins the chances for others who are championing the same cause. So if you’re going to claim to be a soldier of the cause, try to make an effort to say something positive and intelligent. Making ignorant statements just makes us all look bad as a whole.

Mar 11

Some people are just followers

There are some people who are so brain washed by propaganda that there is no reasoning with them at all. These folks always obtusely object to any logical argument despite its legitimacy.  Their minds are closed and they stick to their guns even if they don’t fire.

I once had a conversation about marijuana legalization with one such person. It was the most frustrating hour of my life.  It seemed that no matter what argument I presented, the rebuttal was routed to the same type of answer. “Because it’s illegal and it wouldn’t be illegal if the government didn’t know it was bad for you.” seemed to be the cornerstone of his argument.

At first the topic was a challenge. I was sure I could contradict any argument laid before me. Boy was I in for it.  My first point of debate was that marijuana was safer than alcohol. I pointed out the death rates and compared the fact of its lethal toxicity versus marijuana. I was met with the response from hell. “The government say’s its dangerous for a reason. People get crazy when they are all hopped up on dope.”

I thought it was funny that this person used the term “hopped up”. This is term given to alcoholics because of the Hops used to create the beer they consume. His opinion that people get crazy while “hopped up” on pot amused me also.  There is a greater loss of cognitive awareness and rational judgment under the influence of alcohol than with any strain of cannabis. It was obvious I needed a different example.

At this point I still thought I could win this persons opinion over and pulled out my second line of defense. I then asked “Did you know that children are exposed to pot dealer’s right in their own homes because marijuana isn’t legal?”  Again I was blocked by an answer that was fueled by lack of knowledge. “The government isn’t tough enough on drug dealers. If the government was tougher on penalties then the drug dealers would think twice. Drug dealers are criminals and deserved to be punished if they are going to sell around kids.” he added.

My response was quick and I was sure it was a winner “If it were legalized then pharmacists or store keeps would control distribution not out of home drug dealers.”  He looked at me with distaste and said “You just don’t get it. The government made it illegal for a reason. I don’t want my kid or anyone else’s kid to be able to go into a drug store and get the stuff either.”

“What about alcohol then?” I asked. “That drug is three times worse and can even kill you it’s but it is legal. You don’t see kids flocking to stores to get that do you?” Now I think I had pissed him off more than I may have provoked a thought of insight.

I went on to explain to him that legalization would actually reduce drug related crime and that drug cartels would no longer make blood money through a black market. Nothing I said seemed to matter. This person was content with the way things were and did not see the need to challenge drug war tactics in any way.

Towards the end of the conversation he was on his forth beer. I had made no ground in convincing the fellow that marijuana should be legal.  It seemed every point I made was refuted by some off the screen catch phrase he pulled from an episode of law and order. I was about to make my exit when he looked at me and said “Listen I’d like to stay but I have to pick up my wife. It was fun talking to you”.  He grabbed his keys from the bar, swayed off his perch and left.

Some people just can’t be reasoned with.

Mar 06

The twisted ethics of marijuana criminalization – Part 1

When a governing body engages restrictions upon what its citizens consume it jeopardizes the most basic of human rights and civil liberties. The United States government has done nothing to protect or establish these rights. There are no laws in existence that protect an individuals right to consume intoxicating substances.  So basically, if you think you have a right to drink beer your wrong.

Nothing in the U.S. constitution states that you have the right to be intoxicated. However there have been amendments that oppress the peoples free will to make choices over their own bodies.   A good example and epic failure is the 18th amendment to the constitution.

The 18th amendment restricted the sale and distribution of alcohol despite public opinion or demand. Prohibition ignored the human condition  in the name of politics. Government prohibition imposed and enforced laws that tread upon community values social and habits.  Just like cannabis, the consumption alcohol is an ingrained social phenomenon of the human condition.  It was only after years of public protest and disastrous attempts to enforce anti-alcohol laws that prohibition was repealed by the 21st amendment.

What legislators should have learned from the prohibition mistake was that criminalizing social habits is not only unethical but it has a devastating impact on public health and safety. The question of ethics on this issue has been challenged many times.  However government arguments always seem to win over public opinion and demand. How ethical is that coming from a government that is supposedly “for the people, by the people” ?

Social structures and relationships are created around the consumption of these substances.  Alcohol and marijuana consumers form social relationships and communicable bonds that are essential to a public sense of community. Alcohol and cannabis are the two drugs that draw social participation and are used to achieve a sense of social acceptance and belonging.  People get together to smoke a joint in the same context as they do when they share a beer with their buddies.

Prohibition of socially shared substances threatens an individual’s basic right to participate by choice in nonviolent social rites of acceptance and fellowship. Incriminating a person simply for participating in a peaceful act of social consumption is a crime of corruption in itself.  This is the act of a slave owner not a government of the people that is meant to protect the individual rights of its citizens.

When a governing body imposes legislation that creates criminals out of nonviolent and other wise non-criminal marijuana users it creates a social divide in the public sense of community.  One sided arguments have been made that legalization would create social chaos and threaten public safety. This is by far one of the greatest fallacies ever implied to the public by governing bodies.

Violent crimes are not stemmed from the use marijuana nor does the use of marijuana compel individuals to commit violent crimes. Behavioral and psychological problems are a fact of society and are closer in relation to social moral education, deficient family values and financial despair.  While marijuana use is evident in many crimes (aside from possession and distribution) it is really just an innocent by-stander in relation to the crime.  Most users are nonviolent and active participants in society. So to say that cannabis is the cause is just unethical propaganda.