-
Happy Birthday ICMag! Been 20 years since Gypsy Nirvana created the forum! We are celebrating with a 4/20 Giveaway and by launching a new Patreon tier called "420club". You can read more here.
-
Important notice: ICMag's T.O.U. has been updated. Please review it here. For your convenience, it is also available in the main forum menu, under 'Quick Links"!
The Big Lie
- Thread starter vta
- Start date
Corrupt Cops Busted Selling Improperly Seized Assets
by Morgan Fox
A Michigan man came forward this week with his story of police abuse, and unfortunately, it sounds all too familiar.
According to Rudy Simpson, police raided his home for marijuana based on an anonymous tip and a marijuana stem supposedly found in his garbage. The police found a quarter ounce of marijuana, 12 alleged marijuana seeds, and half of a pill for which Simpson produced a prescription.
Apparently, this was all the justification the police needed to confiscate three pages worth of Simpson’s personal property under Michigan’s asset forfeiture laws, including musical equipment, televisions, DVDs, computers, and other electronics. State law allows authorities to confiscate any materials paid for with profits from drug sales, based only on probable cause. No evidence was ever produced to link Simpson to any marijuana sales, yet his property was seized anyway. According to Simpson, the officers acted like “thugs,” eating food out of his refrigerator and trashing his home during the raid.
Unfortunately for the cops, they raided the home during a band rehearsal, and were unaware that the entire incident was being recorded. This included the police testing their vocal skills on the mic, then openly talking about which of Simpson’s belongings they and their team leader wanted to take! (Follow the first link of this post to listen.)
It turns out this particular unit made quite a bit of money by confiscating big-ticket items during routine, low-level drug busts, either keeping the items or reselling them illegally. The head of the unit, Luke Davis, is currently under indictment for corruption.
This is just another sad example of one of the more insane aspects of the war on marijuana users. Thousands of people have had their homes and belongings stolen by law enforcement, without due process, never to be returned. Some of these people were never even officially charged with a crime or were found not guilty of the charges, but in most cases, the police still sold the property and kept the proceeds!
We live in a great nation. We also live in a nation where the people who are supposed to protect you can kick your door down, terrorize your family, shoot your dog, and take your land and property — all because they think you have some plant matter that is safer to use than alcohol. And there isn’t much you can do about it.
This is why all Americans need to support ending marijuana prohibition: It is simply un-American.
by Morgan Fox
A Michigan man came forward this week with his story of police abuse, and unfortunately, it sounds all too familiar.
According to Rudy Simpson, police raided his home for marijuana based on an anonymous tip and a marijuana stem supposedly found in his garbage. The police found a quarter ounce of marijuana, 12 alleged marijuana seeds, and half of a pill for which Simpson produced a prescription.
Apparently, this was all the justification the police needed to confiscate three pages worth of Simpson’s personal property under Michigan’s asset forfeiture laws, including musical equipment, televisions, DVDs, computers, and other electronics. State law allows authorities to confiscate any materials paid for with profits from drug sales, based only on probable cause. No evidence was ever produced to link Simpson to any marijuana sales, yet his property was seized anyway. According to Simpson, the officers acted like “thugs,” eating food out of his refrigerator and trashing his home during the raid.
Unfortunately for the cops, they raided the home during a band rehearsal, and were unaware that the entire incident was being recorded. This included the police testing their vocal skills on the mic, then openly talking about which of Simpson’s belongings they and their team leader wanted to take! (Follow the first link of this post to listen.)
It turns out this particular unit made quite a bit of money by confiscating big-ticket items during routine, low-level drug busts, either keeping the items or reselling them illegally. The head of the unit, Luke Davis, is currently under indictment for corruption.
This is just another sad example of one of the more insane aspects of the war on marijuana users. Thousands of people have had their homes and belongings stolen by law enforcement, without due process, never to be returned. Some of these people were never even officially charged with a crime or were found not guilty of the charges, but in most cases, the police still sold the property and kept the proceeds!
We live in a great nation. We also live in a nation where the people who are supposed to protect you can kick your door down, terrorize your family, shoot your dog, and take your land and property — all because they think you have some plant matter that is safer to use than alcohol. And there isn’t much you can do about it.
This is why all Americans need to support ending marijuana prohibition: It is simply un-American.
"We live in a ONCE great nation. We also live in a nation where the people who are supposed to protect you can kick your door down, terrorize your family, shoot your dog, and take your land and property — all because they think you have some plant matter that is safer to use than alcohol. And there isn’t much you can do about it.
This is why all Americans need to support ending marijuana prohibition: It is simply un-American."
Scary stuff.
This is why all Americans need to support ending marijuana prohibition: It is simply un-American."
Scary stuff.
the government is sick.
wonder what would happen if all the stoners in the US would send the prez and attorney
general a gram hooter?...and then had them arrested for possession! LOL
wonder what would happen if all the stoners in the US would send the prez and attorney
general a gram hooter?...and then had them arrested for possession! LOL
Plugged toilet proves cops don’t need no knock pot raid warrants
By "Radical" Russ Belville
We told you about the Supreme Court hearing arguments in a case that could determine whether cops can break down your door for merely smelling marijuana. We’ve told you of the deaths of cannabis consumers during surprise midnight no-knock warrants. The reason drug cops have to break down your door in the middle of the night with no warning is so that you won’t use the time between “*knock knock* Police! Open up, we have a warrant!” and you opening the door to destroy any evidence. There’s some logic there for some drugs, since it would be fairly easy to flush a kilo of powder cocaine, a bottle of pills, or the liquid chemicals used to manufacture other drugs down the toilet.
Cannabis? Not so much…
Yeah, if you try to flush over two pounds of organic matter, you’re going to flood a toilet. That’s why they don’t use those “low-flow” johns at the Nathan’s Hot Dog Eating Contest. Any amount of marijuana large enough to consider someone a major trafficker is also too large to flush and any amount small enough to flush is a consumer amount not worth the violence and risk of a no-knock raid. If you suspect the person of growing marijuana, there’s even less justification for the no-knock raid. Lights, ballasts, pots, and soil don’t flush well at all.
So what’s the reason for the no-knock pot raids? Shock and awe. Psych warfare against cannabis consumers. An excuse to use the shiny new military toys the local cops just bought with federal grant money they get for busting more pot smokers. The sheer thrill of playing commando some trigger-happy cops enjoy. The justifiable reaction to the demonized “druggies” cops are inculcated to see as an “enemy”. But protecting evidence in a pot case? Hardly.
"Damn. We woulda had him for felony distribution and cultivation, but he flushed the grow tent, lights, ballasts, ducting, soil, pots, plants, grinders, scales, and sixteen pounds of processed pot when we served the warrant." So, it wasn't a "low-flow", then?
By "Radical" Russ Belville
We told you about the Supreme Court hearing arguments in a case that could determine whether cops can break down your door for merely smelling marijuana. We’ve told you of the deaths of cannabis consumers during surprise midnight no-knock warrants. The reason drug cops have to break down your door in the middle of the night with no warning is so that you won’t use the time between “*knock knock* Police! Open up, we have a warrant!” and you opening the door to destroy any evidence. There’s some logic there for some drugs, since it would be fairly easy to flush a kilo of powder cocaine, a bottle of pills, or the liquid chemicals used to manufacture other drugs down the toilet.
Cannabis? Not so much…
Yeah, if you try to flush over two pounds of organic matter, you’re going to flood a toilet. That’s why they don’t use those “low-flow” johns at the Nathan’s Hot Dog Eating Contest. Any amount of marijuana large enough to consider someone a major trafficker is also too large to flush and any amount small enough to flush is a consumer amount not worth the violence and risk of a no-knock raid. If you suspect the person of growing marijuana, there’s even less justification for the no-knock raid. Lights, ballasts, pots, and soil don’t flush well at all.
So what’s the reason for the no-knock pot raids? Shock and awe. Psych warfare against cannabis consumers. An excuse to use the shiny new military toys the local cops just bought with federal grant money they get for busting more pot smokers. The sheer thrill of playing commando some trigger-happy cops enjoy. The justifiable reaction to the demonized “druggies” cops are inculcated to see as an “enemy”. But protecting evidence in a pot case? Hardly.
"Damn. We woulda had him for felony distribution and cultivation, but he flushed the grow tent, lights, ballasts, ducting, soil, pots, plants, grinders, scales, and sixteen pounds of processed pot when we served the warrant." So, it wasn't a "low-flow", then?
David762
Member
That would never happen ...
That would never happen ...
the President, his Cabinet, and nearly every other politician is above the law. Remember Tricky Dick Nixon's comment that "if the President does it, it isn't illegal". Nixon wasn't impeached, and that axiom has been adopted by practically every President since then. Who knows, maybe even the Drug Czar smokes herb, in private. In today's society, there is the ruling, privileged class who abide by their own rules, and then there is everyone else, the peons.
The herb that was sent to these ass-clowns would get smoked, if it was good enough, and maybe those responsible for sending it would get busted for distribution. And they would not see anything wrong or hypocritical about their public position regarding prohibition of cannabis (or anything else, for that matter).
That would never happen ...
the President, his Cabinet, and nearly every other politician is above the law. Remember Tricky Dick Nixon's comment that "if the President does it, it isn't illegal". Nixon wasn't impeached, and that axiom has been adopted by practically every President since then. Who knows, maybe even the Drug Czar smokes herb, in private. In today's society, there is the ruling, privileged class who abide by their own rules, and then there is everyone else, the peons.
The herb that was sent to these ass-clowns would get smoked, if it was good enough, and maybe those responsible for sending it would get busted for distribution. And they would not see anything wrong or hypocritical about their public position regarding prohibition of cannabis (or anything else, for that matter).
A little TRUTH
A little TRUTH
Source: Globe and Mail (Canada)
Author: Paul Taylor
SMOKING MARIJUANA WON'T GIVE YOU LUNG CANCER
Smoking marijuana doesn't boost your chances of getting lung cancer, even if you're a long-time, heavy dope user, according to a new study.
The U.S. researchers were surprised by their findings, presented this week at a conference of the American Thoracic Society in San Diego. They had expected the controversial weed would jack up cancer risk, just like smoking tobacco.
In fact, previous studies have shown that marijuana tar contains 50 per cent higher concentrations of chemicals linked to lung cancer, compared with tobacco, said lead researcher Donald Tashkin of the University of California at Los Angeles. What's more, marijuana smokers hold their breath about four times longer than tobacco consumers, allowing more time for the hazardous particles to deposit in the lungs.
Even so, the study of more than 2,000 people with different smoking habits found no link between dope smoking and lung, head or neck cancers.
Dr. Tashkin speculates that THC, a chemical in marijuana smoke, "may encourage aging cells to die earlier and therefore be less likely to undergo cancerous transformation."
Despite the reassuring findings, Dr. Tashkin isn't encouraging people to light up a joint. "I wouldn't give any smoke substance a clean bill of health," he told Bloomberg News. There is still reason to believe dope might contribute to other lung ailments such as bronchitis and respiratory infections.
A little TRUTH
Source: Globe and Mail (Canada)
Author: Paul Taylor
SMOKING MARIJUANA WON'T GIVE YOU LUNG CANCER
Smoking marijuana doesn't boost your chances of getting lung cancer, even if you're a long-time, heavy dope user, according to a new study.
The U.S. researchers were surprised by their findings, presented this week at a conference of the American Thoracic Society in San Diego. They had expected the controversial weed would jack up cancer risk, just like smoking tobacco.
In fact, previous studies have shown that marijuana tar contains 50 per cent higher concentrations of chemicals linked to lung cancer, compared with tobacco, said lead researcher Donald Tashkin of the University of California at Los Angeles. What's more, marijuana smokers hold their breath about four times longer than tobacco consumers, allowing more time for the hazardous particles to deposit in the lungs.
Even so, the study of more than 2,000 people with different smoking habits found no link between dope smoking and lung, head or neck cancers.
Dr. Tashkin speculates that THC, a chemical in marijuana smoke, "may encourage aging cells to die earlier and therefore be less likely to undergo cancerous transformation."
Despite the reassuring findings, Dr. Tashkin isn't encouraging people to light up a joint. "I wouldn't give any smoke substance a clean bill of health," he told Bloomberg News. There is still reason to believe dope might contribute to other lung ailments such as bronchitis and respiratory infections.
Source: Baltimore Sun (MD)
Author: Neill Franklin
Note: Neill Franklin, executive director of Law Enforcement Against
Prohibition (www.copssaylegalizedrugs.com), did narcotics enforcement
with the Maryland State Police and the Baltimore Police Department
over a 34-year career.
Save a Cop's Life: End the Drug War
How Can You Ask an Officer to Be the Last Officer to Die for a Mistake?
Several thousand miles, and a comparable cultural divide, separate Elkins, W.Va., from San Luis Potosi, Mexico. But recently, they became sister cities of a grim sort when law enforcement professionals lost their lives fighting America's longest, most costly and least winnable war: the so-called "war on drugs."
On Highway 57, halfway between Monterrey and Mexico City, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Special Agent Jaime Zapata died when cartel gunmen ambushed the car carrying him and a colleague, who was wounded.
In West Virginia, 24-year-old U.S. Marshal Derek Hotsinpiller was shot by Charles E. Smith, who was wanted on charges related to cocaine possession with intent to distribute. Two deputy marshals were wounded in the gunfight that cost both Mr. Hotsinpiller and Mr. Smith their lives.
As a former narcotics cop in Baltimore who has lost several of my best friends in the line of fire, I know what U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder meant when he said, "These courageous deputies put their lives on the line and put the safety of others before their own."
But the attorney general missed the mark badly when he put his faith in business as usual in announcing the formation of a task force to investigate the tragedy in Mexico.
We don't need another task force. We don't need to redouble the efforts that have led to almost 35,000 deaths in Mexico since the end of 2006 and countless others here in the U.S., where we don't even attempt to tally those killed in illegal drug wars.
What we desperately need is to end this "war on drugs" which has done so little to prevent people from using drugs but which has done so much to enrich organized criminals who do not hesitate to use violence to protect their black market profits.
What we need is pure honesty from Attorney General Holder and his colleagues in Washington and in our state capitals. We need our elected officials to summon the collective maturity and political integrity to acknowledge what millions of Americans have known for a long time: The war on drugs has failed, it has made our drug problems much worse and it can never be won.
That's because the root cause of last month's violence in Mexico and West Virginia is drug prohibition, not the molecules that people ingest. There is no level of law enforcement commitment, skill or courage that can ever eliminate obscenely profitable, tax-free drug markets that deliver prized commodities to millions of people.
I didn't always understand this. During my 34-year career in law enforcement, I tried in earnest to enforce the drug laws, thinking I was helping to make a dent with each arrest or seizure. Along the way, several of my colleagues were killed, including one of my best friends, Ed Toatley, a Maryland state trooper who was shot in the head at close range as he attempted an undercover buy in Washington, D.C. in 2000.
After each tragic death, my police colleagues and I pushed ahead on to the next case, and the one after that, thinking that our fallen comrades had paid the tragic price for bringing the scourge of drug abuse under control.
But that belief was wrong. Drug use didn't wane, and the market didn't dissipate. Each arrest we scored was simply a job opening for someone else to step up and take the risk for a chance at the lucrative profits inherent in meeting the insatiable demand for illegal drugs.
We should have learned this lesson decades ago, when alcohol Prohibition was a boon to organized crime and fueled disrespect for the rule of law. Drinking remained rampant, and gang violence flourished. But after we repealed Prohibition, Al Capone and his competitors stopped selling liquor. Today, we don't see Budweiser or Coors distributors killing cops in order to maximize profits.
That's because, since 1933, we have regulated the distribution and sale of alcohol. We need to do the same with drugs that are illegal today.
Let's honor the ultimate sacrifices made by Derek Hotsinpiller, Jaime Zapata, Ed Toatley and so many others in the right way. Let's put their murderers and those who won't hesitate to murder in the future out of business. Let's regulate drugs the way we regulate alcohol and tobacco. It's the only way we can ever win America's seemingly endless war on drugs.
How many more hardworking and brave law enforcers do we have to see killed in the line of duty before our elected officials will change this policy?
Author: Neill Franklin
Note: Neill Franklin, executive director of Law Enforcement Against
Prohibition (www.copssaylegalizedrugs.com), did narcotics enforcement
with the Maryland State Police and the Baltimore Police Department
over a 34-year career.
Save a Cop's Life: End the Drug War
How Can You Ask an Officer to Be the Last Officer to Die for a Mistake?
Several thousand miles, and a comparable cultural divide, separate Elkins, W.Va., from San Luis Potosi, Mexico. But recently, they became sister cities of a grim sort when law enforcement professionals lost their lives fighting America's longest, most costly and least winnable war: the so-called "war on drugs."
On Highway 57, halfway between Monterrey and Mexico City, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Special Agent Jaime Zapata died when cartel gunmen ambushed the car carrying him and a colleague, who was wounded.
In West Virginia, 24-year-old U.S. Marshal Derek Hotsinpiller was shot by Charles E. Smith, who was wanted on charges related to cocaine possession with intent to distribute. Two deputy marshals were wounded in the gunfight that cost both Mr. Hotsinpiller and Mr. Smith their lives.
As a former narcotics cop in Baltimore who has lost several of my best friends in the line of fire, I know what U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder meant when he said, "These courageous deputies put their lives on the line and put the safety of others before their own."
But the attorney general missed the mark badly when he put his faith in business as usual in announcing the formation of a task force to investigate the tragedy in Mexico.
We don't need another task force. We don't need to redouble the efforts that have led to almost 35,000 deaths in Mexico since the end of 2006 and countless others here in the U.S., where we don't even attempt to tally those killed in illegal drug wars.
What we desperately need is to end this "war on drugs" which has done so little to prevent people from using drugs but which has done so much to enrich organized criminals who do not hesitate to use violence to protect their black market profits.
What we need is pure honesty from Attorney General Holder and his colleagues in Washington and in our state capitals. We need our elected officials to summon the collective maturity and political integrity to acknowledge what millions of Americans have known for a long time: The war on drugs has failed, it has made our drug problems much worse and it can never be won.
That's because the root cause of last month's violence in Mexico and West Virginia is drug prohibition, not the molecules that people ingest. There is no level of law enforcement commitment, skill or courage that can ever eliminate obscenely profitable, tax-free drug markets that deliver prized commodities to millions of people.
I didn't always understand this. During my 34-year career in law enforcement, I tried in earnest to enforce the drug laws, thinking I was helping to make a dent with each arrest or seizure. Along the way, several of my colleagues were killed, including one of my best friends, Ed Toatley, a Maryland state trooper who was shot in the head at close range as he attempted an undercover buy in Washington, D.C. in 2000.
After each tragic death, my police colleagues and I pushed ahead on to the next case, and the one after that, thinking that our fallen comrades had paid the tragic price for bringing the scourge of drug abuse under control.
But that belief was wrong. Drug use didn't wane, and the market didn't dissipate. Each arrest we scored was simply a job opening for someone else to step up and take the risk for a chance at the lucrative profits inherent in meeting the insatiable demand for illegal drugs.
We should have learned this lesson decades ago, when alcohol Prohibition was a boon to organized crime and fueled disrespect for the rule of law. Drinking remained rampant, and gang violence flourished. But after we repealed Prohibition, Al Capone and his competitors stopped selling liquor. Today, we don't see Budweiser or Coors distributors killing cops in order to maximize profits.
That's because, since 1933, we have regulated the distribution and sale of alcohol. We need to do the same with drugs that are illegal today.
Let's honor the ultimate sacrifices made by Derek Hotsinpiller, Jaime Zapata, Ed Toatley and so many others in the right way. Let's put their murderers and those who won't hesitate to murder in the future out of business. Let's regulate drugs the way we regulate alcohol and tobacco. It's the only way we can ever win America's seemingly endless war on drugs.
How many more hardworking and brave law enforcers do we have to see killed in the line of duty before our elected officials will change this policy?
Lets free the plant & people that use the plant! What I find most infuriating is that so many people that believe in god & that god made everything, are so against marijuana, & if god made us he put cannaboid receptors in our brains! So what is so hard for people to grasp!
I believe in DARWIN'S theory of evolution so don't blame me!
I believe in DARWIN'S theory of evolution so don't blame me!
Drug Czar’s anti-marijuana rebuttals don’t make any sense
By "Radical" Russ Belville NORML
Gateway Gil - The Man With the Flaming Pants!
This story is by Bruce Ramsey of the Seattle Times and is about Gil Kerlikowske’s meeting with the paper’s editorial board.
Ha ha. Russian monarchy, European monarchy, all we need now are some Sultans… Hey, I have an idea! How about we refer to our democratically elected and bureaucratically appointed executives by terms appropriate for a democratic republic?
Because it is his job to oppose all efforts at marijuana legalization for commercial, industrial, recreational, spiritual, and medical purposes no matter what. God Himself could appear in a brilliant flash of light on every TV channel simultaneously and command mankind to make use of the hemp seed (actually, He already did) and fully legalize cannabis use and Gateway Gil would still be compelled to tell you that would be a bad idea.
It’s even worse for marijuana consumers. 57% of all admissions to treatment for marijuana are forced there by the criminal justice system. 37% of people in “marijuana rehab” hadn’t even used cannabis in the month prior to admission and another 16% had used cannabis three times or fewer. We “have to be encouraged” because most of us do not have a problem that needs rehabilitation.
Exactly. The RAND Study was cited by every prohibitionist who wanted to disparage Secretary of State Clinton’s remarks that 60% of the Mexican gangs’ income derived from marijuana trafficking. In denying that the figure was 60%, they ignored the conclusion that the figure was not 0%. They ignored the self-evident facts that it is much more difficult for criminals to compete in a legal market and that a legal market would provide goods at a much lower price that makes criminal trafficking unprofitable.
Would marijuana use increase? Sure, but would marijuana users increase? Who isn’t smoking pot now who would want to once it were legal? I think that those of us who are toking will certainly toke more as it becomes more affordable and available. But I think there will be few new regular users. Those who haven’t tried it may try it out of curiosity and a few of them might stick with it, but I think most people who wanted to try it already have.
But would it be bad if current tokers used more? It depends. I believe that tokers who can’t get any cannabis now are often substituting other drugs and alcohol in cannabis’ place. With more available cannabis, there would be less use of other drugs and alcohol which would be an overall good.
I don’t know that a President Obama facing a contentious re-election battle in 2012 really wants to do anything to anger a progressive base in the Pacific Northwest in a state with 12 Electoral Votes. I’d rather have seen California and its 55 EVs pushing this battle, but perhaps by election time there will also be a California (and other states) pushing a legalization platform.
However, if Gateway Gil thinks medical marijuana is just a legalization ruse but the feds won’t interfere, why should they interfere if we dispense with the ruse? Is the message here that we need to be sneaky about it? We’ll let you legalize, so long as you call it medicine?
By "Radical" Russ Belville NORML
Gateway Gil - The Man With the Flaming Pants!
This story is by Bruce Ramsey of the Seattle Times and is about Gil Kerlikowske’s meeting with the paper’s editorial board.
Ha ha. Russian monarchy, European monarchy, all we need now are some Sultans… Hey, I have an idea! How about we refer to our democratically elected and bureaucratically appointed executives by terms appropriate for a democratic republic?
Because it is his job to oppose all efforts at marijuana legalization for commercial, industrial, recreational, spiritual, and medical purposes no matter what. God Himself could appear in a brilliant flash of light on every TV channel simultaneously and command mankind to make use of the hemp seed (actually, He already did) and fully legalize cannabis use and Gateway Gil would still be compelled to tell you that would be a bad idea.
Because there is no reasonable answer that begins with “yes”. 52% of the arrests in the War on Drugs are for marijuana. 46% of all arrests in the War on Drugs are for just marijuana possession. Taxation and regulation of marijuana would reap about $15 billion in law enforcement savings and tax revenues. You’d be hard-pressed to identify $15 billion worth of harm being prevented by arresting marijuana consumers, especially considering there are 25 million of us consuming cannabis now under prohibition.
It’s even worse for marijuana consumers. 57% of all admissions to treatment for marijuana are forced there by the criminal justice system. 37% of people in “marijuana rehab” hadn’t even used cannabis in the month prior to admission and another 16% had used cannabis three times or fewer. We “have to be encouraged” because most of us do not have a problem that needs rehabilitation.
Exactly. The RAND Study was cited by every prohibitionist who wanted to disparage Secretary of State Clinton’s remarks that 60% of the Mexican gangs’ income derived from marijuana trafficking. In denying that the figure was 60%, they ignored the conclusion that the figure was not 0%. They ignored the self-evident facts that it is much more difficult for criminals to compete in a legal market and that a legal market would provide goods at a much lower price that makes criminal trafficking unprofitable.
Would marijuana use increase? Sure, but would marijuana users increase? Who isn’t smoking pot now who would want to once it were legal? I think that those of us who are toking will certainly toke more as it becomes more affordable and available. But I think there will be few new regular users. Those who haven’t tried it may try it out of curiosity and a few of them might stick with it, but I think most people who wanted to try it already have.
But would it be bad if current tokers used more? It depends. I believe that tokers who can’t get any cannabis now are often substituting other drugs and alcohol in cannabis’ place. With more available cannabis, there would be less use of other drugs and alcohol which would be an overall good.
I don’t know that a President Obama facing a contentious re-election battle in 2012 really wants to do anything to anger a progressive base in the Pacific Northwest in a state with 12 Electoral Votes. I’d rather have seen California and its 55 EVs pushing this battle, but perhaps by election time there will also be a California (and other states) pushing a legalization platform.
However, if Gateway Gil thinks medical marijuana is just a legalization ruse but the feds won’t interfere, why should they interfere if we dispense with the ruse? Is the message here that we need to be sneaky about it? We’ll let you legalize, so long as you call it medicine?
http://video.pbs.org/video/1825223761
^this one is good too
^this one is good too
Great video!
D
decarboxylator
great thread. thanks guys.
Why cops lie
Peter Keane
Surveillance video from the Henry Hotel reveals that SFPD narcotics officers falsified reports.
Police officer perjury in court to justify illegal dope searches is commonplace. One of the dirty little not-so-secret secrets of the criminal justice system is undercover narcotics officers intentionally lying under oath. It is a perversion of the American justice system that strikes directly at the rule of law. Yet it is the routine way of doing business in courtrooms everywhere in America.
Count this as one more casualty of the "war on drugs." It is simply additional collateral damage from using the American criminal justice system as the battlefield of that war. It stands alongside the wasteful wreckage of hundreds of thousands of imprisoned Americans locked up for drug use, and the destruction of Mexico as a functioning state because of criminal cartels enriched through outlawed American drug use. The corruption of America's police officers as the most identifiable group of perjurers in the courts is one more item on that list.
Why do police, whom we trust as role models of legal conduct, show contempt for the law by systematically perjuring themselves?
The first reason is because they get away with it. They know that in a swearing match between a drug defendant and a police officer, the judge always rules in favor of the officer. Often in search hearings, it is embarrassingly clear to everyone - judge, prosecutor, defense attorney, even spectators - that the officer is lying under oath. Yet nothing is done about it. There are rare cases in which the nature of the testimony and the physical evidence make it absolutely impossible to credit an officer's version and the judge must rule the search illegal. When this happens, the judge rules hesitatingly and grudgingly for the defense. Indeed, judges sometimes apologize to the officer for tossing out illegally seized evidence where the cop has just committed felony perjury in the judge's presence.
Another reason is the nature of most drug cases and the likely type of person involved. Usually police illegally enter a home, search it and find drugs. Like the recent scandal in San Francisco concerning the Henry Hotel residents, the defendant is poor, uneducated, frequently a minority, with a criminal record, and he does have drugs. Police know that no one cares about these people.
But the main reason is that the job of these cops is chasing drugs. Their professional advancement depends on nabbing dopers. The dominant culture they grew up with is popular mythology glorifying rogue cops like Popeye Doyle from the 1975 film "The French Connection." It's reinforced by San Francisco's own sorry history of infamous undercover narcotics officers promoted to top levels in the department despite contempt for the law shown by bullying, brutality and perjury in carrying out illegal searches and arrests. So the modern narcotics officer is just following a well-worn path.
Maybe the video tape scandal from the Henry Hotel will help change this culture. I hope so.
Peter Keane is professor of law and dean emeritus at Golden Gate University School of Law. He is a former San Francisco Police Commissioner.
Peter Keane
Surveillance video from the Henry Hotel reveals that SFPD narcotics officers falsified reports.
Police officer perjury in court to justify illegal dope searches is commonplace. One of the dirty little not-so-secret secrets of the criminal justice system is undercover narcotics officers intentionally lying under oath. It is a perversion of the American justice system that strikes directly at the rule of law. Yet it is the routine way of doing business in courtrooms everywhere in America.
Count this as one more casualty of the "war on drugs." It is simply additional collateral damage from using the American criminal justice system as the battlefield of that war. It stands alongside the wasteful wreckage of hundreds of thousands of imprisoned Americans locked up for drug use, and the destruction of Mexico as a functioning state because of criminal cartels enriched through outlawed American drug use. The corruption of America's police officers as the most identifiable group of perjurers in the courts is one more item on that list.
Why do police, whom we trust as role models of legal conduct, show contempt for the law by systematically perjuring themselves?
The first reason is because they get away with it. They know that in a swearing match between a drug defendant and a police officer, the judge always rules in favor of the officer. Often in search hearings, it is embarrassingly clear to everyone - judge, prosecutor, defense attorney, even spectators - that the officer is lying under oath. Yet nothing is done about it. There are rare cases in which the nature of the testimony and the physical evidence make it absolutely impossible to credit an officer's version and the judge must rule the search illegal. When this happens, the judge rules hesitatingly and grudgingly for the defense. Indeed, judges sometimes apologize to the officer for tossing out illegally seized evidence where the cop has just committed felony perjury in the judge's presence.
Another reason is the nature of most drug cases and the likely type of person involved. Usually police illegally enter a home, search it and find drugs. Like the recent scandal in San Francisco concerning the Henry Hotel residents, the defendant is poor, uneducated, frequently a minority, with a criminal record, and he does have drugs. Police know that no one cares about these people.
But the main reason is that the job of these cops is chasing drugs. Their professional advancement depends on nabbing dopers. The dominant culture they grew up with is popular mythology glorifying rogue cops like Popeye Doyle from the 1975 film "The French Connection." It's reinforced by San Francisco's own sorry history of infamous undercover narcotics officers promoted to top levels in the department despite contempt for the law shown by bullying, brutality and perjury in carrying out illegal searches and arrests. So the modern narcotics officer is just following a well-worn path.
Maybe the video tape scandal from the Henry Hotel will help change this culture. I hope so.
Peter Keane is professor of law and dean emeritus at Golden Gate University School of Law. He is a former San Francisco Police Commissioner.
FreedomFightr
Member
The DEA does not want there brothers in the CIA to have any competition. A very interesting documentary you guys might find good.....it's about Bill Clinton and how him and the owner of Tyson's chicken were moving drugs big time. Its kind of long but damn Clinton was a shady MF. Or google Clinton Body Count........
here is the video....http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6107885031407830500#
here is the video....http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6107885031407830500#
