Home | Community | Message Board

Cannabis Seeds - Original Sensible Seeds
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Left Coast Kratom Buy Kratom Capsules   Kraken Kratom Kratom Capsules for Sale   Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder   Bridgetown Botanicals Bridgetown Botanicals   North Spore Injection Grain Bag   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1
OfflineISH
PsilocybianTranslationServices
 User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 03/02/02
Posts: 787
Loc: Planet Earth
Last seen: 3 years, 11 months
Research Paper: "War on drugs and how it has failed"
    #5033795 - 12/08/05 11:46 AM (18 years, 1 month ago)
Log in to view attachment

If your interested, I have also enclosed a copy of this in Word format, with footnotes.

War on Drugs

The ?War on Drugs? is an irresponsible, uneducated, and racist movement that diverts attention from severe social problems, legitimates the virtual abandonment of minorities and lower classes, and validates a vast expansion of U.S. state power as well as a consequent erosion of civil liberties. Above all it is an outdated policy that has proven itself inefficient and a failure.

The War on Drugs is an ?all-out offensive? strategy against the non-medical use of certain illegal drugs. Its roots can be traced back to the 1880?s, but it was officially instituted by Richard Nixon in 1971. The War on Drugs has many precursor elements in the form of laws aimed at limiting, regulating and prohibiting the use of specific substances by certain minorities.

According to Judge Gray, original drug laws were ??fundamentally racist laws aimed at perceived threats to white women? from the use of cocaine, marijuana, and opium, by black, Mexican and Chinese men respectively.? Each type of drug prohibited was directly associated with a minority class, and was used as the basis for discrimination against these specific minorities.

First, in 1875 San Francisco passed a city ordinance that outlawed the smoking of opium in opium dens. The justification for this was that ?white women and young men of respectable family were getting lured into these opium-smoking dens, where they were ruined morally or otherwise.? This however is a fictional statement without any merit or proof behind it. The true underlying reasons behind the movement of this law were fears that Chinese men and other railroad workers would seduce white women with this drug. Around this same time a concoction of opium and alcohol was being marketed under the name Laudanum. It was sold mainly as a cough medicine, but it had various other uses. The main difference between opium and Laudanum was the mode of ingestion. While opium was smoked by people of Chinese descent, Laudanum was ingested orally by wealthy or middle class Caucasians. These regulatory laws were geared at smoking opium not ingesting it in other ways.

Second, in 1903 the American Journal of Pharmacy stressed that most cocaine abusers were ?bohemians, gamblers, high- and low-class prostitutes, night porters, bell boys, burglars, racketeers, pimps, and casual laborers.? In 1914 Dr. Christopher Koch of Pennsylvania?s State Pharmacy Board made the racial innuendo explicit, testifying that, ?Most of the attacks upon the white women of the South are the direct result of a cocaine-crazed Negro brain.?
Media manufactured an epidemic of cocaine use amongst African-Americans in the Southern United States, although there is little evidence that such an epidemic actually took place. Newspapers used terms such as ?Negro Cocaine Fiends? and ?Cocainized Niggers? to instill fear and spread panic into the general poplation. In the New York Times 1914, headlines read ?Negro Cocaine Fiends New Southern Menace,? this article outlined cases of violence committed by African Americans under the influence of cocaine, the reasons behind use of cocaine, affects of cocaine on the ?Negro,? and cites examples of ?superhuman? strength and ability to take a bullet in the chest at point blank, and not even be phased.

In 1914 the Harrison Narcotic Act was passed by congress. The Harrison Narcotic Act did not appear to be a prohibitive law at all, its official title was "An Act to provide for the registration of, with collectors of internal revenue, and to impose a special tax upon all persons who produce, import, manufacture, compound, deal in, dispense, sell, distribute, or give away opium or coca leaves, their salts, derivatives, or preparations, and for other purposes." The law specifically provided that manufacturers, importers, pharmacists, and physicians prescribing narcotics should be licensed to do so at a moderate fee. The patent-medicine manufacturers were exempted even from the licensing and tax provisions, provided that they limited themselves to "preparations and remedies which do not contain more than two grains of opium, or more than one-fourth of a grain of morphine, or more than one-eighth of a grain of heroin in one avoirdupois ounce."

The provision protecting physicians, contained the wording, "in the course of his professional practice only," After the laws passing, this clause was interpreted by law-enforcement officers to mean that a doctor could not prescribe opiates to an addict for his/her addiction. Since addiction was not a disease, an addict was not a patient, and therefore opiates dispensed to or prescribed for him by a physician were not being supplied "in the course of his professional practice." Thus a law intended to ensure the orderly marketing of narcotics was converted into a law prohibiting the supplying of narcotics to addicts, even on a physician's prescription.

Third, In the United States, the 1937 Marijuana Tax was one of the main bills that led to the criminalization of Cannabis. It was presented to U.S. Congress by Harry Anslinger, then Commissioner of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics. At the time of passing, marijuana was used mainly by Mexicans who immigrated into the United States during the time of Depression, looking for jobs. Through the prohibition and prosecution of marijuana, Americans found a way to repress Mexican migrants. Reason given by Harry J. Anslinger for this blanket ban on Cannabis was that the hemp plant had a ?violent effect on the degenerate races.? Anslinger playing on people?s racism was able to justify the ban on all forms of Cannabis, including Hemp, which contains little to none of the psychoactive resins that Cannabis does.

The popular and therapeutic uses of hemp preparations are not categorically prohibited by the provisions of the Marihuana Tax Act of 1937. The apparent purpose of the Act is to levy a token tax of approximately one dollar on all buyers, sellers, importers, growers, physicians, veterinarians, and any other persons who deal in marijuana commercially, prescribe it professionally, or possess it.

The deceptive nature of that apparent purpose begins to come into focus when the reader reaches the penalty provisions of the Act: five years' imprisonment, a $2,000 fine, or both seem rather excessive for evading a sum (provided for by the purchase of a Treasury Department tax stamp) that, even if collected, would produce only a minute amount of government revenue. (Fines and jail sentences were further increased to the point of the cruel and unusual in subsequent federal drug legislation that incorporated the Marijuana Tax Act. It is now possible under the later version of the Act to draw a life sentence for selling just one marihuana cigarette to a minor.) One might wonder, too, why a small clause, amounting to an open-ended catchall provision, was inserted into the Act, authorizing the Secretary of the Treasury to grant the Commissioner (then Harry Anslinger) and agents of the Treasury Department's Bureau of Narcotics absolute administrative regulatory, and police powers in the enforcement of the law.

The message becomes entirely clear when, having finished the short text of the Act itself, one proceeds to the sixty-odd pages of administrative and enforcement procedures established by the infamous Regulations No. 1. That regulation, not fully reproduced here, calls for a maze of affidavits, depositions, sworn statements, and constant Treasury Department police inspection in every instance that marijuana is bought, sold, used, raised, distributed, given away, and so on. Physicians who wish to purchase the one-dollar tax stamp so that they might prescribe it for their patients are forced to report such use to the Federal Bureau of Narcotics in sworn and attested detail, revealing the name and address of the patient, the nature of his ailment, the dates and amounts prescribed, and so on.
If a physician for any reason fails to do so immediately, both he and his patient are liable to imprisonment-and a heavy fine. Obviously, the details of that regulation make it far too risky for anyone to have anything to do with marijuana in any way whatsoever.?

Drug prohibition causes crime. The Illegal drug business is very profitable since the price of a product increases when it is made illegal. Yearly drug trafficking earnings average to about 60 billion dollars and range as high as 100 billion dollars a year. Also, the outlaw nature of the business means that rival drug sellers must resort to violence to settle disputes among themselves. The per capita murder and assault-by-firearm rate rose steadily while alcohol Prohibition was in effect (1920-33) and fell for 10 straight years after prohibition was ended. The murder rates generated by today's prohibition, of course, are much higher. Police officials have estimated that in many major cities as much as 50 percent of crime, including auto thefts, robberies, assaults, and burglaries are committed by drug addicts to support their habits. It's not a drug-related crime; it's a prohibition-related crime.

The incarceration rate in the United States is higher than in any other country except Russia. This statistic is largely a result of jailing drug users: 58% of federal prisoners are serving time for drug offenses. One out of every 150 Americans is in jail at any one time--and this number is growing. As a result, one in 20 white Americans and one in four black Americans will be jailed sometime during their lifetime.
The ?War on Drugs? has had many unintended consequences. One example cited by Judge Gray of unintended consequences is that our main method of getting tough on drugs is trying to "incarcerate ourselves out of the problem." This has resulted in leniency toward more violent criminals. The combination of overcrowded prisons and laws that specifically require drug offenders to serve full sentences (Mandatory Minimum sentence) has allowed criminals serving time for violent offenses to be granted early release to make room for more drug offenders. This result occurs because, unlike the rule governing drug offenses in many jurisdictions, serving a full sentence is not mandatory for many violent crimes like murder, bank robbery and kidnapping.

The prison-industrial complex refers to interest groups that represent industries that do business in correctional facilities. Among these industries are construction companies and surveillance technology vendors, who become more concerned with selling their products and services, than actually rehabilitating criminals or reducing crime rates. Their main drive for business is monetary. Also, some prisons provide free or low-cost labor for state or municipal governments, which is seen as another positive side-effect for building and maintaining a large prison system.

The great wealth that is caused by prohibition and the War on Drugs leads to the ?corruption of law enforcement, judges and elected officials.? When law enforcement officials arrest people on drug trafficking charges, and are bribed with more money than they will make in a decade, it?s not surprising that some of them look the other way, and later on even aid smuggler, or offer them protection. This kind of corruption is in existence not only in drug producing countries, but also in the United States. Any govt. that declares 25 million of its citizens as criminals, and still can?t enforce its drug laws, will lose respect from all sides.

Drug prohibition also destroys communities. The enormous profits produced by drug dealing, because of prohibition, make a mockery of work ethics. What are young kids to think when the most successful people in inner city neighborhoods are criminals? Drug dealers become role models for youth, creating a cycle of degradation of cultural and moral values. These kids quickly grow into drug dealing lifestyles, because of the promise of quick money, flashy clothes and ?pimped out? cars. The current system only helps to further oppress minorities by allowing drug dealers to reap enormous profits through prohibition.

Family values are directly affected as well. What kind of a family structure can be maintained when a young boy pays for his parents rent through the use of drug earnings? Also it is the illegal drugs that are being sold in schools and playgrounds, not the legal ones. Reasons for this being that kids and young adults have easier access to federally unregulated drugs, like cocaine, heroine, and marijuana; whereas regulated drugs like cigarettes, alcohol, and prescription pill are much harder to attain, because of their regulated status.

The War on Drugs reflects a failure to learn from history. We repealed the prohibition of alcohol because it produced crime, corruption, and social chaos. Now we are making the same mistakes and suffering the same consequences, except we are still trying to maintain that the war on drugs is working. So in turn we end up throwing more money at the problem, as if that will help to solve it.

Drug prohibition centralizes power in Washington. The federal government has usurped the power of states and communities to determine their own policies, and the prosecution of the drug war has caused federal law enforcement agencies to grow at the expense of state and local police. Most recently, the Clinton administration refuses to accept the decision of the people of Arizona and California to allow the medical use of marijuana, and is threatening to arrest doctors who abide by state law. The U.S. government has always seized on wars and emergencies to expand its own powers at the expense of states, individuals, and the Constitution.

The War on drugs has had an erosion effect on civil liberties. It used to be that the government could only punish someone after they were found guilty in a court of law. That is not the case anymore; property can be seized by a mere accusation from police that drugs are in some way involved. Whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty? These ideas are a thing of the past. Along with civil liberties being violated, individual rights are being infringed upon as well. People have rights that the government may not violate. These rights are clearly described in the United States Constitution.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with inherent and inalienable rights; that among these, are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness."

According to the Constitution of the United States, people have the right to live their lives in any way that they choose as long as it doesn?t interfere or violate the rights of others. What could be a more basic, more inherent right than the right to choose what substances one puts into one?s own body? If the government can tell us what we can and cannot put into our own bodies, where does the line get drawn?

In conclusion, it?s plain to see that the War on Drugs and prohibition, were originally set in motion to undermine and oppress minorities, at different times in history, but for similar reasons. Through the illusion that the ?drug problem? needs to be dealt with in a criminal fashion, we deceive ourselves of the true nature of these deeply rooted socio-psychological problems, and alienate a vast majority of our population by labeling them as criminals instead of offering them the help and guidance that they need. We need to recognize that these problems are health issues, like alcoholism, or nicotine addiction, and that they need to be dealt with accordingly. We cannot keep on sweeping these issues ?under the rug? anymore, for they have piled up and created even more problems for society as a whole. Only when we realize that prohibition is hurtful to our country as a whole, and begin to treat our minorities with dignity and respect, will we truly be living up to the Constitution of the United States.


--------------------
Join The Shroomery Folding @ Home Team!



I think of going to the grave without having a psychedelic experience, like going to the grave without having sex. It means that you never figured out what it was all about. The mystery is in the body, and the way the body works itself into nature.
- Terence McKenna, Archaic Revival


Edited by ISH (12/08/05 11:55 AM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1

Shop: Left Coast Kratom Buy Kratom Capsules   Kraken Kratom Kratom Capsules for Sale   Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder   Bridgetown Botanicals Bridgetown Botanicals   North Spore Injection Grain Bag   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Supreme Court rules against medical marijuana Agent Cooper 4,423 12 09/10/12 08:36 PM
by MEEZIE

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Entire Staff
3,025 topic views. 0 members, 0 guests and 1 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.024 seconds spending 0.008 seconds on 13 queries.