Fuck Yeah Drug Policy
Posts tagged with war on drugs.

Film About Most-Wanted Billionaire Drug Lord’s Legacy Premieres at SXSW

The legacy of Mexican drug lord Joaquin “El Chapo” Guzman was captured in a new documentary that premiered at the South by Southwest festival over the weekend. The modern-day Public Enemy Number One emerged from over a decade in hiding at his climactic arrest two weeks ago.

The film, Legend of Shorty, a collaboration between filmmaker Angus MacQueen and Peruvian journalist Guillermo Galdos, follows MacQueen and Galdos on their journey in search of Chapo. According to Guardian film critic Henry Barnes, the pair demonstrated “extraordinary access to the cartel” as they explored Mexico’s Golden Triangle, where they witnessed “batch loads of cocaine, meth and marijuana being prepared for transport” and “surreal meetings with Chapo’s inner circle, including a lunch date with his mum.” 

The last line of the film is Galdos saying, “They got to him before he agreed to give us an interview.” The world’s biggest drug dealer was captured by authorities before the pair could sit down with him.

After over a decade of hiding, the notorious leader of the Sinaloa cartel — the biggest cartel in history, an operation responsible for trafficking an estimated 25% of the illegal drugs that enter the U.S. — was finally put behind bars in February.  

Like everything else about him, the details about Chapo’s capture are pretty outlandish. The notorious drug pin, who has been ranked one of the most powerful people in the world by Forbes, has been living it up while Mexican authorities and the DEA were busting their buns trying to find him since he escaped from a high security prison in 2001. 

He was captured at Mazatlán, a beach resort outside of Sinaloa, where authorities discovered he had spent his massive drug fortune on 16 houses, 43 vehicles, and four ranches. He was also packing major (and pricey) heat — with 97 long arms (like rifles and such), 36 handguns, two grenade launchers and a rocket launcher.

How did one of the world’s most wanted people manage to evade authorities for over a decade, despite living in such extravagant means? Tunnels — burrowed between seven of his houses, with steel doors connected to the shower of each of the homes. The first photo above shows one of these secret entrances to the tunnels.

Check out this video of a CNN reporter walking through Chapo’s underground tunnels

Watch a clip from Legend of Shorty

"Human Rights Watch has long documented the widespread human rights abuses resulting from [the war on drugs]: in the United States, the devastation that disproportionate prison sentences for drug offenses have wrought on individuals and their families and disturbing racial disparities in drug law enforcement; in Mexico, the killings committed in the name of combatting drugs; in Canada, the US, and Russia, how fear of criminal law enforcement deters people who use drugs from accessing necessary health services, exposing them to violence, discrimination, and illness; in Afghanistan and Colombia, how narcotics production has fueled armed groups opposed or allied to the government; in India, Ukraine, and Senegal, how cancer patients suffer severe pain due to drug control regulations that render morphine inaccessible; and in China, Vietnam, and Cambodia, the “drug rehabilitation centers” where people are subjected to torture, forced labor, and sexual abuse."

The Human Rights Case for Drug Reform: How Criminalization Destroys Lives, Feeds Abuses, and Subverts the Rule of Law

The war on drugs breeds a lot of negative consequences — so many that I’ve never been able to list them all in just a few words. And that’s why this is awesome.

LATEST FACEBOOK LINKS
Uruguay May Have Started a Marijuana Legalization Storm in Latin America
Legal Pot Shops Make Over $1 Million In First Day
What America’s Drug War Looked Like in 1969
10 Marijuana Edibles That Could Pass As “Real” Food
Colorado’s Legal Weed Edibles Are High on Sophistication
8 Miraculous Medical Marijuana Survival Stories
Reflections on the Best Year Ever in Drug Policy Reform
Pictured: A U.S. Customs agent points his gun at a car suspected of transporting marijuana, 1969.
Obama Reduces Sentences of Eight Crack Cocaine Offenders
President Barack Obama reduced the sentences of eight people convicted of crack cocaine offenses on Thursday, using his power of clemency to make a statement about what the administration believes is an overly punitive criminal justice system. 
The eight men and women to whom he offered clemency had each already served more than 15 years in prison for drug offenses that did not involve violence. Most will now be released in April, and one, Ezell Gilbert of Florida, who was convicted in 1997 for possession with intent to distribute cocaine and marijuana, will be released immediately.
“If they had been sentenced under the current law, many of them would have already served their time and paid their debt to society,” Obama said in a statement, in reference to the 2010 Fair Sentencing Act, a law which significantly narrowed the enormous disparity in sentences for crack and powder cocaine offenses but did not apply retroactively. “Instead, because of a disparity in the law that is now recognized as unjust, they remain in prison, separated from their families and their communities, at a cost of millions of taxpayer dollars each year.”
To date, Obama has used his clemency powers far less than other presidents. Thursday’s announcement marks the first time a president has commuted sentences of a group of inmates who would have received much shorter sentences had they received their punishments under current laws and sentencing policies.
Thanks to The Guardian

Obama Reduces Sentences of Eight Crack Cocaine Offenders

President Barack Obama reduced the sentences of eight people convicted of crack cocaine offenses on Thursday, using his power of clemency to make a statement about what the administration believes is an overly punitive criminal justice system. 

The eight men and women to whom he offered clemency had each already served more than 15 years in prison for drug offenses that did not involve violence. Most will now be released in April, and one, Ezell Gilbert of Florida, who was convicted in 1997 for possession with intent to distribute cocaine and marijuana, will be released immediately.

“If they had been sentenced under the current law, many of them would have already served their time and paid their debt to society,” Obama said in a statement, in reference to the 2010 Fair Sentencing Act, a law which significantly narrowed the enormous disparity in sentences for crack and powder cocaine offenses but did not apply retroactively. “Instead, because of a disparity in the law that is now recognized as unjust, they remain in prison, separated from their families and their communities, at a cost of millions of taxpayer dollars each year.”

To date, Obama has used his clemency powers far less than other presidents. Thursday’s announcement marks the first time a president has commuted sentences of a group of inmates who would have received much shorter sentences had they received their punishments under current laws and sentencing policies.

Thanks to The Guardian

Remembering Peter Lewis: Billionaire Marijuana Law Reformer
Peter Lewis passed away on Saturday just weeks after celebrating his 80th birthday. He was the chairman of Progressive Insurance and a philanthropist, most notably for marijuana policy reform, to which he has donated well over $40 million since the 1980s.
In 2011, Lewis wrote a Forbes piece explaining why he’ll keep battling drug laws. Here it is:
Billionaire Peter Lewis: My War on Drug Laws
Our marijuana laws are outdated, ineffective and stupid. I’m not alone in thinking this: Half of Americans believe we should stop punishing people for using marijuana. And not coincidentally, more than half of Americans have used marijuana themselves. I am one of those Americans, and I know firsthand that marijuana can be helpful and that it certainly isn’t cause for locking anyone up.
My story is fairly simple. I grew up after college in a world where social drinking was the norm but marijuana was hidden. When I was 39 I tried marijuana for the first time. I found it to be better than scotch. But it wasn’t until I had serious medical problems that I realized how important marijuana could be.
When I was 64 my left leg was amputated below the knee because there was an infection that couldn’t be cured. I spent a year after the amputation in excruciating pain and a year in a wheelchair. So during that period I was very glad I had marijuana. It didn’t exactly eliminate the pain, but it made the pain tolerable—and it let me avoid those heavy-duty narcotic pain relievers that leave you incapacitated.

I am a progressive by birth, by nature, by philosophy—that’s the name of the insurance company I ran as well, which is coincidental—but I am a small ‘p’ progressive. I don’t believe that laws against things that people do regularly, like safe and responsible use of marijuana, make any sense. Everything that has been done to enforce these laws has had a negative effect, with no results.
It’s become sort of a central philanthropic interest of mine—by no means my only interest. But I’m pretty clear. I’ve thought it through, and I’m trying to accomplish something. My mission is to reduce the penalties for growing, using and selling marijuana. It’s that simple.
I’ve been conducting a great deal of research on public opinion on marijuana. Change in this area is inevitable, much like the movement toward equal rights for gays and lesbians. An ever shrinking fraction of the country resists changing marijuana laws, largely for moral reasons. But change is coming. It’s just a question of when and how we get there.
When you think about all the people who have used marijuana—from political leaders to sports stars to corporate executives to people from every walk of life—one way to win this battle is for people to just be honest. If everyone who used marijuana stood up and said, “I use this; it’s pretty good,” the argument would be over.
I’m amazed that anyone could oppose marijuana for medical use. It’s compassionate. Doctors recommend it. But the federal government is so hung up on its war on drugs that it refuses to even allow medical research on marijuana. So I’ve ­supported changing the laws state by state, and I’ll ­continue to do so.
On legalization beyond medical use, we may be some years away, or we may find that we suddenly reach a tipping point, much like the end of alcohol prohibition in the last century. I’m supporting innovative ideas to move toward a system that would regulate, control and tax marijuana.
I’m retired; I have time to work on this, to treat it with the same seriousness that I treated my former work running a large corporation. I care deeply about it. I deeply believe that we’ll have a better country and a better world if marijuana is treated more or less like alcohol.
Thanks to Forbes

Remembering Peter Lewis: Billionaire Marijuana Law Reformer

Peter Lewis passed away on Saturday just weeks after celebrating his 80th birthday. He was the chairman of Progressive Insurance and a philanthropist, most notably for marijuana policy reform, to which he has donated well over $40 million since the 1980s.

In 2011, Lewis wrote a Forbes piece explaining why he’ll keep battling drug laws. Here it is:

Billionaire Peter Lewis: My War on Drug Laws

Our marijuana laws are outdated, ineffective and stupid. I’m not alone in thinking this: Half of Americans believe we should stop punishing people for using marijuana. And not coincidentally, more than half of Americans have used marijuana themselves. I am one of those Americans, and I know firsthand that marijuana can be helpful and that it certainly isn’t cause for locking anyone up.

My story is fairly simple. I grew up after college in a world where social drinking was the norm but marijuana was hidden. When I was 39 I tried marijuana for the first time. I found it to be better than scotch. But it wasn’t until I had serious medical problems that I realized how important marijuana could be.

When I was 64 my left leg was amputated below the knee because there was an infection that couldn’t be cured. I spent a year after the amputation in excruciating pain and a year in a wheelchair. So during that period I was very glad I had marijuana. It didn’t exactly eliminate the pain, but it made the pain tolerable—and it let me avoid those heavy-duty narcotic pain relievers that leave you incapacitated.

I am a progressive by birth, by nature, by philosophy—that’s the name of the insurance company I ran as well, which is coincidental—but I am a small ‘p’ progressive. I don’t believe that laws against things that people do regularly, like safe and responsible use of marijuana, make any sense. Everything that has been done to enforce these laws has had a negative effect, with no results.

It’s become sort of a central philanthropic interest of mine—by no means my only interest. But I’m pretty clear. I’ve thought it through, and I’m trying to accomplish something. My mission is to reduce the penalties for growing, using and selling marijuana. It’s that simple.

I’ve been conducting a great deal of research on public opinion on marijuana. Change in this area is inevitable, much like the movement toward equal rights for gays and lesbians. An ever shrinking fraction of the country resists changing marijuana laws, largely for moral reasons. But change is coming. It’s just a question of when and how we get there.

When you think about all the people who have used marijuana—from political leaders to sports stars to corporate executives to people from every walk of life—one way to win this battle is for people to just be honest. If everyone who used marijuana stood up and said, “I use this; it’s pretty good,” the argument would be over.

I’m amazed that anyone could oppose marijuana for medical use. It’s compassionate. Doctors recommend it. But the federal government is so hung up on its war on drugs that it refuses to even allow medical research on marijuana. So I’ve ­supported changing the laws state by state, and I’ll ­continue to do so.

On legalization beyond medical use, we may be some years away, or we may find that we suddenly reach a tipping point, much like the end of alcohol prohibition in the last century. I’m supporting innovative ideas to move toward a system that would regulate, control and tax marijuana.

I’m retired; I have time to work on this, to treat it with the same seriousness that I treated my former work running a large corporation. I care deeply about it. I deeply believe that we’ll have a better country and a better world if marijuana is treated more or less like alcohol.

Thanks to Forbes

Meet the Faces Behind the Drug Policy Reform Movement

The 2013 International Drug Policy Reform Conference featured an interactive photography project that encouraged attendees to create powerful statements and use social media to challenge the war on drugs. The #NoMoreDrugWar photo booth attracted the young reformer and seasoned activist alike. Attendees shared their commitment to drug policy reform by customizing messages that focused on three themes: criminal justice, marijuana legalization, and health & harm reduction.

"Our marijuana laws are outdated, ineffective and stupid … I am progressive by birth, by nature, by philosophy. But I am a small ‘p’ progressive. I don’t believe that laws against things that people do regularly, like safe and responsible use of marijuana, make any sense."

Peter Lewis (Nov. 11, 1933 – Nov. 23, 2013)

On Saturday, Peter Lewis (chairman of Progressive Insurance) passed away just weeks after celebrating his 80th birthday. Perhaps the country’s most high-profile billionaire backer of drug law reform, NORML estimates he had spent well over $40 million funding the cause since the 1980s.

How Nonviolent People Are Sentenced to Die in Prison Because of the War on Drugs
In the United States, one can be sentenced to life in prison for the following crimes:
Possessing a crack pipe
Possessing a bottle cap containing a trace amount of heroin (too minute to be weighed)
Having traces of cocaine in clothes pockets that were invisible to the naked eye but detected in lab tests
Having a single crack rock at home
Possessing 32 grams of marijuana (worth about $380 in California) with intent to distribute
Passing out several grams of LSD at a Grateful Dead show
Acting as a go-between in the sale of $10 worth of marijuana to an undercover cop
Selling a single crack rock
Having a stash of over-the-counter decongestant pills
These are not hypothetical. Every single one of these petty, nonviolent drug crimes have landed Americans in prison for life without parole.
Life in prison without a chance of parole is, short of execution, the harshest imaginable punishment. Life without parole (LWOP) is permanent removal from society with no chance of reentry, no hope of freedom. One would expect the American criminal justice system to condemn someone to die in prison only for the most serious offenses.
Yet across the country, thousands of people are serving life sentences without the possibility of parole for nonviolent crimes such as those listed above. 
As of last year, 3,278 people were serving life in prison without parole for nonviolent crimes, according to a report released by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) last week.
And to no one’s surprise, about 79 percent of the 3,278 prisoners serving LWOP were sentenced to die in prison for nonviolent drug crimes in the federal system.
How is this possible?
Mandatory sentencing laws that stem from America’s fervent, decades-long crusade against drugs.
The vast majority (83 percent) of life sentences examined by the ACLU were mandatory, meaning that the presiding judge had no choice but to sentence the defendant to a life behind bars. Mandatory sentences often result from repeat offender laws and draconian sentencing rules. Such federal standards for drug convictions are what land nonviolent criminals in prison for LWOP.
The prevalence of LWOP sentences for nonviolent offenses is a symptom of the relentless onslaught of more than four decades of the War on Drugs and “tough-on crime” policies, which drove the passage of unnecessarily harsh sentencing laws, including three-strikes provisions (which mandate certain sentences for a third felony conviction) and mandatory minimum sentences (which require judges to punish people convicted of certain crimes by at least a mandatory minimum number of years in prison). 
These inflexible, often extremely lengthy, “one-size-fits-all” sentencing laws prevent judges from tailoring punishment to the individual and the seriousness of the offense, barring them from considering factors such as the individual’s role in the offense or the likelihood that he or she will commit a subsequent crime.
Federal judges have long been outspoken in their opposition to mandatory sentencing laws. Judge Andre M. Davis of the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals wrote: "I say with certainty that mandatory minimums are unfair and unjust. These laws, created by an overzealous Congress decades ago … hinder judges from handing out fair and individualized sentences, while prosecutors are given unwarranted power to dictate sentences through charging decisions."
How do petty drug crimes add up to life without parole?
Three federal drug offenses can result in LWOP, even if the offenses are relatively minor. For example, a federal conviction for possessing 50 grams of methamphetamine carries a mandatory life-without-parole sentence if the defendant has previously been convicted of two other felony drug offenses, which can be as minor as selling personal amounts of marijuana.
A handful of states have instituted mandatory LWOP sentences for certain drug offenses. In Alabama, a conviction for selling more than 56 grams of heroin results in a mandatory LWOP sentence. Similarly, a person convicted of selling two ounces of cocaine in Mississippi must receive LWOP. To put these sentences in perspective, the average time served for murder in the U.S. is 14 years.
While laws such as these were enacted in part out of concern about drug abuse and drug-related crime, the penalties they prescribe have not succeeded in curbing drug use or addiction rates, which have essentially remained flat for 40 years. Instead, the laws have contributed to mass incarceration in the U.S. 
The ACLU report contains the in-depth stories of 110 individual prisoners waiting to die behind bars for nonviolent offenses, along with more detailed information about mandatory sentencing.
Thanks to Mother Jones and the ACLU

How Nonviolent People Are Sentenced to Die in Prison Because of the War on Drugs

In the United States, one can be sentenced to life in prison for the following crimes:

  • Possessing a crack pipe
  • Possessing a bottle cap containing a trace amount of heroin (too minute to be weighed)
  • Having traces of cocaine in clothes pockets that were invisible to the naked eye but detected in lab tests
  • Having a single crack rock at home
  • Possessing 32 grams of marijuana (worth about $380 in California) with intent to distribute
  • Passing out several grams of LSD at a Grateful Dead show
  • Acting as a go-between in the sale of $10 worth of marijuana to an undercover cop
  • Selling a single crack rock
  • Having a stash of over-the-counter decongestant pills

These are not hypothetical. Every single one of these petty, nonviolent drug crimes have landed Americans in prison for life without parole.

Life in prison without a chance of parole is, short of execution, the harshest imaginable punishment. Life without parole (LWOP) is permanent removal from society with no chance of reentry, no hope of freedom. One would expect the American criminal justice system to condemn someone to die in prison only for the most serious offenses.

Yet across the country, thousands of people are serving life sentences without the possibility of parole for nonviolent crimes such as those listed above. 

As of last year, 3,278 people were serving life in prison without parole for nonviolent crimes, according to a report released by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) last week.

And to no one’s surprise, about 79 percent of the 3,278 prisoners serving LWOP were sentenced to die in prison for nonviolent drug crimes in the federal system.

How is this possible?

Mandatory sentencing laws that stem from America’s fervent, decades-long crusade against drugs.

The vast majority (83 percent) of life sentences examined by the ACLU were mandatory, meaning that the presiding judge had no choice but to sentence the defendant to a life behind bars. Mandatory sentences often result from repeat offender laws and draconian sentencing rules. Such federal standards for drug convictions are what land nonviolent criminals in prison for LWOP.

The prevalence of LWOP sentences for nonviolent offenses is a symptom of the relentless onslaught of more than four decades of the War on Drugs and “tough-on crime” policies, which drove the passage of unnecessarily harsh sentencing laws, including three-strikes provisions (which mandate certain sentences for a third felony conviction) and mandatory minimum sentences (which require judges to punish people convicted of certain crimes by at least a mandatory minimum number of years in prison). 

These inflexible, often extremely lengthy, “one-size-fits-all” sentencing laws prevent judges from tailoring punishment to the individual and the seriousness of the offense, barring them from considering factors such as the individual’s role in the offense or the likelihood that he or she will commit a subsequent crime.

Federal judges have long been outspoken in their opposition to mandatory sentencing laws. Judge Andre M. Davis of the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals wrote: "I say with certainty that mandatory minimums are unfair and unjust. These laws, created by an overzealous Congress decades ago … hinder judges from handing out fair and individualized sentences, while prosecutors are given unwarranted power to dictate sentences through charging decisions."

How do petty drug crimes add up to life without parole?

Three federal drug offenses can result in LWOP, even if the offenses are relatively minor. For example, a federal conviction for possessing 50 grams of methamphetamine carries a mandatory life-without-parole sentence if the defendant has previously been convicted of two other felony drug offenses, which can be as minor as selling personal amounts of marijuana.

A handful of states have instituted mandatory LWOP sentences for certain drug offenses. In Alabama, a conviction for selling more than 56 grams of heroin results in a mandatory LWOP sentence. Similarly, a person convicted of selling two ounces of cocaine in Mississippi must receive LWOP. To put these sentences in perspective, the average time served for murder in the U.S. is 14 years.

While laws such as these were enacted in part out of concern about drug abuse and drug-related crime, the penalties they prescribe have not succeeded in curbing drug use or addiction rates, which have essentially remained flat for 40 years. Instead, the laws have contributed to mass incarceration in the U.S. 

The ACLU report contains the in-depth stories of 110 individual prisoners waiting to die behind bars for nonviolent offenses, along with more detailed information about mandatory sentencing.

Thanks to Mother Jones and the ACLU

"For 50 years, we have tried to tackle the drug problem with only one tool – penalization – and that has failed. As a result, we now have more consumers, bigger criminal organizations, money laundering, arms trafficking and collateral damage. As a control model, we’re convinced that it is more harmful than the drugs themselves."
Julio Calzada, presidential adviser and head of Uruguay’s National Committee on Drugs (via The Guardian)
Uruguay Is Likely to Legalize Cannabis and Set the Tone for Latin American Drug Policy
This week, Uruguay’s senate is expected to pass the world’s most far-reaching drug legalization. The marijuana regulation bill, which has been passed by the lower house of the Uruguayan parliament, will allow registered users to buy up to 40 grams a month from a chemist, registered growers to keep up to six plants, and cannabis clubs to have up to 45 members and cultivate as many as 99 plants.
The government is designing a new set of legal, commercial, and bureaucratic tools to supplant a violent illegal market in narcotics, improve public health, protect individual rights, raise tax revenues, and research the medical potential of the world’s most widely used contraband drug.
The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime estimates that there are 162 million cannabis users — 4% of the world’s adult population. An estimated 10% of adult Uruguayans — 115,000 people — smoke cannabis. Existing law permits consumption of “reasonable” amounts of marijuana, but forbids sales.
Uruguay is trying to bring the cannabis market under state control by undercutting and outlawing traffickers. If the bill is passed, the government will arrange for a high-quality, legal product to be sold in a safe environment at competitive prices. “If one gram costs $1 in the black market, then we’ll sell the legal product for $1. If they drop the price to 75 cents, then we’ll put it at that level,” says Julio Calzada, a presidential adviser and the head of the National Committee on Drugs.
The market in Uruguay is estimated to be worth $30 million a year, according to Martin Fernández, a lawyer with the Association of Cannabis Studies. The pharmaceutical industry will have more freedom to develop and test marijuana painkillers and other treatments than any other country. The hemp, biotech, and marijuana farming industries are other examples of marijuana-related business opportunities that Uruguay can anticipate to yield big money if marijuana is legalized, as is expected.
President José Mujica, a reluctant advocate of marijuana regulation, says that legalization in Uruguay is “not about being free and open,” but is rather “a logical step” in taking users away from the black market. “We don’t defend marijuana or any other addiction. But worse than any drug is trafficking.”
Thanks to The Guardian

Uruguay Is Likely to Legalize Cannabis and Set the Tone for Latin American Drug Policy

This week, Uruguay’s senate is expected to pass the world’s most far-reaching drug legalization. The marijuana regulation bill, which has been passed by the lower house of the Uruguayan parliament, will allow registered users to buy up to 40 grams a month from a chemist, registered growers to keep up to six plants, and cannabis clubs to have up to 45 members and cultivate as many as 99 plants.

The government is designing a new set of legal, commercial, and bureaucratic tools to supplant a violent illegal market in narcotics, improve public health, protect individual rights, raise tax revenues, and research the medical potential of the world’s most widely used contraband drug.

The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime estimates that there are 162 million cannabis users — 4% of the world’s adult population. An estimated 10% of adult Uruguayans — 115,000 people — smoke cannabis. Existing law permits consumption of “reasonable” amounts of marijuana, but forbids sales.

Uruguay is trying to bring the cannabis market under state control by undercutting and outlawing traffickers. If the bill is passed, the government will arrange for a high-quality, legal product to be sold in a safe environment at competitive prices. “If one gram costs $1 in the black market, then we’ll sell the legal product for $1. If they drop the price to 75 cents, then we’ll put it at that level,” says Julio Calzada, a presidential adviser and the head of the National Committee on Drugs.

The market in Uruguay is estimated to be worth $30 million a year, according to Martin Fernández, a lawyer with the Association of Cannabis Studies. The pharmaceutical industry will have more freedom to develop and test marijuana painkillers and other treatments than any other country. The hemp, biotech, and marijuana farming industries are other examples of marijuana-related business opportunities that Uruguay can anticipate to yield big money if marijuana is legalized, as is expected.

President José Mujica, a reluctant advocate of marijuana regulation, says that legalization in Uruguay is “not about being free and open,” but is rather “a logical step” in taking users away from the black market. “We don’t defend marijuana or any other addiction. But worse than any drug is trafficking.”

Thanks to The Guardian

Drug Conviction Can Lead to Lifetime Ban From Food Stamps and Welfare
Thanks to mid-90s drug paranoia, a felony drug charge could earn you a lifetime ban from federal assistance programs like food stamps and welfare. Back in 1996, President Clinton signed into law the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act, but few people were aware of an obscure provision that permanently bars anyone with a felony drug charge from receiving aid from Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) and the Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program (SNAP). While most states that chose to enforce the bans allow exemptions to people with minor drug charges or those who undertake a drug treatment program, 12 states still enforce a permanent zero-tolerance ban that has had a disproportionate effect on single moms and minorities.
Some might say the bans are fair because they apply only to the individual with the drug charge, and not the entire household. But the truth is that even if just one person in a household is banned, the rest of a family relying on federal assistance must share the burden of making up for this loss. And thanks to realities like single moms making up the majority of single-parent households and minorities disproportionately being arrested for drug crimes, they’re the groups taking the brunt of assistance bans as well. 
Thanks to the Pacific Standard [image: Wired]

Drug Conviction Can Lead to Lifetime Ban From Food Stamps and Welfare

Thanks to mid-90s drug paranoia, a felony drug charge could earn you a lifetime ban from federal assistance programs like food stamps and welfare. Back in 1996, President Clinton signed into law the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act, but few people were aware of an obscure provision that permanently bars anyone with a felony drug charge from receiving aid from Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) and the Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program (SNAP). While most states that chose to enforce the bans allow exemptions to people with minor drug charges or those who undertake a drug treatment program, 12 states still enforce a permanent zero-tolerance ban that has had a disproportionate effect on single moms and minorities.

Some might say the bans are fair because they apply only to the individual with the drug charge, and not the entire household. But the truth is that even if just one person in a household is banned, the rest of a family relying on federal assistance must share the burden of making up for this loss. And thanks to realities like single moms making up the majority of single-parent households and minorities disproportionately being arrested for drug crimes, they’re the groups taking the brunt of assistance bans as well. 

Thanks to the Pacific Standard [image: Wired]

Mexican Drug Cartel Selfies Show the Pouty Side of Crime 

The drug war was bizarre and unsettling enough before we found out about these cartel selfies from “Broly Banderas,” who is allegedly a member of the Caballeros Templarios, or “Knights Templar” cartel. Apparently the Knights Templar love their social media and are as self-obsessed as the rest of us…except with more drugs and gory violence.

see more selfies

Online Black Marketplace “Atlantis” Shuts Down

September 20, 2013—Silk Road competitor, Atlantis Market, was forced to shut down in September due to “security reasons outside of our control” after less than a year of operating since it was established in March. 

The site—an online black marketplace for buying and selling illicit goods and services—offered cheaper fees, a more modern website, and promised better security. Canman, a cannabis vendor on both Atlantis and Silk Road, said Atlantis “has the feel of a more seasoned development team in looks and the rapid deployment of new features” compared to Silk Road. But “experience wise, Silk Road contains the critical mass of buyers which is the main difference,” Canman added. “I would say I sell 20-30 times the volume on Silk Road.”

Atlantis grabbed the media’s attention in June with the launch of their “slick, start-up-ified” commercial (watch it above), which features “Charlie the stoner” who’s new in town and in search of some “dank buds.” The video was picked up and widely publicized by sites like The Verge, Huffington Post, and BuzzFeed, which dubbed Atlantis “The New Amazon for Illegal Things.”

Thanks to The Daily Dot

Krokodil Is Not Invading America
In the past month, sensational headlines about the arrival of the “flesh-eating, zombie apocalypse” drug, better known as krokodil, in the United States have caused a bit of a panic on this side of the world. Headlines like “Flesh-Eating ‘Zombie’ Drug ‘Kills You From the Inside Out” and “The Most Horrifying Drug in the World Comes to the U.S.” appeared to herald a chilling new age in America’s drug wars.
But according to the Drug Enforcement Administration, they have yet to see a confirmed case of krokodil — a morphine analogue that acts similarly to heroin but with a shorter high — in the U.S. and blames the krokodil hysteria on misinformation and myths propagated by the media. “To date none of our forensic labs have analyzed an exhibit that contain desomorphine,” Rusty Payne, a DEA spokesperson told The Daily Beast. “We have nothing to indicate that it’s out there.”
On September 23, two emergency room patients were sent to the Banner Poison Control Center, a private clinic in Phoenix, Arizona. They told Dr. Frank LeVecchio, the Center’s co-medical director, that they’d developed open sores after trying a drug called krokodil. Before waiting to receive the lab test results, LeVecchio spread the word to fellow toxicologists and the media. “As far as I know, these are the first cases of [krokodil] in the United States that are reported. So we’re extremely frightened," he told CBS5 in Phoenix. "Where there is smoke there is fire, and we’re afraid there are going to be more and more cases." Soon as you know it, Reuters and CNN had picked up the story, and the rest of the world ran with it.
According to Dr. Andrew Kolodny, chief medical officer at Phoenix House — a non-profit alcohol and drug rehab center — the alleged American krokodil cases are easily explained. ”We don’t have a krokodil epidemic, we have a heroin and painkiller epidemic,” he told The Daily Beast. “This is not a new problem. There are serious medical infections that come from injecting drugs.” 
In Russia, krokodil has become the next best thing to heroin. Reports of its use there date back to 2003 when Russia started a major crackdown on heroin production and trafficking. Users resorted to a homemade alternative: krokodil, which is made by mixing lighter fluid, codeine, paint thinner, and eye drops, among other things. It earned its reptilian nickname by turning its users’ skin scaly, eating them from the inside, and rotting the brain and limbs before precipitating a painful death.    
Thanks to The Daily Beast

Krokodil Is Not Invading America

In the past month, sensational headlines about the arrival of the “flesh-eating, zombie apocalypse” drug, better known as krokodil, in the United States have caused a bit of a panic on this side of the world. Headlines like “Flesh-Eating ‘Zombie’ Drug ‘Kills You From the Inside Out” and “The Most Horrifying Drug in the World Comes to the U.S.” appeared to herald a chilling new age in America’s drug wars.

But according to the Drug Enforcement Administration, they have yet to see a confirmed case of krokodil — a morphine analogue that acts similarly to heroin but with a shorter high — in the U.S. and blames the krokodil hysteria on misinformation and myths propagated by the media. “To date none of our forensic labs have analyzed an exhibit that contain desomorphine,” Rusty Payne, a DEA spokesperson told The Daily Beast. “We have nothing to indicate that it’s out there.”

On September 23, two emergency room patients were sent to the Banner Poison Control Center, a private clinic in Phoenix, Arizona. They told Dr. Frank LeVecchio, the Center’s co-medical director, that they’d developed open sores after trying a drug called krokodil. Before waiting to receive the lab test results, LeVecchio spread the word to fellow toxicologists and the media. “As far as I know, these are the first cases of [krokodil] in the United States that are reported. So we’re extremely frightened," he told CBS5 in Phoenix. "Where there is smoke there is fire, and we’re afraid there are going to be more and more cases." Soon as you know it, Reuters and CNN had picked up the story, and the rest of the world ran with it.

According to Dr. Andrew Kolodny, chief medical officer at Phoenix House — a non-profit alcohol and drug rehab center — the alleged American krokodil cases are easily explained. ”We don’t have a krokodil epidemic, we have a heroin and painkiller epidemic,” he told The Daily Beast. “This is not a new problem. There are serious medical infections that come from injecting drugs.”

In Russia, krokodil has become the next best thing to heroin. Reports of its use there date back to 2003 when Russia started a major crackdown on heroin production and trafficking. Users resorted to a homemade alternative: krokodil, which is made by mixing lighter fluid, codeine, paint thinner, and eye drops, among other things. It earned its reptilian nickname by turning its users’ skin scaly, eating them from the inside, and rotting the brain and limbs before precipitating a painful death.    

Thanks to The Daily Beast

Drug Agents’ Phone Database Is Larger Than The NSA’s | New York Times
For at least six years, law enforcement officials working on a counternarcotics program have had routine access, using subpoenas, to an enormous AT&T database that contains the records of decades of Americans’ phone calls — parallel to but covering a far longer time than the National Security Agency’s hotly disputed collection of phone call logs.
The Hemisphere Project, a partnership between federal and local drug officials and AT&T that has not previously been reported, involves an extremely close association between the government and the telecommunications giant.
The government pays AT&T to place its employees in drug-fighting units around the country. Those employees sit alongside Drug Enforcement Administration agents and local detectives and supply them with the phone data from as far back as 1987.
[…] The scale and longevity of the data storage appears to be unmatched by other government programs, including the N.S.A.’s gathering of phone call logs under the Patriot Act. The N.S.A. stores the data for nearly all calls in the United States, including phone numbers and time and duration of calls, for five years.
[…] Brian Fallon, a Justice Department spokesman, said in a statement that “subpoenaing drug dealers’ phone records is a bread-and-butter tactic in the course of criminal investigations.”
[…] Jameel Jaffer, deputy legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union, said the 27-slide PowerPoint presentation, evidently updated this year to train AT&T employees for the program, “certainly raises profound privacy concerns.”
“I’d speculate that one reason for the secrecy of the program is that it would be very hard to justify it to the public or the courts,” he said.
Mr. Jaffer said that while the database remained in AT&T’s possession, “the integration of government agents into the process means there are serious Fourth Amendment concerns.”
[…] The PowerPoint slides outline several “success stories” highlighting the program’s achievements and showing that it is used in investigating a range of crimes, not just drug violations. The slides emphasize the program’s value in tracing suspects who use replacement phones, sometimes called “burner” phones, who switch phone numbers or who are otherwise difficult to locate or identify.
full article

Drug Agents’ Phone Database Is Larger Than The NSA’s | New York Times

For at least six years, law enforcement officials working on a counternarcotics program have had routine access, using subpoenas, to an enormous AT&T database that contains the records of decades of Americans’ phone calls — parallel to but covering a far longer time than the National Security Agency’s hotly disputed collection of phone call logs.

The Hemisphere Project, a partnership between federal and local drug officials and AT&T that has not previously been reported, involves an extremely close association between the government and the telecommunications giant.

The government pays AT&T to place its employees in drug-fighting units around the country. Those employees sit alongside Drug Enforcement Administration agents and local detectives and supply them with the phone data from as far back as 1987.

[…] The scale and longevity of the data storage appears to be unmatched by other government programs, including the N.S.A.’s gathering of phone call logs under the Patriot Act. The N.S.A. stores the data for nearly all calls in the United States, including phone numbers and time and duration of calls, for five years.

[…] Brian Fallon, a Justice Department spokesman, said in a statement that “subpoenaing drug dealers’ phone records is a bread-and-butter tactic in the course of criminal investigations.”

[…] Jameel Jaffer, deputy legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union, said the 27-slide PowerPoint presentation, evidently updated this year to train AT&T employees for the program, “certainly raises profound privacy concerns.”

“I’d speculate that one reason for the secrecy of the program is that it would be very hard to justify it to the public or the courts,” he said.

Mr. Jaffer said that while the database remained in AT&T’s possession, “the integration of government agents into the process means there are serious Fourth Amendment concerns.”

[…] The PowerPoint slides outline several “success stories” highlighting the program’s achievements and showing that it is used in investigating a range of crimes, not just drug violations. The slides emphasize the program’s value in tracing suspects who use replacement phones, sometimes called “burner” phones, who switch phone numbers or who are otherwise difficult to locate or identify.

full article