It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The War on Drugs and Marijuana Filling up Our Prisons?

page: 1
12

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 30 2009 @ 11:19 AM
link   
First off:

America prides itself for being a leader in many things as a nation but one statistic that we should not be proud of is the fact that the United States, the “land of the free”, imprisons more people than any other country on the planet, including China! The U.S. has over 2.3 million people behind bars while China, with 4 times the population has only 1.6 million. That’s right, with only 5% of the world’s population the U.S. incarcerates 25% of the world’s prisoners and people are imprisoned for things like writing bad checks and drug use that wouldn’t even get a prison sentence in many countries.
Link

Many of the people we put in prison belong there, there is no question about that. However there are many many people in prison whose incarceration is highly questionable. Specific to this thread I am talking about those incarcerated for drug offenses with a particular focus on Marijuana.


Federal prisons were estimated to hold 179,204 sentenced inmates in 2007. Of these, 15,647 were incarcerated for violent offenses, including 2,915 for homicide, 8,966 for robbery, and 3,939 for other violent crimes. In addition, 10,345 inmates were serving time for property crimes, including 504 for burglary, 7,834 for fraud, and 2,006 for other property offenses. A total of 95,446 were incarcerated for drug offenses. Also, 56,237 were incarcerated for public-order offenses, including 19,528 for immigration offenses and 24,435 for weapons offenses.
Link


Police arrested an estimated 723,627 persons for marijuana violations in 2001, according to the Federal Bureau of Investigation's annual Uniform Crime Report, released today. The total is the second highest ever recorded by the FBI, and comprises nearly half of all drug arrests in the United States.
Link


The endpoint in the criminal justice system is corrections, where persons sentenced to supervision are either incarcerated in prison or jail, or in the community on probation or parole. Based on current prison population counts, we estimate that there are 27,900 persons in state and federal prison serving a sentence for which a marijuana violation is the controlling (or most serious) offense.[67] This translates to a national estimated loss of more than $600 million per year.[68]
Link

While I understand that many of those incarcerated for drug offenses should be in prison. Distributing Cocaine, Heroin, and Pills and the violence that accompanies such activities should be punished. Sadly however Marijuana users are a high profile target for our corrections ystem despite what many think.


Of those charged with marijuana violations, 88.6 percent - some 641,108 Americans - were charged with possession only. The remaining 82,518 individuals were charged with "sale/manufacture," a category that includes all cultivation offenses - even those where the marijuana was being grown for personal or medical use.

The total number of marijuana arrests far exceeds the total number of arrests for all violent crimes combined, including murder, manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery and aggravated assault.
Link

So why is Marijuana such a high profile target for the corrections / legal system in the USA? Is it really threat to our society that is requires such a huge commitment of both man power and money?


"Tetrahydrocannabinol is a very safe drug. Laboratory animals (rats, mice, dogs, monkeys) can tolerate doses of up to 1,000 mg/kg (milligrams per kilogram). This would be equivalent to a 70 kg person swallowing 70 grams of the drug -- about 5,000 times more than is required to produce a high. Despite the widespread illicit use of cannabis there are very few if any instances of people dying from an overdose. In Britain, official government statistics listed five deaths from cannabis in the period 1993-1995 but on closer examination these proved to have been deaths due to inhalation of vomit that could not be directly attributed to cannabis (House of Lords Report, 1998). By comparison with other commonly used recreational drugs these statistics are impressive."
Gross but relevant. Link


"A review of the literature suggests that the majority of cannabis users, who use the drug occasionally rather than on a daily basis, will not suffer any lasting physical or mental harm. Conversely, as with other ‘recreational' drugs, there will be some who suffer adverse consequences from their use of cannabis. Some individuals who have psychotic thought tendencies might risk precipitating psychotic illness. Those who consume large doses of the drug on a regular basis are likely to have lower educational achievement and lower income, and may suffer physical damage to the airways. They also run a significant risk of becoming dependent upon continuing use of the drug. There is little evidence, however, that these adverse effects persist after drug use stops or that any direct cause and effect relationships are involved."
Link


According to research published in the journal Addiction, "First, the use of cannabis and rates of psychotic symptoms were related to each other, independently of observed/non-observed fixed covariates and observed time dynamic factors (Table 2). Secondly, the results of structural equation modelling suggest that the direction of causation is that the use of cannabis leads to increases in levels of psychotic symptoms rather than psychotic symptoms increasing the use of cannabis. Indeed, there is a suggestion from the model results that increases in psychotic symptoms may inhibit the use of cannabis."
Link


The Christchurch Press reported on March 22, 2005, that "The lead researcher in the Christchurch study, Professor David Fergusson, said the role of cannabis in psychosis was not sufficient on its own to guide legislation. 'The result suggests heavy use can result in adverse side-effects,' he said. 'That can occur with ( heavy use of ) any substance. It can occur with milk.' Fergusson's research, released this month, concluded that heavy cannabis smokers were 1.5 times more likely to suffer symptoms of psychosis that non-users. The study was the latest in several reports based on a cohort of about 1000 people born in Christchurch over a four-month period in 1977. An effective way to deal with cannabis use would be to incrementally reduce penalties and carefully evaluate its impact, Fergusson said. 'Reduce the penalty, like a parking fine. You could then monitor ( the impact ) after five or six years. If it did not change, you might want to take another step.'
Link


"The results of our meta-analytic study failed to reveal a substantial, systematic effect of long-term, regular cannabis consumption on the neurocognitive functioning of users who were not acutely intoxicated. For six of the eight neurocognitive ability areas that were surveyed. the confidence intervals for the average effect sizes across studies overlapped zero in each instance, indicating that the effect size could not be distinguished from zero. The two exceptions were in the domains of learning and forgetting."
Link

I could continue for a long period of time to show that researcher after researcher all come to the conclusion that there is a very limited impact from the use of Marijuana and that the notion that it is somehow a serious threat to our health is a misconception, if not outright lie.

Comparing Marijuana to Alcohol in terms of the impacts to health and society is telling, seeing as how Alcohol is the drug of choice and considered safer by the powers that be.


In 2001, there were 331 alcohol overdose deaths and 0 marijuana overdose deaths. Source: U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC).
Link


Excessive alcohol consumption is the third leading preventable cause of death in the United States (1) and is associated with multiple adverse health consequences, including liver cirrhosis, various cancers, unintentional injuries, and violence.

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control reported 20,687 “alcohol-induced deaths” (excluding accidents and homicides) in 2003. Source: www.cdc.gov...

The CDC has no reports of “marijuana-induced deaths.” (In reality, there may be 2-5 deaths each year attributed to marijuana, but this article -- bbsnews.net... -- describes how these are actually deaths attributable to other causes but “blamed” on marijuana due to the way the data is collected.)
Link


There is little evidence, however, that long-term cannabis use causes permanent cognitive impairment, nor is there is any clear cause and effect relationship to explain the psychosocial associations.

There are some physical health risks, particularly the possibility of damage to the airways in cannabis smokers. Overall, by comparison with other drugs used mainly for ‘recreational’ purposes, cannabis could be rated to be a relatively safe drug.

Source: Iversen, Leslie. Current Opinion in Pharmacology. Volume 5, Issue 1, February 2005, Pages 69-72. Long-term effects of exposure to cannabis. University of Oxford, Department of Pharmacology.
Link



posted on Nov, 30 2009 @ 11:35 AM
link   
"I could also continue showing that in comparison to other drugs, including legal drugs, Marijuana is considered much safer by many researchers.

So why is it that Marijuana is an illegal drug that we spend so much money on enforcing the ban of in the USA?

Part of it I would say has to do with the Prison-Industrial-Complex who makes a fortune off of drug offenses such as Marijuana. However this is a after effect of what I believe to be the primary cause for the out-lawing of marijuana.

It is my opinion that the reason we can not use marijuana in any form including hemp is due to the manipulation of the government by the textile industry. In the USA there were once laws that made it a criminal offense NOT to grow hemp yet now we are so use to it being illegal that the notion of it being any other way seems unbelievable.


REFUSING TO GROW HEMP in America during the 17th, 18th and 19th Centuries WAS AGAINST THE LAW! You could be jailed in Virginia for refusing to grow hemp from 1763 to 1769; Hemp in Colonial Virginia, G. M. Herdon.
Link


Benjamin Franklin owned one of the first paper mills in America and it processed hemp. Also, the War of 1812 was fought over hemp. Napoleon wanted to cut off Moscow's export to England; Emperor Wears No Clothes, Jack Herer.

For thousands of years, 90% of all ships' sails and rope were made from hemp. The word 'canvas' is Dutch for hemp; Webster's New World Dictionary.

80% of all textiles, fabrics, clothes, linen, drapes, bed sheets, etc. were made from hemp until the 1820s with the introduction of the cotton gin.

The first Bibles, maps, charts, Betsy Ross's flag, the first drafts of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution were made from hemp; U.S. Government Archives.

The first crop grown in many states was hemp. 1850 was a peak year for Kentucky producing 40,000 tons. Hemp was the largest cash crop until the 20th Century; State Archives.

Link

Yet not we are lead to believe that this incredible history of this plant was a mistake?

(called in to work, to be continued)...



[edit on 30-11-2009 by Animal]



posted on Nov, 30 2009 @ 12:03 PM
link   
Good thread

S & F for you



posted on Nov, 30 2009 @ 12:05 PM
link   
I agree that drugs and their illegal status (especially MJ) are the root cause of our burgeoning prison system.

The one thing I take issue with was your statement, "Distributing Cocaine, Heroin, and Pills and the violence that accompanies such activities should be punished."

Why? Because the violence is related to the illegality and NOT the drugs themselves. The drugs themselves virtually never create violent behavior.

So to propagate the concept that the DRUGS are the issue and not the PROHIBITION is doing a great disservice to all.



posted on Nov, 30 2009 @ 12:09 PM
link   
Nice thread, well researched and presented. SnF!


UNfortunatly, this situation we're in is unlikely to change, the goverments want to make as many people into criminals, as it can. And it's doing a bang up job (pun intended)

If they decriminilised cannabis, then they'd make one hell of alot of people back into law obiding citizens! (that goes for most, if not all illegal drugs IMO)



posted on Nov, 30 2009 @ 12:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amaterasu
The one thing I take issue with was your statement, "Distributing Cocaine, Heroin, and Pills and the violence that accompanies such activities should be punished."

Why? Because the violence is related to the illegality and NOT the drugs themselves. The drugs themselves virtually never create violent behavior.

So to propagate the concept that the DRUGS are the issue and not the PROHIBITION is doing a great disservice to all.


While I agree with your critique I only do so to a point. While I do agree that it is the illegal nature of the drugs that often leads to violence I also think that there are other factors such as the imbalance and exaggeration of personalities (coc aine, alcohol, etc) leading to aggression and the highly addictive nature (coc aine, heroine, etc) that lead to crimes to quire cash to pay for drugs or the drugs themselves.

So yes to a degree I do a disservice to drugs in my critique but it is not entirely uncalled for.



posted on Nov, 30 2009 @ 01:00 PM
link   
There is an unholy alliance in our prison system that I've heard called the "Prison Industrial Complex". This unholy alliance basically consists of the companies that build and run prisons as a for profit business; the corrections departments of states that often have HUGE budgets; and the prison guard unions. All three of these interests are politically powerful within the states they operate.

Allied to this rather new incarnation of the PIC against any reform of Marijuana Laws is a three quarter century old alliance of chemical/pharmaceutical, textile, and agricultural interests that were able to get MJ criminalized in the first place back shortly after the end of Prohibition.

Behind every refer madness quoting idealogue who argues against any reform of MJ laws, you'll find that their funding comes from either the .gov, the PIC, or pharma/chemical/ag interests.



posted on Nov, 30 2009 @ 01:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Animal
 



So why is Marijuana such a high profile target for the corrections / legal system in the USA?


A few different reasons, IMO, all related to $$$.

First, it is the most abundantly used of all illegal substances, by far. Many government agencies depend on the ongoing 'war on drugs' for their yearly blank taxpayer funded check. If they no longer had pot users to bust, the #'s of drug offenses would drop like a brick, follwed eventually by their funding.

Second, is taxes. If marijuana wasn't so easily grown, i'm sure it would have been legal all along, and taxed. Somebody would have the market cornered like with everything else, and would have enough money to grease the pockets of our lawmakers to keep it that way. But it grows like a weed, just about anywhere, with very little preparation needed for use. The government makes more money on fines and seizures than they would, realistically, with taxes.

Finally, lobbying efforts from the MANY big corporations that would stand to lose ALOT of money if it were legal. The alcohol, tobacco, pharma, and many industrial giants would lose money if such an easily produced product were readily available to compete with their products.

It has NOTHING to do with public safety whatsoever. It never does, although they fool alot of people into thinking it does. Alcohol, as you've already pointed out, is FAR worse in every way. Any one of us, at any time, can be killed by a drunk driver. People who use marijuana usually prefer to stay at home, away from everybody else.



posted on Nov, 30 2009 @ 01:19 PM
link   
I have read before of all the ridiculous demonisation of the commercial hemp industry being tarnished with the drug element.
However, the prohibition was lifted during the war when farmers were encouraged to grow hemp for the war effort, given the many uses that commercial hemp crops can be used for - oils, fabrics, and a host of other uses that big petro-chemical giants cannot compete against (and whose products are poisoning us all and the environment too).

As has been mentioned already, the prohibition had, and still has, nothing at all to do with drugs, but everything to do with corporate monopoly. Better yet, those politicians playing along and maintaining the prohibition, are paid by the very corporations behind the ban. In other words, screw us all and the environment as long as they get their bucks!

As for the criminalisation of MJ and prison sentences for possession, it too is there to feed the prison industry, plain and simple. No wonder we just saw our own government drug expert sacked, and colleagues resign, over his telling the truth on the subject. If experts do tell the truth, and it doesn't fit with policy, well they'll jst find another expert willing to toe the line and take the cheque.



posted on Nov, 30 2009 @ 01:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Animal
 


well the problem here is you are giving inanimate objects a personality.
that pile of coc aine on the table will just sit there forever unless you touch it.
it doesn't take control of your body and make you go out robbing and stealing.
people do stupid crap and then try to blame it on someone else first,then when no people are available to take the blame they try inanimate objects.After that it is satanic cults/video game or tv violence or rock music.

legalize all consensual crimes-drugs,prostitution and gambling for adults.
Then if they break the law arrest them.
It costs more to make refined sugar than coc aine from their respective crops.think about that for a minute,a junkie could get POUNDS of coc aine for under $5.
And I'll bet they would dig a hell of a ditch too.

keeping something illegal INCREASES it's value making it more profitable to smuggle meaning more death and destruction.



posted on Nov, 30 2009 @ 01:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Animal

Originally posted by Amaterasu
The one thing I take issue with was your statement, "Distributing Cocaine, Heroin, and Pills and the violence that accompanies such activities should be punished."

Why? Because the violence is related to the illegality and NOT the drugs themselves. The drugs themselves virtually never create violent behavior.

So to propagate the concept that the DRUGS are the issue and not the PROHIBITION is doing a great disservice to all.


While I agree with your critique I only do so to a point. While I do agree that it is the illegal nature of the drugs that often leads to violence I also think that there are other factors such as the imbalance and exaggeration of personalities (coc aine, alcohol, etc) leading to aggression and the highly addictive nature (coc aine, heroine, etc) that lead to crimes to quire cash to pay for drugs or the drugs themselves.

So yes to a degree I do a disservice to drugs in my critique but it is not entirely uncalled for.


Of course "...the highly addictive nature (coc aine, heroine, etc) that lead to crimes to quire cash to pay for drugs or the drugs themselves." It is because they are ILlegal, and therefore scarce, and therefore are expensive, and therefore lead users to crime to obtain them.

IF they were legal, they would be cheap, easy to get, clean of adulterants, and there would be no crime associated with their use.



posted on Nov, 30 2009 @ 01:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amaterasu
Of course "...the highly addictive nature (coc aine, heroine, etc) that lead to crimes to quire cash to pay for drugs or the drugs themselves." It is because they are ILlegal, and therefore scarce, and therefore are expensive, and therefore lead users to crime to obtain them.

IF they were legal, they would be cheap, easy to get, clean of adulterants, and there would be no crime associated with their use.


I am curious, could you back this up? I remember reading about "Needle Park" in the Netherlands, or perhaps Switzerland. A place where all drugs were made legal for sale and use. A place that had to be closed down because of the consequences.

Still I do believe that many of these drugs are legal in the Netherlands still. could you produce evidence that in such places these drugs, when legal, do not continue to produce violence and crime?

I will do a bit of digging myself to see if your claim has merit.

Thanks for your contributions to the discussion all the same.



posted on Nov, 30 2009 @ 01:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by 27jd
...Alcohol, as you've already pointed out, is FAR worse in every way. Any one of us, at any time, can be killed by a drunk driver. People who use marijuana usually prefer to stay at home, away from everybody else.


Actually, in a wide array of tests done with experienced users, pitted against "sober" people, the experienced users of marijuana scored marginally BETTER on driving tests than did sober people.

Statistically an experienced user and a sober person are considered to be equal as the slightly better scores of the users were considered statistically insignificant.

Now an inexperienced marijuana user may have issues at the wheel of a vehicle. But mostly, users do just fine on the road (and hundreds of thousands drive daily under the influence with no greater issues than sober individuals).



posted on Nov, 30 2009 @ 01:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Animal
 



I am on a public computer and must take my leave for the moment, but I recommend checking out MPP.org and stopthedrugwar.org (if I remember them correctly...).

I will do what I can when I have access again.



posted on Nov, 30 2009 @ 01:52 PM
link   
I agree with Animal in regards to harder substances. I don't believe users should face criminal charges, but some of those substances have far too dramatic of an effect on people, and if readily available would probably increase alot of problems for society. The psychosis that drugs like meth, and even coc aine after a long binge, often causes represents a danger to society as a whole, and that is my gauge on whether something should be readily available or not. When you've been up for 3 days straight and continue pumping amphetamines into your body, you lose control of yourself and can become paranoid and delusional. A father not too long ago here in AZ, cut his own sons head off because he thought he was the devil.

That's one of the roadblocks with legalization of mj, so many people think that all other drugs should be included, regardless of the impact on society. That hinders the general concensus. Any level headed person, who's seen it with their own eyes, knows how harmful some of those other substances are.

[edit on 30-11-2009 by 27jd]



posted on Nov, 30 2009 @ 01:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Amaterasu
 


I don't doubt that at all. Mj can enhance concentration in experienced users, and cut down on hasty reactions. Unlike alcohol, it doesn't reduce your depth perception, etc. I was just saying that for the most part, they would rather stay home anyway, lol.



posted on Dec, 5 2009 @ 05:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by 27jd
The psychosis that drugs like meth, and even coc aine after a long binge, often causes represents a danger to society as a whole, and that is my gauge on whether something should be readily available or not. When you've been up for 3 days straight and continue pumping amphetamines into your body, you lose control of yourself and can become paranoid and delusional. A father not too long ago here in AZ, cut his own sons head off because he thought he was the devil.

[edit on 30-11-2009 by 27jd]


I hold RELIGION more to blame for this than any drug.
I mean if you believe in imaginary friends when sober that's bad enough and sleep deprivation caused more of that than the drugs did.

So should we criminalize lack of sleep(which DOES cause hallucinations,i know I've had them) or religion(which makes people believe STUPID CRAP like devils that need beheading)?



posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 08:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by the_grand_pooh-bah
So should we criminalize lack of sleep(which DOES cause hallucinations,i know I've had them) or religion(which makes people believe STUPID CRAP like devils that need beheading)?


The devil was probably just that guys personal fear. In the absence of that fear, his paranoia probably would have been focused on his son being an DEA informant, etc. And i know how sleep deprivation causes hallucinations, the difference between a tweeker and an insomniac is that the tweeker is pumping very powerful stimulants into their sleep deprived bodies, effectively spiking their adrenaline and also amplifying paranoia. If you have any experience with meth, you know the difference. Insomniacs are usually miserable and exhausted, not hyper paranoid and unable to sit still. Also, very few insomniacs have it to a point where they go three days straight without sleep, they usually pull a few hours a night, which still sucks but it's better than nothing at all.

Like i said before though, users should not be punished, i just don't personally believe those types of drugs should be readily available. Their just too addictive, and too debilatating not to cause a huge drain on society as a whole, IMO. I understand the concept of personal responsibility, but it's not just the user that is affected, when you add cars, guns, etc. to the mix, the paranoia and violence those hard drugs cause potentially endangers all of us. If you've seen the affects of meth, you know it's not reefer madness-like propaganda.

I'm really not trying to sound like some anti-drug prude or anything. Meth really does cause misery and usually the user destroys their life within a month or two, i've seen it so many times personally. But if the people voted, and their collective choice was to legalize everything, i would accept that. This is just my personal opinion.

[edit on 6-12-2009 by 27jd]



posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 02:59 PM
link   
 




 



new topics

top topics



 
12

log in

join