WA Police dogs fighting the war on drugs – Perth Now

THEYRE the sharp-nosed members of the WA Police doing a job that humans cant in the war on drugs.

The canine detectors are some of polices most valuable crime-fighting tools, able to sniff explosives and drugs even in tiny traces.

Its a skill set that keeps them busy, with drug and explosives detection dogs involved in 855 searches, or roughly 70 a month, in the past year.

In that time, the team of 16 dogs 14 trained to detect drugs and two for explosives with their 10 handlers have uncovered 1.5kg of methamphetamine, up to 30kg of cannabis and more than $1 million in cash.

PerthNow was this week invited to see how these super-sensory detectors stay ahead of the pack.

As part of ongoing training to upskill the canines, Titan, a 4-year-old Labrador, was taken through his paces by handler Sen. Const. Kiera Redden at the vacant and run-down East Perth Watch House building and successfully found the methamphetamine and ecstasy stashed in various hiding spots. His reward was his favourite chew toy rolled up towels.

Sgt Nick Berragan, patrol and deployment supervisor at mounted and canine operations, said people kept coming up with ingenious methods to try to mask the smell of drugs in a bid to fool the dogs but the animals werent beaten by that.

The dogs, trained in either active or passive alerts, could filter smells to detect drugs through other odours.

For example, at the recent Groovin the Moo music festival in Bunbury a sniffer dog managed to detect ecstasy pills which had been wrapped in plastic, placed inside a metal canister and inserted into a lemon.

They find drugs when theres no other way they would be found. They find them in underground safes, underground sea containers that have been buried, Sgt Berragan said.

Quite simply (many) drugs wouldnt be found if we didnt have the dogs.

Sgt Berragan said the old watch house was an ideal training ground because the furniture, equipment and distracting odours helped replicate real-life obstacles.

In a change-up, he said the detection dogs, the vast majority being Labradors, were being socialised more with other people and animals to ensure they worked better in crowded environments.

Police are reviving the practice of having dual-purpose dogs, capable of general purpose and detection work.

The first recruit is 14-month-old Malinois, Maygar, expected to be posted to Port Hedland soon.

Read the rest here:

WA Police dogs fighting the war on drugs - Perth Now

GPH, MILF sign protocol on cooperation and coordination in war … – Minda News

DAVAO CITY (MindaNews / 01 July) The government and Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) signed a protocol Friday that sets the cooperation and coordination mechanisms in addressing the drug problem in the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) and some parts in the Davao region which has MILF presence.

During the 4th Consultative Meeting to Address Drugs, Criminality and Corruption Friday at the Hotel Elena, Catalino Uy, OIC Secretary of the Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG) said the signing of the protocol between the two parties is a manifestation of a year-long series of meetings on how both parties can work together in clearing the Bangsamoro communities of drugs.

On July 12 last year, the government and the MILF signed a two-page Agreement of Cooperation and Coordination between the Coordinating Committee on the Cessation of Hostilities (CCCH) and the Ad Hoc Joint Action Group (AHJAG) of the government (GPH) and MILF in the Campaign against illegal drugs in MILF-Affected Areas.

After the signing last year, Director General Isidro Lapena, chief of the Philippine Drug Enforcement agency (PDEA) said there will be more meetings with the MILF to finetune the MILFs participation in the war on drugs.

Cuy said the GPH and MILF acknowledged the enormity of the drug problem in the country and that the areas controlled by the MILF are not exempted.

He said the 15-page Protocol of Cooperation on Anti-Illegal Drug Operations and related Activities in MILF Areas / Communities will provide procedures and integrate efforts of both parties during anti-illegal drug operations.

The protocol notes that the MILF recognized the ill effects of illegal drugs and the rampant trading of shabu in the Bangsamoro and declared the use, sale and proliferation of shabu as haram and prohibited in Islam.

It said the protocol applies to anti-illegal drug operations and other related anti-illegal drug efforts that will be conducted jointly by the government and MILF forces in the Bangsamoro and some parts in the Davao region which has MILF presence.

It also said the protocol aims to integrate efforts, provide procedures and clearly define the roles of GPH and MILF in the conduct of anti-illegal drug operations and related activities in MILF areas through ceasefire agreement with the end goal of filing drug cases against arrested drug personalities.

The protocol adopts the ceasefire mechanisms of the government and MILF. The protocol states that government agencies that will conduct anti-illegal drug operations in MILF areas shall inform not less than 24 hours prior to the conduct of anti-illegal drug operations, the GPH-AHJAG (government-Ad Hoc Joint Action Group).

The Joint AHJAG shall then inform the GPH-MILF CCCH (Coordinating Committee on the Cessation of Hostilities) in order to avoid misencounter between the GPH and MILF forces.

The protocol also provides, among others, the general guidelines, operational procedures, and implementation of search warrant.

July 12, 2016 Agreement of Cooperation and Coordination On July 12 last year, the CCCH and AHJAG of the government and MILF signed a two-page Agreement of Cooperation and Coordination between the GPH and MILF CCCH and AHJAG on the Campaign against illegal drugs in MILF-Affected Areas.

The agreement provides that in the conduct of anti-illegal drug operations, all existing protocols under RA 9165 or the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002 and all relevant agreements between the GPH and the MILF shall apply, that the PDEA and anti-drug units of the Armed Forces of the Philippines, Philippine National Police, National Bureau of Investigation, Bureau of Customs and Bureau of Immigration and Deportation shall coordinate with the AHJAG and CCCH.

It also involves information exchange/sharing which includes but is not limited to the submission of the MILF of a list of drug personalities identified in its area subject to validation of the law enforcement agencies.

The agreement also provides that the MILF can conduct information drive on the ill effects of illegal drugs in their areas as part of its demand reduction activities and that the drive may be conducted in coordination with the barangay, municipal, city or provincial anti-drug abuse councils.

Before Dutertes anti-illegal drugs campaign, the MILF launched its own campaign in late 2015. An editorial posted on the MILF website on November 17, 2015, shortly after the MILF declared its war on drugs said shabu (metamphetamine hydrochloride) is the enemy of all and, therefore, should be fought together. A common enemy calls for a united front approach.

Smooth sailing

Police Chief Supt. Pierre Bucsit, chair of the GPH-AHJAG, on Friday said he believes coordination between the police and the MILF will become smooth sailing with the signing of the protocol.

He noted the difficulty of the government forces in holding operations inside the Bangsamoro communities before.

The coordination will be smooth sailing when it comes to law enforcement operations. Today is another milestone between government and MILF, he said.

GPH-CCH chair Brig. Gen. Earl Baliao said he saw the need for the two parties to collaborate and coordinate efforts for us to be able to further fast-track our cooperation against illegal drugs.

He said the protocol will allow proper coordination with their MILF counterparts.

We do not have problem before with the conduct of anti-illegal drugs in other areas, but many difficulties in MILF-controlled areas, sometimes the coordination allows our target to get out from the areas, thats why, we believe with the protocol, we will be able to efficiently operate with coordination and support from MILF in their controlled areas, he said.

Lawyer Abdul Dataya, chair of the MILF AHJAG said governments coordination with the MILF will be advantageous because we know the ground.

The MILF will assist in trying to prevent possible misencounters. Meron kaming sariling grupo (we have our own group) who will coordinate with the Armed Forces (of the Philippines), he said.

Dataya said they recommended the addition of PDEA in the efforts against illegal drugs since they are operating in the ARMM and other known MILF areas in some parts of Davao Region.

Under the general guidelines, all planned operations by government agencies shall have anti-illegal drug coordination from PDEA in compliance with the existing rules and regulations as mandated by the Republic Act 9165,

It added the government anti-illegal drug operations in MILF area, whether initiated by the Armed Forces of the Philippines or the Philippine National Police and other law enforcement agencies shall be coordinated with the MILF-AHJAG and CCCH and be supervised by the PDEA to ensure the proper implementation of RA 9165.

It also ensures that respect for human rights will be observed at all time when handling arrested or surrendered drug personalities.

Anti-illegal drug operations by the MILF will be conducted jointly with the PDEA through the ceasefire mechanism.

Also, the protocol provides that a regular seminar/workshop on RA 9165, criminal procedures, handling of drug evidence and other related topics on anti-illegal drugs will be conducted among MILF members and training of the madrasah teachers on anti-illegal drugs will be conducted to ensure successful prosecution of drug cases. (Antonio L. Colina IV / MindaNews)

comments

Read the original here:

GPH, MILF sign protocol on cooperation and coordination in war ... - Minda News

Don Winslow has a best seller, slams Trump’s ‘War on Drugs’ – USA TODAY

'The Force' by Don Winslow(Photo: William Morrow)

Heres a look at whats new on USA TODAYs Best-Selling Books list

'The Force' is with him: Riding strong reviews and movie buzz, Don Winslow has his highest debut ever as his new cop novel, The Force (William Morrow), lands at No. 17. (The full list will be published on Thursday.)

Oh yeah, there was also that full-page ad (and tweet) in Sundays New York Times, in which Winslow blasted President Trump and Attorney General Jeff Sessions for wanting to drag us back into one of the most catastrophic social policies in this nations history: #TheWaronDrugs.

As Winslow points out in his lengthy open letter, he spent two decades researching and writing about the failed War on Drugs in his novels The Power of the Dog and The Cartel. (Winslow had his previous best showing on the list withThe Cartel, which peakedat No. 54 in 2015.)

Sessionshas directed federal prosecutors to charge defendants with the most serious "provable"crimes that carry the stiffest penalties, a reversal of President Obama's more lenient policy toward drug offenders.

So far, Trump has not tweeted a response or taken out his own full-page ad.

Winslow tells USA TODAY that he placed the ad at his own expense because "I feel so strongly that this (drug) policy is wrong. (It) seeks to expand a disastrous policy that has ripped our nation apart."

As for a response from the White House, he says: "After writing about the drug wars for two decades I have developed a number of high-ranking officials as sources. I have heard from so many people cops, congressmen, senators, governors that agree with my position but fear saying so publicly. I have not heard a formal response from the White House but I do know for a fact that Attorney General Sessions and Trump were shown the ad."

The Force is about a good NYPD cop who becomes corrupt. In a **** (out of four stars) reviewfor USA TODAY, Don Oldenburg called the novel intoxicating" and "riveting.

Ridley Scott has bought the film rights to The Force (with James Mangold set to direct) and Scott is directing an adaptation of The Cartel, based on the escapades of (now incarcerated) Mexican drug lord Joaquin "El Chapo" Guzman.

In the ad, Winslow also criticized the Trump administrations gun-control policy and plugged his new book: My most recent novel, The Force, deals with the NYPD's struggle against drugs and guns. My research shows that most of the weapons used in gang violence originate in states that have weak gun laws and unrestricted gun shows.

Winslow is in the midst of a national book tour.

Read or Share this story: https://usat.ly/2tkQ8qL

Go here to see the original:

Don Winslow has a best seller, slams Trump's 'War on Drugs' - USA TODAY

War on terror took backseat as Duterte focused on drug war … – Inquirer.net

Editors Note: Starting June 25, the Inquirer will run on its print, online, and social media platforms a series of stories, reports and commentaries on the socioeconomic impact positive and negative that President Duterte has made in his first year in office. The articles will focus on how the former Davao City mayor has coped with the challenges of the presidency in five major areas that Filipinos consider most important in their lives: peace and order, traffic, economy, governance and foreign policy. This evaluation of the administrations achievements and shortcomings will take into account what Mr. Duterte had promised to do during last years presidential campaign, his June 30 inaugural speech and his July 25 State of the Nation Address.

In this picture taken June 29, 2017 shows smokes billows inside Malawi City as the military launched fresh airstrikes on controlled positions of Islamic State-inspired terrorists as fighting rages for 36 days now.

Distraught housewife Camalia Bauntos husband is trapped in their house in Marawi City and she is pinning her hopes of being reunited with him on President Dutertes vow to crush a small band of Islamic State (IS)-linked terrorists who have brought destruction to the once proud Muslim city in Mindanao.

The Baunto couple, along with their extended family, voted for Mr. Duterte in 2016, helping to propel the former Davao City mayor to the countrys top government post on a promise to bring peace and order to a region long ravaged by armed conflict.

But that promise has been overtaken by deadly events. Abu Sayyaf gunmen, the Maute group and their foreign allies, who have all pledged allegiance to IS, launched a daring raid on Marawi on May 23.

After more than a month of fighting, the death toll has surpassed 400303 IS gunmen, 75 soldiers and police, and 44 civilians, according to military figures.

An estimated 200 residents, including Bauntos husband Nixon, are believed to be held hostage by the gunmen or trapped in the fighting that has transformed the once-vibrant city into a desolate landscape of bombed-out buildings resembling war-torn Aleppo in Syria.

I am losing hope, Baunto told the Inquirer. I am begging the President to rescue him. Is this the peace he had promised us?

Martial law

In reaction to the siege, Mr. Duterte declared martial law in the entire Mindanao while he was on a visit to Russia with all his top defense and security officials and cut short his trip to return home.

The President said he would not allow IS to gain a foothold in the Philippines.

The siege of Marawi was triggered by an attempt by security forces to arrest Isnilon Hapilon, the leader of an Abu Sayyaf faction who had been appointed by IS emir, or leader, in Southeast Asia.

The Armys 1st Infantry Division spokesperson, Lt. Col. Jo-Ar Herrera, said at first that Hapilon was backed by 15 gunmen, but as the firefight escalated, hundreds of others emerged from their hideouts around the city, engaging the surprised troops.

Miscalculation

Analysts said that since Mr. Duterte assumed office last year, his administration appeared to have focused much of its resources into carrying out a war on drugs, which had left at least 10,000 suspected drug users, dealers and traffickers dead.

Officials have neglected the telltale signs of Islamic radicalism among a new crop of Islamists in Mindanao, analysts said.

Richard Javad Heydarian, a political analyst at De La Salle University, said the Marawi conflict puts into focus whether [Mr. Duterte] has a proper appreciation of the sheer scale of the problem in his own backyard.

Without a doubt, the siege of Marawi has been the greatest crisis for Mr. Duterte so far, despite the myriad of controversies surrounding his key policies, including the bloody war on drugs and diplomatic spats with traditional allies, Heydarian said.

We are not only talking about the prospect of a distant caliphate under the flag of Isis, but a potentially disastrous contagion of terror across his home island of Mindanao, he said, using another name for IS.

Undercut ratings

The destruction of Marawi will likely undercut his sky-high approval ratings, particularly among Moros, who initially saw him as their sole and most powerful voice in imperial Manila since the founding of [the] Philippine republic, Heydarian said.

The Marawi siege also forced the government to reassess its independent foreign policy that had seen Mr. Duterte lambast the Philippines traditional ally, the United States, in favor of Russia and China.

Defense Secretary Delfin Lorenzana, martial law implementer, has since sought help from American troops and welcomed Australian military assistance.

In many ways, it has been a sobering and heart-wrenching month for a President who sincerely cared for the people of Mindanao, yet didnt manage to fully optimize existing intelligence and security networks to anticipate, prevent and effectively contain the terrorism conundrum in his home island, Heydarian said.

Complacency

Mr. Dutertes fixation on the war on drugs had overshadowed the equally important war on terrorism, according to Rommel Banlaoi, head of the Philippine Institute for Peace, Violence and Terrorism Research, which has been advising the defense establishment on threat groups.

The fighting in Marawi was an outcome of continued downplaying of threats from pro-IS groups, Banlaoi said.

This government attitude of downplaying the threat resulted in unintended complacency in gathering actionable intelligence information necessary for the development of an effective preemptive counter-terrorism plan, he said.

The battle in Marawi City could have been prevented had government forces seriously exercised due diligence in gathering reliable and accurate intelligence information while enemy forces were still in [the] inception stage, Banlaoi said.

Military officials have strongly denied that there had been a failure of intelligence on IS plans in Marawi.

Long fight

On Tuesday, the President said he wanted to finish the fighting soon and saw no satisfaction even in winning it.

I already had the complete picture and I knew that it would be a long fight, he said at the Eid al-Fitr celebration in Malacaang.

In his report to Congress on the martial law declaration, Mr. Duterte said the Maute group, which had 253 men by late 2016, was bent on turning all of Mindanao into an IS province. As much as 75 percent of Marawi had been infiltrated by the Maute group and the Abu Sayyaf, his report said.

Solicitor General Jose Calida said martial law was justified because of the festering rebellion of the Maute group, which had allied with Hapilons Abu Sayyaf faction and pledged allegiance to IS.

Calida said the more dangerous Maute group had transmogrified into an invasion force of foreign terrorists to launch attacks in the Philippines if its members could not travel to Syria to fight alongside IS.

Despite shelling and bombing runs, the terrorists remain well-entrenched in a small area in the city, posting snipers at strategic points in Marawi to prevent the advance of troops more accustomed to jungle warfare than urban fighting.

The Marawi siege has alarmed the countrys Southeast Asian neighbors.

They fear that IS is trying to set up a stronghold in Mindanao, which it could use as a springboard to launch attacks across the region.

Maute brothers

Mr. Duterte had earlier dismissed the Maute brothers as drug-addled former cops.

In truth, Omarkhayam Maute studied in Egypt where he embraced Islamic militancy, according to various intelligence groups.

He taught at a madrasah in Indonesia, where his wife is from, but eventually went back home to pursue his dream of establishing a state purely for Muslims in Mindanao.

His older brother, Abdullah, was more radical and inherited their father Cayamoras ideals as a former official of the Moro Islamic Liberation Front. Cayamora and wife Farhanadescribed by police as the groups financierhave been arrested separately.

The brothers had set up Daulah Islamiyah, which the police had played down as a group of small-time crooks operating near Lanaos forests.

The group grabbed national headlines in September last year when they claimed responsibility for bombing the Presidents hometown of Davao, killing 15 people.

Explore on our special anniversary site the Inquirer series of multiplatform reports and commentaries on the gains and challenges during President Duterte's first year in office. Daily content begins June 25 till July 24.

Subscribe to INQUIRER PLUS to get access to The Philippine Daily Inquirer & other 70+ titles, share up to 5 gadgets, listen to the news, download as early as 4am & share articles on social media. Call 896 6000.

Here is the original post:

War on terror took backseat as Duterte focused on drug war ... - Inquirer.net

Mental Health Of The Nation: Casualties In The War On Drugs – Bahamas Tribune

By DR MIKE NEVILLE

Before you can break out of prison you must realise that you are locked up, Unknown.

The great war on drugs! Wars cause untold devastation, death, disability both physical and mental and some people profit enormously. Drug wars are the same, death by overdose, bad reactions, murder and of course massive profits for sellers, suppliers and financiers. I am told the economy of The Bahamas benefited from the cocaine trade but the social price in addiction, crime, guns and death was always too big a price to pay. This desire to decide which are good drugs and which are bad drugs so we can fight over their use is a concept that in my humble opinion is doomed to fail.

There is a very simple fact call it a formula which helps us understand drugs all drugs have both good and bad effects.

The good effects are part of modern medicine and treat all sorts of illnesses and really save lives; the bad effects are the devastation mentioned above.

To balance my equation, we need to know if we are allergic to the drug, when even a so-called good drug can create horrendous effects. We need to know how much of the drug we are taking and the speed we are consuming it, this is called the delivery system.

A good example is aspirin, in many ways a wonder drug, used for pain, fevers, inflammation and as an anticoagulant in heart patients, it is even cheap and has no restrictions on its sale. Some people are allergic to aspirin but even if you are not, if you take too much it can burn holes in your stomach which causes bleeding and can cause death, as can a simple overdose. A wonder drug that can kill!

I talked about alcohol earlier and most of us know that drinking a bottle of cold beer slowly is totally different from drinking a bottle of rum rapidly.

Cocaine first came on the scene in the Inca culture, the leaves were chewed and a mild stimulant effect helped people work at high altitudes. Cocaine hydrochloride was isolated from the leaves in 1860 and rapidly gained a reputation as a wonder drug. It was used to increase energy, served in drinks and even injected intravenously as an adjunct to psychotherapy by Sigmund Freud himself. The ensuing addictions and paranoid psychosis put a damper on its use until the eighties when The Bahamas became the international laboratory for freebase, now known as crack. The addiction proved to be so powerful that the profiteers soon marketed it heavily in North America and then the rest of the world.

Heroin is generally regarded as the worst drug around. The very word conotates evil and certainly it creates a devastating addiction that leaves a path of destruction and death. The other side of the equation is that when working in general medicine in England, I was licensed to prescribe heroin for terminal illness and it is excellent giving good pain management whilst allowing the patient to remain mentally clear.

Cannabis, weed, pot, herb the names go on forever, not too different from the drug itself. The active ingredient tetra- hydro cannabinol breaks down into numerous active isomers which affect us differently, in effect it is more than one drug and like other drugs the effects depend on the strength and delivery system. Small doses are probably safe for most people, large doses not so safe. There is also the problem that if you happen to have the genetic make-up that makes us vulnerable to psychosis then cannabis triggers psychosis in these vulnerable people.

The great war on drugs seems to me to have been a complete failure; drugs are plentiful and relatively cheap and educational efforts seem to be failing so we are faced with a conundrum. Why not try something else? There is an old saying that the only good thing about banging your head against a brick wall is when you stop. There is a pressing need for international social research as to what happens when we change drug laws. Spain briefly legalised all drugs but drug tourism put a stop to that before true results could be evaluated. Many countries are changing their laws on cannabis use and time will tell if that is the correct way to go. Amsterdam poured money into drug education and treatment, whilst decriminalising cannabis use and granting cafes licenses to sell it. They also sent ambulances with uniformed nurses into drug affected areas where heroin addicts could get their drugs administered by the nurse free. It showed everyone that addiction was a medical problem and they really took the cool out of drugs.

I am not sure where the answer lies but as with all medical and social problems controlled international research must be the best way to find the answer.

Dr Mike Neville is a forensic psychiatrist who has practised for more than 40 years in The Bahamas, working at Sandilands, the prison and in private practice. Comments and responses to mneville@tribunemedia.net

Follow this link:

Mental Health Of The Nation: Casualties In The War On Drugs - Bahamas Tribune

The War on Drugs Places ‘Black Joy’ in the Line of Fire – AlterNet


AlterNet
The War on Drugs Places 'Black Joy' in the Line of Fire
AlterNet
These pieces will reflect on the ways in which the institutions of policing and prosecution- both driven by calls for law and order in the wake of the War on Drugs- continue to function as instruments of reinforcement for the overarching structural ...

Continue reading here:

The War on Drugs Places 'Black Joy' in the Line of Fire - AlterNet

COLUMN: Jeff Sessions’ war on drugs would continue a failed approach – Indiana Daily Student

Last week, United States Attorney General Jeff Sessions wrote in an op-ed for the Washington Post that drug trafficking is an inherently dangerous business. If you want to collect a drug debt, you cant, and dont, file a lawsuit in court. You collect it by the barrel of a gun.

He has used this thinking to resurrect the long-failed War on Drugs that goes against the growing bipartisan support for criminal justice reform. He has announced his intention to imprison more non-violent drug offenders, expand the police state, and crack down on medical marijuana users.

These things would happen in a country that already runs the largest prison system in the developed world, according to Prison Policy Initiative, and commits its penal labor, unprotected by the 13th amendment, to a life of modern slavery.

Where Sessions logic fails is his misunderstanding of the nature of black markets.

Drug trafficking is violent for the same reason liquor trafficking was violent in the Prohibition era. When markets arent protected by the states monopoly on violence, parties can afford to renege on their contracts and promises.

Illegality motivates traffickers to take enforcement into their own hands. Decriminalizing and taxing dispensaries, like what Massachusetts, Washington and Colorado have done with marijuana, undercuts the illicit market, weakening the power of criminals and reducing violence.

A revived tough on crime stance that attacks suppliers would do little to stop illicit drug consumption. Any economics teacher can tell you reducing supply in a market with inelastic demandlike the market for addictive substanceswouldnt reduce the quantity bought and consumed.

Rather, its more likely that a crackdown on suppliers would simply raise prices. Similarly, researchers continue to find that tougher penalties and longer jail time does little difference in deterring crime than lighter sentences, according to the Sentencing Project.

It would be wiser of Sessions to realize that the worst drug epidemic of our time is not marijuana, methamphetamines, or even heroin, but prescription opioids.

Over two million Americans suffer from debilitating addictions to pain relievers, which is more than meth and heroin addicts combined, according to the National Institute on Drug Abuse.

And the rate in Indiana is higher than the national average.

Perverse fiscal incentives for doctors and aggressive ad campaigns by big pharma companies have pushed opioids like Vicodin, OxyContin, and fentanyl onto millions of desperate people.

Sessions and our own state prosecutors could better spend their time taking on big pharma and the pain industry for things like false advertising, as the state legislature in Kentucky is doing, according to the Kentucky Law Journal.

A better drug policy would focus on the demand of drug consumption by supporting educational programs, supervised injections and rehabilitation.

Progressive public programs in Portugal, Canada, and the United Kingdom offer medical-grade heroin to addictswhich undercuts the black marketsupervise injection sites, and mandate the inclusion of substance abuse treatment in public insurance programs, none of which is addressed in the Republican health care proposals, according to Mother Jones.

We could go a long way to a healthier, more secure public by transitioning opioid-based painkillers to cannabinoids and rewriting the fiscal incentives that lead doctors to over-prescribe, according to the Washington Post.

To be clear, I support a drug policy that reduces dependency, violent crime and minimizes risks to public health.

Sessions, however, has failed to offer policies that achieve these goals. Rather, it seems that people like him sacrifice the well-being of vulnerable Americans on the altar of wishful thinking.

Its time for change.

Like what you are reading? Support independent, award-winning college journalism on this site. Donate here.

See original here:

COLUMN: Jeff Sessions' war on drugs would continue a failed approach - Indiana Daily Student

Gregory County finding success in war on drugs – Daily Republic

Judge Bobbi Rank has sat behind the bench in Gregory, Tripp, Todd and Bennett counties since her appointment in October. She joins the Sixth Judicial Circuit at an interesting time, as charges of possession and ingestion of Schedule I and II drugs, which include methamphetamine, plummet in one of her counties and skyrocket in another.

In Gregory County, 22 charges of possession or ingestion of Schedule I and II drugs were filed in 2015, according to the Unified Judicial System. The next year, only 20 charges were filed.

But so far this year, there have only been four charges filed, according to UJS.

At that rate, Gregory County would see an estimated 8.44 drug charges, a nearly 62 percent reduction in only two years.

"Anytime we've got less drug crimes, that's beneficial to society," Rank said.

Scott Anshutz, Mayor of Gregory, the largest town in Gregory County with about 1,300 people, credited the decline to county and city law enforcement, even though every officer in Gregory's three-person department was hired in 2016.

"The newer generation versus us older guys probably know what to look for," Anshutz said.

The three officers are 31 years old or younger, according to Gregory Chief of Police Travis DeBuhr, and two had no prior law enforcement experience. But DeBuhr said his officers have been quick to learn, and they know what to look for.

"I think just working with the other departments and putting the hard work into it is the only way you can really get it done, especially with the new guys, trying to get them caught up on it," DeBuhr said.

The reduction in drug crimes is even more impressive compared to the state average. In South Dakota, possession and ingestion charges rose more than 25 percent from 2015 to 2016, from 7,898 to 9,906. With 4,751 charges filed so far this year, the state is on pace to break 10,000 total charges.

But despite the reduction in one county, Rank said drug crimes still make up the bulk of her caseload. In Tripp County, Schedule I and II drug charges rose 178 percent in 2016, topping out at 64 charges. It's on pace to drop back down, but this year may still outpace the 2015 total.

The greatest rise in Rank's counties comes in Bennett. There were 12 charges filed in that county in 2015, but they more than doubled the next year and have continued to grow exponentially. So far in 2017, there have already been 34 charges filed, putting the county on pace to file more than 70 possession and ingestion charges, which would be a nearly 498 percent increase in two years.

Rank doesn't know why drug crime is increasing there, but she said judges across the state are staying busy with drug charges, and she was prepared to handle any situation after applying to take now-retired Judge Kathleen Trandahl's place.

"I think when you apply to be a judge, you just, you know as part of your application that you can take any sort of case," Rank said.

But even with drug crimes and a murder case in the area, Rank, who grew up near Winner, is happy to bring her family back to Tripp County.

Read more:

Gregory County finding success in war on drugs - Daily Republic

PopPolitics: ‘The Force’ Author Don Winslow on the ‘Insanity’ of Trump’s Return to a War on Drugs (Listen) – Variety

Don Winslows new epic novel The Force centers on NYPD detective sergeant Denny Malone, who leads an elite unit, waging a war on drugs, gangs and guns. Malone is both effective and corrupt, the kind of figure that raises moral questions of when the ends justify the means.

Fox already has snatched up the rights to the novel, published last week, with James Mangold directing and David Mamet adapting the book into a screenplay.

In an interview with Varietys PopPolitics on SiriusXM, Winslow talks about how his own experience, working as a private detective in New York in the 70s, inspired this latest work, as well as how hes long had the idea of centering one of his novels in the city.

The French Connection I can remember to this moment sitting in a big theater on Broadway in Times Square watching that film, and thinking, Man, this is so exciting, and gritty and vivid. Wouldnt it be great if some day I could make my living telling stories like this?' Winslow says.

The Force is set in the present day, against a backdrop of politically charged issues over police use of force and the war on drugs.

Winslow is particularly outspoken about the Trump administrations approach to the drug war, having taken out a full-page ad in the New York Times on Monday in which he says that the president wants to drag us back into one of the most catastrophic social policies in this nations history.

What Mr. Trump and Mr. Sessions have vocalized lately is a return to the worst days of the war on drugs, in terms of maximum sentences, arresting again for marijuana, and pushing for heavy sentences there, Winslow says. You would think that 50 years of futility, 50 years of policies that have only made things worse, you try something different.

Listen below:

Winslow talks about his process of researching The Force, including interviews and conversations with cops, combing through court records and studying policing textbooks. After his success in writing on the Mexican drug war in novels such as The Cartel, Winslow as said that cops are harder to penetrate that drug cartels.

They are more insular. Its a more protective kind of society, he says. I cant tell you how many cops told me, I only talk to other cops. Only other cops can understand me. And both professionally and personally, they have a longstanding habit of keeping things close, keeping things tight. Drug traffickers, particularly the ones you interview in prison, dont have a lot to lose, and are more amenable to talking and telling stories.

But Winslow says that once he established trust with NYPD officers, then you could believe everything that they said. You could go deep with them in ways you never could with drug traffickers.

Listen below:

Coal Culture

Michael Bonfiglio, director of the documentary From the Ashes, talks about the making of his project, which features interviews with displaced coal miners and others who are grappling with the health and environmental impacts of the 19th century energy source.

While President Trump decided to pull out of the Paris climate accords because of his belief that it would harm coal industry jobs, From the Ashes shows how the industry is still unlikely to see a rebound in jobs, given the mechanization of the business.

The coal industry is not a huge employer, and replacing the jobs that the coal industry provides is not an undaunting task at all, Bonfiglio says.

From the Ashes debuted on National Geographic on Sunday, but is available for free on streaming sites like YouTube, Hulu and Amazon until next Monday.

Listen below:

PopPolitics, hosted by Varietys Ted Johnson, airs from 2-3 p.m. ET/11-noon PT on SiriusXMs political channel POTUS. It also is available on demand.

Link:

PopPolitics: 'The Force' Author Don Winslow on the 'Insanity' of Trump's Return to a War on Drugs (Listen) - Variety

Sally Yates Condemns Jeff Sessions for Reinstating Harsh Low-Level Drug Sentences – TIME

Former Acting Attorney General Sally Yates has publicly criticized Attorney General Jeff Sessions for reinstating harsh mandatory minimum drug sentences aimed at curbing violent crime throughout the U.S.

In a Washington Post op-ed titled "Making America Scared Again Won't Make Us Safer" published Friday, Yates argued that incarcerating low-level drug couriers is counterproductive, expensive and damaging to American communities.

"Not only are violent crime rates still at historic lows nearly half of what they were when I became a federal prosecutor in 1989 but there is also no evidence that the increase in violent crime some cities have experienced is the result of drug offenders not serving enough time in prison," Yates wrote.

"Every dollar spent imprisoning a low-level nonviolent drug offender for longer than necessary is a dollar we dont have to investigate and prosecute serious threats, from child predators to terrorists," Yates continued. "Its a dollar we dont have to support state and local law enforcement for cops on the street, who are the first lines of defense against violent crime. And its a dollar we dont have for crime prevention or recidivism reduction within our prison system, essential components of building safe communities."

Last month, Sessions in a memorandum ordered federal prosecutors nationwide to pursue the "most serious, readily provable offense" in drug cases.

"It is a core principle that prosecutors should charge and pursue the most serious, readily provable offense," he wrote at the time.

Many were quick to label the directive as the new War on Drugs. Yates in her op-ed encouraged lawmakers to consider the "human costs" of the initiative.

"More than 2 million children are growing up with a parent behind bars, including 1 in 9 African American children," she wrote. "Huge numbers of Americans are being housed in prisons far from their home communities, creating precisely the sort of community instability where violent crime takes root."

Yates said that throughout her career as a prosecutor at the Justice Department, she charged high-level, international narcotics traffickers and had "no hesitation" asking judges to impose long prison sentences.

"While there is always room to debate the most effective approach to criminal justice, that debate should be based on facts, not fear. Its time to move past the campaign-style rhetoric of being 'tough' or 'soft' on crime," she concluded.

Read more here:

Sally Yates Condemns Jeff Sessions for Reinstating Harsh Low-Level Drug Sentences - TIME

Koch network to Trump administration: You are never going to win the war on drugs. Drugs won. – The Denver Post

COLORADO SPRINGS The Trump administrations tough talk on marijuana is creating an unusual alliance: pot smokers and the conservative Koch political network.

Mark Holden, one of the influential networks top leaders, decried President Donald Trumps administration for returning to the harsh sentencing era of the war on drugs.

You are never going to win the war on drugs. Drugs won, he told reporters as the network opened a three-day retreat Saturday at The Broadmoor resort in Colorado Springs.

Attorney General Jeff Sessions directive to re-evaluate marijuana policies is a particular problem. Even though it remains a federal crime to possess and use marijuana, he said, its legal in a number of states, so we have to come to grips with that somehow.

Earlier this month, Sessions asked Congress to repeal federal protections for medical marijuana, citing a historic drug epidemic related to opiates. The 2014 policy prohibits the Justice Department from using federal dollars to block states from legalizing the use, distribution, possession or cultivation of medical marijuana.

When it comes to medical marijuana, Holden argued it should be off-limits to a federal law enforcement crackdown.

Holden, the general counsel for Koch Industries who leads a network-backed effort to address overcriminalization and criminal justice reform, was cautious about reading too much into his stance.

Im not here to say our position is legalize drugs or anything else, he said, adding: But I dont think that we should criminalize those types of things and we should let the states decide.

The approach fits with the conservative philosophies advanced by Charles and David Koch as part of their policy and political work. Holden suggested Sessions position represents a failed big government top-down approach.

Its based on fear and emotion in my opinion, he added.

Follow this link:

Koch network to Trump administration: You are never going to win the war on drugs. Drugs won. - The Denver Post

One year on: Has the Punisher fixed the crime? – NEWS.com.au

President Rodrigo 'The Punisher' Duterte has a controversial, deadly take on stamping out drug crimes in the Philippines.

Philippine's President Rodrigo Duterte. Picture: AFP Photo/Noel Celis

LAUNCHED a year ago, Philippine President Rodrigo Dutertes brutal war on drugs has resulted in thousands of deaths, yet the street price of crystal methamphetamine in Manila has fallen and surveys show Filipinos are as anxious as ever about crime.

Duterte took power on June 30 last year, vowing to halt the drug abuse and lawlessness he saw as symptoms of virulent social disease.

Thanks to his campaign, government officials say, crime has dropped, thousands of drug dealers are behind bars, a million users have registered for treatment, and future generations of Filipinos are being protected from the scourge of drugs.

There are thousands of people who are being killed, yes, said Oscar Albayalde, Metro Manilas police chief told Reuters. But there are millions who live, see?

A growing chorus of critics, however, including human rights activists, lawyers and the countrys influential Catholic Church, dispute the authorities claims of success.

They say police have summarily executed drug suspects with impunity, terrorising poorer communities and exacerbating the very lawlessness they were meant to tackle.

This president behaves as if he is above the law that he is the law, wrote Amado Picardal, an outspoken Filipino priest, in a recent article for a Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines publication. He has ignored the rule of law and human rights.

The drug wars exact death toll is hotly disputed, with critics saying the toll is far above the 5,000 that police have identified as either drug-related killings, or suspects shot dead during police operations.

Most victims are small-time users and dealers, while the masterminds behind the lucrative drug trade are largely unknown and at large, say critics of Dutertes ruthless methods.

If the strategy was working the laws of economics suggest the price of crystal meth, the highly addictive drug also known as shabu, should be rising as less supply hits the streets.

But the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agencys own data suggests shabu has become even cheaper in Manila.

Drug suspects are rounded up during an anti-illegal drugs operation at an informal settlers community at the Manila Islamic Center in Manila on October 7, 2016. Picture: AFP Photo/Noel CelisSource:AFP

Shanty dwellers living inside the cemetery look at bodies being buried on January 24, 2017 in Manila, Philippines. Many bodies of victims of extrajudicial killings lay unclaimed in a morgue as funerals have had to deal with an upsurge in fatalities from the drug war. Picture: Getty Images/Dondi TawataoSource:Getty Images

In July 2016, a gram of shabu cost 1,200-11,000 pesos (A$88-$800), according to agencys figures. Last month, a gram cost 1,000-15,000 pesos ($73-$1100), it said.

The wide ranges reflect swings in availability and sharp regional variations. Officials say Manilas street prices are at the lowest end of the range. And that has come down, albeit by just a few dollars.

If prices have fallen, its an indication that enforcement actions have not been effective, said Gloria Lai of the International Drug Policy Consortium, a global network of non-governmental groups focused on narcotics.

The problem is, according to Derrick Carreon, the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agencys spokesman, that while nine domestic drug labs have been busted, shabu smuggled in from overseas has filled the market gap.

Demand needs to be addressed because there are still drug smugglers, Carreon said.

While smuggled shabu has kept the price down in the capital, the official data shows the price has gone up in the already substantially more expensive far-flung regions, like the insurgency-racked southern island of Mindanao.

Duterte declared martial law in Mindanao last month after militants inspired by Islamic State stormed Marawi City, and the armys failure to retake the city quickly has dented the presidents image as a law-and-order president.

A woman hugs her husband, next to a placard which reads, I'm a pusher, who was shot dead by an unidentified gunman in Manila on July 23, 2016. Picture: AFP Photo/Noel CelisSource:AFP

An alleged drug dealer and victim of a summary execution lies dead on a main thoroughfare on July 23, 2016 in Manila, Philippines. The victim was an alleged drug peddler, a claim disputed by his wife. Picture: Getty Images/Dondi TawataoSource:Getty Images

AFRAID OF THE DARK

Surveys by Social Weather Stations (SWS), a leading Manila pollster, reveal a public broadly supportive of Dutertes anti-drug campaign, but troubled by its methods and dubious about its effectiveness.

SWS surveys in each of the first three quarters of Dutertes rule showed a very high satisfaction with the anti-drug campaign, said Leo Laroza, a senior SWS researcher.

In the most recent survey, published on April, 92 per cent said it was important that drug suspects be captured alive.

Respondents also reported a 6.3 per cent rise in street robberies and break-ins. More than half of those polled said they were afraid to venture out at night, a proportion that had barely changed since the drug war began, said Laroza.

People still have this fear when it comes to their neighbourhoods, he said. It has not gone down.

Public and police perceptions of crime levels seem to diverge.

The number of crimes committed in the first nine months of Dutertes rule has dropped by 30 per cent, according to police statistics cited by the presidents communications team.

Albayalde, the capitals police chief, said people, particularly in Manila, felt safer now, especially due to a crackdown on drug users who he said commit most of the crime.

In the first 11 months of Dutertes rule, police say 3,155 suspects were shot dead in anti-drug operations. Critics maintain that many of them were summarily executed.

Police say they have investigated a further 2,000 drug-related killings, and have yet to identify a motive in at least another 7,000 murders and homicides.

Human rights monitors believe many of these victims were killed by undercover police or their paid vigilantes, a charge the police deny.

For residents of Navotas fishport, a warren of shacks near Manilas docks, the body count is too high. There were nine killings in a single night in Navotas earlier this month, according to local media.

In mid-May, said resident Mary Joy Royo, a dozen gunmen arrived on motorbikes and abducted her mother and stepfather. Their corpses were found later with execution-style gunshots to the head and torso.

They should be targeting the drug lords, Royo told Reuters. The victims of the drug war are the poor people.

The dead body of Valien Mendoza, a suspected drug dealer, gunned down by unidentified assailants in Manila. Picture: AFP Photo/Noel CelisSource:AFP

Maria Espinosa crying outside the funeral parlour where the body of her dead 16-year-old son, Sonny Espinosa, was taken in Manila. Picture: AFP Photo/Noel CelisSource:AFP

RIPPLE EFFECT

As the death toll has risen, so has domestic and international outrage.

In October, the Hague-based International Criminal Court said it could investigate the killings if they were committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack against a civilian population.

Police operations were halted for much of February after it emerged that anti-drug police abducted and killed a South Korean businessman last year, but the outcry over the rising body count has rarely slowed the killing or led to prosecutions.

The Philippine Commission on Human Rights is investigating 680 drug-war killings.

In this country the basic problem is impunity, Chito Gascon, the commissions chairman, said. No one is ever held to account for the worst violations. Ever.

Police chief Albayalde says that the forces Internal Affairs Service (IAS) investigates all allegations of abuse by his officers.

We do not tolerate senseless killings, he said. We do not just kill anybody.

IAS told Reuters it had investigated 1,912 drug-related cases and recommended 159 officers for dismissal due to misconduct during anti-drug operations, although it didnt know whether any had yet been dismissed.

Earlier this month, 19 police officers charged with murdering two drug suspects in their jail cell in November were released on bail and now face trial for the lesser crime of homicide.

Duterte, who has repeatedly urged police to kill drug suspects, had already vowed to pardon the officers if they were convicted.

You have a head of state who says, Kill, kill, kill, a head of state who says, Ive got your back, said CHRs Gascon. That has a ripple effect.

Marawi, on the southern island of Mindanao,has become the latest victim of Islamic State linked attacks beyond the Middle East. Since declaring martial law on the city, Philippines President Rodrigo Duterte has apologised for the military offensive that has left Marawi in ruins.

Read more:

One year on: Has the Punisher fixed the crime? - NEWS.com.au

War on drugs is an abject failure – Columbia Daily Tribune

By Renee Hoagenson

Hello, my name is Renee Hoagenson, candidate for the office of United States House of Representatives in the November 2018 elections.

On June 15 my campaign held a town hall in Columbia, during which many questions were asked covering a variety of subjects. There were several questions regarding the addiction epidemic and the related subject of incarceration.

In the Friday Tribune article covering this event, I am quoted as saying that my personal opinion is that most drugs should be legal so that addiction could be addressed in the open. This quote is presented as my platform in my bid for Congress. My opponents reply indicated that I advocate the use of drugs by children in schools.

First, let me be clear that no child should ever be given any recreational drugs or alcohol. This insinuation by Vicky Hartzlers office is false and opportunistic. This sort of rhetoric is damaging to the public discussion and stands in the path of making meaningful progress in combatting addiction in our country.

So what is the nature of this problem and what can be done?

Addiction is a chronic brain disorder. It is a health issue. Much research has been conducted on this issue shedding light on the physiological processes that happen in an addicts body and brain. We know, for instance, that 95 percent of addiction begins during adolescence. Some people are more vulnerable to addiction due to predispositions that include genetics, emotional trauma and mental illness.

We also know that there is treatment available that is effective in restoring an alcoholic or addicts mental health. Sometimes this treatment is effective the first time, sometimes it requires a cumulative approach. It usually requires an ongoing recovery practice to achieve and maintain a drug-free, healthy life.

Its easy to misunderstand the addicts plight as a weakness of character or a moral failing. Loved ones often are perplexed as to why the addict shows tremendous willpower regarding every area but this. Its confusing to think that the addict chooses to ruin his life with excessive alcohol or drug use.

Indeed, the addict feels alone and misjudged, unable to find the words to adequately explain the feeling of compulsion. This is compounded by the fear of being incarcerated should they seek help. So the addict suffers silently (or not so silently) in shame and stigma trying to manage the itinerant fallout of his behavior.

According to the Department of Justice, one third of drug offenders in prison had no prior criminal history. More than 40 percent will return within two years on another drug-related incident. We are imprisoning sick people, further desecrating their lives when we could be helping them at far less cost.

In Facing Addiction in America, the Surgeon General reports that we save $10-$12 in incarceration costs for every dollar we spend in treatment. Think about that, if we took 10 percent of the budget we currently spend to incarcerate drug offenders and instead spent it on treatment, we would have fewer active drug addicts. Treatment rehabilitates people, restoring them to the community and their families. The penal system costs 90 percent more and helps no one.

Not only is treatment more effective for addiction, it is less expensive to society overall. The National Institute of Health reports that drug addiction treatment reduces drug use and its associated health and social costs including reducing drug-related crime, justice system costs and healthcare. Add in the related financial and emotional costs to the family. Also, consider the incalculable costs of bringing an effective worker back into the community and their family.

Addiction touches at least one in three adults in someway, occurring in at least one in ten people. When adults struggle for emotional balance it is impossible to be an effective role model for their children, perpetuating this heartbreaking cycle.

We have tried the War on Drugs for the last 40 years. It doesnt work; its a failed campaign. Addiction rates and drug-related death rates continue to increase. Its time to look at the addiction epidemic in our country from a different perspective.

Renee Hoagenson is a candidate for the Fourth Congressional District seat.

The rest is here:

War on drugs is an abject failure - Columbia Daily Tribune

History Channel tells stunning secret story of War on Drugs from the beginning it was a political war on people – American Enterprise Institute

From a very important article in The Intercept by Jon Schwartz The History Channel Is Finally Telling the Stunning Secret Story of the War on Drugs (emphasis added):

The History Channel is showing a new four-part series called Americas War on Drugs. Not only is itan important contribution to recent American history, its also the first time U.S. television has ever told the core truth about one of the most important issues of the past 50years.

That core truth is: The War on Drugs has always been a pointless sham. For decades the federal government has engaged in a shifting series of alliances of convenience with some of the worlds largest drug cartels. So while the U.S. incarceration rate has quintupled since President Richard Nixon first declared the war on drugs in 1971 (see chart above), top narcotics dealers have simultaneously enjoyed protection at the highest levels of power in America.

On the one hand, this shouldnt be surprising. The voluminous documentation of this fact in dozens of books has long been available to anyone with curiosity and a library card. Yet somehow, despite the fact the U.S. has no formal system of censorship, this monumental scandal has never before been presented in a comprehensive way in the medium where most Americans get their information: TV.

Thats why Americas War on Drugs is a genuine milestone. Weve recently seen how ideas that once seemed absolutely preposterous and taboo for instance, that the Catholic Church was consciously safeguarding priests who sexually abused children, or that Bill Cosby may not have been the best choice for Americas Dad can after years of silence finally break through into popular consciousness and exact real consequences. The series could be a watershed in doing the same for the reality behind one of the most cynical and cruel policies in U.S. history.

That this series exists at all shows that were at a tipping point with this brazen, catastrophic lie. We have to push hard enough to knock it over.

You can watch a 4-minute overview of the series above and you can watch full episodes of the series online here:

Episode 1 Acid, Spies, & Secret Experiments

Episode 2 Cocaine, Cartels, & Crack Downs

Episode 3 Gangs, Prisons, & Meth Queens (requires sign-in with your cable TV provider)

Episode 4 Heroin, Terrorists, & Kings of Pain (requires sign-in with your cable TV provider)

Bottom Line: As Ive written before, Im confident that in a future, more enlightened, advanced, open-minded and tolerant America, well look back on Americas immoral, senseless, expensive and failed War on Drugs Otherwise Peaceful Americans Who Chose to Ingest or Smoke Plants, Weeds and Recreational Substances Proscribed by Arbitrary Government Regulations with the shame, contempt, and embarrassment that it so rightfully deserves for such cruel, intolerant, and inhumane treatment of our fellow citizens (and our children and family dogs). Kudos to The History Channel for making such an important contribution to bringing us much closer to that future reckoning with such an embarrassing and shameful chapter of Americas history that matches (if not exceeds) Americas previous failed, costly and shameful War on Alcohol Otherwise Peaceful Americans Who Chose to Ingest Recreational Beverages Proscribed by Arbitrary Government Regulations during the 1930s.

See the rest here:

History Channel tells stunning secret story of War on Drugs from the beginning it was a political war on people - American Enterprise Institute

How the CIA Turned Us onto LSD and Heroin: Secrets of America’s … – Reason (blog)

America's War on Drugs, History Channel"There's a huge story to be told," says Anthony Lapp, "about the actual extent of the U.S. government's involvement in drug trafficking."

And that's exactly the story Lapp and his co-producers Julian Hobbs and Elli Hakami tell in a mesmerizing four-part series that debuted this week on cable TV's History Channel. Through dramatic recreations and in-depth interviews with academic researchers, historians, journalists, former federal agents, and drug dealers, America's War on Drugs (watch full episodes online here) tells true tales of how, for instance, the CIA and Department of Defense helped to introduce LSD to Americans in the 1950s.

"The CIA literally sent over two guys to Sandoz Laboratories where LSD had first been synthesized and bought up the world's supply of LSD and brought it back," Lapp tells Nick Gillespie in a wide-ranging conversation about the longest war the U.S. government has fought. "With that supply they began a [secret mind-control] program called MK Ultra which had all sorts of other drugs involved."

The different episodes cover the history of drug prohibition, the rise of the '60s drug counterculture; heroin epidemics past and present; how drug policy has warped U.S. foreign policy in Southeast Asia, Central America, Afghanistan, and beyond; the bipartisan politics of prohibition; and much more. America's War on Drugs features exclusive and rarely seen footage and documents how, time and time again, the government was often facilitating trade and use in the very drugs it was trying to stamp out. The show's website adds articles, short videos, and more information in an attempt to produce an "immersive experience" that will change how viewers think and feel about prohibition.

Lapp, who has worked at Vice, Huffington Post, and elsewhere, tells Gillespie that he is particulary excited to see his series air on the History Channel because it's an indicator the drug-policy reform is in the air. Though not a libertarian himself, he says "a great trait of libertarianism...is that knowledge and reason will eventually win out over keeping things in the dark, making things taboo." Even when it veers off into questionable territory (such as the role of the government in creating the crack epidemic of the 1980s), America's War on Drugs performs the invaluable function of furthering a conversation about drug policies and attitudes that have caused far more harm than they have alleviated.

Audio production by Ian Keyser.

Image: America's War on Drugs, History Channel.

Subscribe, rate, and review the Reason Podcast at iTunes.

Listen at SoundCloud below:

Don't miss a single Reason podcast! (Archive here.)

Subscribe at iTunes.

Follow us at SoundCloud.

Subscribe at YouTube.

Like us on Facebook.

Follow us on Twitter.

This is a rush transcriptcheck all quotes against the audio for accuracy.

Nick Gillespie: Hi I'm Nick Gillespie and this is the Reason podcast. Please subscribe to us at iTunes and rate and review us while you're there.

Today we're talking with Anthony Lappe who along with Julian Hobbs and Elli Hakami has produced a four part docuseries called America's War on Drugs for the History Channel. You can go to history.com to watch the series and read more about our country's longest war. The series aired this week and it will be in reruns on History Channel, so check it out there.

Anthony, thanks for joining the Reason podcast.

Anthony Lappe: It's great to be here Nick.

Gillespie: Give us the big picture first. Who's your audience for this and what do you hope to bring to people through the docuseries?

Lappe: The exciting thing about this project really is the fact that it's on the History Channel. I honestly didn't believe it was actually going to air until it started airing on Sunday night and I was sitting there watching it because what we do here is actually pretty radical. I don't think anyone has ever really told this story fully on mainstream cable television before. We take a very critical look at the entire history of the war on drugs. In particular, looking at American foreign policy and how the Central Intelligence Agency is not just been involved in a couple of bad apples here and there. In couple rogue operations as a lot of these drug trafficking allegations have been called before.

But actually very directly involved in drug trafficking not only drug trafficking but in the largest drug trafficking stories of our time. Whether that's in the secret tests that introduced LSD to the United States or heroin during the late 60's and early 70's from southeast Asia, to cocaine during the late 70's and early 80's onto opium and heroin coming out of Afghanistan. There's a huge story to be told there about the actual extent of the US government's involvement in drug trafficking.

Gillespie: Let's talk first about the old days of MK Ultra and mind control and the way that the CIA actually helped introduce LSD evolved drugs into America, to American minds. What was going on in the 50's with the CIA and how did they become involved in introducing LSD to Americans?

Lappe: This is a story that a lot of your listeners may have heard about, people have heard about MK Ultra and I had as well, but I never really understood the full origins of the story. They go all the way back to the 1950's. During the 1950's of course, US and the Soviet Union are locked in a battle for hearts and minds around the world and psychoactive drugs were a big part of the Cold War psychological warfare programs on both sides.

The CIA had heard rumors that the Soviet Union was starting to use LSD at this point as a truth serum to see if they could break spies and get them to expose details, admit they were spies et cetera. The CIA literally sent over two guys to Sandoz Laboratories where LSD had first been synthesized and bought up the world's supply of LSD and brought it back. With that supply they began a program called MK Ultra which had all sorts of other drugs involved.

In particular they started doing secret tests around the country. Some of them using in veteran's hospitals and through the military. Others were in mental hospitals, a lot of basic, pretty much a lot of them were unwitting people, mental patients. But one of the incredible stories we found, I never knew this before, is that Ken Kesey, famously the author of One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest and really the guy who started the famous acid tests in the San Francisco Bay area, it was really the godfather of acid movement. As a Stanford grad student, or sorry an undergrad, was part of a test at the Menlo Park Veteran's hospital. Loved it so much that he got a job in the lab, stole all the acid, went up to San Francisco and started his acid test. That was the origins of how LSD was introduced into United States. This was also happening in other places around the country. It was just that Ken Kesey was the progenitor of the entire movement. It literally was the CIA.

Gillespie: That is a real challenge to all good thinking Libertarians like myself. Small L Libertarians who say that the government can never do anything right. The manage to strangely change the course, not of, I guess maybe of Cold War history, but certainly of American cultural history through their actions. The first episode of the series, and again check these out on history.com, the History Channel if you have, you can download their app and take a look at it. Plus there's other material there that's well worth delving into.

You look at the prehistory of Richard Nixon's declaration of a war on drugs in the early 70's, what were some of the motivating factors you found behind Nixon declaring war on drugs? Very early in the 70's he talked about, famously used the phrase, declaring a war on drugs, that illegals drugs were the number one enemy facing America. What was going on, things like pot and acid and heroin rose to that level of attention from the federal government?

Lappe: You really had two strains happening. You had the psychedelic movement which was heavily influenced by acid which the CIA itself had introduced, which is just my blowing right. Then you had pot as well which basically increasing numbers of young people were smoking. Nixon declares famously this war on drugs in June 1971. At the same time there was a massive heroin epidemic that really was ravaging mostly the eastern seaboard. What a lot people don't realize is that too in part, you could argue another case of blow back from our own operations.

During the mid 60's to late 60's there was a famous, everyone knows, a war against communist forces in Vietnam but also next door there was a gigantic secret war happening in Laos that officially we were not supposed to be fighting. Both politically it was radioactive for Johnson to declare another front but there were also treaties that said that we couldn't have troops on the ground both with Laos and we had an agreement, a sort of tacit agreement with the Soviet Union they wouldn't put troops on the ground.

There was a massive clandestine CIA operation in Laos running this secret war. People have probably heard of this CIA airline called Air America. Basically we go into business helping a local warlord named Vang Pao. When we started the war in the mid 60's, around 65, Vang Pao was a sort of somewhat populous, anti-communist leader of the Hmong hill people in Laos and was peripherally involved in growing opium because that's really what the cash crop was in that area.

By 1968, 1969 into 1970 Vang Pao was the biggest heroin trafficker on the planet. Some of his partners were the Sicilian mobsters that we had gone into business to put in Havana Cuba and south Florida to try to kill Fidel Castro. Basically we had created this huge network or aided this huge network of international drug trafficking that created a massive heroin epidemic which has only been surpassed by the current opioid crisis and we go into that later.

What happens is, there's all this heroin in the theater of war in southeast Asia, a lot of troops are getting hooked, famously they all start bringing this heroin back and heroin really starts devastating the inner city and there was a legitimate belief by a lot of people that really it was out of control and crime rates were really skyrocketing especially in cities like New York. So Nixon was under a lot of pressure. He had run in 1960 under the banner of law and order and the country was literally falling apart by 1971 in his eyes.

Gillespie: As you were saying, the crime really ratcheted up. It started in the 50's but it really ratcheted up in the 60's, there was the perception that people were leaving cities in droves to avoid crime. You talk, I think, in the first episode, it's something that in 1960 the government figures had something like 50,000 heroin addicts around the country or heroin users and it had crept up to something like 200,000 or 500,000 by about 1970.

Lappe: Yeah.

Gillespie: Part of it Nixon was a law and order guy and there's, you go into this a bit at your site as well as in the show that John Ehrlichman one of Richard Nixon's chief lieutenants in a 1990, 94 interview with Dan Baum who ultimately published a story in Harper's about this, that he said that the war on pot and the war on drugs was really a way to control black people. There was also this sense that the urban American was going to hell in a hand basket as well.

Follow up question for that is, the war on drugs gets birthed out of mixed feeling and Nixon and there's some footage in one of the episodes of Ronald Reagan denouncing the use of acid in the 60's and obviously became drug warrior himself as president. There was a strong bipartisan element to the war on drugs because even people, Jimmy Carter seemed to be okay with the idea of pot legalization or decriminalization until events overtook him and he became a staunch drug warrior. People like Bill Clinton, people like Barack Obama also added to the drug war. What is the, I guess that's a long wind up for a pretty simple question, what is it about the war on drugs that pulls such support from Democrats and Republicans across the board?

Lappe: I think this is pretty deep question because I think it goes to what I found in working on this project which is really one of the most epic projects I've ever worked on in my life in terms of the amount of research we did. I think drugs have always played a scapegoat role in our society where we see other social forces, in particular economic forces and other things that have been pressures on communities and it's very easy to point the finger at drugs. In some ways it's a natural reaction to try to crack down on them in the harshest way. Of course by cracking down on drugs are an inanimate object, there is no such thing as a crack down on drugs. You're cracking down on people. And when you crack down on people, that has a reverberating effect. It also can be used as a tool.

Nixon is probably one of the most cynical politicians in our history but maybe not the worst in my opinion. He saw it purely, in my opinion, as a political move. As a way to take out this, he believed he had all these enemies that were growing around him, all these social movements, you had black nationalism, you had increasingly radicalized hippie movement that had turned from a peacenik movement into a more dangerous, whether underground type of operations. There was a feeling that society was unraveling to some degree. That was in large part because it was because we lived in a oppressive racist society and there was a war that in 1968, everyone knew was at a stalemate or that we had lost but continued going on. People don't realize half the people died, of our soldiers after 1968 when Nixon ran under this completely cynical lie that he had a secret plan to end the war [Editor's note: Journalism historian Joseph W. Campbell has documented that Candidate Nixon never publicly made such a pledge, which continues to be cited frequently.].

There was all these other forces going on in drugs were very easy way to demonize people.

Gillespie: At the website, at history.com, among the various things you have in timelines or whatnot that are worth going back to. The early attempts to link cocaine with black people and if you want to crack down on cocaine because white women may be taking it or something, you crack down on black people. When pot became illegal, under federal law, became effectively illegal in the 1930's, it was identified with Mexicans. Chinese and opium was a problem. It is fascinating in the 60's you have with something like LSD the youth movement and hippies and then again when ecstasy which was made illegal in the 80's thanks in large part to Joe Biden.

The identification of a subculture or subgroup or a particular ethnic group that you can crack down on is one of the really haunting elements, I think, of the drug war and that comes through in this, in this series. Talk a bit about how particularly after 9/11 part of the series, and I think you're absolutely right in looking at it, that what this does in a way that is really fresh and interesting is look at how foreign policy, US foreign policy has been both guided and infected by the drug war. Talk a bit about the post 9/11 era and how have fears of narco-terrorism really changed the way we go about our foreign policy?

Lappe: Narco-terrorism is a term that started, that was introduced after 9/11, shortly after really. We show how in the first Superbowl after 9/11, the Partnership for Drug Free America began running this very eerie infamous ad now where you had a bunch of kids saying, "I supported terrorists, I supported a suicide bomber, I did this." Basically saying because I did drugs I was helping all of these different terrorists groups et cetera. When the incredible irony is that our own government has been knee deep in drug trafficking for decades.

There was a big push though it was completely ironic and what we show in our last episode which is the post 9/11 era, is we actually have an undercover DEA agent. This was a huge theme that we saw throughout our series was the tension between the DEA and the CIA. I'll paint the picture of what was happening in Afghanistan.

In the late 1990's, opium has always been one of or the biggest cash crop in Afghanistan. During the 1990's there was a massive civil war. All sides were using opium to finance themselves. The Taliban comes in to power and starts taxing at first, opium growers but by the late 90's the Taliban is having a huge PR problem. They're chopping off women's heads in stadiums and they're blowing up the Buddhas. They were becoming an international pariah. They pulled this incredible PR coup where they said they were cracking down on opium. When really all they were doing were stockpiling it. Basically they launched this whole fake crackdown that got the UN off their back. The US, we even in 2000, sent them $40 million of aid money to help, quote unquote, crackdown on opium. But really what was happening was they were stockpiling opium and then after 9/11 used those stockpiles to ramp up their war effort.

At the time of 9/11, Afghanistan was about 30% of the world's heroin. Today it's about 90%. What Afghanistan has become is a drug war. People never talk about it in that context but Afghanistan is a giant drug war. The Taliban have, to quote REM, lost their religion. They're really are not much of a religious force any more as they are just any other militant insurgency group that is trying to take down a government. There isn't much, they're not putting a lot of effort into their Sharia program. They basically have become gigantic drug traffickers. But also our allies in Afghanistan. Including in the early days, Hamid Karzai's brother, Wali Karzai was the biggest heroin trafficker and drug lord who controlled all the traffic in Kandahar. Who was completely protected by the CIA.

I talked to soldiers who literally their job was to guard the opium fields of our local warlord allies. This heroin has had a major impact on the world's drug stage. It should be noted a lot of the heroin that comes into the United States is coming from Mexico now but a lot of it is coming from Afghanistan, especially on the east coast and in Canada. It's a really incredible story that no one really talks about. There's a great reporter that is one of our contributors to the show named, Gretchen Peters, wrote a book called, Seeds of Terror. That essentially is her thesis.

We also have great stories about the undercover DEA agents who were fighting to try to take down drug traffickers at the same time the CIA was undermining their efforts.

Gillespie: It's a phenomenal drama that unfolds and it has these dark, rich, historical ironies that abound throughout the series. The odds are good now at least and actually in a story that's up at the website, you guys talk about Jeff Sessions, the Attorney General under Donald Trump. Who has really, he's pledged to really redouble efforts at least domestically, on the war on drugs which you guys point out at least in it's Nixonian phase has been going on for 50 years. It's really more like a 100 years when you go all the way back to things like the Harrison Narcotics Act.

It's failing, it doesn't seem to have much effect on drug usage rates, they seem to be independent of enforcement, there's obviously problems with surgeon opiod use that is it's own tangled web of unintended consequences and weird interventions into markets. At the same time the odds are phenomenal that pot is going to be fully legal in the US within the next decade if not before. During the campaign, weirdly Donald Trump seemed to be at times okay with the idea of different states deciding what kind of marijuana policies, obviously the Sessions factors a big difference from that. Are you optimistic that we're at least entering the beginning of the end of the drug war, to borrow a terrible Vietnam phrase that there's light at the end of the tunnel in terms of American attitudes towards currently illegal drugs, and rethinking the drug war?

Lappe: There's no doubt that things are moving in that direction in the same way there's no doubt that things like gay rights and LGBT rights are moving in a certain direction. Jeff Sessions essentially is a weird outlier, historical blip, as you said, to try to pin Trump down on any one ideology or stance is literally impossible. He said we were going to stop all our foreign wars, yet he's sending 8,000 more troops in Afghanistan. Whatever Trump has said on the war on drugs is sort of irrelevant.

But Sessions is just a weird dinosaur throwback to another era that I think is just going to be, if he survives the next three years. Will just be a blip in the road towards eventually people moving, starting with marijuana towards legalization both for, at least, nationwide to medicinal use if not most states towards recreational use. Because people are seeing that it doesn't really have any negative effects, there isn't really a gigantic increase in use and there's great benefits to society in terms of being able to tax it and make it a normalized thing. I think a big part of the problem with drugs and Dr. Carl Hart at Columbia is one of the most iconoclastic guys on this and he's in our series, he's out on the far fringes of this. But what he really says is, the problem with drugs is not drugs. The problem is drug use and misuse and people being idiots with drugs and not knowing how to use them.

Gillespie: But it's hard to know how to use them if you're not allowed to freely and openly discuss the facts, your experiences, your parents, we have enough problems with alcohol abuse and that's fully legal. When you start talking about these other drugs it's hard to get good information.

Lappe: Right. It's the same thing with these abstinence programs. You see wherever there's abstinence programs there's more STD's, there's more pregnancies because people are ignorant. I think that's a great trait of libertarianism even though I don't believe in everything you guys believe in. Is that knowledge and reason will eventually win out over keeping things in the dark, making things taboo. I think that people are rational and when it comes ... There's always going to be people who are going to abuse something, just the same way people abuse alcohol or any substance. I think there is a general consensus that we're moving in a particular direction and I think that ultimately it's going to be better for society.

Gillespie: I hope so and think that your series that was on History Channel will being rerun there as well as it's available on history.com along with a lot of other articles and timelines, does a really good job of helping to start that discussion which has been waiting to happen for decades now.

We have been talking with Anthony Lappe who along with Julian Hobbs and Elli Hakami has produced a great four part series for History Channel called, America's War on Drugs. It's available online and look for it on your basic cable package.

Anthony, thanks so much for talking to the Reason podcast today.

Lappe: Thanks a lot, it was a lot of fun.

Gillespie: This has been the Reason podcast, I'm Nick Gillespie, thanks for listening. Please subscribe to us at iTunes and rate and review us while you're there. Thanks so much.

Continue reading here:

How the CIA Turned Us onto LSD and Heroin: Secrets of America's ... - Reason (blog)

Crime novelist Winslow calls out Trump on drug wars – The San Diego Union-Tribune

For the second time in three years, local crime novelist Don Winslow has taken out a full-page ad in a national newspaper criticizing the governments war on drugs, an issue that has formed the backbone of several of his bestselling books.

The Julian residents newest salvo is in Sundays New York Times, framed as a series of posts on Twitter from Winslow to President Donald Trump, who uses the social media platform often to air his thoughts.

Winslow, 63, has spent almost 20 years researching and writing about drugs Americas appetite for them, the Mexican cartels that torture and kill each other to control distribution, the police on both sides of the border who try to stem the tide or corruptly become part of the flow. His books The Power of the Dog and The Cartel are violent, searing and critically acclaimed epics about the cost and futility of the war.

In addition to his novels, hes written about the subject numerous times in essays for major newspapers and magazines in the U.S., Mexico and Europe. He favors legalization, treatment and rehabilitation instead of mass incarceration.

In an essay published last week on Time.com, Winslow criticized Trump and Attorney General Jeff Sessions for being either woefully or willfully ignorant of the facts surrounding drugs. Both have called for a renewed crackdown emphasizing law enforcement instead of public-health strategies.

After five decades of this war, drugs are cheaper, more plentiful and more potent than ever, Winslow wrote. If thats Trumps idea of success, Id hate to see his version of failure.

He added, Rather than make a real effort to address the drug problem at its roots at a time when more Americans die from opiate overdose than from car accidents Trump and Sessions hand us fantasies such as the border wall, which will do nothing to slow the flow of drugs, and facile, intellectually lazy lock em up soundbites that make for good politics but horrible policy.

In May, Trump said the cartels have literally taken over towns in the U.S. The drug epidemic is poisoning too many American lives, and we are going to stop it in many different ways, he added. One of them will be the wall.

In 2015, Winslow took out a full-page ad in the Washington Post urging Congress to change directions with the nations drug policy. The only way to win the war on drugs is to stop fighting, he wrote. A half-century of failed policy, $1 trillion and 45 million arrests have not reduced daily drug use at all.

Winslow is currently on a tour promoting his newest book, The Force, which came out Tuesday. Its about the leader of an elite New York Police Department unit caught up in corruption while fighting the influx of drugs and guns to the city.

The author will be at Warwicks in La Jolla on Monday and at Mysterious Galaxy in Clairemont on Friday.

RELATED: Don Winslow calls 'The Force' the cop novel he's always wanted to write

john.wilkens@sduniontribune.com

The rest is here:

Crime novelist Winslow calls out Trump on drug wars - The San Diego Union-Tribune

Do you want better streets or a bigger ‘war on drugs’? – Fresno Bee


Fresno Bee
Do you want better streets or a bigger 'war on drugs'?
Fresno Bee
President Richard Nixon did not see the slaughter of innocents when he launched the War on Drugs. Of course, his staff thought he did it to punish hippies, anti-war protesters and blacks. Politicians invent wars as diversionary tactics when they ...

Read more:

Do you want better streets or a bigger 'war on drugs'? - Fresno Bee

Jeff Sessions Draws New Battle Lines for War on Drugs – Observer

Last weeks revelation that Attorney General Jeff Sessions was plotting to target medical marijuana providers was largely obscured by his testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee the next day. In a letter written to Congress on May 1, Sessions argues that because marijuana remains illegal under the controlled substances act, representatives should disregard longstanding protections against the prosecution of medical cannabis. These protections had just been renewed as part of a budgetary bill two days prior. Its no coincidence that when the bill hit President Donald Trumps desk on May 6, he included a signing statement that largely echoed the attorney generals sentiments. On May 10, Sessions outdid himself when he issued a memorandum calling on US Attorneys to seek the harshest punishment allowed by law when prosecuting drug crimes, directly overturning the more lenient sentencing guidelines pushed forth by Eric Holder in 2013.

This threatens to undo significant progress that drug war opponents have made in recent years. Since Colorado voters made the Rocky Mountain State the first to legalize recreational cannabis in 2013, eight other states have followed suit. Added with the 21 states that allow medicinal cannabis, 60percent of Americans live in a jurisdiction that has legalized marijuana. Moreover, former President Barack Obama commuted the sentences of over 1,000 non-violent drug offendersmore than any previous president.

In the current political environment, ramping up the War on Drugs would cause backlash for both the Trump administration and the GOP. In 2018, incumbent Republicans in states that have legalized marijuana would be forced to answer for an administration intent on disregarding the will of voters. Conversely, any Democrat running on a pro-marijuana platform would gain an instant boost in support as well as financial backing from an increasingly profitable cannabis industry. Come 2020, the issue would also give a boost to Democratic presidential candidatessuch as Bernie Sanders and Kamala Harris, both of whom have expressed support for legalization.

Even if Trump loses in 2020 and these policies are overturned by a future administration, their impact over the next four years could prove devastating. If Sessions memo is followed by federal prosecutors, it would mean an increase in the enforcement of mandatory minimum laws, which remove judicial discretion and carry automatic 10 and 20 year sentences. Prior to Holder ratcheting back enforcement of these laws, they led to disproportionate sentences on numerous occasions. In one instance, a man was sentenced to a triple life prison sentences merely for introducing two drug dealers to each other. In another, a man was sentenced to a 42-year prison term for selling crack, a sentence the judge was obligated to impose under the three strikes law because he had two previous misdemeanor arrests for selling pot.

Increased enforcement of medical marijuana laws will lead to more horror stories such as these and will further increase the U.S. prison population, which is already the largest in the world. For medical cannabis users, many of which suffer from debilitating health conditions, a federal crackdown would make it more difficult for them to get the relief they need. It could also increase the risk many users already face of losing child custody.

For drug war opponents, the ultimate goal is that Congress pass a law decriminalizing marijuana at the federal level. This would be the only surefire way to both restrain Sessions and ensure that somebody of his ilk never again sets their sights on the War on Drugs.

Read the original post:

Jeff Sessions Draws New Battle Lines for War on Drugs - Observer

Jeff Sessions’s new war on drugs won’t be any more effective than the old one – Washington Post

By David Cole and Marc Mauer By David Cole and Marc Mauer June 22 at 2:45 PM

David Cole is national legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union. Marc Mauer is executive director of the Sentencing Project.

Attorney General Jeff Sessions is right to be concerned about recent increases in violent crime in some of our nations largest cities, as well as a tragic rise in drug overdoses nationwide [Lax drug enforcement means more violence, op-ed, June 18]. But there is little reason to believe that his response reviving the failed war on drugs and imposing more mandatory minimums on nonviolent drug offenders will do anything to solve the problem. His prescription contravenes a growing bipartisan consensus that the war on drugs has not worked. And it would exacerbate mass incarceration, the most pressing civil rights problem of the day.

Sessionss first mistake is to conflate correlation and causation. He argues that the rise in murder rates in 2015 was somehow related to his predecessor Eric Holders August 2013 directive scaling back federal prosecutions in lower-level drug cases. That policy urged prosecutors to reserve the most serious charges for high-level offenses. Holder directed them to avoid unnecessarily harsh mandatory minimum sentences for defendants whose conduct involved no actual or threatened violence, and who had no leadership role in criminal enterprises or gangs, no substantial ties to drug trafficking organizations and no significant criminal history. (Mandatory minimums can lead to draconian sentences, as in the case of Ramona Brant, a first-time offender sentenced to life imprisonment for her part in distributing drugs at the direction of an abusive boyfriend). Individuals who met the stringent criteria of Holders policy would still be prosecuted, but they would be spared overly long mandatory minimums. Sessions offers no evidence that this policy caused the recent spikes in violent crime or drug overdoses. There are three reasons to doubt that there is any significant connection between the two.

First, federal prosecutors handle fewer than 10 percent of all criminal cases, so a modest change in their charging policy with respect to a subset of drug cases is unlikely to have a nationwide impact on crime. The other 90 percent of criminal prosecution is conducted by state prosecutors, who were not affected by Holders policy.

Second, the few individuals who benefited from Holders policy by definition lacked a sustained history of crime or violence or any connections to major drug traffickers.

Third, the increases in violent crime that Sessions cites are not nationally uniform, which one would expect if they were attributable to federal policy. In 2015, murder rates rose in Chicago, Cleveland and Baltimore, to be sure. But they declined in Boston and El Paso, and stayed relatively steady in New York, Las Vegas, Detroit and Atlanta. If federal drug policy were responsible for the changes, we would not see such dramatic variances from city to city.

Nor is there any evidence that increases in drug overdoses have anything to do with shorter sentences for a small subset of nonviolent drug offenders in federal courts. Again, the vast majority of drug prosecutions are in state court under state law and are unaffected by the attorney generals policies. And the rise in drug overdoses is a direct result of the opioid and related heroin epidemics, which have been caused principally by increased access to prescription painkillers from doctors and pill mills. That tragic development calls for treatment of addicts and closer regulation of doctors, not mandatory minimums imposed on street-level drug sellers, who are easily replaced in communities that have few lawful job opportunities.

Most disturbing, Sessions seems to have no concern for the fact that the United States leads the world in incarceration; that its prison population is disproportionately black, Hispanic and poor; or that incarceration inflicts deep and long-lasting costs on the very communities most vulnerable to crime in the first place. As of 2001, 1 of every 3 black male babies born that year could expect to be imprisoned in his lifetime, and while racial disparities have been modestly reduced since then, African Americans are still a disproportionate share of the prison population. Mass incarceration has disrupted families, created even greater barriers to employment and increased the likelihood that the next generation of children will themselves be incarcerated. Advocates as diverse as the Koch brothers and George Soros, the Center for American Progress and Americans for Tax Reform, the American Civil Liberties Union and Right on Crime agree that we need to scale back the harshness of our criminal justice system.

Rather than expanding the drug war, Sessions would be smarter to examine local conditions that influence crime and violence, including policing strategies, availability of guns, community engagement and concentrated poverty. Responding to those underlying problems, and restoring trust through consent decrees that reduce police abuse, hold considerably more promise of producing public safety. Sessionss revival of the failed policies of the past, by contrast, has little hope of reducing violent crime or drug overdoses.

Visit link:

Jeff Sessions's new war on drugs won't be any more effective than the old one - Washington Post