Growing Fear

The National Post has done it again. They have an absolutely fabulous bit of uninformed reefer madness propaganda. They rant on and on about the danger posed by growops run by gangs. And what is their solution to this problem, pray tell? To throw more money at this problem. Fill up the jails with gang-bangers. We all know how well that has worked in the US.

It drives me absolutely crazy to read this garbage. All you have to do to avoid the violence associated with grow-ops is to legalize pot. But such a simple, straight-forward solution is not embraced. Instead we force peaceful pot people to subsidize criminal organizations. Meanwhile, we have a provincial election going on and not a single one of our provincial leaders has the courage or the intelligence to do the one thing that would provide a huge blow to the problem of gangs and violence in this province - legalize marijuana.

Blog Neglect

I just haven't had time to keep this blog alive lately. I feel kind of bad but I have just been too busy to care. Anyway, here is a nice attack ad to laugh at. This is how well the election is going!

SKMP Press: The good, the bad and the ugly

Saskvotes saw fit to blog about Tom Shapiro's candidacy in this provincial election, but they didn't bother to tell us his name. Patrick Book refers to him as "A Regina man suffering from AIDS". How rude! A person is identified by their name, not their physical condition. Luckily, John saved the day and wrote a very supportive blog post over at Abandoned Stuff.

So far I haven't heard any stoner jokes, references to grass-roots activism or smoky-filled back rooms. I am very disappointed. :(

Trouble in My Constituency

According to Celestial Junk, Sask Party campaign signs are being vandalized in my constituency of Saskatoon Meewasin. I noticed this myself, as I was driving down Warman Road in my ugly little car.

I want to make it clear that I deride these tactics. But I don't think anybody would like my hippy, liberal, environmentally friendly solution to this problem:

Ditch the campaign signs.

We humans are such sheep that we need flashy, pretty campaign signs to decide who should represent us for the next four years. We need to fill the landfills with this nonsense and our candidates need to spend all that money on this crap. Who cares? Quit being a bunch of sheep and quit letting yourselves be influenced by advertising.

If I ran Elections Saskatchewan, I would only let candidates spend $1000 and have no billboards or campaign signs. They could have a web-site and a few speeches to sell their ideas. That's it. There wouldn't be any campaign signs to destroy and there would be less crap in the landfills. Everybody wins and I never have to look at butt-ugly campaign signs ever again.

Pot 2.0

While I fiddle around trying to fix this $#^$(%^# bog, go ahead and read this reefer madness from the Drug Czar. They are at it again.

Where did my comments go?

I changed my template and my haloscan comments disappeared. Being a n00b when it comes to all these technical matters really sucks. As soon as I have a minute I will try to fix it. In the meantime I will re-activate blogger comments.

Have you ever been?

Marijuana

Canada's number one google search.

From the Brits

Drug prohibition gets kicked in Britain in the Independent. The North Wales Police Authority deserves credit for endorsing Chief Constable of North Wales, Richard Brunstrom.

Canada chooses cannabis, not so high on steroids

So it isn't just Ross Rebliati, the famous Olympic snow-boarder that tested positive for weed.

Do you think cannabis is a performance-enhancing substance?

Saskblogs Meet at Jerry's Food Emporium

*WARNING* Contains self-satisfied, blogger-ific navel-gazing. If you want to read about the drug war and why it sucks, go and read some of the links in the side bar until I decide to write about the provincial election.

Against my better judgment, I went to a Saskbloggers luncheon at Jerry's Food Emporium. It was a lot of fun and very educational to meet some of the faces behind Saskatchewan bloggers. I met Lance from Catprint in the Mash,Saskboy from Abandoned Stuff and Kate of Small Dead Animals. There were a number of other people there, including the leader of the Liberal Party, David Karwacki. If I have left you out, please put your name in the comments.

Update: I also met Twyla.

While it was a great experience meeting these people and chatting, the experience was ruined by the realization that I hate blogging. All the petty internet bickering and blog wars and email wars and on and on. I hate it completely. And it is pretty much impossible to blog if you are as bored by this stuff as I am. Just to keep up with all the petty blog wars is difficult. So when Kate was talking about an internet poll that was rigged by a bunch of bloggers, my only thought was "Why does anybody care about an internet poll in the first place? Hasn't everybody figured out by now that they are completely irrelevant?" I have a hard time believing that anybody takes that stuff seriously. But I guess that they do. The emperor has no clothes?

Also, Kate was talking about a photograph of smog that was photo-shopped. Again, who cares? That has nothing to do with anything. It says nothing about the validity of global warming. It just means that that reporter was stupid and lazy. Kate certainly got a lot of attention by mentioning it. If anybody has a link to that story and is so inclined, please link it.

Although I absolutely love writing and putting my ideas out on the internet and I love engaging people about the drug war, I despise blogging. I will continue to put my left-wing, hippy liberal views out there but don't be surprised if I shut down the comments.

Don't ever let me write about blogging ever again. It's giving me a migraine.

The Provincial Election

I get to help the SKMP run in the election. This is going to be a lot of fun. We go to the polls on Nov. 7th. As soon as we get candidates registered I will blog it and put it on the SKMP site, as soon as I figure out how it works*. I am not so techno-literate, I probably fried my brain with all the drugs that I have supposedly used.

Anyway, the idea of going door to door and engaging the public about the harm caused by the war on drugs, makes me very happy indeed.

* If you know how to use Joomla, let me know.

Harper’s “war on drugs” regressive and irresponsible: Green Party

I have to give credit where it's due. The Green Party has taken a non-cowardly stance in support of reforming our drug policy.

Jared Giesbrecht, Justice Critic for the Green Party, added that the 2002 Senate Special Committee on Drugs and examples from European countries have led the Green Party to the conclusion that it is time to legalize the adult use of marijuana, developing a taxation rate for the substance similar to that of tobacco.

“Mr. Harper’s plan to impose tougher penalties on users of marijuana and other drugs is a misguided approach. Substance abuse is a medical issue, not a criminal issue. Simply spending more tax dollars on drug law enforcement is not the answer. Canadians want to see a comprehensive anti-drug strategy that gets to the root of the problem, not Harper’s patch-work agenda that seeks the quick fix.”

Good job Green Party! I just wish that the other parties could get on board with the legalization of marijuana. The Liberals and the NDP take the cowards way out and strongly support the Insite safe injection site while completely ignoring the drug war. I won't waste my time supporting the NDP until they live up to their policy resolutions and get serious about ending the drug war.

Of course, if a party dared to speak of legalizing all drugs, they would get two gold stars from me. But that's asking a lot, I know. I wonder if people are ready to hear that message.

"No, I can't tell you where to buy weed."

Harper's new drug policy emulates proven disaster

Thanks for the editorial, Danger lurks in Conservative drug strategy (SP, Oct. 3), but the blow has fallen just the same. The wilful ignorance of Stephen Harper's drug policy is dangerous indeed.

For example, Harper says: "If you sell drugs or produce drugs, you will go to prison." No, not really. I know this because his policy is copied from our good neighbours to the south, who now have more than two million people in prison while drug use grows.

The FBI reported 820,000 drug arrests in 2006 but still the U.S. is flooded with illegal drugs. The Office of National Drug Control Policy tracks the prices of heroin and cocaine -- prices that have consistently fallen as drug penalties and enforcement have increased.

Any economist will tell you that as supply increases beyond demand, prices fall. And why does supply increase? Because Americans really, really want drugs and will do anything to get them: harsh criminal penalties are no deterrent.

And where is drug use less prevalent? It's where drugs are legal. Yes, addiction, disease and overdose are less frequent where people are not "protected" by ridiculous laws. That's because social norms are far more effective than the government in controlling drug use.

What is worst about Harper's drug policy is that it sins against the fundamental principle of democracy. The genius of democracy is that when a man has the freedom to make his own choices, on average he'll live better and more happily, even though he has the freedom to make mistakes.

If you like paying taxes for no reason, if you like putting people in jail to make them worse, if you like increased fear, crime, disease, death and addiction, then Harper's your man. If you long for a safer, freer, happier world, however, the Conservative drug policy is a disaster.

Ken Sailor

Saskatoon

Good job on the letter, my friend. Except for that man-talk at the end. Male as standard, female as secondary is a good example of insidious sexism. It's lazy to write this way and just goes to show how underhanded sexism is, when a highly enlightened man who hates the drug war, falls into this trap.

Down with Hippies

From the Ottawa Sun we are treated to this gem:

The federal government's proposed drug strategy simply won't work. It smacks of a strategy driven by hype, emotion and political expediency. It will do absolutely nothing to reduce the use of drugs in this country.

Can we not learn something from our southern neighbours about a failed drug strategy, a strategy that dates back to the 1970s. Or as Canadians are we slow learners? The most punitive, draconian drug laws in the world has not stopped the flow into and the use of drugs in the U.S. "Say no to drugs!" What a joke.

It's about time we start treating drug addiction for what it is, namely, a public health problem.

Emile Therien

(Most punitive? Some countries execute drug dealers)

The editors at the Ottawa Sun seem to think that Canada should get some credit because we aren't like those bad places that execute drug dealers. That's like me going to work teaching kids and expecting a gold star because I don't call them names and beat them with a strap.

Romney would lock up MJ Patients

What a knob.

I get mail

One Robert Jereski sent me an email asking for my thoughts and opinions about Plan Mexico. Plan Mexico is the $1 billion the Americans are giving to the Mexican government to fight the drug war. John Walters and Co. have been frantically trying to sell the drug war by claiming that the price of cocaine has gone down and thus the Drug War is not a failure. Don't listen to those drugged-up hippies!

Of course, calling a temporary increase in the price of cocaine in the drug war a victory just goes to show how delusional the powers-that-be really are. Despite the demonization and otherization of scary, evil drug addicts, the fact remains that they are people. They are just as resourceful as those of us that choose to limit our drug-taking to legal and socially acceptable drugs such as alcohol, tobacco or prescription drugs. A poor, determined, desperate addict will simply turn to crimes such as prostitution or break and enter to afford their habit. Middle-class and wealthy people that can afford to pay for their habit simply find another supplier for their drugs. Also, new dealers will come in and supply the drugs that the ADDICTS are looking for. Any price increases thanks to law enforcement are temporary at best. As the eloquent blogger at I was the state says, when supply of a product decreases, the price goes up. With a highly profitable commodity like cocaine, there will always be people willing to risk jail time to make the big bucks.

At any rate, I am rambling again, as I like to do. I am writing this post to address Robert Jereski, who was kind enough to solicit my opinion about American interference in Mexican foreign policy. He pointed me to the fact that the Clinton administration supported an equally disastrous program known as Plan Columbia. Thanks for reminding me that Democrats and Republicans are equally imperialistic when it comes to the drug war. Apparently, Amnesty International are opposed to plan Mexico unless it targets the deep flaws in the judicial and security systems.

I have to admit, that while I am flattered that strangers on the internet value my opinion on the drug war and foreign policy, I feel deeply unqualified to comment. There is no question that the incidents at Oaxaca show that there is corruption in the criminal justice system and it needs to be cleaned up. I would love nothing more than for the corrupt Mexican regime would stop murdering disobedient left-wing dissidents that don't approve of the government. I am nothing, if not an opinionated dissident school marm mom with a blog full of opinions that will change the world.

However, let's not lose sight of the big picture. This blog is not called "Blame the drug war" for nothing. I am trying desperately to emulate the great feminist blogger Twisty Faster. I Blame the Patriarchy steps back and shows how patriarchy should be blamed instead of the individuals living within it. I want to put the blame on the drug war instead of on the individual drug addicts and dealers living within this system. Why blame them when it's the entire, corrupt system that needs to go? How is it helpful to rail against the no-good drug pushers preying on the addicts, when so much of the harm caused by drugs is caused by the drug war and not the use of drugs? Talk of punishing pushers and healing addicts distracts everybody from the real issue: The drug war sucks.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Amnesty International says nothing about the drug war. The number one cause of police corruption and the state abusing its' power against its' own people and Amnesty International says nothing about it? Where is the policy statement at AI calling for the immediate end to the war on drugs? Like I said before, I am but a lowly school marm mom with a whole lot of opinions and please correct me if I'm wrong. But I did not find anything at AI calling for an end to the drug war.

The UN is another international organization that supports the drug war. They have the UN Office on Drugs and Crime and resolutions reading like a drug warriors' wet dream.

Until these international organizations and ngo's can pull their heads out of their butts and support ending the drug war, they will get criticism from me. *BURN* Calling for reform of Mexico's corrupt judicial system is great but we should not forget to call for an end to the drug war as well.

Also, to answer your question about US president's, here is a really good summary of the war on drugs. Jimmy Carter supported the legalization of marijuana but it never went anywhere. It's hard to expect a lowly US president to be able to counteract all those years of reefer madness propaganda.

All of the US presidents have supported the war on drugs. All of them had a number of drug war pushers for Drug Czar. The Drug Czar title has always reminded me of a bunch of teens playing Dungeons and Dragons in the basement. At any rate, all of the Drug Czars lived up to the pointy-hat authoritarian image and spent piles of money on enforcement while drugs have gotten increasingly cheaper and more available over the years.

What's Harper Smoking?

Dan Gardner rocks. Go and read it right now.

Tough on Drug Pushers, Soft on Users

The polarization of political issues into the two neat categories of right and left has always struck me as problematic. There are only two sides to every issue - right and wrong. The Tories are trying to cast themselves as the white-hat cowboys by promoting a tough-on-drugs campaign. The Conservatives want to crack down on pushers while going soft on the users. What this means is more money spent fighting grow-ops and also an increase in spending to save the addicts from themselves. Meanwhile the Tories are casting the NDP as black-hats while they gush on about the Insite safe injection site. But nobody is promoting the most important harm-reduction idea of all: repealing prohibition.

Why does the NDP spend so much time focusing on the safe injection site while Harper is promising to spend $22 million on busting grow-ops? I have yet to hear an NDP member publicly support legalizing marijuana, a measure that would eliminate grow-ops and do something about the underground black market economy that is crippling our society. All the drug-related violence that the police claim to care so much about is related directly to the drug war, not the use of drugs. Yet none of these cowards has the courage to say it.

The political left is not doing a good job of opposing the war on drugs. They focus on harm-reduction while completely ignoring the war on marijuana users. Meanwhile, there is $10 million promised for "prevention initiatives", meaning worthless reefer madness propaganda about how bad pot is for your health. Tony Collavano, the president of the Canadian Police Association recently stated that marijuana is more harmful than tobacco. I guess he didn't know that marijuana does not cause lung cancer and is far less harmful than tobacco or alcohol. Pot has never caused a single death in the thousands of years it has been used for both recreation and medicinal use. I am fearful for this world when the head of the police state Canadian police is promoting such blatant lies. We may have to ship them off to Jamaica for some education.

The NDP says they don't want no "US war on drugs" but they don't define what that means or why that is a bad idea. The US has the highest incarceration rate in the world. Black people are jailed at disproportionately high rates compared to whites. Since their war on drugs began when Nancy Reagan started her "Just Say No" campaign, drugs have gotten more potent and cheaper in price over the years. Since that time the American government has devastated Columbia with narco-aerial spraying raids that has had a tremendous and negative impact on the environment and the economy. Herbicides are poison and they ruin food and drug crops alike. American money has funded the Columbian army in war on their own people. The American government is not a role model for Canada to follow.

The war on drugs does not reduce the number of drug users. The black market encourages drug use in a million ways that you can only understand if you have spent some time connected to the drug culture in some way. Selling drugs is profitable and recruiting new customers makes money. Only a small percentage of users and growers get caught.

All you have to do to end the black market economy is legalize . Growing and selling the wrong plants shouldn't be a crime.