2 PARAGRAPHS 4 LIBERTY: #191 "DRUG PROHIBITION KILLS AGAIN!"

      Many prior 2 Paragraphs editions have outlined how our government’s policy of Drug Prohibition is killing people, both through the absence of quality control as well as the rampant violence of Mexican drug cartels and juvenile street gangs which emanates from the sales of illicit drugs.  But now we can update those unnecessary deaths with the current so-called opioid crisis.  Yes, drug “overdose” deaths have increased recently, many coming in combination with alcohol and other substances.  But a closer look at the news reports shows that many of these deaths are caused by the synthetic form of heroin called fentanyl.  This is manufactured in Mainland China that is as much as 50 times more potent than heroin, such that a sugar-packet-sized bag of it is strong enough to kill 500 people!  But, since it is so potent, only small amounts are needed, and they can be shipped into our country without detection fairly easily.  So it is the absence of quality control and accurate labeling caused by the illicit market spawned by Drug Prohibition that is killing so many people.            

     As reported on October 21, 2018 in the Orange County Register, the Zheng drug trafficking organization in Shanghai advertises and sells fentanyl and its synthetic cousins quite cheaply and openly in 35 languages on the internet.  And since the DEA is now monitoring our country’s medical doctors so strongly when they prescribe narcotics as pain medication, many doctors are hesitant to provide them to their patients.  So this either leaves the patients in needless pain, or forces them to seek relief from street drugs, like heroin.  And the result?  Last year there were 28,826 recorded deaths in our country from overdoses linked to synthetic opioids, mostly fentanyl, which is up from “only” 3,100 such deaths in 2013.  But in countries that do not prosecute the possession and use of heroin, such as Portugal and the Netherlands, fentanyl is virtually unknown.  So, for all of the potential harm that can be caused by heroin, don’t you agree that the quality control and death prevention efforts would be better left in the hands of a legal market overseen by medical professionals, than an illegal one overseen by mobsters?  In other words, the term “Controlled Substances” is the biggest oxymoron in the English language.  Why?  Because as soon as we prohibit a substance, we leave all of the control regarding quantity, quality and age restrictions in the hands of the bad guys!  There must be, and is, a better way!

Judge Jim Gray (Ret.)

2012 Libertarian candidate for Vice President, along with

Governor Gary Johnson as the candidate for President

The quote for the week comes in the form of a poem written at the Terezin Nazi Concentration Camp in what is now the Czech Republic by a 12 year-old boy, who soon was killed. It brought tears to my eyes.  

                                By the way, these columns are now on Facebook and LinkedIn at judgejimgray, Twitter at judgejamesgray, and wordpress at judgejimgray@wordpress.com.  Please visit these sites for past editions, and do your part to spread the word about the importance of Liberty.

DRUG PROBLEMS VS. DRUG MONEY PROBLEMS - by Judge Jim Gray

DRUG PROBLEMS VS. DRUG MONEY PROBLEMS - by Judge Jim Gray 05/04/08

As all sophisticated people know, life is full of distinctions. One of those critical distinctions that we will discuss today is the difference between drug problems, and there certainly are many, as opposed to drug money problems.


  There is no doubt that illicit drugs can sometimes be dangerous and addictive and cause harm. Many people’s health and lives have been ruined, and families torn apart emotionally and financially because of the havoc caused by the abuse of and addiction to illicit drugs. So without question this is a big problem.


  But there are also big problems that are caused exclusively by drug money. For example, for years we have been hearing and reading about the large-scale violence and corruption that takes place with drug dealers in Colombia, Mexico, Afghanistan and many other countries. And certainly the United States has had its share of this violence and corruption as well. These problems are not caused by the drugs themselves, they are caused by the drug money.


  Similarly, it is drug money that is causing drug-addicted people to commit crimes in order to get the money for their drugs. Obviously that includes burglaries, purse-snatchings, check offenses, shop-liftings, and prostitution. As a practical matter, all of the illicit drugs themselves are extremely inexpensive to raise, manufacture and package. In fact they are actually “dirt cheap.” The only reason they are expensive is because they are illegal, and that expense causes many crimes.


  For example, marijuana is not called a “weed” for nothing. It will grow virtually anywhere. In fact, for all of our efforts for its eradication, marijuana is presently the largest cash crop in California. (Number two is grapes, if you care.) And even though the DEA has gone to great lengths to convince us that the opium poppy can only be grown in mountainous regions, the National Park Service was actually growing those poppies for years at Thomas Jefferson’s home in Monticello before the DEA found out about it and made them take them out. (They are a beautiful flower.) So if the opium poppies will grow in Virginia, it is pretty obvious that they will grow anywhere.  


  But now I want to talk to you about another drug money problem that you probably are not aware of. The following scenario would take place in my courtroom about every four or five weeks when I was sitting on a Juvenile Court calendar. There would be, for example, a single mother of two small children who made a bad decision, namely she decided to hook up with the wrong boyfriend. The man would be selling drugs and the mother would generally be aware of it, but that is the way things were.


  One fine day the boyfriend would tell the mother that if she would take a package across town and give it to “Charlie,” he would give her $500 for her efforts. She would basically know the package contained drugs, but she was behind on her rent and the $500 would really help. So she would do it. And then she would be arrested and convicted for the offense of transporting drugs, and sentenced to five years in prison. Now to be honest, in today’s world being sentenced to five years in prison for transporting four ounces or so of cocaine is not an unreasonable sentence.  


But let me ask you a question: when the mother is put in prison, what happens to her children? Well, that answer is easy. The mother has legally abandoned her children since she is not available to take care of them. As a consequence they would all come to me in Juvenile Court on the Abused and Neglected Children calendar.  


So I would have this young mother in my court in a jail jumpsuit and handcuffs and I would tell her the truth, which was that she would not functionally be a part of her children’s lives for the next five years. At that point she would usually become misty-eyed at the realization. (Wouldn’t you?) But then I would tell her the brutal truth, which was that unless she was really lucky and either had a close personal friend or family member that was both willing and able to take custody of her children until she was released, her children would probably be adopted by somebody else by the time she got out of prison. At that point she would usually break down in tears. (Wouldn’t you?)


But if that human tragedy is not enough to break you down, I can probably dissolve you in tears as a taxpayer. Because in the first year, we will be spending upwards of $5,000 per month per child to keep them in a group home until they can be adopted by someone else. That means that in that first year we will be spending about $60,000 per child, times two children, plus an additional $25,000 to keep the mother in prison. As a result we will be spending somewhere around $145,000 in taxpayer money physically to separate a mother from her children!  


And who gets to enforce this situation? I do. Of course I do it because I have sworn to uphold the law. But I do not have to do it quietly, and that is why I am passing on this story to you.


So from my experience and perspective, if we would change our drug laws to hold people accountable for their actions instead of what they put into their bodies, we would begin greatly to reduce the drug money crime. And this could be easily done by undercutting the market for the sale of illicit drugs to adults.  


As was discussed in an earlier column, we could start by treating marijuana like alcohol. That would result in the savings of huge amounts of taxpayer money that are presently being spent on efforts to eradicate marijuana and to prosecute non-violent marijuana users. In addition, we could generate additional billions of dollars annually simply by taxing the sales of marijuana to adults, just like we do for alcohol. And all of this would have the substantial additional benefit of making marijuana less available for our teenagers than it is today. Why? Because illicit drug dealers don’t ask for i.d.


So what is not to like? We should pattern our conduct after most countries in Europe and start to address these problems as managers instead of moralists. This would reduce the crime, violence and corruption brought about by drug money. And then we could re-focus our efforts upon the actual drug problems themselves, like many countries are doing in Europe.


I think that everyone agrees that the federal government does not have all of the answers in this area, so why don’t we allow each state to decide what is best for its people? This is the concept of federalism upon which our great country was founded. There are viable alternatives to our present failed federal policy of Drug Prohibition, so let’s allow each state to try some alternatives. What do you think?

James P. Gray is a Judge of the Superior Court in California, the author of Why Our Drug Laws Have Failed and What We Can Do About It - A Judicial Indictment of the War on Drugs (Temple University Press, 2001) and Wearing The Robe - The Art And Responsibilities of Judging In Today's Courts, has a blog at http://judgejamesgray.blogspot.com/. http://www.judgejimgray.com, and can be contacted at www.judgejimgray.com.

“Let’s Go With What Works” by Judge Jim Gray

“Let’s Go With What Works” by Judge Jim Gray 10/07/07

 In last week’s column we discussed why our policy of Drug Prohibition is not working and why it will never work. That probably was a discouraging column to read for many people. In fact, by discussing the matter in this way it might even appear to some people that we are simply “giving up.” But that is flat out not true. We still have the same goals, which are to reduce drug abuse and all of the crime and misery that accompanies it. Instead we are simply changing our approach to meet those goals. But today’s column will bring you hope, because now we will discuss drug programs that have been working well, both in this country and in other countries around the world.  

 

  The first thing to do when focusing upon programs that work is to start by making the same important distinctions that they make, such as the difference between drug crime on the one hand, and drug money crime on the other. Similarly we must make distinctions between someone’s use of drugs, as opposed to their misuse, abuse or addiction to drugs. And we must also focus upon the difference between the government attempting to hold adults accountable for their actions, as opposed to trying to hold them accountable for what they put into their bodies.  

 

  So what works? The first thing is full, honest and open education. You show me a problem area in our society, and I will show you how full, honest and open education is a material part of its resolution. The truth is that there actually are some benefits of using mind altering and sometimes addicting drugs, because if there were not, people obviously would not be using them. But there are just as obviously some sizeable risks, so we should focus honestly upon both the risks and the benefits of putting these various substances into our bodies. Education of this kind is working quite well today with regard to the biggest killer drug of all, which is tobacco, and it will work just as effectively with regard to other drugs as well.  

 

  Another program that works quite well for people who are addicted to injectable drugs is a Needle Exchange Program. What is that? This program allows a person to exchange a dirty hypodermic needle and syringe for a clean one at a designated location – no money changes hands, and no questions are asked. That’s it. All of the research studies show that programs of this kind do not increase drug usage, and they do not decrease it either. They are neutral in that regard. But they reduce the incidence of the HIV virus that leads to AIDS as well as Hepatitis C and other blood-born diseases by about 50 percent! Regardless of what one thinks about people who inject themselves with illicit drugs, they do not deserve to contract the AIDS virus. And if that humane reason is not enough, consider that it costs us taxpayers about $100,000 for each person in our country that gets AIDS.

 

  Much hope can also be gained from a Heroin Maintenance Program that has been in operation in Switzerland since the middle 1990s. This is a program run by licensed medical doctors that furnishes prescriptions of heroin to people who are addicted to it, and the prescriptions are filled at local pharmacies. To qualify for the program, people must be at least 18 years old, have been addicted to heroin for at least two years, present signs of poor health, had two or more failed attempts at conventional treatment, and must surrender their drivers’ licenses.  

 

By the way, none of these presently illegal drugs are expensive to grow, manufacture or supply. Marijuana is not called a “weed” for nothing; it will grow anywhere. And the National Park Service was growing the opium poppy that is used to make heroin for years at Monticello until the DEA found out about it and ordered them removed. If the poppies will grow in Virginia, they will grow virtually anywhere. The only reason any of these drugs are expensive is because they are illegal. So the cost of the heroin in this program is no more than $10 per day for even the heaviest-using drug-addicted person.

 

  The results of the heroin-maintenance program show a 60 percent drop in felony crimes by the patients, and an 82 percent drop in patients selling heroin. No one has died from a heroin overdose, and new infections of AIDS and Hepatitis have been substantially reduced. In addition, heroin usage in the communities has also been materially reduced for several reasons. One reason is that most new users are introduced to heroin by members of their social groups, and 50 percent of the users sell heroin to support their own habits. But with so many users/sellers in the medical program, non-users have fewer opportunities to be exposed to heroin. In addition, this medicalization program has actually tarnished or de-glamorized the image of heroin and made it unattractive to young people. As a result of this success, Switzerland’s heroin maintenance program is being replicated in Germany, Holland, Belgium, England, Spain and Canada.

 

  Another program that works quite well is treatment. The RAND Corporation published the results of a study back in 1994 that said that taxpayers get fully seven times more value for their tax dollar with drug treatment than they do for incarceration, even for the heaviest-using drug-addicted person. This shows that it is much more effective to provide treatment for a non-violent drug-addicted person, which costs about $3,500 per year, than to incarcerate that same person at the cost to the taxpayers of about $25,000 per year.

 

  For those people who are in prison, drug treatment has also been shown to bring truly positive results. For example, in Donovan State Prison in Northern San Diego County, drug-addicted people who receive treatment as well as a program of aftercare support have a recidivism or re-offender rate of about 18 percent within the first year after being released from prison. But similar groups of drug-addicted people who do not receive the treatment program and an aftercare component have a recidivism rate of about 80 percent within the same period of time! So think of all of the crimes that are not committed; victims who are not victimized; police who do not have to investigate; and prosecutors, defense attorneys, judges and juries who do not have to try criminal cases – as well as the prison space that is freed up – all as a result of the treatment program at Donovan.

 

  But treatment is not simply having people listen to lectures about health and the dangers of drug usage. It also involves anger management training, individualized and group counseling, education and job skills, and a focus upon the merits and benefits of personal responsibility. And the aftercare support groups also assist in procuring employment for the subject, as well as furnishing personal reinforcement and reminders of the benefits of staying off drugs.

 

  Holland has taken its own sophisticated approach that recognizes that even though these drugs can be dangerous and that their presence in their society will cause harm, no matter what the criminal justice system does, the drugs are still here to stay. This realization has led Holland to adopt a national program of “harm reduction.” This approach includes honest education, needle exchange programs and drug treatment on demand, but also includes the de-criminalization of drugs. This means that although it is still illegal in Holland to buy, use or possess these drugs, as long as people adhere to widely known general guidelines about quality, quantity and age restrictions, the police are instructed in writing to look the other way and leave them alone. Of course, if a person drives a motor vehicle under the influence of any of these drugs, etc., that person is prosecuted heavily.

 

  Is this program working? Well, the Minister of Health of Holland held a press conference a few years ago in which he said that marijuana usage in his country was only half of what it is per capita in the United States – both for adults and for teenagers! And then he went on to explain why, by saying that “We have succeeded in making pot boring.”  

 

  But what effect will these programs have upon our children? Well, as discussed in our last column, our policy of Drug Prohibition is actually putting our children in harm’s way. But let us take that a step further. I have never in all of my experience heard anyone say that being a heroin addict is a good thing, and I will bet that you have not either. So in my view, we should not hide things like needle exchange and heroin maintenance programs from our children. I say we should actually take them there! What do you think these drug-addicted people will tell our children? “Come and follow my lead and really mess up your life?” No, I think they will tell our young people the truth, such as “Look at me. Do you want to grow up to be like me?” “Do you know how I got started? I thought it was cool, or someone gave me a free sample of heroin and I thought I would just try it,” etc. That will be true, honest and a lasting education, and our children will benefit from being exposed to it.

 

  Finally, my suggested alternative in this and many other areas is to utilize the libertarian concept of Federalism. Our great country was founded upon this principle. That is to say that each state should be allowed to employ a policy and set of programs that it feels will best serve and protect its people. Obviously the federal government does not have all of the answers. Let each of our 50 “crucibles of democracy” grapple with and develop a policy that works best for its people, and then let us all observe the results.

 

There is no legitimate reason why we cannot learn a lesson from programs that work, and put into effect similar programs in our communities. In the meantime, let us convince our city councils, mayors and chiefs of police to make the arrest and prosecution of non-violent offenders for the possession and use of drugs like marijuana their lowest priority.

James P. Gray is a trial judge in Orange County, California, the composer of the high school musical “Americans All,” and can be reached at JimPGray@sbcglobal.net for further information about the peer court programhttp://www.judgejimgray.com