Nola; regarding why LEAP (Law Enforcement Against Prohibition) is against prohibition:
http://www.informationclearinghouse.inf ... e33020.htmSelected sound bites.
Plan Colombia was $5.2 billion we spent trying to train the Colombian police and spraying herbicides on the coca crop. At the end of five years of that program, the coca production went up 25 percent in Colombia.
Comment: seems like giving money to fight drugs increases flow.
NELSON: Well, you talk about it somewhat, but you have to be careful, because everyone wants to get promoted. That's the whole purpose of going in, to work your way up the chain, where you can have more influence on what's going on.
Comment: those who help build the system are rewarded.
As a young 22-year-old coming in from a rural community, going into the academy, you listen to what they tell you and you believe it. And so you buy into—at that time you were still buying into the residual of Harry Anslinger, who said that blacks and browns use marijuana and it makes them rape white women.
Comment: LOL.
And in those days, just possession of a tiny amount of marijuana was a felony. Well, a felony arrest was a big deal for a young police officer. And so you did your job. And in those days, especially in those days, quota systems were rampant. The measurement of good police work was not an absence of crime; it was what did your recap look like at the end of the day.
Comment: so the head of the cartel and a guy on the street both face felonies and provide the same quota points. I wonder which would be easier to arrest? As a young officer striving to hit quota, do you spend 3 years on a sting operation or just grab some guy smoking a joint in a poor area?
And so by the time I was a commander, it was about the same time that President Nixon announced the war on drugs, and it was also the same time that I had just uncovered at the divisional level the growth of two small gangs. They were called the Bloods and the Crips. And they had a membership of less than 100. Those two small gangs in the 40 years of this drug war have grown to 33,000 gangs across the nation with a membership of 1.5 million.
Comment: sounds like alcohol prohibition.
Two years ago, the DOJ said the cartels control drug trafficking with the help of the gangs in 250 American cities. This year the DOJ said the drug cartels control drug trafficking in 1,000 American cities.
Comment: we provide an economy for the most dangerous criminals in the world and then think we are safer than having some strung out people on the street? 90% of the danger of drugs is due simple bc they are illegal.
So we haven't made a dent in these three strategy approaches. Addiction, drug abuse, it goes up and down. The flow of drugs is now warehouses full. The guns are tens of thousands of war-level weapons. And the money, even being laundered by domestic banks, they get a slap on the hand, there's millions of dollars on pallets.
And cutting the head off the snake, I came to discover as a police executive who likes to do a good job and likes to meet his goals and effectively execute the strategy, that was a big thing to me, because I finally decided there's no snake, it's starfish. And when you cut a starfish in half, you get two starfish. When you cut it four ways, you get four. And the only way to kill a starfish is to remove its nutrient. And in the case of the cartels and the gangs, the nutrient is money.
They can't function without money. They can't buy guns, money can't be laundered, and they'll be out of business. And so prohibition creates their opportunity for money. And if we take that black market away, we're going to dry 'em up. And that's what I discovered as a police executive.
Comment: that's when he understood that to do his job best, he had to stop doing his job.
The issue is it's institutionalized. Prison unions fight us all the time. Police unions fight us because they don't want it legalized, because then they're going to lose membership. As he mentioned earlier, the police make a tremendous amount of money from the federal government, not counting—if the police arrest someone at night, a couple of kids for a few joints, they take them in and arrest them, put them in jail, they go back the next day for a hearing, they get three hours overtime a piece. It's a money-making machine for them. They don't want to quit it.
Comment: makes sense.
The military-industrial complex does not want it to end, because if you sell a Sikorsky helicopter to Colombia for $16 million, that's nothing. It's going to cost $100 million a year to put the maintenance contract in place to keep them flying.
Comment: the simple truth is without war and drug wars our economy would suffer. The money that the Fed prints, lends to Columbia to buy weapons we say they need, from us goes into the pockets of gun runners such as good old VP Dick's Halliburton. If Columbia defaults on the loan, we pay it back. The money we are paying back didn't exist, was created for the sole purpose of putting it in to the hands of our wealthy and used to attack our freedoms.
when you get arrested for a drug offense, I don't care if they don't put you in jail; you've got an arrest record. And when you go to get a job, you check the box, they see you've had an arrest, they look and you had a drug arrest, you're not going to get hired. You're going to be marginalized the rest of your life.
Comment: ok, ok, you discovered how self serving this post is, I'm just bitter that I was caught destroying my life and those around me yet not willing to accept the punishment: a lifetime of marginalization because of 250 grams of weed when I was 20.
Final comment which wasn't addressed directly in this interview: tough on crime. Every politician wants to be tough on crime. How de define that a politician is tough on crime? Increase in arrests.
Which of these is tough on crime?
A. I've put away 3000 more criminals than the guy before me.
B. I stopped arresting non violent offenders.
Fun Fact: last time I checked, the only people in eligible for student loans were convicted drug offenders.
A comparative truth would be Vietnam. As many have said that the drug war has failed, many also say that the Vietnam war was a failure. And many now say the war on terror is failing.
What if Vietnam were considered a success by some? What if the war on terror is considered a success by some? What if the war on drugs is considered a success by some? Who benefitted from these wars? Who did these wars threaten? Why do we not see that the same people are benefitting? Why do we not see that these people are threatened by any change in the status quo if its not their agenda?
What actually happens in these wars? Do you think that munitions companies close up shop after these wars? The only thing that will help their bottom lines is fear. Why are all these wars causing fear? Fear of a country succeeding on its own and being a positive blueprint for others to follow? Fear of the police in our neighborhoods? Fear of terrorists on our soil?
We demand our safety. Quid Pro Quo. How do you think I feel about being in prison for nearly six years? How do you think I felt being attacked 5 times by guys holding shanks? How do you think I feel when I can't get a job? Did you think you we're making me safer? Do you think you we're making society safer?
I'm not a violent person, except when it's my turn in a CC game. But I wonder if the sovereignty of our nation extends to me, or by making the choice to have a choice I have somehow given it up.
Eight-year olds, Dude.
