The war on drugs

[Skybird]

I saw a documentary on the so-called war on drugs in America this evening, a 105 minutes program that was indeed mindblowing: "The House I Live In". It is made by the guy behind "Why we fight", which was a stunningly good documentary on the Iraq war years ago.

It was broadcasted on German-French TV channel ARTE, and will be repeated again on July 8th, 2 a.m. in the morning.

It gave insights and empirical data that not just linked contexts and facts that you would not expect to learn easily, and presented an amount of critical self-reflection and criticism of the installment of this war on drugs that is rare on TV these days, at least by German standards. The war on drugs has turned into an economic profit-making business branch that has already changed society as a whole, and not for the better, it has negatively affected the self-understanding of the police and the relation between police and civilian society, and has given the law system an unbelievable spin that send it pretty much off balance. That there also is an empirical link between the criminalising of certain drugs and the wanted "ghetto-isation" of certain minority groups to ban them from competing on the labour market, was not clear to me, not in that clarity at least.

The film does a very good job in explaining that the whole thing is far more complex and multi-levelled than ordinary pub-discussions usually recognize. And it paints a frightening picture of the future. Frightening not because of drugs, but because of what the society and the state is turning into.

The film won the Grand Jury Prize at the Sundance Film Festival 2012.

This is the trailer.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a0atL1HSwi8

And an introduction by The Guardian:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uuCVbR8vO_U

The official website:
http://www.thehouseilivein.org/

Highly recommended to see the whole show.

P.S. On a sidenote, I found it ironic that it was especially Nixon who seem to have understood the real complexity and nature of th problem better than any politician before and after him. Of course, cheater that he was, this insight did not stop him from nevertheless acting in violation of his understanding, for opportunistic powerpolitical reasons.

No pleasant outlook. And the American way to tackle the problem simply is very unjust, racist, and profit-led. It seem to aim at noit solving it, but to intentiknally boost and foster it to make the imprisonment industry (that'S what it is for sure: an industry) a regular branch of the ordinary economy.

[mookiemookie]

Sounds interesting, and not simply because I already agree with its premise. You can be sure if the government declares "War" on a nebulous concept (drugs, poverty, hunger, etc), we're in for wasted time and money and no real progress made on the issue at all.

I'm happy to see that decriminalization of marijuana is beginning to take a foothold in this country. I'm not a user anymore, so I don't have a dog in that hunt (aside from my tax dollars) but the idea of "reefer madness" is so archaic and outdated as to be laughable.

I think in my lifetime we may see minor drug offenses turn into something akin to a speeding ticket. I believe our society will be better for it.

[CaptainHaplo]

For once, I agree with Mookie on the whole governmental "war on ________" is a waste.

To that end, lets end the war on poverty. Stop "fighting" against it with welfare.

[Wolferz]

The governments war on drugs is and has always been a pathetic excuse to incarcerate people into what has become a for profit prison system and it's cottage industries within the walls that need slave labor to fill the workforce.
When you get ten years for two joints something just ain't right.
Then there's a darker side to the whole mess. A side that I doubt the documentary even mentions. Legal drug dealers called big Pharma and a shadow government within the legitimate one, controlled by the worst drug pushers on the planet. Skull and Bones.
The old guard is finally beginning to wane and be replaced by those with more open minds.

[Armistead]

Yep, it's amazing our last 3 presidents admit to drug use, they win the highest office in the world, why millions doing the same go to jail.

[Skybird]

what stunned me was the link between ethnic minorities becoming a competitor on the job market, and tackling them by not discriminating them - formally - for being that ethnicity, what would have translated into unhidden racist arguments, but by criminalising them by criminalising previously legal consummation of typical drugs. To get rid of Chinese workers, smoking Opium was criminalised. To get rid of Mexicans, smoking cannabis was criminalised and called Marihuana. To get rid of Blacks, cocains negative effect was blown beyond proportion by raising a hysteria over "crack". The weight of the empirical links and evidences stunned me, I did not know that it all was SO MUCH pushed off balance.

reminds a bit of how beer producers demonised a threatening rival to their profits when it emerged - the "green fairy", absynth. Even the original unfiltered drink never was that great a health danger to the public, as the horror stories implied and that got started by beer producers when they had already lost 15 percent of their market to the producers of this new drink.

Frightening path the US society has embarked on. The monetarian business model of changed police rules of operation, due to declaring a policy of war on drugs, only detoriates things.

The problems are so very much homemade. Haplo, you shoot not far enough - wellfare is not the root of this evil, but the simple fact that at various points of US industrial history masses of employees suddenly were not needed anymore and thus threatened the privileged majority of workers still having jobs, which corresponded with skin coloer very much. See that film in full. There are some things to see and learn that you will not like to hear about - nevertheless are true.

[Armistead]

I haven't watched it, but seen some close. I dont think they get rid of job competition by criminalising previously legal drugs. All races get arrested for drugs. I think the bigger problem was discrimination that led to poverty which cause more crime and drug use.

I know some black leaders complain pot remains illegal, because the black man would get rich selling it, which is silly. It becomes legal, white corporate America would find a way to get the market and get rich off it.

Anyway, the prision system has become a profit system over these minor drug offenses.

[Skybird]

I haven't watched it, but seen some close. I dont think they get rid of job competition by criminalising previously legal drugs. All races get arrested for drugs.
Think again. Somewhere in the film they count that up to 90% of a certain drug mentioned got consumed by whites, but at that time almost 90% of all drug addicts and traders arrested in relation with that drug were blacks.

As I said, the film makes it clear that what seems to be obvious and self-offering to reason - is not reasonable and obvious at all. There are some serious things going terribly wrong. Politicians calling for even more law and order and draconic penalties just makes it worse - but they accept that since such populistic slogans get them elected.

Watch that film. For me, it is just interesting. For you, assuming you are living in America, it becomes or already is an issue of vital self-interest. Somebody in that film says at the end that the war on drugs compares to a holocaust running in slow motion. After having seen all the film I understood the truth in that apparently rhetoric phrase. And when judges, policemen and prison staff voice their criticism and resignation that openly as in that film, then this should make every American think about his own fate, where I am just listening in for reasons of curiosity. The fallout from the distorted system no longer just raisn down on the ethnic minority groups. It now has started to rain down on the white mainstream as well.

[WernherVonTrapp]

Think again. Somewhere in the film they count that up to 90% of a certain drug mentioned got consumed by whites, but at that time almost 90% of all drug addicts and traders arrested in relation with that drug were blacks...
:hmmm: Interesting. I made lots of drug arrests during my career, and not one of them was "black".

[Skybird]

:hmmm: Interesting. I made lots of drug arrests during my career, and not one of them was "black".

It was a scene before I think a senate committee, a hearing, something like that, and the considered state was I think California. The issue discussed was the impact of one certain drug, over a certain period of time when it became a problem some time in the 80s, I think I recall they talked about Crack. The scene is in the movie somewhere. It was not just a claim by the film maker, but info voiced by I think an official in public, before such a committee.

Also, check your national statistics on arrests and skin colour, and how they changed, or not changed over the past 50 years, regarding drugs, and skin colour. Most drug consumers are whites, it thus should be whites leading the arrest numbers. But for some reason it is not like that. Says the police representatives in that film. Blacks consume drugs less than whites, but are overrepresented in arrest over consummation by several factors. That needs to be explained.

Another interview they included - from a police guy, mind you - reflected on how the priority put on war on drugs changed arrest behaviors and shifted the focus of police work from generally more harmful crime like robbery and murder, to bagatelle crimes regarding consummation or possession of even smallest amount of drugs, even such harmless stuff like Marihuana. That officer asked the interviewer this: when an officer gets payed by numbers of arrests per month, and focus is politically wanted on drugs, then this has two effects. The one officer may spend many hours and days for investigating a case of murder or robbery , and at the end of the month gets two or three arrests scored. The other officers knows he gets payed by arrests, so he goes onto the street and starts to arrest suspects over minor drug offences that the law has blown out of proportion, and thta way he scores let'S say 60 arrests by the end of the month. Guess what the police is focussing on, robbery and murder, or arresting persons who consume drugs, may it be Crack, may it be Marihuana? This officer worried about the quality of police investigation work suffering from this, because police now tends to not care for patient, long investment of time, but just sees the street as a fish pond where they take a big fork ionce a day and catch out what they get, without caring anymore for the severity of the offender's "crime" or any contexts leading beyond the letter of the paragraph that calls it an offence.

There seem to be quite some police officers and judges who are seriously worried by how things have turned, and they question both the effic iency and the morality of the rules and paradigms currently being acted by. Many seem to have resigned and do not care anymore. What wil not help to reinstall the trust that the civilian population already has lost.

Anyhow, I'm telling some info from the film by memory only. If somebody has doubts, he better goes out and watches that movie somewhere. I refer to that film only, and by memory. But the real important witnesses are not me, but those people they interview in that film, and who are prison wards, judges, activists, police officers, offenders, family members.

[Wolferz]

:hmmm: Interesting. I made lots of drug arrests during my career, and not one of them was "black".

What was the most common drug you made arrests for?

[Betonov]

Good thing I live in a country that possesion of (small quantities) only ends up with a fine. Mostly just confiscation and your name in the cops little badboy book.

[Catfish]

A war on drugs, in the USA ?

There were wars against middle and south american countries
(financed by drugs)
There were wars in Corea and Vietnam
(financed by drugs)
There were wars against middle east countries
(financed by taxpayers)
There is a world war against terrorism
(financed by taxpayers)

Who fights a war against drugs ?
The Cocaine Importing Agency ?

Sorry, but :dead:

[WernherVonTrapp]

What was the most common drug you made arrests for?The most common, or most often arrested were marijuana, then heroin, crack, illegal prescription drugs, some Special-K (or Ketamine), Ecstasy (methylenedioxymethamphetamine). Too many to remember. Oh, and I was wrong. After thinking about it, I did remember where I was involved (not the arresting officer) in an arrest that involved two "blacks" and two "whites".
It came about after a call of a suspicious vehicle parked in front of a known (or common) actor's residence. Upon arrival with other units and subsequent investigation, it was learned that this white male was pimping his girlfriend out for sexual favors in lieu of payment from two male drug dealers (black males). During a probable cause search, illegal drugs (crack) was found and all parties were arrested on various different charges. But that's the only one I can think of. I worked in a small suburb just outside the city of Paterson, NJ (where I just happened to be born and raised).

I'm not disputing anyone's claim's here; just stating a fact. I became a LEO in the mid-late 80s. I grew up with friends who (for purposes of this topic) were black, hispanic, circassian and eastern european. I suppose, because of that, I never looked at things from a color standpoint, though early as a child, I remember hearing racial slurs of every kind coming from older people.

[WernherVonTrapp]

Good thing I live in a country that possesion of (small quantities) only ends up with a fine. Mostly just confiscation and your name in the cops little badboy book.You cannot do that in the states because, even the guys who you give a warning to, will run off and brag to their friends. I've seen it happen with various things (drugs, fireworks, alcohol, etc.) where word gets around that "the cops probably kept it for themselves or smoked it", etc.. Then IAD comes looking for YOU and a big investigation ensues. Where applicable, I've only handed out citations too, but always tagged and bagged the evidence, turning it over to the evidence custodian to maintain the "chain of evidence". Maybe the big cities can get away with that, since there are always shootings, robberies and such to occupy their time, but in the smaller suburbs, if you turn in evidence w/o filing charges, you yourself can potentially be charged with failing to enforce the law, malfeasance, nonfeasance, etc.. In essence, it could end up costing you your job.

[Wolferz]

I don't fault any officer of the law for doing his duty in enforcing drug laws. Laws that are for all intents and purposes black and white in their interpretations. But then you have to question the motives behind some of these laws. I'll use Cannabis as an example. It's not really a drug. It's a naturally occurring plant that needs no manipulation by man, other than cutting and drying to make it useful. Unlike the harder, more addictive drugs like Cocaine and amphetamines. Both of which are chemically processed into their addictive forms. Cannabis, no matter what some government paid lab rat says, is NOT physically addictive. You can imbibe Cannabis every day for years and not suffer any physical withdrawal symptoms if you suddenly stop using it,
unlike other substances. Even the oh so legal alcohol has a nasty set of withdrawal symptoms and we've all seen the effects of impairment that alcohol provides.

Cannabis was originally demonized by a director of the USDA doing his imitation of Napoleon, just to appease the big influential commodity growers in the southwestern US. Their main beef stemmed from the migrant farm workers bringing their Cannabis up from Mexico with them when they came to pick fruits and vegetables. Not so much because they were getting stoned and acting lazy but, more because the seeds made their way into the grower's dirt and grew like the weeds they were.
On the other side of the coin was Hemp. A more fibrous form of Cannabis that made strong durable products like clothing and rope. The budding petrochemical industry of the day saw it as a direct threat to their livelihood after they discovered the formulas for making nylon, rayon and other artificial fibers. So they lobbied to kill the competition that Hemp threatened. The Cotton growers weren't real happy about Hemp either. Hemp had been cultivated in the states from the time before we were a sovereign nation.
So technically, the war on Cannabis has been waged by big money interests seeking profit. The elected have long since been bought and paid for by these lobbies and have seen no reason to interrupt their cash and perk flows. Then came their realization that enforcing these unfair laws carried a side benefit of prison industries ripe for profit taking by all involved.

The way I see it, Cannabis isn't for everyone but, it has certain medicinal benefits for many ailments. This threatens big pharmaceutical companies. It's a naturally occurring analgesic and Bayer will fight against it tooth and nail, along with every other maker of pain killers.
Well, God put Cannabis here for a reason and I trust him far more than I trust Squibb Pharmaceuticals.
Attitudes are starting to change more rapidly now as the brainwashing lies and propaganda of big government loses it's grip on people's minds.
They can keep showing Reefer Madness in school health classes if they want. It's at least good for a laugh.

[Betonov]

The way I see it, Cannabis isn't for everyone but, it has certain medicinal benefits for many ailments.

Tell me about it. the one I smoked in may made so sick I havent touched since and I doubt I will :nope:
oh well, I'm running out of vices

[Wolferz]

Tell me about it. the one I smoked in may made so sick I havent touched since and I doubt I will :nope:
oh well, I'm running out of vices

Must have been some good shtuff. :03::D
Or you were already ripped on booze. The two do not mix well.:Kaleun_Sick:

I very rarely drink alcohol because it makes me sick.

[August]

I think "Reefer Madness" did more to promote drug use in this country than just about anything else. The problem with over the top, easily discounted propaganda like that is that it causes doubt in the veracity of other anti-drug messages.

After all if pot doesn't drive you insane then maybe meth won't either.

[WernherVonTrapp]

I think "Reefer Madness" did more to promote drug use in this country than just about anything else. The problem with over the top, easily discounted propaganda like that is that it causes doubt in the veracity of other anti-drug messages.

After all if pot doesn't drive you insane then maybe meth won't either.
The first time I saw that film (without going into my life history:D) I thought to myself; "These people have got to be kidding me. They expect viewers to take this seriously?"

There were many times when I was making an arrest (and not just for drugs either) where I quietly advised the arrestee that I didn't necessarily agree with the laws, but was bound by law to enforce them.

[Betonov]

Or you were already ripped on booze. The two do not mix well.

Nope, sober as a judge. Something didn't agree with me that day and I stopped completely. So much for pot making you addicted

[Wolferz]

Nope, sober as a judge. Something didn't agree with me that day and I stopped completely. So much for pot making you addicted

Fair enough. You had an allergic reaction. Like I said, it's not for everybody. Just like penicillin isn't for everybody. My wife, for example, would die if she took a drug containing penicillin. But that doesn't stop them from producing it.

The government is hypocritical in their application of the drug laws for all of the reasons I mentioned previously and then some. They tell you that you can't use pot to ease your aches and pains. Here, take this vicodin instead. But it's OK to imbibe alcohol and tobacco. Even though both of those substances have a far greater negative impact on those who become addicted to them.
Why? Tax money.
Cannabis also opens the mind to their BS and they definitely don't want too many people waking up.:huh: It's far too late for that and they refuse to see it.
So they leave the majority to become victims of a shady black market system instead of creating a legal control framework.

Here's a little known fact... Do you know who holds the patent on medical marijuana? The Federal government of the United States.
Can you say "conflict of interest?

[Skybird]

German Focus magazine reports on how the industry in the US has discovered prison labour as a way to produce cheap, and for private capital interest, which helps to boost the private prison sector, and motivates for legislation to encourage high imprisonment rates by drqaconic penalty for even marginal offences, to ensure that prisons stay profitable and always enough slave workers are in the production line.

http://www.focus.de/panorama/welt/tid-32255/23-cent-lohn-pro-stunde-wie-gefaengnisse-mit-moderner-sklaverei-milliarden-verdienen_aid_1037691.html

A depressing, dangerous and disgracing business model that in my opinion equals slave labour. I am not against forcing prisoners to work for the costs of their "lodging", but I am against motivating to boost imprisonment rates and turning prisons into an attractive business model. The TV docu already showed how marginal offences have become for which you can earn long slave work sentences, and how real important focusing on really major crime cases gets neglected by a system that sees its focus now in serving the profit interests of private contractors and private business leasing the prisons as de facto slaves. The whole system is not only depressingly but also very dangerously derailed.

IMO this becomes dangerously comparable with slave labour in KZs.

[Ducimus]

The War on drugs, it failed.

[TarJak]

The War on drugs, it failed.

Like most forms of prohibition.

[Skybird]

One must ask whether it is about drugs in the first at all these days. It seems it is about increasing the flow of slave workers into the work camps where their working power is used to make profits for private businesses. To reach that, draconian penalties are called out for drug abuses so minor that they do not justify years or life in prison.

It is as if one does surgery on patient snot needing surgery at all, to tune the financial balances of the hospital. Could be that there comes a solidarity lottery for winning a free surgery session comes next next where even healthy people must participate in order to generate income for hospitals.

The dangerous step beyond the red line is when prisoners in prisons must not work to generate the money spend for their food, clothing, electricity and prison maintenance costs (I am all for that!), but could be leased as slave workers to private people and businesses. It is here where I do not see major differences anymore between this system, and KZ workers in the third Reich, in a system where it was common that the Wehrmacht or the industry asked in a KZ whether they could deliver more workers for this, more workers to there, and the security apparatus making sure that the supply in KZ prisoners was such that it could meet these business interests. The dorr for abuse of such a system is wide open in the US, and obviously the abuse already is immense, and is growing.

It also has as a consequence, that policework'S focus - as the documentary illustrates - shifts from criminal investigation to catching easy fish: to collect financial boni (kind of head bounties) and to keep the growing number of prisons full of "workers".

Something goes dramatically wrong with that system there. What'S next? Enforced organ donor, maybe? Wait, in China they already have that.

If one sees all this together, and keeps in mind that racism against ethnic groups via criminalization of previously legal drug consummation serves a purpose that has nothing to do with fighting drugs, then it is easy to conclude that if the system would not be about the claimed war on drugs, then it would be about something else. This war is about something very different than just drugs.