« What the heck is NYC doing so right to reduce murders, and why can't Chicago replicate it? | Main | Talk in Georgia about modifying its (too) tough approach to Atkins death penalty issue »

October 18, 2013

Recommended reading (and hoping for more comments) at "Marijuana Law, Policy and Reform"

As I have noted in this space before, I am now posting much less on marijuana law and reform issues here because my energies on this topic are now mostly channeled to my new blog Marijuana Law, Policy and Reform.  While I continue to urge everyone who is especially interested in drug policy reform topics to regularly check out my work over there, I will continue to post links to some MLP&R highlights unless I hear complaints or concerns about the practice:

As the title of this post reveals, I have so far been a little disappointed by the absence of comments in response to most posts at MLP&R.  The traffic at the site has been pretty robust for a new blog (e.g., my sitemeter reports a few hundred hits most weekdays, especially if I post new content). But given that the blog is dedicated to a topic so controversial and contestable, I had expected there to be more engagement by readers (at least via anonymous commentors). 

Could it be that I have managed to make marijuana boring by actually treating it as a serious and important topic of law, policy and reform?

October 18, 2013 at 10:33 AM | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451574769e2019b001e25c4970b

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Recommended reading (and hoping for more comments) at "Marijuana Law, Policy and Reform":

Comments

Relax, dude. No comments over there just means your readers aren't, like, too worried about stuff.

Posted by: Cheech | Oct 18, 2013 2:09:21 PM

One potential reason for the lack of intense activity is that the question has been settled intellectually. It is self evident to the ordinary person. It is not settled only to the lawyer driven government bureaucracy in rent seeking. A giant machine arrests people, fines, incarcerates them.

One may not oppose legalization of marijuana without advocating for the prohibition of tobacco and alcohol. The first kills 50 people by car crashes, none by itself. The others kill 500,000 people by horrid disease. The prohibition of marijuana contributes to the excess 5000 murders among black males, fighting over territory. Since there is no support for Prohibtion of alcohol and tobacco, not even the Supremacy is calling for the execution of 10,000 dealers, and the lashing of a million users. Only such extreme penalties would work. So the sole logical position is to support legalization of marijuana.

These lawyers are subhuman traitors to the nation. In rent seeking, the tax dollar is stolen, and no benefit is returned to the taxpayer. In the case of the DEA, the courts, the police, the prisons, the lawyer dominated filth in our legislatures, it goes beyond rent seeking to real treason, and serious damage to the nation.

The illegality represents a federal price subsidy to the enemies of the nation, the Taliban, the Mexican Drug cartel undermining our ally south of the border, hurting its economy and sending many seeking safety to our nation. It enriches our enemies, and deprives the states of tax revenue, our tobacco companies of income, and our unemployed of lucrative jobs.

Those opposing legalization must be held accountable for this massive damage.

If one wants to discuss taking action against prohibition, rather than the non-controversy of legalization that would be a compelling discussion.

Posted by: Supremacy Claus | Oct 19, 2013 5:48:49 AM

The Supremacy has also proposed a remedy for those getting into trouble with addiction to marijuana, the adult pleasure license, to be revoked for those who cannot control themselves and who start to do damage.

Posted by: Supremacy Claus | Oct 19, 2013 5:51:37 AM

Since this is a crime policy blog, it must be pointed out that half the murderers are drunk, half the murder victims are drunk, and half the suicides are drunk. Of the 30,000 deaths from car crashes, at least a third are from drunk driving, often taking 2 to 3 others with them.

The use of marijuana may be an under appreciated factor in the mysterious drop in crime rates, especially violent crime rates.

The use of marijuana should be promoted above the advertising for alcohol to reduce murders, violent crimes, suicides, and car crashes (50 deaths from cannabis driving compared to 10,000 deaths from drunk driving). Marijuana promotes apathy rather than aggressiveness, as alcohol does.

Posted by: Supremacy Claus | Oct 20, 2013 12:37:52 PM

Same problem as on Civil Rights blog. Every refresh of page erases comment before posting. Frustrating and discouraging.

Doing rough draft here, and pasting on other blog.

The shorter the half life of a substance, the more addictive. Crack has a shorter half life than powder cocaine and is more addictive, thus the greater penalties.

Nicotine. Half life: 1 hour. Addiction risk: 50% after 50 cigarettes. Deaths: 400,000 (nicotine harmless itself, except for addictiveness, but delivery requires consumption of many carcinogenic, heart toxic substances).

Alcohol. Half life: 3 hours (.25 oz an hour, assuming a drink an hour, but with many factors). Addiction risk: 10%. Deaths: 100,000.

Cannabis. Half life: 10 days. Addiction risk: 9%. Deaths: 50 by crash crash, zero from marijuana alone (dangerous if leads to other illegal drug use).

The half life is just a gross estimation with many personal and environmental factors affecting it.

Addiction risk seems to be genetically determined as well, since risk is elevated in the adopted away offspring of addicts. Offspring living with addicted parents have a lower risk of addiction since they may abstain having seen the consequences. Unclear whether addiction proneness is general (to any addictive substance) or specific (offspring of alcoholics become alcoholics not heroin addicts at greater than expected rate). Risk of alcoholism is nil across the board, even in offspring of alcoholics, where alcohol is prohibited, for example in Muslim or Methodist homes. Prohibition works when fully enforced in the family.

Posted by: Supremacy Claus | Oct 20, 2013 1:12:22 PM

Chill, Supremacy.

Posted by: Cheech | Oct 20, 2013 3:54:53 PM

Yo, Cheech: Out to Cali last year. Venice Beach boardwalk. Every block had a guy yelling in front of a clinic, "The Doctor is in. Walk in, fly out. $40."

You are right, I should have gone in gotten my prescription for a condition specific brand of marijuana. There was a sign listing 100 conditions that qualified, plus "Any other chronic medical condition" at the bottom.

Posted by: Supremacy Claus | Oct 20, 2013 5:11:51 PM

I see a social need for large scale discussion of the illness and death caused by smoking cigarettes. It is a disgusting thing to be around and it is gruesome in its toll. TNT is rolling out some new Mob movie on television with countless ads showing mobsters puffing away on cigarettes. All the young punks who admire the punks on the tube will be puffing away if they were not already. Pot smokers trash their lungs but not as badly as the cigarette chumps.

Posted by: Liberty1st | Oct 21, 2013 9:12:02 AM

The juxtaposition between cigarette smokers who do it legally and are encouraged by the likes of Edward R. Murrow, and then the illegality of pot is best put forth by Bob Marley in his hit song: Legalize Marijuana. He starts off with the unsung phrases: Cigarette smoking is Dangerous, Hazad to your health! Then the tune starts: "Legalize marijuana! hoo hoo hooo, Right here in sweet Jamaica! hoo hoo hoo... etc
Marley is right. Tobacco is a killer and pot is not so bad.

Posted by: Liberty1st | Oct 21, 2013 1:30:44 PM

Liberty1st --

"Pot smokers trash their lungs but not as badly as the cigarette chumps."

Depends on how much they smoke. Unfiltered joints (and they're all unfiltered) are far more harmful than normal cigarettes, and will do you in a good deal more quickly.

Posted by: Bill Otis | Oct 21, 2013 7:09:15 PM

B. Marley @wiki:
“In July 1977, Marley was found to have a type of malignant melanoma under the nail of a toe ... Marley
turned down [doctors'] advice to have his toe amputated, citing his religious beliefs. Despite his illness, he continued touring …
Bob Marley appeared … it would be his last concert.

Shortly afterwards, Marley's health deteriorated and he became very ill; the cancer had spread throughout his body … Marley
sought treatment at the Bavarian clinic of Josef Issels, where he received a controversial type of cancer therapy (Issels treatment) partly based on avoidance of certain foods, drinks, and other substances ...

While flying home from Germany to Jamaica, Marley's vital functions worsened. After landing in Miami, Florida, he was [finally] taken
to the hospital for immediate medical attention. Bob Marley died on 11 May 1981 at Cedars of Lebanon Hospital in Miami (now University of Miami Hospital); he was 36 years old. The spread of melanoma to his lungs and brain caused his death.”:

"Liberty1st":
Will you emulate your herbal idol, and disavow legitimate medical science generally?
With ACA/Obamacare as your option, I completely understand.

Posted by: Adamakis | Oct 22, 2013 8:26:28 AM

Post a comment

In the body of your email, please indicate if you are a professor, student, prosecutor, defense attorney, etc. so I can gain a sense of who is reading my blog. Thank you, DAB