ACLU: US Drug War Hurts Women

I guess so. Personally, I don't think that answering the phone or merely being present when a drug dealer is busted qualifies as a "crime." The criminals in that instance are the prosecutor who charges the woman to bump his conviction numbers, the politicians who passed laws that are being used to convict peripherally involved individuals, and the judges who do not assure that justice is done.

You may see it that way, but I do not, and neither do many of them.

An ex-girlfriend of mine served two years in prison because she went out to dinner with a guy after her 5 year high school reunion. On the way home, he stopped at a park to complete a drug deal, completely unbeknownst to my ex. She stayed in the car, was never a part of the deal, and they still busted her for dealing drugs. She was unable to get a plea bargain because she didn't know anything (had never so much as smoked a joint), while the guy who did the deal got a year of probation for turning in his dealer.

Our justice system does not dispense "justice" when it comes to the drug war.

Um, they ARE lobbying to repeal the drug laws. That is a big part of what this report is about. They are reporting on one of the major unintended consequences of prohibition.

And yet they should be. Who are these "potheads" hurting? What harm are they doing to society?

Part of the problem with drug reform is that everyone seems to have been snowed by the government propaganda that claims that medical mar1juana is a smoke screen for "legalizers" among other egregious lies. You seem to think that the only people who advocate for drug reform are people like Tommy Chong (who, BTW, has been sober for a few years now) or Woody Harrelson. What about the voices like Walter Cronkite, William F. Buckley, Bill Richardson (Ex-Governor of NM), or any of the other hundreds of anti-drug war folks who just get ignored?

The biggest problem is that the government will not allow debate to happen, certainly not in this country, and even in the UN. US officials at a recent UN anti-HIV/AIDS conference (http://stopthedrugwar.org/chronicle/379/halfwhat.shtml) kept any mention of needle exchange programs completely out of the resolutions resulting from that conference, despite massive evidence that these programs are extremely effective at reducing the spread of HIV/AIDS. Debate is limited to "how much harsher can we be with regard to drugs" and the government spends millions every year to keep the general public snowed.

It is disgusting to me and it should be disgusting to you, but as long as people have the "do the crime..." attitude, unfortunately, it will not change anytime soon.

 

Put up or shut up, moron.

 

A point that was brought up and that I conceded earlier in the thread.

I related one of the dozens of stories I have heard about peripherally (in that case, not at all) involved persons being arrested, convicted, and incarcerated on drug charges. I worked as a drug abuse treatment professional for several years and heard many, many stories much like the one I related and the ones mentioned in the story.

For a more complete discussion, there is a book called "Shattered Lives" that details some of the worst abuses of the drug war and shows the destruction that said "war" has wreaked on the lives of Americans.

I would go so far as to say that I believe that a mother who smokes pot heavily would be a MUCH better mother than a heavy or even a binge drinker.

I totally disagree that "anyone who is a heavy drug/alcohol user will more than likely be a poor parent," particularly when the drug you are talking about is mar1juana. I have known dozens of heavy smokers who were exemplary parents, committed PTA members, community leaders, and business owners. You won't hear much about them because they keep their smoking very private (for good reason), but I would be willing to bet that a pretty heavy percentage of the respectable, hard working, taxpaying adults you know also smoke mar1juana.

# According to the federal Household Survey, "most current illicit drug users are white. There were an estimated 9.9 million whites (72 percent of all users), 2.0 million blacks (15 percent), and 1.4 million Hispanics (10 percent) who were current illicit drug users in 1998." And yet, blacks constitute 36.8% of those arrested for drug violations, over 42% of those in federal prisons for drug violations. African-Americans comprise almost 58% of those in state prisons for drug felonies; Hispanics account for 20.7%.

Source: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, National Household Survey on Drug Abuse: Summary Report 1998 (Rockville, MD: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, 1999), p. 13; Bureau of Justice Statistics, Sourcebook of Criminal Justice Statistics 1998 (Washington DC: US Department of Justice, August 1999), p. 343, Table 4.10, p. 435, Table 5.48, and p. 505, Table 6.52; Beck, Allen J., Ph.D. and Mumola, Christopher J., Bureau of Justice Statistics, Prisoners in 1998 (Washington DC: US Department of Justice, August 1999), p. 10, Table 16; Beck, Allen J., PhD, and Paige M. Harrison, US Dept. of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics (Washington, DC: US Dept. of Justice, August 2001), p. 11, Table 16.

You must be pretty sheltered then, because whites use drugs at roughly the same percentage as blacks. Whites are more likely to snort powdered cocaine than use crack, they are more likely to use methamphetamines than blacks, IOW, even if blacks and hispanics use mar1juana more than whites (I have not seen any evidence of this), whites use other (more dangerous) drugs more than blacks, and overall drug usage rates are pretty much constant across races.

 

I don't necessarily think that courts are harder on women, except that women are less likely to have information that can be parlayed into plea bargains and as such, they usually get hit with the full sentence where their "men" get reductions (see the story above).

Unfortunately, when the women are incarcerated, especially when they didn't have anything to do with the crime, the egregious injustice comes when authorities break up families in the name of ... protecting families. Kids who grow up in foster homes and orphanages are much more likely to experiment with drugs later in life than those who grow up with one or both parents. I would assert that a stable home where one or both parents use drugs (remember, alcohol is a drug) is a better home than those the state places children in.

 

I have no illusions about women and the drug trade. Women sell drugs just like men do, but when was the last time you heard of a major cartel or drug ring being run by a woman? I am sure it happens, but I don't believe that nearly as many women are involved in the drug trade at high levels.

You are absolutely correct, and it happens that way for men, too. People who get nabbed in drug busts and who are too low level to give any information of use get the maximum sentence and get charged with the harshest crime the prosecutor can think of. Higher level players get off far lighter (or go on to become professional informants) because they can plea their crime and sentence down. This has the net effect of making sure that low level drug users bear the brunt of the enforcement sting while high level players hardly feel the sting, if they ever do.

The gender issue comes up for me when we start taking kids away from their primary caregivers (most likely women) in the name of "protecting the family," or "sending messages to the children."

I would much rather implement a policy that ACTUALLY reduces drug use, particularly use of drugs like cocaine, heroin, and methamphetamines (and especially among young people) and that helps people who do get addicted to recover from said addiction.

 

Honestly, those numbers are so close that you might as well say that race is not a big factor in drug usage. In addition, it is likely that blacks and hispanics, two groups at risk for more aggressive prosecution of drug laws, are not as honest as whites on these surveys.

If you look at the official numbers from Holland, you will see that race does not seem to be a determining factor in drug usage.

However, 55% of the people in jail for drugs are black despite the fact that they comprise only 15% of drug users in America. If that isn't racial bias in enforcement, then I don't know what is.

 

There may very well be a lot more data on race, though I doubt that prisoners are surveyed regarding class (I don't think they collect stats on income).

Actually, your 13% figure even more glaringly illustrates the problem when a race that comprises only 13% of the population also has 55% of the people in jail for drugs.

I am dure that there is a major class bias as people who cannot afford high-priced attorneys end up with more jail time and less chance for plea bargains. I don't see how this would account for all of the blacks in jail since there are plenty of poor white folks, but I am sure that class plays a part.

The statistics that I have seen indicate that crime is committed by the various races at a pretty even rate. There are major differences in the types of crimes (more blacks commit burglary, robbery, etc. while more whites engage in fraud, blackmail, and extortion) committed, but much of this is class based as well.

This would be an interesting theory to try to prove. However, you might as well try to profile the phone book if you are talking about every single male between 16 and 35. That is a HUGE demographic.

Please, feel free to go off on tangents.