Thurgood Marshall’s Prescient Warning: Don’t Gut the 4th Amendment – The Atlantic

His dissent in a 1989 case stated that “today’s decision will reduce the privacy all citizens may enjoy.” And so it has.

Source: Thurgood Marshall’s Prescient Warning: Don’t Gut the 4th Amendment – The Atlantic

Just more proof that the Drug War is like the War on Terror in that it has been eroding our rights and freedoms away since its inception. Don’t take my word for it!  The first African-American Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshal is saying the same thing here, that the drug war erodes our rights! So many people have claimed that the drug war does not erode our rights… Those people are simply wrong.

Anytime any politician speaks of any type of war we should all tremble at the long history of using wars and war terminology to dismiss the rights of citizens.

Chief

Why Is Marijuana Banned? The Real Reasons Are Worse Than You Think

Source: Why Is Marijuana Banned? The Real Reasons Are Worse Than You Think

Racism, Greed, Ignorance, Corruption… take your pick. Don’t believe me? Click the above link. Red Pill? or Blue Pill?

 

The history of cannabis prohibition is pretty dirty stuff. It was NEVER about public safety unless you think like they did back then, and are terrified of Blacks and Mexicans in general or of them sleeping with white women?

If you can answer yes to any of the following questions then you may get where they were coming from back then. Racism, Corruption, Greed, and Ignorance.

Is African-American music satanic?

Does Marijuana cause white women to seek the company of negroes? And Darkies to seek out white women?

Is Marijuana an addictive drug which produces in its users insanity, criminality, and death?

Does Reefer (cannabis,marijuana)make darkies think they’re as good as white men?

Does Marihuana lead to pacifism and communist brainwashing?

Does marijuana make you likely to kill your own brother?

Is marijuana the most violence-causing drug in the history of mankind?

Is the English word assassin derived from the word hashishan?

Does Marihuana make fiends of boys in thirty days?

Does Hashish goad users to bloodlust?

 

Likely to murder your brother or a pacifist communist? Which one is it? It was never either of course. Just more lies courtesy of the US Govt.

These questions were all taken from direct quotes and statements from Harry J. Anslinger the first US Drug Czar. He popularized the term Marijuana (it was previously known as cannabis by most Americans hence the need for his name change to lie about it.)and began a long campaign of lies to demonize drugs and the people who choose to medicate with them.

He held his job for 30 years and spewed filthy racist lies throughout his career to make the public believe that drugs are a public menace and exported his American Racism throughout the world with his drug policies aimed at controlling ethnic populations.

Its disgusting and I have personally NEVER heard or seen a public official attempt to defend the drug war after being confronted with any of these statements above but the policies of our war on drugs were derived from this thinking, and continue to support it.

Drugs are no way as bad or dangerous as they would have you believe. They were irrationally scared of black people and Mexicans back then! That was the only so-called danger. These were people of the times when they lynched blacks for sport! They wanted to criminalize people for taking medicine.

Pols take sides as marijuana legalization campaign heats up Sheriff Tompkins.. Wrong on Cannabis

BOSTON — As proponents gathered outside the State House Wednesday, Aug. 3 to urge support for marijuana legalization and condemn arguments against it as rooted in fear, opponents of a ballot question to allow the adult use of marijuana released a list of 119 members of the Legislature opposing legalization.

Source: Pols take sides as marijuana legalization campaign heats up | August 26, 2016 | www.leominsterchamp.com | Leominster Champion

“I’m always concerned, particularly as a sheriff, about who goes to jail and who does not, and when you look at the overwhelming number of people of color, black and Latino, that are in our incarceration facilities, yes, I am very concerned about that,” Tompkins told the News Service. “That said, I have to balance that with health issues and I have to balance that with what I see going on.”

Sherriff Steve Tompkins is not in a good place when it come to cannabis policy… Lets hope someone pulls him to the side and teaches him a thing or two about cannabis.

 

He seems to believe its better to continue to criminalize cannabis and take peoples freedom away for possession than to change our culture for the better. The “health issues and what he sees going on” are enough for him to claim that its best left illegal for now. A corrupt position because there are no real health issues to be concerned of. Nothing that rises to the level that he is claiming. Only Reefer Madness concerns.. The continued criminalization of cannabis is a detriment to those that have been living under the terror of the drug war. Steve Tompkins doesn’t seem to believe we have suffered enough?

This is your Bill of Rights…on Drugs | American Civil Liberties Union

You probably remember the good ole’ frying pan, fried egg, fried brain anti-drug commercial from back in the day. If taking a good beating from a frying pan is what happens to your brain on drugs, you should check out what’s happened to your Bill of Rights on drugs. Almost 40 years ago, perhaps sparking the Bush team’s bright idea to declare a “war on terror,” President Nixon declared a “war on drugs.”

By the time George Bush Sr. entered the White House in 1989, a Washington Post-ABC News Poll found that 62 percent of Americans would be willing to give up a few of their freedoms in order to fight the war on drugs. And Uncle Sam has been more than willing to take them up on it. Most of the court cases within the past 40 years that have methodically abridged individual rights like freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures and property rights, have all concerned drugs. Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall even coined a term for the growing practice of sacrificing constitutional rights in the name of the fighting drugs: the “drug exception.”

It seems appropriate on this Constitution Day to take a few moments to mourn all that we’ve lost from the Bill of Rights and the Constitution due to these “drug exceptions:” Freedom from Unreasonable Search and Seizure: Perhaps the big loser of all has been the Fourth Amendment, which limits the power of the government to enter and search one’s private property. Think about it: Unlike other crimes, drug offenses do not often have complaining witnesses (i.e.: people who come forward to request police assistance). The parties who use, sell or manufacture drugs are consenting participants who likely wish to hide their drug activity. In order to unearth drug crimes, the police must engage in wiretapping, surveillance, undercover operations, the use of confidential informants, entrapment by offering to buy or sell drugs, and countless other practices that strike at the heart of what the Fourth Amendment is all about.

In the name of the drug war, courts have allowed suspicionless drug testing of wide swaths of students and private employees, and the State of Michigan almost got away with conducting random drug testing of welfare recipients. The incidence of surprise, paramilitary-style raids on people’s homes – and courts’ approval of them – in the name of routine drug policing has skyrocketed in recent years. Similarly, courts have repeatedly given the stamp of approval to the ever-increasing use of police drug dogs to search homes, cars, bags and people. Freedom of Speech: When it comes to speaking out against the government’s drug policy, the right to free speech has also fallen prey to the drug war. In 2007, the U.S. Supreme Court carved out a “drug exception” to one of the most central tenets of free speech jurisprudence: the government cannot discriminate on the basis of the viewpoints being expressed in speech.

In Morse v. Frederick the Court ruled that a student’s speech could be censored at a school-related event (even outside the school), not because it was disruptive or because it provoked imminent lawlessness, but because it contained the word “bong.” The Court drew on other drug-related precedent to find that when it comes to students in the school context (and even students who are near a school, as in this case), the government can make exceptions to free speech rights when it comes to speech about drugs. Freedom of Religion: In a 1990 case brought by Native Americans who use peyote for religious purposes, the U.S. Supreme Court shunned the longstanding rules protecting the free exercise of religion and ruled that all religious practices give way to the general laws of the land – in this case drug laws. In response, Congress passed the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) which restored the rights of people to participate in religious activities even when their practices appear to be in tension with other laws.

The U.S. Supreme Court subsequently struck down RFRA protections as applied to state laws so that when state laws and religious practices conflict, the state laws essentially win out. The silver lining, however, is that courts have ruled that RFRA protections remain intact in matters of federal law, such as in the case of Gonzales v. UDV (involving a church’s use of ayuhausca tea as part of its ritual, in conflict with federal drug laws) and Guam v. Guerrero (involving Rastafarians’ religious use of marijuana, in conflict with federal drug laws).  Currently, courts are considering the legality of the Church of Cognizance’s religious use of marijuana. Right to Vote: Because the laws of many states continue to deny voting rights to those with current or prior felony convictions – many of them for drug offenses – an entire class of citizens has been shut out of the democratic process. To da

Source: This is your Bill of Rights…on Drugs | American Civil Liberties Union

 

The shame and disgrace of the drug war is so evident… Between the Patriot Act and our  Drug War policies there is so little left of The Bill Of Rights. We will only be able to honestly claim 2 or 3 of the lesser 10 Amendments for our protection in Bill of Rights. Not enough left to wipe your ass with!

Obama Leaves Behind a Marijuana Nightmare – MARIJUANA POLITICS

At the twilight of his presidency, Barack Obama leaves unmet the huge need to change federal cannabis law. President Barack Obama will soon leave office. Although he will re-enter private life as one of America’s better presidents, he has failed to address the calamitous war on drugs, especially the eight-decade […]

Source: Obama Leaves Behind a Marijuana Nightmare – MARIJUANA POLITICS

I really couldn’t have summed it up better myself. Don Fitch lays it down in bruising detail. Prohibitionists truly have a lot more explaining to do… Who will take responsibility for the decades of deliberate lies and mistreatment at the hands of government and cause a change of course? I’m guessing no one. Not the President Not Republicans or Democrats or likely any citizens for that matter. Will it ever end then? We must continue to change culture with knowledge.

The New Politics of Marijuana Legalization: Why Opinion is Changing | Brookings Institution

Surveying a wealth of new data on public attitudes toward marijuana legalization, E.J. Dionne, Jr. and William A. Galston explain the forces and limits behind the trend toward legalization. They seek to answer the following: Will America see the emergence of a broad pro-legalization consensus, or rather of a durably divisive cultural disagreement?

Source: The New Politics of Marijuana Legalization: Why Opinion is Changing | Brookings Institution

 

Opinions on Cannabis are changing rapidly. We are all at an interesting point in history when the effects of the information age are beginning to filter down to effect the lives of all Americans. The lies of the drug war do not stand up to scrutiny when people have information at their fingertips via the internet. So eventually the more rational argument floats to the top in this new age of information. There will always be propaganda but now the lies of the past are becoming exactly that… The lies of the past. Truth is inevitable? New understandings and developments in history and the archaeological record, Social justice campaigns like Black Lives Matter, cannabis legalization efforts throughout the nation, religious or spiritual awakenings and reforms, are all results of the so many ideas being able to be shared so quickly through communities large and small. Will our culture change? The answer is yes.

Chief

Top African American Leaders Join Over 1,000 Worldwide Calling for End to “Disastrous” Drug War, Ahead of UN Special Session | Drug Policy Alliance

Source: Top African American Leaders Join Over 1,000 Worldwide Calling for End to “Disastrous” Drug War, Ahead of UN Special Session | Drug Policy Alliance

Another long list of people trying to make the world a better place by ending drug war policies worldwide. they use the same language that we typically use here at bostoncannabis.info

“Disastrous”

Local politicians should take note.

 

The unprecedented list of signatories includes a range of people from Senators Elizabeth Warren, Cory Booker and Bernie Sanders to businessmen Warren Buffett, George Soros, Richard Branson, Barry Diller, actors Michael Douglas and Woody Harrelson, Super Bowl champion Tom Brady, singers John Legend and Mary J. Blige, activists Reverend Jesse Jackson, Gloria Steinem and Michelle Alexander, as well as distinguished legislators, cabinet ministers, and former UN officials.

“The drug control regime that emerged during the last century,” the letter says, “has proven disastrous for global health, security and human rights.  Focused overwhelmingly on criminalization and punishment, it created a vast illicit market that has enriched criminal organizations, corrupted governments, triggered explosive violence, distorted economic markets and undermined basic moral values.

“Governments devoted disproportionate resources to repression at the expense of efforts to better the human condition.  Tens of millions of people, mostly poor and racial and ethnic minorities, were incarcerated, mostly for low-level and non-violent drug law violations, with little if any benefit to public security. Problematic drug use and HIV/AIDS, hepatitis and other infectious diseases spread rapidly as prohibitionist laws, agencies and attitudes impeded harm reduction and other effective health policies.

“Humankind cannot afford a 21st century drug policy as ineffective and counter-productive as the last century’s.”

“The influence and diversity of the leaders who signed this letter is unprecedented,” said Ethan Nadelmann, Executive Director of the Drug Policy Alliance, which orchestrated the initiative in collaboration with dozens of allied organizations and individuals around the world.  “Never before have so many respected voices joined together in calling for fundamental reform of drug control policies – in particular limiting ‘the role of criminalization and criminal justice… to the extent truly required to protect health and safety’.”

The UN Special Session, which will take place April 19-21, is the first of its kind since 1998, when the UN’s illusory but official slogan was “A drug-free world – we can do it!”  The upcoming UNGASS was proposed in late 2012 by the Mexican government, with strong support from other Latin American governments.  Last year UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon issued a strong call-to-action, urging governments “to conduct a wide-ranging and open debate that considers all options.”  Today’s public letter to him was prompted in part by the obstacles to such debate within the confines of the United Nations.

“This letter was drafted and all the signatures secured in just the past few weeks,” noted Nadelmann.  “The signatories represent a tiny fraction of the distinguished leaders in politics and public policy, academia, law and law enforcement, health and medicine, culture and entertainment, business, and religion who would agree with the sentiments expressed in this letter.”