Drug Czar: Tide Turning in Drug War

WASHINGTON - America is achieving historic successes in the war on drugs, and some high-tech gadgets may be helping to turn the tide, John P. Walters , the nation's drug czar, said on Wednesday.

"We've had use go down by 11 percent by teenagers over the last two years. We haven't seen that happen in 10 years — 400,000 less kids are using drugs in 2003 than in 2001," Walters told an audience attending a counter-drug technology exhibit in Washington, D.C.

Walters, whose official title is director of the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy (search), demonstrated some of the technology contributing to this success. Mini-buster contraband detectors, night vision kits and wiretap systems were among several items on display at the exhibit.

Police officers use the mini-buster, which is about the size of a chalkboard eraser, to find hidden drugs, money and other contraband tucked away in false compartments in cars, suitcases and other sealed areas. The technology is similar to that of a stud-finder, which detects density changes in walls.

Another tool is a drugwipe, which a police officer uses to wipe a surface to detect traces of marijuana, cocaine, opiates or amphetamines. If the drugs are present, the swab changes color.

"These technologies help state and local law enforcement work with the federal government to find and bring to justice those who market these drugs and it complements what we're doing outside of our borders and overseas," Walters said.

But not everyone is as pleased with the new technology. Advocates for changes in marijuana laws say that the equipment is not only invasive, but is misdirected at some individuals who don't deserve to be under surveillance.

"All of this stuff exists to some degree on the notion that we make our society better somehow by arresting and jailing people who use marijuana. When attempts to instrument that policy are intrusive and threaten people's liberties, that's a great concern to us. I think there has been a ratcheting up of some of these more intrusive methods," said Bruce Mirken, director of communications for the Marijuana Policy Project (search).

"The picture, overall, is frankly increasing desperation by the advocates of prohibition who resort to more extreme tactics, and it’s a great concern, but it's also a sign that they are losing the battle for public opinion," Mirken said

Previously, much of the high-tech gear was only available to federal law enforcement. The items are now being distributed free of charge to law enforcement agencies as part of a Technology Transfer Program (search) first enacted by Congress in 1998.

The Technology Transfer Program provides state and local law enforcement agencies with equipment and training for deployments and operations. All equipment is transferred to recipient agencies at no cost and becomes the permanent property of that organization

Former Rep. Bob Barr (search), R-Ga., now a civil liberties advocate, said that on a recent visit to a small West Georgia police department, the chief showed off several shiny new M-16 rifles provided by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (search).

"The federal government is encouraging the militarization of local police forces by giving away weaponry and providing advisers," Barr said, commenting on general trends in policing, not only on anti-drug policies.

State and local agencies can receive the tools after participating in mandatory training sessions. More than 6,000 agencies are currently involved in the program.

Fox News

----------------------------------------------
Drug Czar: Tide Turning in Drug War
Thursday, February 19, 2004
By Peter Brownfeld

Why is it that everytime there is a decrease in drug use they say its because of the enforcement end, that might decrease demand, but it DOESN'T STOP PEOPLE FROM USING DRUGS. The numbers they get are basically useless, and can easily be manipulated. The numbers would be a lot more reliable if they used emergency room visits, number of arrests, and number of deaths to determine the amount of users instead of asking people. Too many people don't admit to it (espeically teenagers being asked in school). I know I always lied on those cause my teachers looked at them.

Heh. All the numbers I've ever cared to look at have pointed to increases in enforcement causing more usage. When use decreases, they should compare the decrease to the average person's decrease in spending. Considering the economic rut we're in, there should be a huge drop in use. I've already learned long ago not to pay any mind to wild claims made by American media. It just isn't very believeable anymore when it comes to subjective statements or data.

I can somewhat picture the # relationship, but not with arresting individuals from large busts. The supply goes down, meaning less people have drugs to do. I mean, it would seem that the larger the police enforcement, the more people tend to use drugs. But if it was to be legalized, meaning minimal police enforcement, then usage would soar. So it's quite an odd situation, statistically speaking.

It's funny how a couple times per year the DEA can always come up with a "We're doing our job, really! And it's working!" speech. But any independent inquiry into the matter comes up with little relevant info and more proof that the drug war isn't, and never has, worked.

" "The picture, overall, is frankly increasing desperation by the advocates of prohibition who resort to more extreme tactics, and it’s a great concern, but it's also a sign that they are losing the battle for public opinion," Mirken said "

On the bright side, maybe the WOD is nearing its death throes. On the downside, when it begins its death throes, it'll be dragged out of the national forum while throwing a temper tantrum like a two-year-old and maliciously taking out as many hippies and whoever else with it as it can. A lot of the most zealous drug warriors are going to do as much damage as possible just out of spite (long after the will of the public is apparent) before throwing in the towel. It seems to me that while the will of the people might not be total legalization, the people certainly want greatly relaxed drug laws and the government is doing exactly the opposite. Medical MJ in certain states is a perfect example. Fuck vice law in all its hideous forms.

" Previously, much of the high-tech gear was only available to federal law enforcement. The items are now being distributed free of charge to law enforcement agencies as part of a Technology Transfer Program (search) first enacted by Congress in 1998. "

Free of charge huh? Free like shoplifting I bet.

Previously, much of the high-tech gear was only available to federal law enforcement. The items are now being distributed free of charge to law enforcement agencies as part of a Technology Transfer Program (search) first enacted by Congress in 1998.

The Technology Transfer Program provides state and local law enforcement agencies with equipment and training for deployments and operations. All equipment is transferred to recipient agencies at no cost and becomes the permanent property of that organization

Click to expand...

I know a few good, honest, hard-working single mothers with children who could use perhaps .001% of the millions of dollars the Fed's are spending on giving local police departments I-Spy technology, for help with daycare expenses or food or clothing for their beloved little children.

I don't know, it seems weird to me that we have men and women who work 80hrs a week to feed and house their children, while we have Officer Dickwad from the local police department that can tell you if you have a half-burnt piece of bud under the floor matt of your car from 5 miles away with his eyes closed.

We are getting closer and closer to a police state in FREE america.
I say let people be who they want to be as long as they a re mindful of others. Take out the drug dealer by legalizing and the crime just wouldn't be there anymore.

I hope the economy collapse soon and we stop giving a flying fuck about out material wealth

" But if it was to be legalized, meaning minimal police enforcement, then usage would soar. "



While I agree that the "transient response" would fluctuate dramatically (all hell would break loose initially), I would like to think that after the new wore off and people realized that they have to learn to be responsible for their own actions (which I'm aware is currently a rather foreign concept here) with drugs that use would fall to levels below even that of countries where drug use is persecuted far less. I would invite anyone that disagrees to explain why drug use in most countries always seems to be proportional to enforcement (more enforcement, more use). I'm not standing firm on this belief and challenging someone to disprove it by any means, it's just that I've seen nothing that goes against it.

I have a feeling that the last desperate move by the government if things ever get that far will be to legalize everything and then jump up and say "I told you so" when things go haywire before everything has settled back down (if it even happens that way). Things would in my opinion get somewhere from a good deal to somwhat worse before slowly getting better and ending at a point that is far better than how it is now. If they actually had the best interests of the people at heart, they'd slowly phase it in responsibly and eliminate even the problems due to the transient response, but I'm 100% sure that they'd happily do it incorrectly and hope to see the movement fall square on its face. They've fought this WOD long enough in the face of logic that it's obvious to me that they're getting some sort of significant satisfaction from doing so.

I hope I'm not giving Americans too much credit for having common sense and learning to use responsibly. That would say that we were somehow incapable of doing what many countries have practically accomplished already (far more relaxed drug laws yet significantly less use and drug related problems). I know plenty of people, a lot of whom are drug users themselves, that predict hell on earth if legalization ever occurs but I've surely never seen a single valid reason to believe it.

I know plenty of people, a lot of whom are drug users themselves, that predict hell on earth if legalization ever occurs

Click to expand...

Well Alcohol is legal, quite toxic and addictive, yet did all hell break loose yet? Not really, most people have self control. So that's that for peoplke using this argument against legalizing other less addictive drugs

Just more propaganda designed to justify funding for the draconian war on drugs industry in the U.S.. Hopefully they will eventually realize that you can't simply arrest everyone possible and the problem will go away. Actually, if it wasn't so annoying , it would be humerous.

Im kind of down with this sort of policy.. I know im going to get everyone in this site going mad but i think that a soft approach to drugs promotes the idea that effects fo drugs are soft. My two cents anyway

Yeah, right. We need a police state with video cameras in every home and toilet. You need microchips inplanted into kids and monitor everyone 24hrs a day. Only by having a government with an extreme hand will we be able to enjoy a drug-free world with high levels of freedom and justice. Yeah, right.

hotMOovZ: the drugwar promotes tainted drugs in society and a low level of education which results in increased deaths. These tough drug polocies just show the government rather have votes then prevent people from dieing. All this when the CIA has been documented selling drugs many times in the past. The drguwar will not work just like the alcohol prohabition didnt work. Do you think its good putting all that drugmoney into the hands of terrorists and criminal organisations?

^^

In response to your last question, yes, i do.

Terrorists, to me, are law enforcement.

I don't think there is a strong relation between drug policies and drug use. For instance: cannabis use in the UK (where it is forbidden) is higher than in the Netherlands (where it is tolerated).

Heroin use is low in the Netherlands because of the fact that users are regarded as 'patients' or 'losers'. In countries where junkies are put in jail, they are regarded as 'criminals' which in this case equals 'rebels' .

Anyways, I think that a very strict anti-drug policy (such as the USA has) leads to higher drug use, because of the following mechanisms:

1. "If the government warns against it and the police try to stop it by all means, it MUST be something SPECIAL !! Man, I gotta have some of that VERY DANGEROUS stuff !! "

2. "My friend is using drugs. Wow, this guy is my hero! He has the guts to do it even if it is FORBIDDEN ! He is in fact a rebel, an independent thinker, an unconventionalist, an artist..."

Since when is Bob Barr an advocate for civil rights? He used to be one of the biggest drug warriors around

"In response to your last question, yes, i do.

Terrorists, to me, are law enforcement."

It is true that the fight against American and our policies of control, but every terrorist attack that takes place against America is another excuse for our government to tighten their grip on the citizens, i.e. Patriot Act. It just puts us closer and closer and closer to Martial Law, and IMO, it would be much better if this government was overthrown by its own people. We could revolutionize the world by starting with our own country. Utopia may be possible.