Ask any seasoned drug policy reformer about one of the biggest hurdles to overcome in reforming cannabis laws and they’ll quickly acknowledge that to be the lack of both outreach to and participation from minorities (and women). This is why the recent announcement below by the American Bar Association (ABA) to hold a seminar in New York City this August heartens me.

If drug policy reform is to make the large strides that its important mission and sense of purpose aspires, it can’t achieve such without the participation of both minorities and women in substantially larger numbers.

This important seminar is free to the public and provides continuing legal education (CLE) credits for lawyers.

The Council on Racial and Ethnic Justice is comprised of eleven members appointed by the ABA President and is committed to:

-eliminate racial/ethnic bias in the justice system by educating and involving lawyers and their bar associations

-engage lawyers and their bar associations in programs designed to eliminate racial/ethnic bias in their communities.

Alternative Solutions to the Impact of Drugs on Communities of Color

Saturday, August 9, 2:00-3:30pm, Marriott Marquis, Music Box, Majestic Complex, 6th Floor

Conclave with the leaders of color from the medical, dental, legal and other pertinent professions to discuss the impact of drugs and drug policies on communities of color. Crucial issues that confront communities of color that are combating these issues will be addressed, and an in-depth discussion on how to obtain the necessary resources, networks and tools will be discussed. This will be a complimentary CLE program.

And How It Informs About Who Supports Cannabis Prohibition…

“Supporting marijuana use is an example of domestic terrorism—it puts the public at great risk and threatens the very fabric of our society.” -Ron Brooks, President of National Narcotics Officers’ Association, 4/11/08

In my many annual public appearances and media interviews advocating for cannabis law reforms, the question will often arise ‘if NORML and the other drug policy reform groups are right that there are safe and viable alternatives to cannabis prohibition laws, who then opposes you in trying to amend current state and federal laws?’

The recent political endorsement given to former Republican congressman and ardent drug warrior Doug Ose by the National Narcotics Officers’ Association (NNOA) provides a handy opportunity that helps reveal exactly who are America’s prohibitionists and what are their motivations against ending cannabis prohibition.

Who Actually Supports (Or Profits From) Cannabis Prohibition?
At this juncture having worked over 17 years at NORML/NORML Foundation, my standard reply, without achieving doctoral dissertation length is 1.) There are five basic subgroups of Americans who strongly oppose any reforms in cannabis laws, and 2.) These subgroups constantly seek to deepen and enhance prohibition laws, i.e., politically and culturally oppose citizens and organizations who don’t favor prohibition laws; advocate for greater criminal sanctions and fewer civil liberties (more penalties, longer prison sentences, higher fines, and more of the ‘Big Three Ps’: police/prosecutors/prisons) and civil penalties (forfeiture, drivers license suspension, loss of child custody for parents who consume cannabis, denial of college loans to students busted for pot, removal from public-assisted living housing, etc…).

The Five Pillars Of Pot Prohibition
For all intent and purposes, in my opinion, educators, religious leaders, health organizations, military leadership, business and insurance institutions, and economists are not rabid supporters of cannabis prohibition per se. However, the five subgroups of Americans who do support rigorous cannabis prohibition laws and penalties are:

Full Story

What major city in America has some of the most aggressively enforced cannabis laws (despite the fact that cannabis has been decriminalized there for more than 30 years)? What major city in America arrests nine minorities for every one Caucasian?

Houston? Atlanta? Dallas? Birmingham? New Orleans? Miami?

According to a new and comprehensive report, would you believe the five boroughs that make up New York City?

What was the New York City Police’s reaction to the data? In the New York Times today they of course attack the groups involved in bringing to the public’s attention the department’s overly aggressive and expensive enforcement of what are supposed to be decriminalized cannabis laws, and then make the amazing claim that there were not 350,000 cannabis-related arrests from 1997-2006, but a mere 8,770.

What the ?!*%$?!#@*^$#<:+={/#@7$!!!

The police commissioner, Raymond W. Kelly, has denied that the city’s police officers are using racial profiling in conducting street stops.

The department’s chief spokesman, Paul. J. Browne, said on Tuesday that the report was flawed. He said there were 8,770 marijuana-related violations from 1997 to 2006. In a statement, Mr. Browne said:

The N.Y.C.L.U. has used an advocate for marijuana legalization to mislead the public with absurdly inflated numbers and false claims about bias. (Note that the report was underwritten by the Marijuana Policy Project, a pro-legalization organization). If the N.Y.C..L.U. is for legalization it should just say so without resorting to smears. It has repackaged
virtually the same flawed presentation Harry Levine made to the marijuana legalization lobby group NORML in Los Angeles last year. The report erroneously claims that most of the over 300,000 persons arrested between 1997 and 2006 were not smoking marijuana in public and that they possessed only small amounts of marijuana; in other words, the
infractions were violations. But the actual violations total for 1997-2006 was 8,770; not the 350,000. Between 2002 and 2006, the total was 3,449. Here’s the breakout by year:

1997: 1062
1998: 987
1999: 810
2000: 1394
2001: 1068
2002: 758
2003: 701
2004: 663
2005: 623
2006: 704 (It was 683 in 2007)

Hmmmm….I wonder who is telling the truth here, public advocates or the cops?

At least when NORML confronted Mayor Bloomberg on his 100th day in office in 2002 to stop the NYPD’s then controversial practices such as ‘Operation Condor’ that exploded the cannabis arrest from around 2,000 per year to over 55,000, the NYPD’s public spokesperson did not come out and, shall I say, prevaricate regarding New York City’s verifiable criminal justice data. Back then, the NYPD’s top brass in effect said to NORML and the national media ‘So what if there was an increase in arrest? We were tasked with a quality-of-life, ‘clean up New York City’s streets’ campaign under Mayor Giuliani…’

The documentation of New York City’s massive increase cannabis arrests have been well documented for years (and affirmed by both state and federal data!), so why is the NYPD attempting to now downplay, in such a dramatic way, their nearly 15-year old aggressive policing policy regarding minor cannabis offenses?

Full Story