I am so surprised and disappointed that the black churches have come out against legalization. Many of their children are involved in selling and are dying over “turf.” I would rather my child smoke pot than die due to being a dealer. Pot has made many gangs wealthy with great personal costs.

Good lord, Jane! Rational, reasoned discourse? On tv? I don’t think anyone could have anticipated…*g* Well done.

This whole thing reminds me of “pro-lifers” refusing to do things which reduce the number of abortions. They have another hidden agenda, just like these people.

We should also stop using farm subsidies to undercut Mexican crops, but that is government welfare for hard working white people, so its always okay no matter what. Racism doesn’t exist, though.

Aside from conservatives objecting to marijuana legalization on moral grounds, we are sure to hear about the evils of government regulation and taxation on legal marijuana. Nevermind the freedom to do with one’s own body as one wishes. Nevermind the new, badly needed revenue stream.

Better to just cut taxes and borrow money to fund endless war.

De-funding the cartels seems like a no-brainer. So why isn’t anyone talking about it?

Because we value our Puritan heritage more than common sense?

Jane you have raised the most rational question relating to our dilemma.

The War on Drugs was the first “endless” war, leading to the “moral” climate that fostered the current “endless” war on terrorism.

Both have furthered many political “careers”, both require nothing but smug moral (and racial) superiority, both from the politician that raises this “herald” and the many who profit from its proud flapping …

What you propose is reason, is humane, is the best and most proper thing our nation could do to end the spiraling mayhem.

Unfortunately, the “movers and the shakers”, the pols and money-makers, will argue that doing the right thing would be wrong, while CONTINUING to do what is clearly wrong and truly immoral is the only “right” thing to do.

Those who have and maintain power through deceit and force cannot bow either to reason or to humanity …

DW

If pot were legalized, Big Pharma might have trouble pushing their poisonous anti-depressant shit like Prozac and Zoloft that their making assloads of money from.

And,..and once pot is legal then gay marriage, sex in the streets, and the decline of morality that the crazy ass tea party is always carping about will soon follow.

You’re right, Jane, no brainer.

Thanks Jane. I am as anti-drug as they come. Even I vehemently support the decriminalization and taxation of pot.

Oakland approves marijuana factories

This imho is a huge states rights issues. The states desperately need the tax revenue. It is also an incredibly poor use of the law enforcement dollar. Progressives can tell DEA and other federal law enforcement resources to back the hell off of pot in their state. The Republicans who own the prisons in their heavily GOP districts will not be happy.

Hahaha…saw a bumper sticker the other day that said, “Bacon: the gateway food”. Made me think about all the processed crappy food-like substances that are marketed to us that cause way more health problems than pot.

There are two groups that make a lot of money from weed being illegal: Mobsters and police departments.

My life’s goal is to end big ag subsidies (corporate welfare). You pretty much have to repeal NAFTA to do it, though.

Details, details.

Prison guards too. And the privatized prison industry that employs them.

And I have to wonder: where is the criminal defense bar on this? Legalization would dry up a revenue stream for them as well.

Ah, Jane, you’re getting all zen. I mean that in a good way. I’m glad you pointed to the real problem. Making the border problems about poor brown people who want a better life is the straw man issue. Funny, when I hear the term Illegal Alien Bill, I hear Illegal alien bill, not Illegal Alien Bill. But, I have weird ears/filters.

I rail about the info gap, the media confusements and so on because
it always seems the big stories get away until it is too late to
address them head on anymore once the media has got ahold of it
and flogged it to fit in their ever-ongoing scorecard of
‘who’s up and who’s down’.

Lemme explain. Robert Krentz was killed in March by an unknown assailant.
Both he and his dog were shot on his own property, mending a fence near the
border with Mexico. A fence for animals, not people.
Immediately, FOX claims it was probably an illegal immigrant.
fox:
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/03/29/illegal-immigrant-suspected-killing-arizona-rancher/
Other’s with a better idea of the local situation think it was more probably
drug smugglers or a drug ‘scout’.
This story of the murdered rancher seems to be (or was made to be) the
cause that broke the
camel’s back of the AZ state legislature in causing it to push through their
sweeping new immigration law that is currently spreading sedition and paranoia
and hardening people’s resolve in every direction and in all sorts of ways all
across the country.
The story of the rancher’s death was pushed hard by FOX news and
Michelle Malkin,
initially, both consistently offering the illegal immigrant angle and
the ramifications
of that without offering any other viewpoint for several days. The
Arizona press
did a better job logically finding a motive for someone to be out
there and with a weapon,
who was not a US border cop, a local AZ cop or say some target
practicing Swedish tourists.
from the AZ daily star
http://azstarnet.com/news/local/border/article_32642381-6314-53b4-aff1-570dbd1d6834.html

Local law enforcement thinks this was a result of drug traffickers as
290 pounds
of pot were found on the property and eight people were arrested a few
days before.

All the evidence points to drug trafficking for the killing of this
humanitarian
cattle rancher.
Drug traffickers aren’t trying to immigrate for one thing.
Immigrants don’t usually carry guns even when they try to sneak in.
Nor do they travel by themselves.
Law enforcement says it was probably a single assailant.
Most pundits will say that that the killing of Mr Krentz was what
largely precipitated
the new law in Arizona that I say, has caused such a huge distraction
from the real issues.

I lay these facts out pedantically and very carefully because the rest
of the story and my solution is comparatively easy.

Everybody knows that the smuggling of illegal drugs from Mexico, by the cartels
is what is funding the civil war in Mexcio. They sell dope here and buy guns
for use in combatting the Federales in Mexico. since the war has escalated
there (~2008) violent crimes have actually decreased in AZ. Except in
Joe Arpaio’s district.
And crimes by illegal immigrants has dropped as well, but dramatically
so as compared
with crimes by citizens. This doesn’t surprise me at all. ** There’s
a war going on
across the border in Mexico. But it also happens to be the
very time that some people in Arizona in particular want to assert the
right to powers
that before now has been assumed only by the USGOV. They say the FEDs
have failed them
and so they must stand up and defend themselves, abrogate the power of
the FEDs to
be able to deport at will essentially. But there are many legal
experts and law enforcement
police chiefs with decades of experience in AZ and with cross border
problems who agree
that demanding proof of citizenship won’t help in finding where all
the immigrants just
went and won’t address the smuggling issue. Human or otherwise.
Everybody knows that INS or FBI can’t catch all the smmugglers OR the
immigrants.
Part of that is because there are two tracks. Smuggling people and
smugling drugs
are two different things and even treated differently by the US Border guard.
But not by Fox News. In fact, according to them this is not really a
drug smuggler/cartel issue, not a war
on drugs in the US issue even, but instead it is painted as
broad-based an illegal
immigrant problem as they can fan it.
Qui bono?
For now, Joe Arpaio and Jan Brewer.
Now while I’ll agree that a healthy discussion about immigration,
migrant workers,
questions of amnesty or not etc are all long overdue, it’s long past
time we recognize
the problems for what they are. The violent crime that DOES spill
over into the US
associated with cross border traffick is with drugs not people.
If Arizona were to take a real libertarian step
and make pot legal tomorrow, the incentive for the border traffic in
pot would cease.
If that were to be regulated by whatever way the want to, like
California, like Colorado,
the cartels would have to come up with another source for cash
overnight. And the violent crime from
cross border traffic would cease. The cartels would have to start
buying Netflix chains or something.
I look at this issue much as I did the struggle against the lottery
and gambling houses,
even bingo. Twenty years ago Kansas was one of the last to legalize
gaming and give it
restrictions. It turned out to be a big revenue bringer for the
state. People’s reluctance
was due to morals that they learned from the generation or two before.
Gambling causes BIG
problems. Turns out, trying to prohibit it made it worse. The drug
war is several times worse and
Mexico is fighting our war for us. We can stop funding the cartels if
we want to. One way or another. Take away the source of their
funding and they will have to find another way to keep their
territory…
And one of those ways of stopping their funding, the way we’ve always
tried it — Prohibition — is what has brought us here.
Unless you watch FOX news and listen to Karl Rove.
Anymore I almost feel the same about Cokie Roberts and Chris Matthews.
They’ll tell you who is up and who is down this week in the beltway
insider war of words,
if they think Obama can add another topic to his plate or what kind of
a wedge they think the Republicans
will try and force into the discussion to prove their ‘convictions’ this week,
but they won’t ask why we can’t end funding the Mexican drug cartels?

[npr thought it important to remind people today of where the cartel
gets the lion share of their cash. Looks as though I'm right on time
today 19may10].
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/stor … =126978142

As far as the immigrants we should be down there telling them all,
“Beinvenidos, Willkommen, Get in here outta that sun!”
Because with 25 million + undocumented workers and illegal immigrants,
people whio actually WANT to pay taxes and pay into social security,
generations of them, they can help pay into social security and pare
down health care costs too!
I rail about the info gap, the media confusements and so on because
it always seems the big stories get away until it is too late to
address them head on anymore once the media has got ahold of it
and flogged it to fit in their ever-ongoing scorecard of
‘who’s up and who’s down’.

** In fact, however for example, violent crimes are flat in Arizona
and the state in effect giving a largely unfunded mandate to the local
police will make their jobs more impossible not less since some on the
right and the far right in Arizona seem to think they can just wish
and the cops will be able to tackle local as well as national ‘law
enforcement’ however they think they can write it to soothe their
fears. That’s not how it works.
How’s that Great Wall of Arizona comin’ people?

Well said, great appearance.

I was shocked as well by the conservative saying she “had to think about it.” Maybe the corporate interests funding conservatives have finally realized how much money there is to be made in this new market. (Disclaimer: Just speaking in general, I have no knowledge of this particular conservative’s funding source.)

sorry so long, I wrote it out may23. Glad to see ms Hamsher on it.

You certainly make a strong case Jane, but there’s more than one elephant in that small room. Mexico is a POOR 3rd world country essentially operating in a state of anarchy. We are a wealthy, bloated economy (comparatively) offering safety and opportunity (riches & education) for those who successfully run our pretty porous border gauntlet.
My guess is, there are many people living incredibly corrupt, incredibly poor countries where the corruption is NOT supported by Drugs who wish grasping for a better life (starting with free medical care & free education & free social support systems) was as easy as crossing a porous border.

Illegal Alien Bill sounds like the sequel to those two Tarantino/Thurman projects.

As the Feds come crashing down on state laws in Arizona, I’m reminded of the last time the Feds came crashing down on state laws, the laws protecting the mortgage industry.

And we all know how well the mortgage crashing turned out.

I’m on it. Calling Quinten right now. No, better yet. I’ll Twitter. *g*

Tell him “hello”. Thanks.

Better, the government should supply everyone with at least an ounce a month for free. That will put the cartels and the dealers and everyone out of business. Permanently.

GO JANE!!

In my opinion the illegal immigration has always been a politically motivated issue. It could be solved by a law where the business would be penalized for hiring undocumented workers. It should be the responsibility of the business (AG. Diary, Poultry etc mostly the big ones) or individual employers. The Fed or State should not be involved in chasing the “illegals” and thus save resources and use it more appropriately. The boogie man of illegals puts a lot of money into Govt. Agencies and big contractors (security, border walls— Boeing, balckwater). Of course passing such a law would be impossible because of our beloved congress can not do anything without getting permission from the corporate masters who wont like to see the cheap labor melted away by such laws.

Not only will cross-border smuggling be reduced, but the domestic marijuana cultivation industry will explode.

Need a revenue stream, California?

Love me some Aspergers kids, like Mr T. They’re so brilliant.
And, back OnT, pot may be nature’s ritalin. Think about it. I’ve heard of ADD and Aspgperger students doing better in school after they started smoking [small] quantities of pot. Just saying.

I was shocked, too, when both Ratigan and conservative talk radio host Martha Zoeller agreed with me.

Support for legalization isn’t strictly a progressive vs. conservative issue, in my experience. Conservatives often object both on the grounds that it’s the government telling people what to do, and that it’s a waste of money. Both of which, incidentally, are fair criticisms.

One word, Jane: Tequila

On Winning The Mexican Drug War, Or, “Fighting For Peace Is Like…”

This discussion began with an examination of the question of how you might reduce the power of the Mexican Drug Cartels, you’ll recall; so let’s end this conversation by posing some questions that tie the whole thing together:

–When’s the last time you heard of three carfuls of guys from Jack Daniels using their Tommy guns to first shoot up, and then burn, Jim Beam’s distillery so that they could take over their turf?

–Mexican Drug Cartels make billions of dollars annually importing virtually every drug you might want: they import the reefer, I’m told, and the cocaine, the heroin, the meth, the ecstasy…and probably Viagra, to boot.

You know what the one drug is that Mexican Drug Cartels don’t import?

Tequila.

–So if liquor has become a legal business…and Jack Daniel’s sees no business imperative in a raid on Jim Beam…and Mexican Drug Cartels aren’t making money smuggling tequila (at least not since the 1930s, anyway)…and the last drive-by shooting that involved the liquor business was sometime in 1932 or early 1933…and every single “Mafia Liquor Cartel” was basically out of business the moment Prohibition ended…you think maybe it’s time that we thought about making some of the other drugs a legal business, too?

Tequila!

As people have proved in most parts of the country, you can grow marijuana just about anywhere, if you have the motivation. It’s also a potential revenue stream at the retail level, where a “sin tax” is typically applied to such things.

On the other hand, if pot were legalized, the quality of pot would go down.

Pot has been illegal all these years, and during the same period, I’m told, pot has gotten many times better. This is rather funny, from a sociological point of view. Does the black market create better product than the legitimate market?

If you imagine an era where pot is legalized, you will quickly realize that the quality of pot will start to go down, year by year, as the capitalists get their hands on it. That’s because capitalism screws up everything it touches.

The marketers be doing what they always do–incrementally making products worse, because you can make a few more bucks that way, and you need money for advertising and testimonials and lawsuits and other stuff today’s pot dealers don’t have to worry about.

And don’t forget the cool chemicals these bozos will add to it. Talk about gilding the lily…

If and when pot is legalized, the pot will start to get worse. That’s all there is to it. In a few years, unless we pass strict regulations, it will be junk.

Sounds good, but not good. If there was a big penalty, then businesses would back away from anyone they even had a doubt about. Since there is no good system for really knowing who is legal and who isn’t, meaning foolproof, businesses would just not hire anyone that had even a small doubt attached to them.

That would bring up issues of discrimination.

Of course, this would bring into the being the pipe dream to end all pipe dreams; businesses forced to hire people and then penalized by the same entity for hiring them.

fabulous article last summer about “conservative, christian” mom discovering the positive effects marijuana tea had on her 10 y.o. autistic son – will do some google diving to see if I can find

and although you mentioned Aspberger’s, it was an excellent narrative of all her family went through as a result of her decision

A true ideological conservative would be all over legalization, considering prohibition to be an unjustified exercise of government power, and meddling in the life of the individual. The fact is, the majority of what call themselves “conservatives” are not-they are radicals. A true conservative would have no part of warrantless wiretapping, cooked intelligence, endless imprisonment, and so on…liberals are not being opposed by conservatives. We are engaged in an intellectual war with radical authoritarian reactionaries, who bear more than a little resemblance to Mussolini-style fascists, and who are allied with the big business to whom they will give a free hand, the propaganda ministry of Rupert Murdoch, the arms makers, cops, and jailers. There are others…legalization would be a huge victory, for true conservatives, liberals, and Americans in general. I’m hopeful, but will be amazed if we actually see it.

I’m not surprised. They’ve been a big part of the problem on the Democratic side.

Legalization could generate $1.4 billion in revenues in California alone if it’s taxed at the same rate as alcohol. And that money would come straight out of the pockets of the cartels.

I know my suggestion for your name the campaign contest was too late, but I DO still like:

ATM – Alcohol, Tobacco and Marijuana

Are you saying legalization = telling people what to do? How can that be? We know anyone can just Say No. ;)

Meet you at the google dumpster. My son’s the one who just said maybe pot is nature’s ritalin. And, no he doesn’t imbibe. But, he does come up with some good thoughts. Are you in Vegas?

Blue Texan’s regularly scheduled post is now available: Exclusive! Andrew Breitbart Tells ABC: “I Got Lucky with Matt Drudge”

Another great post, Jane. What’s your read on DiFi’s opposition (other than the fact that she opposes pretty much everything that makes any sense, of course). Is she (somehow) juiced in financially on keeping weed illegal, or is she just doing the wrong thing…again?

Cong. Rangel has always been four-square aginit. He’s even argued that it helps support families in his district keeping the price up at black market levels.

Don’t know if you’re talking to me, but to me, criminalization is telling people what to do. Legalization is getting big government off the back of the little guy…what conservative doesn’t support that?

no sweetie, not in Vegas. time constraints and the no small matter of not being able to play well with others when it comes to Kossacks :D

you have FB mail

Legalization or decriminalization of many controlled substances, but especially marijuana, makes too much sense for the Very Serious People to ever accept, much less embrace. Marijuana in particular, because just about anyone can grow it almost anywhere, competes directly with Big Pharma’s pain control monopoly of prescription and OTC medications, and is too decentralized a commodity for them to profit were it legal. It doesn’t matter if its a safer drug than alcohol or other legal substances, until they can find a way to make money from it they will always want it proscribed.

Precisely.

But that’s also one of the arguments against legalization: that we’ve already got enough drunks on the road, why do we want to add a bunch of stoners, too?

Well, speaking from, uh, personal experience, one of the reasons it’s so fun to get high is because it’s illegal. If pot were legal (and the thrill was gone, as it were) would there really be that many more smokers-on the road or anywhere else?

And come to think about it, all those stoned drivers doing 15mph on the freeway may not be such a bad thing, anyway. ;-)

Sigh…sorry. I think it was a reply to 27. Thanks. Your answer reflects the same confusion I was having.

DIng!
In addition, if we de-funded drug cartels, we would also de-fund the prison guards, the probation officers, etc.

There is a line of thinking on the far right that has some merit on this issue and others. Of course those are the same people who will never go along with the regulate and tax portion of legalization.

In many ways the prison system is “criminal”. Way to make money and get all those have-nots/people of color off the street. A very sad enterprise.

And how well things turned out when the feds came down against segregation, eh? Oh, wait. That steps on your point, don’t it?

*sigh*

#28

Your post supports the case for Marijuana, but shoots holes in Janes case for solving the border problem.

If the Cartells are bringing in every known drug and we legalize Marijuana, I doubt if they’ll throw up their hands and say, “Well, we had a good run there for a while, guess we’ll have to go back to working the fields”.

I suppose actual cross-border drug smuggling continues, but here in Utah and elsewhere in the West it has become common to find Mexican cartels starting marijuana plantations in out-of-the-way places like national forests.

@30

It could also open up a niche specialty market for really high quality, local, organic crops. Seems to be the way things are moving.

The Teachers did better, after some weed, too !

But how would the CIA, NSA, DEA and all those other alphabet agencies fund their ops?
sorry, I’m a bit cynical today. The spectre of starvation just won’t leave my mind

Jane, you’re my hero!

And, no. The quality won’t go down. Is Jack Daniel’s worse because we ended prohibition? Get a grip. There are already contests for the finest cannabis. Growers will continue to experiment, and we’ll enjoy the varieties.

Drug violence is fueled by the profit motive, period. As the poster mentioned above, there are no cartels smuggling Tequila into the United States, and there haven’t been since we ended the nightmare of alcohol prohibition.

Senators, prison lobbies and police unions may favor keeping drugs illegal, but they, too suffer from the corruption of money. They, like the cartels, generate wealth from the status quo. The rest of us suffer the consequences of a “war,” conceived by Nixon, waged not against an empire determined to destroy us, but rather, one waged by our government against its own citizens. Half the country has smoked pot at one time or another. Any law targeting half the population is an outrageous overreach, and reeks of tyranny.

Legalize, regulate, tax. End prohibition now.

Maybe the Feds will come crashing down on 9/11.

Bringing marijuana legalization into the immigration debate is brilliant. FDL is one of the few news organizations which cares enough about civil liberties, minority protection, and crimefighting to talk about this pressing issue.

Good going, Jane! Keep it up.

Great post and good commentary. Won’t go on, except to say: follow the money. The only reason why pot has not been legalized yet is because too many people make more money from if it’s illegal. Period.

Keep this debate going, please!

Free Roger Christie
http://www.thc-ministry.org/?page_id=453

u should post that on the Seminal

Also starting marijuana crops in empty houses. There’s been a ton of drug catel busts of marijauna crops grown indoors in empty houses that were either purchased by the cartels, or the cartels squatted in them. A lot in the Sacramento area, for ex.

A good, exhaustively documented primer on the issue is Marijuana is Safer: So Why Are We Driving People to Drink?. It’s by three people who’ve been working this issue for a while, and it is well researched and exhaustively end-noted. Many of the studies they cite are in peer-reviewed jourlans and written by folks who are either employed by various federal agencies (e.g. NIH) or by universities. Among other things the authors build a compelling case asserting that one of the strongest but stealthiest supporters of the draconian marijuana policies are the alcohol interests. They also make a good case that pot is inherently much safer and less prone to abuse than is booze.

what percentage of prisoners in California are in prison or anywhere else in the USA for buying pot for recreational purposes? Come on. It is miniscule, If any. I would still bust anyone who smokes legalized pot for recreational purposes in public places. So maybe legalization could lead to other law enforcement issues. No one has the right to force anyone to ingest black pot smoke into their lungs as second hand users. This was a prevalent problem at the universities I attended when recreational pot smoking in public was largely ignored by the police.

Good post, and I agree. I am aware of the rancher who was killed near the border. Krentz’s family and neighbors, plus the Native Americans in the local reservations on the border, all had the same things to say:

the undocumented workers who cross the border to WORK are not the problem or the issue. Citizens who live along the SW border all say the same. Citizens living along the border, including the Native Americans in reservations, have been “dealing with” illegal aliens for years coming across their lands to look for work. In nearly all cases, the contact has been friendly with the US citizens and Native Americans helping the illegals find food and water, if needed. Otherwise, such people pass over the lands quickly and cause little to no problems.

What has been happening lately along the border is solely and only about the drug cartels and the drug wars in MX that have next to nothing to do with non-citizens wanting to work here.

Legislation like SB 1070 in AZ will server only to take away needed funds to deal with the violence of the drug cartels, and will serve only to make AZ citizens LESS safe. It is an incredibly stupid, short-sighted law that is yet another unfunded mandate ginned up to trick conservatives to vote for the likes of Jan Brewer and her Republican grifter cronies in the AZ state gov’t. Disgusting.

Legalizing marijuana will go some distance to dealing better with the drug wars in MX, which most US citizens do not realize has a lot to do with marijauna smuggling and illegal sales in the USA.

Stop the madness!!

Oh please! What a strawman argument. You’re not going to be inundated with secondhand pot smoke. Come up with a better argument than that.

Indeed, like the absurdity of some people whom use the bible to perpetuate abstinence. The Hebrew culture(kinda like the old Hindi?and I’m sure many others) had social stucture’s that acknowledged human sexuality at the appropriate time of it’s blossoming.

Wasn’t there a study of primates, and the love they received by it’s mother as babies, and then touch and love at pubescence affected their level of violent antisocial behavior? So that one’s had BOTH were more peaceful.

Fodder is not easily made of loving beings.

Certainly the alcohol and tobacco companies are working behind the scenes to stop the legalization of pot bc they fear that it will reduce their profits. They are motivated only by profits, not by anything else.

The same can be said by BigPhARMA, which doesn’t want pot legalized either. If nothing else, there are genuine benefits for medical use of pot, esp for pain management, the reduction of nausea, and to encourage hunger (esp needed with some cancer treatments). Big PhARMA can’t make any money off of pot, and they may also see reduction in profits in some of their drug peddling, uh, sales.

Follow the money… that’s all that’s involved here.

hi there

Just like I am not inundated by second hand tobacco smoke, right? Try New York City sometime. Outlawing tobacco and pot would be just fine except for the law enforcement issuess. But recreational pot smoking in public is obnoxious. I cannot see any progressive values attached to ingesting black smoke of any kind.

Yeah, that Jane is pretty wily. Her beta noire is ag subsidies, eh? Interesting, on the West coas the answer is simple, but not easy,(, just cut kids out of the e cut off their govt. subsidized water. In the midwest and East, plenty of water and lot of different funding sources. I’m sure UC-Riverside economist Mason Gaffney has a Georgist land tax trick or two up his sleeve concerning farms, let’s see… yup, of course Mason talks about farms, starts on p. 23 (the whole paper is pretty interesting, but long).
The Hidden Taxable Capacity of Land: Enough and to Spare

Back to the weed, there have several government commissions that have recommended decriminalization, most famously the Nixon-appointed Shafer Commission. Hoowever the British govt did something interesting with their commision a few years ago, they a team of public health and police officials compare the ill effects of different intoxicants. Apparently cannabis is less dangerous than alcohol or tobacco.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/6474053.stm#drugs

Miniscule???

Are you mad?

Thank you, Jane.

The money that now goes to the cartels, … could instead be … going into the coffers of states… Legalization could generate $1.4 billion in revenues in California alone if it’s taxed at the same rate as alcohol.

Don’t forget – this is based on the ‘retail’ price dropping by something like 80%. That equals many, many more billions that will be freed up and pumped into the legitimate consumer economy.

I remember reading this week that a mere 1500-ish are in state prison in CA for marijuana offenses and thought, WTF? Then realized most personal-possession sentences are for less than a year; those are spent in county facilities. I don’t think I’ve seen savings numbers that take into account LEO, court, incarceration, lost productivity, and impact-to-society-of-ex-prisoners-unable-to-function-due-to-the-stigma-and-prisoner-mentality, but I bet they’re big.

How many persons are incarcerated in California at present for purchasing pot for recreational purposes? Get off the hyperbole. What’s the answer?

You’re the one claiming the number is miniscule, “if any”. Back that up.

No one goes to jail anymore for buying pot for recreational purposes, not for resale, for personal use. In New York there is a statutory requirement that anyone buying an ounce or less gets a REQUIRED adjournment contemplating dismissal. Don’t actually know the required dismissal range in CA. But yu folks who advocate ingesting black smoke do so in a haze of misinformation.

We lose wonderful talent by the drug testing industry while they make a bundle.

Workplace drug testing is about mainly pot.

Try to explain to jeff sessions or any other brain dead like him there is no comparison to drinking. They can’t relate other than it’s like drinking how many beers.

Re Prop 19, the California Legislative Analyst’s Office says:

Impacts on State and Local Expenditures. Reduction in State and Local Correctional Costs. The measure could result in savings to the state and local governments by reducing the number of marijuana offenders incarcerated in state prisons and county jails, as well as the number placed under county probation or state parole supervision. These savings could reach several tens of millions of dollars annually.

Reduction in Court and Law Enforcement Costs. The measure would result in a reduction in state and local costs for enforcement of marijuana-related offenses and the handling of related criminal cases in the court system.

The front page at NORML claims there’s a pot smoker busted every 37 seconds (up or down, depending how you look at it, from every 45 seconds).

Is it really your position that none of them do time, and law enforcement is busting them for jollies, and that the Legislative Analyst’s Office doesn’t know what it costs to incarcerate pot offenders in the state?

I repeat, put up or shut up.

How many people go to jail per year for possession of weed?

In 2007, 872,720 arrests for possession in the US.

That makes it ‘every 36 seconds’.

I was too lazy to do the math. Thanks.

Oh, for crying out loud:

YEAR MARIJUANA ARRESTS

2001 723,627
2000 734,498
1999 704,812
1998 682,885
1997 695,200
1996 641,642
1995 588,963
1994 499,122
1993 380,689
1992 342,314

In 2001, drug law violators comprised 20.4% of all adults serving time in State prisons – 246,100 out of 1,208,700 State prison inmates.

Source: Harrison, Paige M. & Allen J. Beck, US Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Prisoners in 2002 (Washington, DC: US Department of Justice, July 2003), Table 17, p. 10.

“In 1995, 23% of state prisoners were incarcerated for drug offenses in contrast to 9% of drug offenders in state prisons in 1986. In fact, the proportion of drug offenders in the state prison population nearly tripled by 1990, when it reached 21%, and has remained at close to that level since then. The proportion of federal prisoners held for drug violations doubled during the past 10 years. In 1985, 34% of federal prisoners were incarcerated for drug violations. By 1995, the proportion had risen to 60%.”

Source: Craig Haney, Ph.D., and Philip Zimbardo, Ph.D., “The Past and Future of U.S. Prison Policy: Twenty-five Years After the Stanford Prison Experiment,” American Psychologist, Vol. 53, No. 7 (July 1998), p. 715.

The U.S. nonviolent prisoner population is larger than the combined populations of Wyoming and Alaska.

Source: John Irwin, Ph. D., Vincent Schiraldi, and Jason Ziedenberg, America’s One Million Nonviolent Prisoners (Washington, DC: Justice Policy Institute, 1999), pg. 4.

“Since 1982 total justice expenditures more than quadrupled from nearly $36 billion to over $167 billion, a 366% increase. The average annual increase for all levels of government between 1982 and 2001 was 8% (table 1).”

Source: Bauer, Lynn & Steven D. Owens, “Justice Expenditure and Employment in the United States, 2001″ (Washington, DC: US Dept. of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, May 2004), NCJ202792, p. 2.

In 1997, there were 216,254 drug offenders in state prisons (out of a total State prison population of 1,046,706 that year). Of these, 92,373 were in for possession, 117,926 were in for trafficking, and 5,955 were in for other drug crimes. Only 41.9 percent of State drug offenders were under the influence of drugs at the time of their offense.

Source: Mumola, Christopher J., “Substance Abuse and Treatment, State and Federal Prisoners, 1997″ (Washington, DC: US Dept. of Justice, January 1999), p. 3, Table 1.

“Nineteen percent of State prisoners, and 16% of Federal inmates said that they committed their current offense to obtain money for drugs. These percentages represent a slight increase from 1991, when 17% of State and 10% of Federal prisoners identified drug money as a motive for their current offense.”

Source: Mumola, Christopher J., “Substance Abuse and Treatment, State and Federal Prisoners, 1997″ (Washington, DC: US Dept. of Justice, January 1999), p. 5.

States spent $32.5 billion on Corrections in 1999 alone. To compare, states only spent $22.2 billion on cash assistance to the poor.

Source: National Association of State Budget Officers (NASBO), 1999 State Expenditure Report (Washington, DC: NASBO, June 2000), pp. 38, 68.

From 1984 to 1996, California built 21 new prisons, and only one new university.

Source: Ambrosio, T. & Schiraldi, V., “Trends in State Spending, 1987-1995″, Executive Summary-February 1997 (Washington DC: The Justice Policy Institute, 1997).

California state government expenditures on prisons increased 30% from 1987 to 1995, while spending on higher education decreased by 18%.

Source: National Association of State Budget Officers, 1995 State Expenditures Report (Washington DC: National Association of State Budget Officers, 1996).

What’s the number of incarcerated recreational pot smokers in CA? I don’t know but based on national trends and specifically New York, it is negatory. Needless to say that if you are an advocate of ingesting black pot smoke into your lungs, please so it in your own abode and not in a public place.

What 20,000 arests a day in the usa or 400 a day in each of the US states. Yu call this an issue? Gimme A BREAK. What are the arrests for possession or dealing?

Show me your proof of second-hand marijuana smoke being harmful.

Post the studies. Do it now.

Prove what you’ve made up has any basis in fact. And, please stop smoking that drug with its white smoke. It causes brain damage in rats.

Ditto what I posted @86.

Ditto what I posted @86.

Try responding with facts, not your fantasies.

Corection =2000 arrests a day or 40 in each state per day. Ridiculous.

In 2001, drug law violators comprised 20.4% of all adults serving time in State prisons – 246,100 out of 1,208,700 State prison inmates.

Ridiculous.

You’re a tad afraid of responding to my posts, apparently. Facts frighten you?

I don’t like standing in movie lines with spaced out people smoking pot. If yu want medical proof that is not available to me this afternoon. But I would take it as common sense that putting black smoke of any kind into my lungs is an issue for me and I should be able to avoid having to do.

Apparently cannabis is less dangerous than alcohol or tobacco.

This is thoroughly addressed in the book I Amazon-linked up thread. There are no known instances of a person dying of overdosing on marijuana, whereas there are thousands of deaths by alcohol poisoning in the US each year. Furthermore people who are high on pot tend to become more cautious about risks, not more inclined to ignore them as is the case with the sauce.

leftin72 has no facts, just fears, php.

Mindless, foolish and rather pathetic fears.

Mindless because leftin72 has no interest in facts or in the pointless and destructive incarceration of others for doing him NO harm …

Foolish because leftin72 will continue to spew these fears at the slightest opportunity.

And … pathetic is as pathetic selfishly and self-concernedly does.

You, php, provided facts, you provided reason, and you clearly are concerned about your fellow human beings …

DW

I hope we will be able to carry on this conversation by focusing on issues rather than the character or feelings of fellow commenters – thanks.

Yu want to get involved in personal attacks, ok. But this site advocates legalizing grass smoking with no restriction on public use is obnoxious. How many of these so called arrests for possession involve public use of pot? If yu are so interested with putting black smoke into your lungs, please do so out of sight.

De-funding the cartels seems like a no-brainer. So why isn’t anyone talking about it? I frankly don’t know….

Great article, Jane. I’m so proud of FDL for taking up this issue, and you are correct that it directly speaks to the scary drug war between the cartels at the U.S./Mexico border. I only higlighted your quote above because I believe I do know, or have a hypothesis, why people aren’t talking about it: fear of being marginalized, even if what criticism is out there comes from compromised sources who make money out of the ongoing drug war, i.e., the prison industry, the police, and the politicians who want to utilize fear to use the issue for demagogy. The U.S. government also has a long history of laundering black ops funds through drug smuggling. See The Strength of the Wolf: The Secret History of America’s War on Drugs, and The Strength of the Pack: The Personalities, Politics, and Espionage Intrigues That Shaped the DEA, both by Douglas Valentine.

Valentine is a well-respected historian, most famous for writing The Phoenix Program, a full account of that Vietnam-era program of torture and assassination.

The other must book on this general subject (government use of the drug war) is Alfred McCoy’s classic study, The Politics of Heroin: CIA Complicity in the Global Drug Trade

Black smoke seems to be an issue for you. Very odd because pot smoke is not black. You’ve not only never smoked pot, you’ve never even seen it being smoked. Yet you have a strong opinion. Are any of the other things that you dislike black? Stoned persons, perhaps?

“drug law violators” I assume yu are are including crack, cocaine etc.

Pot smoke then, black or white, tobacco smoke black or white? if you are so interested in putting smoke in your lungs, please limit your acts of smoking to non public places.

One word. Vaporizer.

http://www.vapir.com/

What a non-issue.

Are you backing down off your prohibitionist stand? Ready to permit consumption of a garden product in private? Excellent. I’m glad we had this chance to chat.

this site advocates legalizing grass smoking with no restriction on public use

Prove it.

This is like trying to talk sense with a second-grader who has just discovered poop jokes, sans the giggles and snarks.

I guess my son was precocious :-D

If my kid smoked marijuana, i would insist on growing his supply myself.

Its not just a pot problem but Mar-J accounts for about 60-75% of the total volume of traffic. the drug war is an abomination, obscenely expenisve and destructive. The police state policies and tactics of the GWOT grew right out of the drug war. Also wonderful ideas like private for-profit prisons. The drug war is mostly a shooting war against poor people. nearly 40 years,trillions of dollars, and millions of destroyed lives later,it has done NOTHING to curtail use or traffic. it may even have increased traffic because it has driven prices up, wich leads to obscene proffits, which leads always to killing.

Hear, hear! It’s a good way to ensure its quality. Of course, like any good cook, one must taste the concoction before serving it up to guests!

Mine, too! ;-)

Ok….
.

..number of arrests for violations of the marijuana laws hit an all-time high of 755,186 in 2003…The previous peak of 735,500 was recorded in 2000, with 724,000 arrested in 2001 and 697,000 in 2002…As has been the case in past years, the vast majority of marijuana arrests — some 88% — were for simple possession. Arrests for marijuana offenses constituted 45% of all drug arrests.. This effort is…costing American taxpayers approximately $7.6 billion dollars annually…nearly a million (923,006) people were arrested on other drug charges, with the vast majority of those being for simple possession..The number of drug arrests in 2003 (1,678,192) was greater than for any other major crime category.All property crimes combined totaled 1,605,127 arrests, while all violent crimes combined totaled 597,026…driving while intoxicated arrests (1,448,148) simple assault (1,246,698).

Source: University of Missouri St. Louis, abstracting the FBI Uniform Crime Report 2003
I haven’t seen anyone arguing for unrestricted public pot smoking, nor for the right to put anything in your lungs, but these ARE the numbers. BTW, where are these theaters you mention, where people openly smoke weed in line? I’ve never seen anything like that, anywhere. Good way to go to jail in this part of the country.

I’ve been saying this for several decades: decriminalize all drugs. In Portugal, several years ago, the government decriminalized all drugs and to the surprise of all, drug use dropped in half. So half of the people that were using illegal drugs were doing so because they were illegal! Time to give up our stupid arrogant puritanical anti-drug crusades. When illegal drugs are decriminalized, the prices of plant-based drugs, such as marihuana, will quickly drop to very low levels, especially if you can buy them in the produce section of your local grocery store.

Marijuana contains none of the carginogens of cigarettes. It’s actually far better for you, not chemically addictive, and has health benefits in certain situations.

See here especially the graph on the left for addiction and physical harm.

See here for the Harvard study that effectively demonstrates marijuana’s ability to assist in the fight against cancer.

‘Nuff said.

The world’s richest person lives in Mexico, and tax rates for the rich are horribly low.
They need to help their own people by taxing the rich and raising wages. Or is that the solution in the United States, as well.

The moran “antis” are now on the opposite end of the spectrum: they want the whole loaf over the “half-a-loaf” they’d get with legalization and regulation. Under the regulated law, they’d have to deal with people “using dope” (oh noes!!!1!), but they’d have a better society and culture. Without the regulation, they get society ripping itself apart AND people are STILL using substances! Oh NOES!!!1!!! Get over the fact that we smoke/eat/vaporize our herbs, [edited by mod.]. We’re happy and will drag you and yours kicking and screaming into the new millennium. Sheesh.

[modnote: please do not verbally abuse fellow commenters.]

Like everything else, it’s all about money. All sorts of righteousness are abandoned when the price is right. Lotteries and gambling in River City? OMG..

One would imagine, Leftin72, that the rules that apply to smokimg tobacco in public would also be applied to marijuana smoking, and I doubt that most who smoke marijuana woould have no difficiulty in respecting the rights of others.

DW

I assume you mean that those smoking pot in public would not do so before driving and that we would avoid a whole new plethora of DWI cases then classified as DWS, driving while stoned. I do not share your gracious hopes for the future of pot smoking. Just more government enforcement expense on a different front, regulating the sane use of otherwise legal pot smoking.
Directly to your point I have seen no positive development in courtesies in this regard from tobacco smokers. And based on my own experience pot smokers, like tobacco smokers, would be resigned to public pot smoking during working hours since I assumed the pot smokers would be banned, like tobacco smokers, from partaking in the workplace.

Egregious, when a commenter refuses to acknowledge truth or the rights of others, including the right not to be arrested or locked up for doing NO harm to others, and persists in arrogantly selfish tantrums about absolute nonsense, respecting no viewpoints not in strict keeping with their own embellished fears, essentially atttempting to take over a thread and override the intent of discussion and consideration, either they are trolls or so sadly uniformed as to have little to offer beyound bluster and bombast. I do not consider it unfair or improper to point out their unwillingness to engage.

Thank you.

DW

the pot smokers would be banned, like tobacco smokers booze fans, from partaking in the workplace.

Fixed.

Again, you make assertions without evidence, regarding driving under “the influence”.

Where is your proof?

Or, do you equate your assumption with the whole of truth?

Clearly, we disagree.

However, Leftin72, I won’t blow smoke in your face if you don’t blow “smoke” up my ass.

How’s that?

Perhaps we may find, someday, some things we might agree upon?

For now, I wish you a good day, and a smoke-free life.

DW

I think employers will still be able to test against it as a prerequisite of hiring, just like they can with alcohol. I think the laws that DW was refering to are the laws like we have in California, where it is illegal to smoke within 25 feet of the door of a public facility or business. It’s illegal to smoke within 100 feet of a school, etc.

I’m sure it will still be a punishable offense for driving under the influence. Legalizing sale and consumption doesn’t mean people are going to run around with joints in their mouths.

I think that a lot of people who are against this are assuming that legalization will cause an explosion in the amount of marijuana use in our country. The fact of the matter is its easy as hell to get marijuana now, and the laws and penalties are fairly minimal, so they’re not really a deterent. People who are going to smoke pot next year are already smoking pot this year.

And they’re normal people! They’re not all urban youth, or skateboard punks, or emo wrist-cutters. They’re middle-aged white college grads, too. They’re elderly Hispanics, African Americans, etc., who are productive members of society and smoke a recreational doobie on the weekend.

Your arguments are flawed because your premise is false. Let it go and give it a chance.

These concerns are much better than the black smoke concern. But we already have laws about driving while impaired. So that’s covered, as any pot smoker would agree.

The enforcement expense for regulation would be far less than the current expense of prohibition. I guess I don’t understand your point there.

That workplace issue seems comparable to what we already have with companies refusing to hire tobacco smokers. Pot smokers could be excluded at the management’s discretion.

So I guess we’re left with your own observations of smoker discourtesy. Some smokers, I assume, not all. But we don’t put discourteous people in prison, as a rule. Unless they smoke the wrong plant.

assumed the pot smokers would be banned, like tobacco smokers, from partaking in the workplace.

Its illegal in California to discriminate against someone for their personal tobacco use. Smokers can’t smoke in public buildings (for public use, not just publicly owned) like offices, but they can sure smoke outside, as long as they’re 25 feet from the door.

-Edit: I have found that marijuana dispensaries allow smoking, hookah lounges allow tobacco smoking indoors, and some cigarette shops allow smoking inside. There is some provision of the law that I’m not familiar with that makes these things possible.

However, Leftin72, I won’t blow smoke in your face if you don’t blow “smoke” up my ass.

I just laughed harder than I’ve laughed all week. Thanks for that! :)

Jane, John Kerry was in El Paso last year on one of his fact finding junkets. Investigating the violence in Juarez and its spillage across the border. An El Paso UT professor told him that legalizing pot would defuse the situation by removing the profit. The professors advice was as usual ignored. Speaking truth to power does not work if those in power are deaf to all but those that line their pockets. Many in power own stock in these privately owned prisons and get paid according to prisoner count. Recently a 19 year old nephew of a friend was murdered in Juarez. It doesn’t need to be that way…

Thanks Jane.

The prohibition of marijuana is stupid and evil. The people who perpetuate the war on drugs are stupid and evil. There is nothing to argue about. All the facts are on the side of legalization. Only ignorance and evil are on the side of criminalization. Yet there it is. Our longest war, the war on drugs, continues.

So thank you again for saying what is totally fucking obvious but is never said by the stupid ignorant people who always seem to be in charge of everything.

Seems like you hate pot smokers and have some sort of obsession with black smoke. These are your personal problems and have nothing to do with public policy. I recommend therapy.

How about with a vaporizer that emits no smoke of any kind? I assume you’d have a problem with that, too. If you come out in favor of banning any kind of tobacco and alcohol consumption in any place at any time, we’re having a conversation. [edited by mod.]

[modnote, please everyone is entitled to their own opinion.]

Amen on this one. End Prohibition!

As a hardcore Conservative, you might be surprised to learn that there are plenty of conservatives (and libertarians) who agree 100% Jane. Unfortunately, Ground Zero of the Drug War is our National Parks and Forests…every summer a new batch of reporting makes the rounds, the public ignores the dangers and the Cartels become bolder.

If you need another arrow in your quiver to advance your case, realize that these cartels are Simultaneously DESTROYING our National Parks & Forests: Sequoia, Yosemite, Redwood, Pt. Reyes to name a few. The cartels are masking their poisonous, pesticide laden activities under the canopy of some of the World’s oldest and largest remaining Old-Growth Temperate Forests.

Additionally, The cartels are threatening physical harm against the accidental visitor and have shot at (and killed) Federal Authorities. Seems to me they tried to take down an FBI Helicopter in Sequoia in 08 or 07? It will not be long before a stray hiker is killed in Sequoia, Yosemite or somewhere in between.

In any event the destruction of the National Parks and Forests by the Mexican Cartels is well documented, as is their threats against law enforcement and judges alike:

http://is.gd/dDZH7
http://is.gd/dDZHp
http://is.gd/dDZHH
http://is.gd/dDZHS

Contrary to popular belief, many conservatives wish to conserve America’s treasures for future generations and maintain them in a manner that is safe for visitors.

Maybe that helps a bit, Good Luck.

Rename this post, “How does the premier Progressive Blog stay relevent as the Dems who regularly abuse its constituency are growing more likely to maintain control of both the House & Senate?”

I’m not actually convinced that we’d get that much tax money from legalizing marijuana; I think that it’s easy enough to grow (hell, stoners can do it) that instead of buying it, everyone and their brother would be growing it and passing it around like beer aficionados at a home brew club.

Of course, this doesn’t argue against legalizing it; simply removing the money from the drug gangs and the almost equally-thuggish DEA would in itself be a Very Good Thing(TM). Keeping millions of non-violent offenders out of jail every year would be a Very Good Thing(TM). Normalizing relations with Mexico would be a Very Good Thing(TM).

But let’s not count on it being some huge tax windfall. I think that the ONLY reason it’s a huge, profitable industry today is that it’s illegal to grow your own, and much easier to detect a grow operation than it is to detect an ounce bag of kind bud.

Legalize it because it’s the ethical, sane, humane thing to do, yes. Tax it when sold in stores, sure. But don’t count on the taxes making you rich.

Legalization long time coming. Billions of tax dollars lost over the decades

I absolutely believe smoking marijuana impairs judgment. Have sat at numerous green lights with friends who have smoked and do not respond to the green light as they would if they had not been under the influence.

Same rules that apply to alcohol and driving should apply to marijuana (thc level in blood) content.

More research, more verifiable proof. Yes indeed. But in my book same rules should apply

Research
http://www.nida.nih.gov/researchreports/marijuana/marijuana3.html

http://www.nida.nih.gov/researchreports/marijuana/marijuana3.html#hippo
Acute (present during intoxication)

* Impairs short-term memory
* Impairs attention, judgment, and other cognitive functions
* Impairs coordination and balance
* Increases heart rate

Persistent (lasting longer than intoxication, but may not be permanent)

* Impairs memory and learning skills

Long-term (cumulative, potentially permanent effects of chronic abuse)

* Can lead to addiction
* Increases risk of chronic cough, bronchitis, and emphysema
* Increases risk of cancer of the head, neck, and lungs

http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/evidence99/marijuana/Health_1.html

MENTAL HEALTH, BRAIN FUNCTION, AND MEMORY

It has been suggested that marijuana is at the root of many mental disorders, including acute toxic psychosis, panic attacks (one of the very conditions it is being used experimentally to treat), flashbacks, delusions, depersonalization, hallucinations, paranoia, depression, and uncontrollable aggressiveness. Marijuana has long been known to trigger attacks of mental illness, such as bipolar (manic-depressive) psychosis and schizophrenia. This connection with mental illness should make health care providers for terminally ill patients and the patients themselves, who may already be suffering from some form of clinical depression, weigh very carefully the pros and cons of adopting a therapeutic course of marijuana.

In the short term, marijuana use impairs perception, judgment, thinking, memory, and learning; memory defects may persist six weeks after last use. Mental disorders connected with marijuana use merit their own category in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) IV, published by the American Psychiatric Association. These include Cannabis Intoxication (consisting of impaired motor coordination, anxiety, impaired judgment, sensation of slowed time, social withdrawal, and often includes perceptual disturbances; Cannabis Intoxication Delirium (memory deficit, disorientation); Cannabis Induced Psychotic Disorder, Delusions; Cannabis Induced Psychotic Disorder, Hallucinations; and Cannabis Induced Anxiety Disorder.

In addition, marijuana use has many indirect effects on health. Its effect on coordination, perception, and judgment means that it causes a number of accidents, vehicular and otherwise.

For further information, you may find the following sites helpful:

* http://www.sarnia.com/GROUPS/ANTIDRUG/reality/updatejl.html, for information on links between marijuana use and mental health risks.
* http://www.sarnia.com/GROUPS/ANTIDRUG/mrr/21.96.10.html, for more information on the indirect effects of marijuana on health
* http://www.adf.org.au/drughit, the Australian Drug Foundation�s website
* http://marijuananews.com/a_safe_ high_.htm, a reprint of New Science magazine�s “Marijuana Special Report: A Safe High?” with commentary
* http://marijuananews.com/claim_four.htm, an article about the similarity of long-term marijuana use�s effect on the brain to that of “hard” drugs, with commentary
* http://www.drugs.indiana.edu/publications/iprc/misc/smokescreen.html, for general information on the health risks of marijuana.
* http://www.health.org, the homepage of the National Clearinghouse on Alcohol and Drug Information, for general information on marijuana.

Leen,

Ur a drug warrior?!?!?!

Makes too much sense.

I’m all about legalizing. But marijuana is a drug and has some serious negative and destructive effects. Same rules that apply to alcohol and driving should apply to marijuana. It absolutely impairs judgment and reaction time

Leen, Don’t know who you are or what you do, but that’s some great stuff you’ve been sharing. I hope you’ll hang around for the argument. THANKS.