« Evictions: Conflict between federal and state law, federal law shall prevail, says judge | Main | BC: Drug homes are discovered without warrants »
Fisher: Brutal reality of the drug war affects common people
By Hempology | April 20, 2008
Thu, 17 Apr 2008
Source: Sidelines, The (Middle Tennessee State U, TN Edu)
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/2861
Author: Byron Wilkes
Cited: Law Enforcement Against Prohibition http://www.copssaylegalizedrugs.org
JAY FISHER DISCUSSES VIEW REGARDING WAR ON DRUGS
Attorney Jay Fisher revealed his and others’ belief that the war on drugs is eroding the rights of civilians.
Fisher spoke on behalf of Law Enforcement Against Prohibition, with the term prohibition referring to the current illegal status of narcotics, from marijuana to crack cocaine and ecstasy.
LEAP consists of sheriffs, constables, and cops, as well as academics such as linguist and philosopher Noam Chomsky and noted economist Milton Friedman.
“The act of prohibition effectively sets up the black market which America fights against,” Fisher said. “The notion of an absolute ban is a failure. The question of policy can only be debated proactively after elected officials have hashed out the current situation.”
Fisher spoke not only from a policeman’s perspective, but as someone who has spent five years as a paramedic, seeing the brutal reality of the drug war as it affects common people in the streets.
Fisher also represents Georgia’s state corrections department constitutional rights cases, and has seen the overcrowding of prisons by inmates with nonviolent drug offenses firsthand.
During the lecture, Fisher defined the rights an average person is entitled to. After showing a few quotations of men such as John Adams and James Madison, Fisher put on view a quote from current President Bush that read: “There ought to be limits to freedom.”
He discussed the statutes which state and federal government have usually made their case against narcotic drugs known as the Commerce Clause of the Constitution, which allows Congress to regulate commerce between states, and vicariously, many areas including criminal justice.
Fisher brought up Gonzales vs. Raich, a Supreme Court case in which Angel Raich, an elderly woman, was convicted for buying medical marijuana in California despite the fact that no interstate commerce had taken place in the transaction.
He also pointed to the 18th Amendment that prohibition ultimately fails despite the extent of any measures taken to fulfill the law.
Pointing to research done at the Cato Institute indicating the initial decrease of alcohol consumption in 1921, and the relapse that increased alcohol consumption beyond its prior levels by 1923, Fisher asserts that the relapse was due to the activities of gangsters and bootleggers, who realized the potential profit that could be made due to the prohibition of alcohol.
Fisher also discussed the salient dissimilarity between the types of arrests law enforcement officials make when dealing with different kinds of criminals. He mentioned the show “48 Hours,” in which suspected murderers are actually often treated as docile citizens without the use of excessive force or firepower.
In contrast, Fisher brought up the extreme methods used by narcotics agents or the Drug Enforcement Administration, including the approval of Special Weapons and Tactics team entries.
“One reason people justify the use of SWAT teams is for the quick apprehension of a suspect,” Fisher said. “But a larger aspect of it is the heavy reliance authorities have on confidential informants whose information can often lead to bad decision making on the part of the officers.”
According to a Cato Institute study, there have been 150 botched raids conducted by paramilitary SWAT teams; a ‘botched’ raid denotes the death of at least one individual not affiliated with the police.
Fisher also discussed a future in America where the twisted and paradoxical execution of the drug war might be brought under close scrutiny in terms of its constitutionality.
Steps have already been taken to close disparities between sentencing for similar drugs ( in terms of sentencing, possession of a single gram of crack is equal to 500 grams of powder cocaine ), but the question of retroactivity and timeliness for those already incarcerated remains an issue.
Topics: Articles | Comments Off
Comments are closed.