Tag: war on drugs

  • Drug Dealers vs. Business

    Drug Dealers vs. Business

    A liquor store in Baltimore is being forced to close because a man was killed there and drug dealers congregate. Here’s the story in the Sun. I’m of mixed feelings. Liquor stores in the ghetto are hardly the most sympathetic businesses. But if they were all shut down, it’s not like the neighborhood’s problems would suddenly disappear.

    It’s a shame there aren’t more locally run business in the ghetto. In many ways, the Eastern District is typical. Here’s a quick, perhaps inaccurate, and certainly unpolitically correct history of business life in the Eastern.

    In the old days, or so I hear, many of the local businesses were run by Jewish people. At least that’s how the story is told on the street. Were they exploitive? Some think so. But, no, I don’t. Are all businesses exploitative? I don’t think so. Many of these Jews had grownup in the neighborhood. Many had stayed in the neighborhood when other whites fled. Yes, they were there to make money. But they also spoke English and hired locals to work in their stores. In hindsight, these were the good old days.

    After the riots in the late 1960s, many of these store owners felt betrayed by the anger, left broke by the destruction, and realized that a little profit wasn’t worth their life. A lot of businesses packed up or closed for good.

    Over the next 30 years, more businesses closed. And not an insignificant number of these after the owner got killed in a robbery.

    Today there’s not much left. Monument St is still filled with stores. And there’s a excellent (black owned) produce store that deserves special mention (Leon’s Produce, 1001 N. Washington St.).

    Other stores include laundromats, bars, Chinese takeout (called “yakamee” in Baltimore), and corner stores. The corner stores are now mostly run by Koreans (who are still referred to as “Chinamen”). If the store owners can’t afford a home in the suburbs, they may they live upstairs, in sort of a castle-like fortress setup.


    I can see the causes for resentment on both sides. At it’s worst, think L.A. riots and Koreans guarding their stores with guns. The store owners sit all day behind plexiglas selling overpriced crap. Many don’t speak English. Most hate their customers. And because they’re behind glass and won’t come out, they can’t control what goes on in the lobby of their own store. And unlike the old days, these store owners, by and large, couldn’t care less about the well being of the neighborhood. Still, and this is important to remember, the bigger problem in the neighborhood is too few stores, not bad store owners. Besides it’s not easy to run a business in the ghetto. That’s why so few people do it. I wouldn’t. If running a store in the ghetto were such an easy way to make money, why don’t you do it?

    Now I don’t know Mr. Yim, the owner of the closed liquor store. But my guess is 1) he felt helpless to control what went on in and around his store, 2) he was helpless to control what went on in and around his store, and 3) he didn’t really care as long as his 1,000 daily customers kept giving him money so he and his family could survive.

    From the story: “More than 300 residents signed a petition in the spring asking the city liquor board not to renew the store’s license…. “With those doors locked, [the drug dealers] don’t have a place to hide anymore.”

    But here’s the problem: with the doors locked, the drug dealers will still have places to hide. Drug dealers don’t want stores. Business owners are a pain in their ass. Business don’t want drug dealers scaring customers. Businesses call police… until eventually the business owner wins gives up.

    For drug dealers, a vacant building is better for business than a store. Vacants don’t attract who don’t want to buy drugs. Vacants don’t call police. Vacants are good places to hide your stash. You can run away from police through a vacant. You can fuck your girl in a vacant. Every time a store closes, the drug dealers win. And by and large, the drug dealers have won a lot.


    I was friends with a local man man who ran a corner laundromat. From behind the glass we’d drink coffee and talk about politics and race and I’d chuckle at the junkies who came in and paid 50 cents for a cup of sugar with a little coffee. The owner believed he was doing good. He was. If he closed, how would the old people on the block do their laundry? He was right. He also closed around 2pm because it was too dangerous after that.


    His corner was a bad drug corner. The worst we had in Sector 2. And that’s saying a lot. For a while he called police because of drug dealing on his corner. When police pulled up, the dealers would run into his store (and cause trouble). After a while, police became convinced that he was a drug dealer. Because whenever police pulled up, there were drug dealers in his store. There’s a certain logic to that, except it’s wrong.

    As much as I can guarantee anything, I can guarantee that this man was not dealing drugs. But what was he to do? He stopped calling police and continued to yell at dealers when they came in his store. There’s nothing the dealers would have liked more than him closing for good. And that’s why it’s sad whenever a business closes. The bad guys have won.

  • Man suspected of selling drugs on bicycle hit by car

    Oops. Sorry.

    Not really.

    The story from the Baltimore Sun is here.

    This is Sector One in the Eastern, for those who care.

  • Teens Cite Ease of Access to Drugs

    The Washington Postreports: “A growing number of teenagers say it’s easier to illegally obtain prescription drugs than to buy beer or marijuana.” 19 percent, to be exact (according to the survey from The National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuseat Columbia University). 25% say marijuana is the easiest, with 43 percent saying they could buy the drug in less than an hour.

    Arguably, regulation of beer and cigarettes is pretty effective. The problem may be, given our absurdly high legal drinking age, that teenagers too often have trouble getting beer. For many, pilfering prescription drugs or buying weed is the easier option.

    If the choice is between a few beers and popping pills, we really should encourage responsible drinking.

    Like it or not, most teenagers start drinking around 16. Cracking down too much on that either fails or encourages kids to try other, more dangerous drugs.

    Besides does anybody really believe that college students shouldn’t drink?

  • Big bust in Australia

    Big bust in Australia

    Australia police confiscated 15 million pills of ecstasy. That’s a lot of dancing! The ecstasy was hidden in cans from Italy, supposedly of canned tomatoes.

    What’s amazing about hauls of these huge sizes is just how little they matter.

    Why, what if all that ecstasy had gotten through?! I mean just think, every shipment before this didget through… and nobody was the worse for it. Ecstasy isn’t really dangerous. If it were pure MDMA (the active ingredient) 15 million pills could have been swallowed and nobody would have died (unless, of course one person swallowed all 15 million).

    But still, 15 million pills is a lot, almost enough one for every man, woman, and child in Australia.

    You want to know how hard it is to stop drugs from coming in? Look at this picture from the BBC:
    The article says 15 million pills were in 3,000 cans. That’s 5,000 pills per can. I think that’s doable. These are big cans.

    Each layer in the pallet has 72 cans. That means you need only 42 layers of cans. I’m no expert with the fork lift, but I’m thinking maybe you could stack these 8 high(?). So with just maybe five pallets, you could enough E to supply all of Australia for, well, I have no idea for how long Australia needs to go through 15,000,000 pills.

    How hard can it be to move a couple of pallets into an economy? Not hard at all. That’s why we’ll never get rid of drugs Not as long as people want to get high.

  • Special delivery

    Special delivery


    If you want to keep a bad drug raid from hitting the papers, I guess you shouldn’t do it to prominent white folk (see picture).

    Doug Donovan in the Baltimore Sun reports:

    [The Mayor of Berwyn Hights, Prince George County, Maryland] Calvo’s home was raided by the county Sheriff’s Office SWAT team and narcotics officers after a package of marijuana addressed to the house was seized. Police obtained a search warrant and officers broke down their door and shot and killed the family’s two black Labrador retrievers, Payton and Chase.

    But arrests this week of two men involved in a marijuana smuggling ring that allegedly delivers packages of the drug to unsuspecting homes appears to indicate that Calvo was not involved in any illegal activity.


    A while back I wrote: “Just because this guy is mayor, does not mean he is not a drug dealer. Maybe he is. Maybe not. Maybe his wife is. Maybe not. I don’t know. I don’t care!”

    I’ve always told people that can’t be illegal to receive drugs in the mail, because if it were, why not just send drugs to all your enemies. I made the mistake of applying logic to the war on drugs.

    Now seems clear that this mayor is not a drug dealer. And you know what, despite what I wrote earlier, it does matter and I do care. It’s wrong for police to bust down your front door when nobody’s life is in danger. It’s bad enough to do so if you do have drugs. But to do so when you don’t have drugs is far worse.

  • U.S. News: Moskos says Regulate Drugs

    Don’t forget to buy the current issue of U.S. News & World Report to see my piecein print.

  • War On Drugs: 2. Dogs: 0

    This is crazy. I hate the war on drugs.

    Here’s part of the storyin the Washington Post.

    A police SWAT team raided the home of the mayor in the Prince George’s County town of Berwyn Heights on Tuesday, shooting and killing his two dogs, after he brought in a 32-pound package of marijuana that had been delivered to his doorstep, police said.

    Mayor Cheye Calvo was not arrested in the raid, which was carried out about 7 p.m. by the Sheriff’s Office SWAT team and county police narcotics officers. Prince George’s police spokesman Henry Tippett said yesterday that all the residents of the house — Calvo, his wife and his mother-in-law — are “persons of interest” in the case.

    The package was addressed to Calvo’s wife, Trinity Tomsic, said law enforcement officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the case is ongoing.

    Just because this guy is mayor, does not mean he is not a drug dealer. Maybe he is. Maybe not. Maybe his wife is. Maybe not. I don’t know.

    I don’t care!

    Here is what bothers me (and this doesn’t even include 2 shot dogs):

    Fed Ex gets a package filled with marijuana. Dog sniffs it. Police notified. I got no problem there.

    But then the police take over and deliver the drugs to the door?! And then they wait to bust down the door? Why didn’t they just take the drugs? Oh, because they wanted an arrest. But they didn’t make an arrest!Why didn’t they just ring the doorbell? Because thanks to prohibition and the war on drugs, police are allowed to bust down the door of your home.

    I just doesn’t make sense. The police delivered the drugs!!!

    Maybe we should all send drugs to our enemies.

    Kudos to the local police for pointing out: “Berwyn Heights Police Chief Patrick Murphy said county police and the Sheriff’s Office had not notified his department of the raid. He said town police could have conducted the search without a SWAT team.”

    The whole story can be read here. It’s worth it.

    p.s. I do like the quote: “We’re not in the habit of going to homes and shooting peoples’ dogs…. If we were, there would be a lot more dead dogs around the county.”

  • I’m just sayin’…


    Cocaine Sustains War Despite Rebel Losses in Colombia

    …this is what drug prohibition does.

    From the New York Times.

  • You will not do that shit on my porch!

    I just chased two junkies off my stoop! This is, as they say, not that kind of neighborhood. Plus this block has something like four active and former cops living on it.

    I’m sitting here writing about drug legalization in my basement office, and I hear two guys outside the window. One goes on my stoop. I go upstairs to investigate. I see the cap comes off a water bottle and I see a needle about to come out of a sleeve.

    Mother fucker! The SOBs are about to shoot up! I haven’t dealt with junkies at my door since I lived in Baltimore (when I stepped on a load of crap one of them left and somewhat routinely had to deal with junkies shooting up and drunks pissing in my alley).

    I open the front door to get the element of surprise. I know the heavy screen door is locked and secure, but they don’t know that.

    “You will notdo that shit on my porch!” They’re kind of apologetic, but not really. They make some faggy comment, perhaps because I’m standing there in my underwear (hey, it’s hot!).

    Dumb ass New York native white guys, for what it’s worth.

    Gets the adrenaline flowing, that does. Something as simple as that.

    __________________________________

    This was “my” alley in Baltimore:
    It was fun to write “violators will be arrested” when I actually had the power to carry through on that threat personally!

    I wasn’t the only person who lived there. But I was the only person that had to take a small alley off of an even smaller alley to enter his house. I lived on the second floor and my only entrance was off the rear porch… to an alley, that connected to another alley.

    No, I couldn’t subscribe to a newspaper or get mail service. Pizza delivery was out of the question.

    But it was a nice apartment and rent was only $300/month. I also had the world’s best landlady, Miss Mary. She lived downstairs (with the front door). I’d make her spankopita and she’d leave regular shipments of paximathiaand koulourakia (delicious Greek cookies).

  • So I was battling the Drug Czar

    Me and Lee Brown (former Houston mayor, New York Police Commissioner, and federal Drug Czar) mano-a-mano in a no-holds-barred cage match! (Also known as 700 words in U.S. News & World Report.)

    I think I kick his ass. But then I would think that, wouldn’t I? And it’s not really a fair cage match. He is 70.

    Drugs Are Too Dangerous Not to Regulate—We Should Legalize Them

    The nation’s drug problems should be controlled through regulation and taxation

    Drugs are bad. So let’s legalize them.

    It’s not as crazy as it sounds. Legalization does not mean giving up. It means regulation and control. By contrast, criminalization means prohibition. But we can’t regulate what we prohibit, and drugs are too dangerous to remain unregulated.

    Let’s not debate which drugs are good and which are bad. While it’s heartless to keep marijuana from terminally ill cancer patients, some drugs—crack, heroin, crystal meth—are undoubtedly bad. But prohibition is the issue, and, as with alcohol, it doesn’t work. Between 1920 and 1933, we banned drinking. Despite, or more likely because of, the increased risk, drinking became cool. That’s what happens when you delegate drug education to moralists. And crime increased, most notoriously with gangland killings. That’s what happens when you delegate drug distribution to crooks. Prohibition of alcohol ended in failure, but for other drugs it continues.

    Law enforcement can’t reduce supply or demand. As a Baltimore police officer, I arrested drug dealers. Others took their place. I locked them up, too. Thanks to the drug war, we imprison more people than any other country. And America still leads the world in illegal drug use. We can’t arrest and jail our way to a drug-free America. People want to get high. We could lock up everybody and still have a drug problem. Prisons have drug problems.

    Illegal production remains high. Since 1981, the price of cocaine has dropped nearly 80 percent. Despite the ongoing presence of U.S. and other troops, Afghanistan has been exporting record levels of opium, from which heroin is made. Poor farmers may not want to sell to criminals, but they need to feed their families, and there is no legal market for illegal drugs. Al Qaeda in Afghanistan, the FARC in Colombia, and drug gangs in Mexico all rely on drug prohibition. A legal drug trade would do more to undermine these terrorists than military action would. If we taxed drugs, profits would go to governments, which fight terrorists.

    Illegal drug dealers sell to anyone. Legal ones are licensed and help keep drugs such as beer, cigarettes, and pharmaceuticals away from minors. Illegal dealers settle disputes with guns. Legal ones solve theirs in court. Illegal dealers fear police. Legal ones fear the IRS.

    Less use.Regulation can reduce drug use. In two generations, we’ve halved the number of cigarette smokers not through prohibition but through education, regulated selling, and taxes. And we don’t jail nicotine addicts. Drug addiction won’t go away, but tax revenue can help pay for treatment.

    The Netherlands provides a helpful example. Drug addiction there is considered a health problem. Dutch policy aims to save lives and reduce use. It succeeds: Three times as many heroin addicts overdose in Baltimore as in all of the Netherlands. Sixteen percent of Ameri-cans try cocaine in their lifetime. In the Netherlands, the figure is less than 2 percent. The Dutch have lower rates of addiction, overdose deaths, homicides, and incarceration. Clearly, they’re doing something right. Why not learn from success? The Netherlands decriminalized marijuana in 1976. Any adult can walk into a legally licensed, heavily regulated “coffee shop” and buy or consume top-quality weed without fear of arrest. Under this system, people in the Netherlands are half as likely as Americans to have ever smoked marijuana.

    It’s unlikely that repealing federal drug laws would result in a massive increase in drug use. People take or don’t take drugs for many reasons, but apparently legality isn’t high on the list. In America, drug legalization could happen slowly and, unlike federal prohibition, not be forced on any state or city. City and state governments could decide policy based on their needs.

    The war on drugs is not about saving lives or stopping crime. It’s about yesteryear’s ideologues and future profits from prison jobs, asset forfeiture, court overtime pay, and federal largess.

    We have a choice: Legalize drugs, or embark on a second century of failed prohibition. Government regulation may not sound as sexy or as macho as a “war on drugs,” but it works better.