The War on Drugs Has Failed

The War on Drugs Has Failed

>> SCHNEIROW: My name is Brian Schneirow. I’ve
been an engineer here for the last five and a half years or so now, but I know that it’s
not why you all came here today. You certainly didn’t come to see me. So a few months ago,
I was on a plane and I just happened to be sitting next to this person who was–started
talking about drug policy and how it affects society and some of the implications of that,
and I found the talk absolutely fascinating. In fact, we talked, I think, almost the entire
flight which was about an hour or so. So, what was even more interesting was his credentials.
He was a 33-year veteran of law enforcement and the executive director of a group called
the Law Enforcement Against Prohibition. So, of course, at the end of the flight, I asked
him if he’d like to come here to Google and give a talk on the topic and he agreed. So
with me today is Neill Franklin, the Executive Director of LEAP, so come on.
>>FRANKLIN: First of all, I want to thank Brian. You know, I’m impressed by Brian. I
mean, what he has done to promote this and get this moving for us here at Google, I give
you thanks for that. And also, you might want to thank him; he supplied a wonderful lunch
for you guys. I can–I see that. Way to go, Brian. That’s pretty–that’s the way to get
them here. And I–he didn’t tell me that I would be a little overdressed for the occasion.
But I’ll tell what I’m going to do, I’m going to loosen up a little bit. How’s that? Is
that better? All right. Everybody get their–you see, my wife, she gets a little upset when
I don’t loosen my tie at night when I go to bed, you know, it’s not like–she’s trying
to get me wear these things called pajamas or something I [INDISTINCT]. But after so
many years in law enforcement, mainly, for me, in criminal or narcotics investigation,
I agree; when I was in narcotics investigation, I used to dress a little bit more relaxed
and I looked a little different. But once I started going up through the ranks which
I’ll talk a bit–just a little bit about, the costume changed. So, I’m kind of used
to this, but I’ll get over it. Real quick. I want to give you a brief overview of our
organization, Law Enforcement Against Prohibition and just a little bit of my background, as
Brian touched upon. Can everyone hear me okay? Okay. Law Enforcement Against Prohibition
was formed in 2002 by five cops, retired cops. Jack Cole was one of those five and he was
our–he was my predecessor as Executive Director for Law Enforcement Against Prohibition. I
took over in July. And Jack Cole, a retired New Jersey State Trooper, did a lot of time
in narcotics work for the New Jersey State Police and was into a lot of very interesting
cases. But they had the forward thinking and the courage–see, because it was their forward
thinking that brought them to the place of realizing that there’s something really wrong
with our drug policies in this country. You know, after three decades of no successes
and being there on the frontlines, they realized that something’s not right. It’s not what
we thought it would be. So they formed LEAP, Law Enforcement Against Prohibition and we’re
thousands. We have about probably around 35,000 supporters now worldwide. We’re based here
in the United States, but we’re in 78 countries, probably more than 78 countries now. And not
just cops, we have judges, retired federal judges. We have prosecutors, we have corrections
officials. We have a current warden of a prison, who is on board with us and we have a speaker’s
bureau of over a hundred members who travel around toů I like that effect. That’s neat
stuff. Should I expect any less from Google? But–so that’s what we do. We teach people
about our failed policies. We teach about what occurs on the frontlines. So that’s a
snapshot of LEAP. And oh, I can’t forget this. We are completely nonprofit, 5013C. So if
you guys want to help us out to continue our message, please feel free and I can give you
a little bit more information on that. But that’s our website,, L-E-A-P dot C-C.
And to make it easier to remember, another way to get there is
That will get your attention. So, now about me. As Brian said, a little over 33 years
in the business of law enforcement and just so, you know, make sure I was clear. Our organization
says we must legalize all drugs in order to solve our issues, not just in this country
but worldwide. And those issues I will be talking about today. Now when you hear that
word legalize, don’t fall out of your seat. We’re not talking about a free for all; we’re
not talking about, like, how you guys get lunch here at Google. I do like it though.
But we’re talking about regulation and control. We’re talking about taking complete control
away from the criminals and making sure that it is regulated and controlled in a responsible
manner. Okay, my 33 years, I started with the Maryland State Police back in the late
1970s. Couple of years after I joined the State Police, I became an undercover narcotics
agent, worked primarily around the Washington D.C. area. From there, I eventually worked
my way into management, eventually commanding a number of taskforces in the western part
of the state, multi-jurisdictional drug taskforces. I think I had about seven during that time
as a lieutenant with the Maryland State Police. Shortly thereafter, I became a Regional Commander
for both Narcotics and Criminal Investigation. I then had the northeast part of the state;
the state was divided in half, so I had about 12 counties under my command and of that,
I think there was probably about 12 different taskforces. From there, I went to become the
commander of training for the Maryland State Police, which was one of the two largest training
academies divisions within law enforcement in the State of Maryland. I then retired from
there in 1999. From there, I went to Baltimore. I was recruited to go to Baltimore which was
my hometown. I then commanded their training division which was the largest training division
in the state. I did that for four years. Before leaving there and going to my third–you see,
I had a problem, I couldn’t keep a job. But I got over that. I think I’m at my last stop
now because I went to the Maryland Transit Administration to command their detective
bureau, their Criminal Investigations Bureau. During that time, I also had the privilege
to be the chairperson for a grassroots organization in Hartford County, Maryland, which was called
the Heroin Narcotics Task Force. Now, no, it wasn’t cops; it was a community. It was
formed by two moms that had lost their sons, their two sons to heroin overdoses–they were
high school students–and they were trying to get funding for treatment and education
and it’s a difficult task, very difficult task. So it got me to see from another perspective
this issue that we’re talking about here today. I’ve been involved with mentoring children
throughout the years and also, the president for an organization on a board for an organization
called TurnAround Incorporated, which was an organization in the Baltimore area for
domestic violence. We’re advocates for domestic violence, child sexual abuse, sexual assault,
and it gave you–and you’d be surprised how this also spills over into that realm as well.
You guys seen the HBO series, The Wire? I’ll make one quick comment about that. Except
for the community of Amsterdam, it’s right on. Right on. And many of those characters
and scenes and scenarios that you would see in that were really taken from true life over
a span of maybe a couple of decades and they pushed it all together. Okay. Real quick,
I got a question. I assume that most of the people, not all of you here, are familiar
with our drug policies in the country, right? For the most part, marijuana, heroin, cocaine,
that stuff, it’s illegal, right, to possess and so on. Just by a show of hands, how many
of you think that our current policies are working? Don’t be bashful. I mean, you’re
among friends. One, two? Anybody? Okay. And just for the record, I didn’t see a single
hand go up and there’s probably about 150, 60 people in this room here. I asked that
question for a reason and as you’ll see as we move through the program. So let’s go ahead
and move through the–I got a little slideshow here that we’re going to roll through real
quick. Before 1914, heroin–I’ll use this so I can move around a little bit. Is this
good?>>Yeah, it is.
>>FRANKLIN: Okay. So before 1914, heroin could be bought from any grocery store, and
that’s true, before the Harrison Act. But then we in this country decided to start with
our Drug Laws. And back then, 1.3% of our population was addicted to drugs, okay? That’s
when drugs were legal. And I talked a little bit about my career but this is just some
visuals. That’s a good looking guy there. And this guy standing next to me, that’s my
brother. He’s the reason I got into law enforcement and he was my instructor. That’s when I graduated
from the Police Academy. He was my instructor in the Police Academy. I can tell you some
stories there, but–there he is again. So we both–that’s when I went to another agency,
that’s when I went to Baltimore; I was a colonel there and he was a colonel with the Transportation
Authority after he left the State Police. I had to encourage him to retire and move
on. He’s still with Baltimore. And that’s what happens when you start talking about
this stuff. That was the end of my career with my last agency. But they couldn’t find
anything, so I was set free eventually. So from 1979 to 2009, and, you know, I mentioned
the span because as you’ll see, we’ll be talking about–you know, we’re talking about the past
three to four decades and, you know–and that’s three decades for me and the war on drugs
started a few years before that. 1970, oh, my God. So 1.3%, you just remember seeing
that figure again? Okay. One point three percent in 1970, people were addicted to drugs. So
we’ve gone through–we went through quite a few decades and still at that same percentage.
1970–now, we’re talking about deaths as a result of our drug culture. But 1970, less
likely than falling down stairs than to die from using drugs, okay? I mean, less likely
to die from using drugs than falling downstairs. Falling downstairs is more dangerous so stay
off stairs. Use the elevator. Same thing with choking on food. So it’s not like the propaganda
that has been put out there over the years that drugs are dangerous, they’re going to
kill you, blah, blah, blah, blah. Many more things in this world that are going to kill
you, believe me. This isn’t–stay away–I was going to name a particular restaurant
but I don’t want to be sued for slander, so–but you know where I was going with that. There
are many of them. 1970, Soft Drugs back then. Hard Drugs were virtually unheard of. And
I’m going to start rolling through these slides real quick, because I think it’s very important
to get some good dialogue on, but I want to give you guys a good foundation for, you know,
what this is all about, touch on a few areas. So I’m going to be clicking through rather
quickly as we get going. Now, here is a–from the DEA Briefing Book of 2001 and a lot of
the stuff that we use from the Feds, you’ll see, you know, it goes back a few years but
it’s very hard to get current information statistics from the Federal Government, and
I don’t know why that is but so be it. But if you look at the two charts here, on the
left, price, on the right, purity, and down the center, we have years beginning of 1980
going through 1999. And we’re referring to–if you look in the upper left, all I’ll say it’s
$3.90 and we’ve referred to as–we’re talking about heroin here. We referred to it as a
trade, because back then that amounted–that’s what it cost, $3, about $3. And these adjustments
that you’re going to see, inflation is included in it. It’s factored into that so that we
get a good comparison, as how prices change as we navigate through the years. So, on the
purity side, in 1980s, 3.6% purity for heroin when you bought heroin off the street back
then. 1970, was about–when you compare the prices, it was about $6 for the same amount
of heroin. You can see in 1980, it was $3.90. If you go back 10 years, it was about $6.37,
so you see that the price in those 10 years went down for buying the same amount of heroin.
Purity back in 1970 was 1.5%, so you see the purity had gone up considerably. What I’m
talking about here is supply and demand. What I’m talking about here is if we’re doing what
we’re supposed to do as it relates to the war on drugs to reduce the amount of drugs
coming into the country, the availability–first of all, if less drugs were coming in into
the country, purity level would either stay the same or it would become less because they
cut it more. They would cut it more. But if more drugs are coming into the country, then
your purity is going to go up; it’s going to increase. Same thing when you compare it
to gasoline. When there’s plenty of gasoline, prices do what? They go down. Limited supply,
price goes up. And I have somebody who will probably talk a little bit about that as we
move forward. So when you look at the purity–[INDISTINCT] and I’m going to move forward real quick.
I’m going to move up to 1999. That same amount of heroin in 1999 was now under $1 at 80 cents.
Purity level, 38%. Today, heroin purity is extremely high. I mean, it’s–in some places,
it’s almost pure, because we have not been effective in keeping drugs out of our country.
And I think after four decades of that trend, it’s pretty obvious that we’re not going to
be. So, you know, just wanted to touch on that real quick. All right. Drug users, according
to the DEA, 1965, 4 million; 2% of that population. In 2003, 112 million; 46% of that population.
Money spent fighting the drug war. Okay. Since 1970, we spent $100 million; 2003, $70 billion.
Okay. This is what we’re doing in the law enforcement effort. And I saw that on my span
of career as we continued to buy more toys and spend more money, put more people into
our narcotics units, going from, like, 10 and 15 people in the unit back in the 1970s,
all the way up to a few hundred in the late ’80s. Drug seizures. You know, back in the
’70s, when I first came on and I started working undercover, when I seize an ounce of cocaine,
man, I was big time. I got all the pats on the back and I mean, it was big–it was a
big deal. An ounce of heroin? Oh, my God. Big stuff. Now, a quarter ounce of heroin.
In 2002, if you wanted a good pat on the back, you needed 10 tons of heroin. Yeah, we winning
that war, no doubt about it. How about 20 tons of cocaine? So now, you’re talking a
container load at the port. And that’s the truth. Once again, it shows that it’s still
coming in quite a bit. Wholesale cocaine costs, 60% less. Wholesale heroin costs, 70% less.
Prices are going down, just like I was talking about with gasoline; supply and demand. It’s
here. Let’s talk about overdoses per 100,000 users. In 1979, that was the day that–the
year that I graduated from the State Police Academy, we’re at 28 deaths per 100,000. Look
at that, 141 deaths by 2000. So we’re not saving lives over these decades. That’s for
sure. Here’s just a quick chart on arrests, marijuana arrest versus total drug arrests
in the U.S. from 1970 up till 2005. Down at the bottom, you’ll see we arrested a half
million people in 1970. Quadrupled. 2005, 1.9 million, total drug arrests. Forty-four
percent. Eighty nine percent increase in marijuana possession arrests. Crazy. We’re filling up
our jails and that’s also costing us money to the tune of 30 something thousand; depending
on where you are. Some of them average around 29, $30,000 per inmate per year. It sounds
like a college education. And that’s not what they’re getting; they’re coming out better
criminals, so they think. Okay. U.S. tax dollars spent on prosecuting the drug war. We spend
over a trillion dollars, folks. And here’s your healthcare program. And there’s a sort
of graph that talks about arrests of nonviolent drug offenders in the millions and how it’s
gone up from 1970 to 2006. I’m moving to the actual numbers, 39 million arrests, drug arrests.
And most of these arrests I’m talking about folks, are nonviolent. I’m not talking about
the folks out here shooting, killing people. 2002, percent of population addicted, damn,
we’re still at 1.3. Man, figured with all of these drugs and stuff in the country, we’ll
go up to about, what? I don’t know, 10, 12%. One point three, just like back in 1914. So–and
that’s what I was just talking about. When it was legal, when drugs were illegal, after
40 years, we’re still around the same percentage, so. Ah, this is interesting percent of crimes
cleared by arrest or exceptional means. What this is, this is information from our U.S.
Department of Justice as it relates to, across the country, how many crimes we’re solving.
Okay. Murder, rape, robbery, you know, all those real crimes against people. 2006, as
you can see, murder, clearance rate, 60.7; rape, 40.9; robbery, 25.2. We are now–have
unsolved out here. Forty percent of our murders go unsolved. Sixty percent of our rapes and
arsons go unsolved. Seventy-five percent of robberies go unsolved. Now when they go unsolved,
these people continue to prey upon you. So what happens when you don’t solve crimes?
Eighty-three percent of property crimes. In 1963, we solved 91% of our murders. Today,
like I said, 61%. We’re focusing a lot of our energy on our drug policies and enforcing
drug laws in our neighborhoods and communities. So, 30% fewer. Chasing nonviolent drug users.
That’s what I was just talking about, protect us from important people. Now, as we get into
the violence here, how did I come to where I’m at? This how I came to where I’m at. It’s
the violence in the illegal drug trade that really gets to me. I know there’s money involved.
I know that we’re losing money from taxes not changing our [INDISTINCT] but this is
what gets me. In 2000, right after I retire from the State Police and went to Baltimore
City, I got a phone call in the middle of night about a trooper who had been shot. And it was this guy, Ed Toatley, who was a
good friend of mine. And Ed had worked for me on many times but more importantly he wasů
And still is a friend. So, in case you can’t see that, he was making an undercover buyer–buy
in the Washington D.C. area from a drug dealer, while working with the FBI. And they were
surveilling all of this, I mean, they were right down the street. This was cameras in
the car and everything. A guy comes back out and shoots Ed point blank range in the head
to keep the money and the drugs. The guy gets away and goes to New York, but we eventually
caught him. So now, his wife and three kids are alone, as it relates to that relationship.
But it didn’t stop with Ed; there are many police officers that have met the same fate
as my friend. And it continues, and it continues. But it’s not just us out there on the frontlines
who are dying. A couple of years later in Baltimore, in this corner row home, this is
where that family lived on President Street in Baltimore. This is the Dawson family, that’s
the mom up there, Angela, and five kids. The husband, there’s no photo of the husband here,
but he was also in that home on that night when the neighborhood drug dealer set their
home on fire. Because she was working with the police to get him off of that corner so
her kids didn’t have to deal with him. So, he murdered them. See, it’s not just Mexico.
Where in Mexico–we, over the past, since 2006, have had more than 28,000 Latinos murdered.
Not because we have a drug abuse problem in this world, because we have drug Prohibition
which creates an illegal market just like back in the 1920’s with Al Capone and alcohol
here in the United States, it does the same thing. We’ve taken a problem and made it 10
times worse by invoking prohibition. All right. School children report it’s easier to buy
illegal drugs, marijuana, than it is alcohol and beer, because alcohol and beer is regulated.
And when a kid comes to me–up to me on the street and says, “Hey man, can you go in the
store and get me a six-pack?” I’d say, “You done lost your mind.” But when he walks up
to a drug dealer on a corner or sends a text message, all they want to see is his money
and won’t see a driver’s license. And as we’ve already seen the drugs are increasing, the
amounts are increasing every year. It’s becoming more difficult for the cartel to transport
her across the borders so now they’re growing it at our National Parks and they’re guarding
it with–they have guards up in the trees with AK47s. Just ask any DEA agent, they’ll
tell you. That’s what the illegal trade generates, 500 billion every year. It’s more than that
but we low-ball it. That’s a mere 20–$255 million, that’s in a room of a drug dealer’s
house. Probably too much for the bank vault to handle. Five hundred billion would cover
a room 2,000 times that size. And check this out. They don’t count their money, they weigh
their money. Seriously, they weigh it. I mean, you saw how much money that was. They weigh
it and if you can’t see that, $100 bills, 37.1 pounds equal $1 million. You might want
to weigh your money one day, that’s why we’re telling you then. If you’re not already weighing
it. All right. So, remove the profit motive. You remove the profit motive, we remove the
violence, all right? That’s plain and simple. After doing this for 40–almost 40 years,
believe me, I know. That’s what it’s all about out there in the streets. So you end prohibition.
How you end prohibition, you legalize drugs. You regulate and control it, that’s how you
get the profit margin out of it for these guys. Let’s talk a little bit about decriminalizing
them. You know, there’s a difference. To decriminalize, that helps the people who are possessing because–and
so if you’re–you have a small amount or whatever it is, you don’t go to jail, that’s a good
thing. But it doesn’t take the violence out of the business, because the dealers are still
out there, the cartel is still out there. Now, they decriminalized in the Netherlands
in 1976, Portugal in 2001. And in Portugal, this is for all drugs, not just marijuana
or whatever. This is heroin, cocaine and what have you. Mexico 2009, a lot of people don’t
know that they did that in Mexico. Argentina in 2009, but once again, they didn’t take
the full step to legalize. They only took half a step, that’s why they still have the
violence in Mexico. You still have your dealers. You still have the illegal underground market.
Okay, so won’t legalization cause everyone to use drugs? What do you think? Will it?
Question, of the 160 some odd folks of you sitting in this room today and you that are
watching over the net, how many of you would use heroin, cocaine, crystal meth tomorrow
if it were illegal, I mean, if it were legal? Tomorrow, it’s legal. You can go out here
and buy it from a safe place, you know. And so how many of you would use it? Remember,
I said you’re among friends. Not only that, of the people you know, and I assume that
you know people, right? You–like Facebook and–you tweet and all that stuff. Okay. Of
those people you know, how many of those people do you know that would use it tomorrow? If
you know any that would use it tomorrow, they’re probably already doing it. You get my point?
But the good thing about it, if we were to legalize it the more, at least you, for those
who do use and currently buy, they don’t have to go out into that dangerous market like
you saw in the HBO series, The Wire, you don’t have to go out into that market and buy it.
Additionally, you would know what you’re getting because just like with alcohol, you know what
the alcohol content is; it says it right on the bottle. There are certain standards. There’s
certain things they can and can’t put in it. The purity level. So, for someone who’s using
heroin, you know, because if I–if I’m using heroin, I’ll buy illegally from you today,
I’m not saying that you do that. But if I buy from you today, you might be selling me
something at 30% purity. But you’d probably don’t even know what your purity level. I
mean, you know, you just mix it up. But if you’re going tomorrow because the police locked
you up, then I got to buy from you. You might be selling yours at 80%. Next thing I know,
I’m in shock trauma. I’m–you know, well, if someone gets me help because I don’t–you
know, because when you O.D., people just don’t run and get you help especially if they’ve
been hanging out with you. They’d make 40, 50 phone calls first, trying to figure out
what to do before they get you–if they get you medical attention, because it’s–because
you’re a criminal. That would make me a criminal. And I don’t want to go to jail even if it
involves saving your life. And it’s a problem, that’s why we have so many overdoses. In the
Netherlands–talking about if drugs were legal. In the Netherlands, where you can now use
at your–marijuana at your, you know, little coffee shops and so on, marijuana use by 10th
graders, 28%. Marijuana use by 10th Graders in the United States, 41%. It blows that out
of the water. All right. Lifetime prevalence in the U.S. and in the Netherlands: USA, 37%;
Netherlands, 17%. They made it boring to use pot. Old people use pot. Heroin use lifetime:
USA, 1.4%; Netherlands, 0.4%. It’s a different mindset. Homicide rate in the Netherlands:
USA, 5.6; Netherlands, 1.5. Portugal, drugs used by 13 to 15 years-olds decreased by 25%
because in Portugal, the Cato Institute–in case you want to look into this more, Cato
Institute did a study on it, you can find it online. In Portugal, drug use, 16 to 19
year-olds decreased by 22%. Heroin overdose deaths, because now it’s okay to go get help
and not only that, it’s–there’s more money available for treatment and education, decreased
by 52%. Portugal, HIV infections, new cases of HIV infections decreased by 71%. Check
that out, that’s saving lives. Mexico, I’m going to skip right through these because
there’s not much there but this talks about, in Mexico and then I think Argentina. Well,
police corruption, and let me touch on this real quick, police corruption. Yeah, we have
it in the United States here, it’s profitable. Everybody likes to make money no matter what
you do, whether your wear the uniform or not. Now, the cases are few, but yeah, we have
cops, we have prosecutors, we have other people who take bribes, who rip off drug dealers,
who do whatever they got to do, despite the uniform they wear, to make money. Okay, it’s
profitable and they take bribes, and they give passes to drug dealers and so on. It’s
different in Mexico. In Mexico, first, we offer you the money, you don’t want to take
the money, next we offer you a bullet, and we offer your family members a bullet. So,
if you don’t take the money, believe me, you’ll take the second option and you’ll do whatever
they want you to do because they will kill your family. Okay. I hope we’re on time. Okay.
I want to talk a little bit about incarceration rates because this is important and this is
per 100,000 starting with European Nations per population 100,000. They are at or below,
in Europe, 150 per 100,000 incarceration. The United States, by March of 2008, try 1,009.
We lock up a lot of people more than anybody else in the world including China. Who wants
to live in China? You want to? Okay, but, you know, you’ve probably been there before,
you know where to go. No, but seriously, yeah. No, I’m not, you know, making fun of China,
anything like that. It’s just I’m talking about how our country is supposed–if it had
this wonderful Constitution and freedoms and what have–you know what I’m talking about;
those protections from unreasonable search and seizure, I can’t go down that road right
now because we’ll be all day. But we have issues there in this country. Federal prisoners
from 1970 to 2005, okay. The yellow are for non-drug offenses, and you see they start
low but they only come up to about right here. The red for drug offenders, so in 1970, it’s–you
can hardly see it, but then it starts on this path and then we really get into the drug
war and it’s off the roof. Way up there above 240 something percent by the year 2004, 2005.
So you can see, it’s greatly outpaced other crimes. Yeah, it went up for other crimes
as we continue to put people in prison for other crimes, but for drug offenses, it’s
off the roof. And there are a number of reasons for that, a lot of–I mean, but money is one
of them. The grants and things that law enforcement agencies get from the Federal Government for
focusing upon drug arrest and there are other reasons too. And these are just the numbers
in relation to the actual chart. So that you can see the, you know, the increase the–for
regular arrest for non-drug, it increased 294%. But for drug-related arrest, it increased
2,558%. So those are the actual numbers, correlate to that. And here’s a–starting at the top,
we have Denmark and we work our way down to Turkey, Georgia, Greece, to the UK and what
have you. The United States, of course, is the one with the bar all the way over here,
as it relates to people we imprison per 100,000. So, as you can see, we outpace everybody.
Here’s Russia. Of course, the United States. There. Anyway, let’s move through that. I
think you get the picture as far as how we put people in prison. There’s also a disparity
issue and I’ll touch on that real quick also, real quick. But who uses drugs? Before I get
to that disparity issue to solve that, who uses drugs? And these are–we get these figures–majority
of our figures from the U.S. Department of Justice and the Feds. Whites constitute for
70%–72% of all drug users in the U.S. Blacks constitute for 13.5% of all drug users in
the U.S. Who gets arrested? Thirty-seven percent of those arrested for drug violations are
black. Who goes to prison? Sixty percent of those in state prisons for drug felonies are
black. Eighty-one percent in Federal–no, of Federal drug offenders are black and that’s
in Federal Prisons. Blacks are now serving an average of six years for their offenses,
while whites are serving an average of four years. Of the convicted defendants, 33% of
whites receive a prison sentence. So when you’re convicted 30–one third go to prison
for whites. Fifty-one percent, that’s half, for blacks. A black male born today has a
one in three chance of serving time in prison to being introduced to the criminal justice
system, one in three. So we’re talking about disenfranchisement, 14% of black men lost
their right to vote, on average. In Texas, that’s 31%. Incarceration rates, white males
per 100,000 in the Unites States. Nine hundred and forty-three white males per 100,000 in
the United States incarceration rate. South Africa, 1993 under Apartheid, for black males,
that was 851 and we thought that was atrocious. In the United States under prohibition in
2008, try 4,919 per 100,000. 2447seconds There’s a book written by Michelle Alexander called
“The New Jim Crow”, if you haven’t read it, oh my God, read it. It really breaks this
whole thing down, I mean, she did a wonderful job with that, great book, educated me on
a number of things. Outcome of legalization, now, 1.9 million less people arrested each
year, that’s what we’d had. So, you know how costly that is to house 1.9 million people
even if it’s just for a month or a few days throughout the year? You know how much money
that cost? And when they’re in there, they’re not paying taxes, I guarantee you, because
they’re not working. Seventy billion dollars would be saved each year. So End Prohibition.
Number two on the list, have Federal Government, and these are just some–to have the Federal
Government produce these drugs, now this isn’t in a position of LEAP. However this talks
a little bit about regulation and control. Some of the things that we could do. That
would deal with quality control, we talked a little bit about that, knowing what you’re
going to be getting, if you choose to march down that road, we do not condone them the
use of drugs at LEAP, we don’t. Drugs are dangerous, drugs will harm you. They will
harm you but we’ve just made it 10 times worse by subjecting people to prison, Prohibition.
Standardization, okay, you know what the potency level is, measurement and potency. Like I
said, reduce and end of overdoses. All right. Number three, sell drugs to adults from the
state package stores or whatever models that are out there. Let the States, the individual
50 states decide on how that’s going to be. The Feds get out of it, let the states decide
how to do it, that’s how the Constitution intended it to be in the first place. For
those drugs that might be too bad, all right. Like they do up in Canada with the NAOMI project
for Heroin Maintenance Program. If you’re an addict, you can go in and get what you
need, so that you are not out stealing, you’re not lying to your family members, you’re not
causing problems in your neighborhood, you’re not knocking people over the head to get the
money that you need to buy it from the illegal drug dealer on the corner. You can take care
of your issue without it costing us. And hopefully get your counseling and get off of it, and
that’s what I’ve–was just talking about here, at Switzerland, that’s what they do in Switzerland
and the Netherlands, and Canada, Germany too, Denmark. Oh, there you go. And under that
program, not one overdose death since 1994. How many have we had in here in the United
States. Once again, it does a great–as it relates to AIDS and Hepatitis, because they’re
no longer out sharing needles. All right. Crime was cut by 60%. Oh, my God, so many
benefits. Eighty-two percent decline in new heroin cases, oh my God, we’re having so much.
It doesn’t make such a difference, folks. Redirect the money just, you know, that we
save and what we get from taxes, what–mainly from what we save to programs, the true treatment
and education, then you’ll solve the root issue which is your drug abuse problem. But
we can’t do it with dumping most of our money into enforcement and filling up our prisons,
it just doesn’t work. It doesn’t work, 30 to 40 years, it hasn’t worked. You could do,
one is for free education, health care and housing, job training, employment, livable
wages, the list is long of what we could do if we were to turn that corner and head another
direction. Rehabilitation centers, oh my God. There you go. All right. Redirect the money,
save programs, okay, talked about that. I want to touch on this real quick. 1985, 42%
of us smoked tobacco, nicotine, the most addictive drug that’s out there, ask anybody that smokes
and is trying to kick the habit. However, on 2003, because we launched this massive
program to teach people and to make it uncomfortable for you to smoke in places. Now, it’s only
21%. My, you can be effective, in reducing use, if you just do it the right way. Albert
Einstein, we all know what he said. Oh, let me just get right to it. But for those who
can’t read this, the prestige of government has undoubtedly been lowered considerably
by the Prohibition Law. And he’s talking about Prohibition in general. For nothing is more
destructive of respect for the government and the law of the land than passing laws
which cannot be enforced. It is an open secret that the dangerous increase of crime in this
country is closely connected with this. Forty years you can’t enforce this law properly,
Prohibition. And this is a picture from that–Delaware Alcohol Prohibition, just want to say real
quickly, it was the ladies that came out in full force to reverse–to reverse the 18th
amendment and repeal it, because they want to save their children. That’s what it was
about. And if you want to save the kids today, that’s what we have to do. So, that’s my presentation,
I want to bring somebody up real quick and then we’re going to have questions. But I
tell you, Robert, why don’t you come on up. Robert Leason is from Australia and he is
over at Stanford over with the Hoover Institute, right?
>>LEASON: In the Economics.>>FRANKLIN: At, in the Economics Department.
And I just met him the other day and I told him I was having this talk here with you guys,
a little discussion and presentation with you guys and invited him to come along. He
is an expert in Economics and he can talk a little bit about economics from a worldwide
perspective, from a national perspective here, and I just want to have him here available,
to answer some questions and you want to take just a couple of minutes?
>>LEASON: Sure. I wouldn’t take up too much of your time. Just a couple of minutes. That
was a very interesting, clear presentation. I just want to add a little bit by way of
Economics. In other words, what does Economics tell us about the War on Drugs? Well, I think
economics is unambiguous. The income tax which is what I’m working on at the moment. I’m
working on the abolition of the income tax because I want to replace it, as most economists
do, with the Consumed Income Tax. The income tax was the gateway drug to Prohibition. Why?
Because in order to abolish alcohol, you lose an awful lot of revenue, therefore, you need
another source of revenue; the income tax was that source of revenue. Now, we’ll see
in a minute, when I finish this two or three minute talk, that by reintegrating drugs into
the legal network, we also find ourselves an enormous source of tax revenue. I’m working
at the moment on a method of eliminating income tax and that fits in nicely with that research
project. Okay. So, what is the relationship between the war on drugs and the war on terror?
One finances the other. Where do the funds come from to kill American soldiers from the
war on drugs? Where do the Taliban get their funds from? The war on drugs. Now, very simply
proposition of economics. Title revenue equals price times quantity sold. Why do oil producers
form cartels such as OPEC? Very simple reason. If you can form a cartel, dominate the markets,
you can do what? Restrict supply. Why? Because if you’re dealing with a commodity for which
the demand is inelastic, it is in your interest to restrict supply. What happened in 1974?
There was a four-fold increase of the price of oil. Why? Because it’s in the interests
of OPEC to reduce supply. Likewise, it is in the interest of drugs suppliers to reduce
supply. So if I was a drug dealer, I will be out there saying, “Just say no to drugs.
Let’s get tough on drugs. Let’s get serious on this war on drugs.” Why? Because it’s in
my commercial interests, because I’m an–I’m in the market already. I’m paying off all
the cops I need. The last thing I want is new entrants. We want tough laws to keep entrants
out, because new entrants will lower the price, lower the revenue. Very simple proposition.
So, there’s some very simple solutions here. Neill has outlined some. Let me just give
you a couple and then I’ll finish. In 1974, Turkey, not Afghanistan, was the source of
heroin. Ninety-four percent of heroin was grown in Turkey, almost similar–identical
proportion to the proportion of heroin that originates from Afghanistan. The Turks decided
to do something very radical. They put this to the State Department and the State Department
said, “You bunch of communists, we’re not going to tolerate that.” What they wanted
to do is they want to legalize the production of poppies in Turkey. Now, it just so happened
that when–that great guy Richard Nixon got involved in a little bit of trouble in 1974,
I can’t remember what it was, perhaps, some of you could tell me afterwards. The Turks
went ahead and did their plan anyway because the State Department–the American government
was caught up with Watergate. What did they do? They said to Turkish poppy growers, “You
could grow whatever you like, any quantity, and guess what; we’ll buy it from you.” And
you know what happens to that; it’s sold as painkillers around the world. A commodity
of which we are in tremendous shortage. There’s millions of millions of people who are dying
painful deaths because we don’t have enough painkillers. Now since 1974, and this is not
a research interest of mine but I have it on good authority, not a single bust of heroin
anywhere in the world has been traced back to Turkey. Now drugs pass through Turkey but
I understand none of the poppies grown in Turkey make their way into the illegal drug
market. So there I think is probably where I shall stop. If we integrate these dangerous
commodities, and drugs are dangerous commodities, back into the legal fabric, we generate an
enormous amount of tax revenue. We minimize the damage associated with this and we destroy
funding for the Taliban and their criminal crony friends. Now if we have got any chance
of introducing rational public policy in America, we should start with eliminating this counterproductive
nonsensical war on drugs and use rational thought informed by economic analysis and
common sense rather than shallow emotional rhetoric which is where the war on drugs comes
from.>>FRANKLIN: When I met you yesterday, something
just told me you would be right for this, so that’s why I brought you up. So, we have
a couple of minutes left over. I doubt it if any of you have any questions or anything
but we’ll entertain some. Absolutely. Seriously. Yes?
>>[INDISTINCT]>>FRANKLIN: If you want to come up, you can–I’d
like you to–.>>No. That’s all right. [INDISTINCT]
>>FRANKLIN: Okay. I’ll rephrase the question.>>I have a problem, on one hand, you made
perfect sense and I agree with you. On the other hand, if I were talking to a politician
who generally supported a lot of issues that are our interests today, I would tell him
to run away from this as fast as I could, because you couldn’t possibly get away from
this. And I’ll particularly tell him, don’t tell anybody that this is what they do in
Europe, because then you really won’t get away. My question is, what can we and what
can you, what can your organization do about what I see as an unbelievably massive PR problem,
where any politician talks about legalization of drugs is immediately discounted from the
poppies?>>FRANKLIN: Oh, that’s a good question. What
he asked was what can you do as citizens, as folks here, because–well, basically, what
he said, when a politician wants to talk about this issue and they consider it quite a third
row issue, you know, like the metro third– electrified grill, if you touch it, you die.
It’s a third row issue for politicians, so what can we do, what can you do to get politicians
to, I guess, speak to this or they’ll come forward with this. Let me start by saying
that politicians are beginning to do it, because there are a number of organizations out there,
including ours, which has been going to them and it’s becoming–we’re getting this more
out in the open. The first thing you can do is actually go to our website and just sign
on, so that we can keep you informed of the good information, all the updates that are
coming out. All the propositions that are out there, all the bills that are out there
related to this such as what Senator Jim Webb is doing now in Washington D.C., as he’s taking
a good look, he’s developing a panel that would take a really good comprehensive look
at our entire criminal justice system and this is a huge part of it. So go to our website,
and sign on so we can keep you informed and send you information. The second thing is,
find out–many people don’t know who their representatives are. Find out who your representatives
are, then send them emails. Call them and say, “Hey, I’m in your district. It’s okay
for you to talk about this because I feel it needs to be talked about.” Because as you
saw the first question I asked, how many of you think our current policies are working?
No hands went up and that’s what you can say to them. You know I was at this, you know,
forum and this presentation of Google and they asked a question, how many of you think
that our policies are working and no hands went up. So as my representative, what are
you doing to move in a different direction if we out here believe that it’s not working?
So talk to them about moving in another direction. Yeah.
>>LEASON: There’s a very simple answer to that question. It’s called tax competition.
If drugs are legalized in the local level, in state or even the Lower House level, then
income tax and other taxes will fall. Therefore, the logic is, you want the War on Drugs; you
pay for it with higher taxes. And tax competition will eliminate the war on drugs.
>>FRANKLIN: Absolutely. From the money perspective. They understand taxes. Yes?
>>I have a question for the money perspective. How do you lower taxes?
>>FRANKLIN: How do you lower taxes?>>Yeah. How do you make themů?
>>FRANKLIN: Well, the first thing you do is stop spending money. That’s the first thing
you do. All right. I mean really, that’s–that’s balancing your checkbook 101. Stop spending.
Evaluate where you’re spending your money and right now, we’re spending according to
Jeffrey Myer and who’s out at Harvard, who’s done a lot of studies as it relates to finances
and the drug war. I think he puts it at $76.8 billion a year, all right, so we stop spending
that. Robert just talked about the taxes that you can generate from doing it appropriately
and you don’t have to start moving forward with all these hard drugs. I mean marijuana–no
one’s ever died from ingesting marijuana. I think that’s a good place to start, compare
that to alcohol. Maybe people will start using marijuana in lieu of alcohol. And we’ll really
save some lives.>>And in lieu of tobacco.
>>FRANKLIN: And in–thank you and in lieu of tobacco. I mean the list is long. So start
there and I think through taxes, stop spending what we’re currently spending, where we’re
spending it. Start letting people–well, just stop putting people in prison, because you
got to pay for them, you know, pay for college education and then again start contributing
to the tax base instead of taking from it. The list is long and there are a number of
studies out there that do speak to this. I would suggest that you go online and Google
Jeffrey Myer from Harvard and you’ll see a lot of work that he’s done nationally and
he’s also begin–he’s begun to break it down state by state. Yes?
>>[INDISTINCT]>>FRANKLIN: Well, I–it wouldn’t be something
I’d do but–okay. I see what you’re saying. Here’s my suggestion. We’re in California,
right? There’s a proposition out there right now, right? Make a statement, folks. That’s
where you can begin, because I guarantee you, marijuana puts 60 to 70%–that big room of
money you saw, 60 to 70% of that money for the cartel comes from marijuana. What happens
if you take that much revenue from GM or from BP?
>>Bail-out.>>FRANKLIN: I like that. But I don’t think
these guys are going to get bailed out. But that in and of itself, would greatly cripple,
not just the cartel members but the neighborhood gangs that we have out here or maybe because
it’s the same for them as well. That’s their biggest, you know, profit margin–it comes
from marijuana. Yes? I’ll get to you then I’ll come back over here to you, sir.
>>How do I look for some law enforcement to do about this? Did they find this kind
of argument persuasive, and if they don’t, what are their [INDISTINCT]?
>>FRANKLIN: It depends on where you are, what your job is in law enforcement, who you’ve
talked to, and how much knowledge you have. The folks in my circle get it. Because they
listen to what I have to say and they know all the facts surrounding this issue and how
it affects your life and everyone else’s lives. The higher up you go, the more resistance
you find, because the more political that position becomes, the higher up you go in
an agency. In some states like here in California, you’re going to see opposition come out like
probably the Narcotics Union. You know what, and I don’t–I don’t have a problem saying
it because I was in narcotics and I can say from firsthand that, I’d like being in narcotics,
not that I really liked going out and arresting a lot of these people. I found out when I
was in narcotics, in undercover work, these are really good people. Most of these people
I dealt with were really good people but I enjoyed wearing the shorts, man and the t-shirts,
and the sandals and driving a cool car, you know, a Corvette or a 5-liter Mustang or Mercedes.
I didn’t want to go back in the uniform, pushing a patrol unit. So to–you know, there are
incentives, you know, agencies get a lot of money from the Feds. They seize a lot of money
and property every year. It’s called Policing for Profit, another good study done by the
Cato Institute. Look that up. Policing for Profit, and the list is long. So I–in my
circle, one of the first things I said to the folks in my circle who wear the uniform
is, “Please go back to thinking how you thought when you first came into this line of business,
this career, why you came into it in the first place, to be effective in a positive piece
of someone’s life.” Because once they’ve been on for a while, they become tainted, so I
get them to go back to think that and if we change this police relationships then many
communities would improve drastically, because we will no longer be an occupying force in
those neighborhoods searching everyone, searching their homes, searching their cars, profiling
issues, and the list is long, so we could repair that and become respected for the most
part again. Yes? You.>>Well, I was surprised to see government
production on your slides. If you mean exclusive government production then you’re no longer
talking about legalization of production distribution, only the consumption. And if you’re not talking
about what’s the government production, then why should the government be able to compete
with private supplier, why in other wordsů?>>FRANKLIN: That’s just–what you saw on
the slide was just a suggestion of one impossible model. Are we good?
>>I think they’re on the wrong PC.>>FRANKLIN: Okay. I was just–of one possible
model that–there’s many different models. What we’re saying, at least, is when you move
forward you’ll then have 50 states that can work on many different possible models.
>>But I don’t understand what the model [INDISTINCT].>>FRANKLIN: Oh, I was referring to like the
Heroin Maintenance programs that they currently have in some of the other countries, where
you’re no longer–when someone doesn’t have to pay for what they need to get–when they
get treatment.>>The question is, what were you referring
to with that point, exclusive government production or non-exclusive government production?
>>FRANKLIN: I don’t know. It’s whatever–it would be whatever we decided for it to be,
but the problem is we don’t know what it could possibly be, because we have our heads stuck
in the sand. We know what we’re doing now doesn’t work, but we’re not moving forward.
We’re not creating think-tanks, serious think-tanks to figure out the new direction. That’s the
biggest problem we’re having right now is that we’re stagnant.
>>LEASON: There is a very simple answer. Very simple answer to your question. Gary
Becker won the Nobel Prize in Economics in 1993. He’s got a fantastic article in the
Journal of Political Economy, published I think, in 2005 where he demonstrates conclusively
that legal producers have lower cost curves than illegal producers. So that’s–it’s more
efficient and the illegal producers will be driven out of the market. So it’s a complicated
argument, it’s very mathematical on some but have a read of that. I think you will find
the answer to your question there, that illegal producers will be driven out of the market
through cost cut–the inability to compete with legal users.
>>Yeah that’s right but that’s under the assumption that the government will have the
exclusive production.>>LEASON: Yeah.
>>FRANKLIN: Right. Right. Right. I’ll take two more questions and then we’ll call it–I’m
going to take you and then I’ll come back to you, sir. Okay. Yeah.
>>[INDISTINCT]>>FRANKLIN: Is there a reason why I never
mentioned Prop 19? One of the reasons we’re 5013C and we don’t do too much in–you know,
in pushing legislation, changes our tax status. But Prop 19 needs to move forward, in my opinion,
it definitely needs to move forward. I think it’s critical that it move forward not in
2012 but now, because I’m telling you, after being on the frontlines for over three decades,
everyday that we wait, thousands of people die. And I mean I’m serious about that. I’m
not just talking about here in the United States, I’m talking about worldwide. This
is a worldwide issue. Other countries look to us and our policies. We have huge influence
over the U.N. as it relates to drug policy on a worldwide scale. The U.S. needs to move
forward, do the right thing, correct our policies and directions so that other countries will
follow suit. And we’ll save lives and people talk about the unintended consequences of
legalization. God, look at the current consequences. You know they’re talking about, “Oh, my God,”
you know, “usage from marijuana may go up 3%.” Okay, usage goes up 3%. Smoking marijuana
doesn’t kill anyone. If we stay where we’re at, we’ll have another 6,000, 7,000 people
die in the next year in Mexico, in the United States, we’ll probably have about another
10,000 people die on our neighborhood drug wars and, yeah, we’ll keep it illegal. I mean,
come on, I mean and those that do become addicted even if increase usage does go up, at least
we would have the money for proper treatment but I’m telling you right now, I–from–as
a cop would much rather take someone off of a street corner to a good treatment center
and put than put them in a body bag and take them to the morgue. Any day, any day. And
as Jack Cole would say, “You can get over an addiction. You’ll never get over conviction.”
You can’t get student loans, you can’t get housing, you can’t get jobs and the list goes
on and on and on. And what happens to that person? They eventually end up in jail or
somehow become draining to society, instead of productive in society, all because they
decided to use a substance and–yes, sir.>>Am confused, what’s the natural competition
like for governments to [INDISTINCT] drugs?>>FRANKLIN: There is none. I mean they tried
to say it was related to commerce but that’s–it’s not. It’s up to the states to decide what
they should be. You see back–when they did Alcohol Prohibition, that’s why they had to
create the 18th Amendment. There had to be a constitutional change for them to do that.
So nowů There are some studies that you can read that speaks specifically to that and
I don’t want to speak incorrectly because, you know, what’s in my area is law enforcement
and now you’re getting more into the economic part of it and Constitutional Law. I can speak
to Constitutional Law as it relates to those like the Fourth Amendment and the Fifth Amendment
dealing with law enforcement and policing, but not as it relates to interstate commerce
and all that good stuff. But there–you can find that information as to what the Government
is saying the reason is for, so.>>I’m just saying, would it be, maybe simpler
to [INDISTINCT]>>FRANKLIN: Well, and that’s one of the things
that I know it’s not going to be safer than in Argentina and that’s what [INDISTINCT]
because it’s unconstitutional. And you ask anybody that deals with Constitutional Law
and they’ll tell you that it is–in this country, it is unconstitutional, but there was something
that they did or said that kind of like skirts, you know, it kind of like skirts the edges
of it and that’s one of the problems we’re having. That’s–with this drug policy that
we have that affects so many other areas of the Constitution. I mean we’re ripping–we’re
ripping the Fourth Amendment to shreds out here, as it relates to searching people and
in many cases, the Supreme Court, it’s holding up some of these searches that are done by
law enforcement folks out here in the streets. And when you look at these cases and that’s
why–as a matter of fact, what we’re talking about right now and I think it also answers
your question is in the book that I mentioned by Michelle Alexander, “The New Jim Crow”
speaks specifically to that, so you might want to take a look at that too. So, I know
we kind of ran out of time here, but I just want to thank you guys for having me here
today, hosting me here today.
I had a great time. Thank you. And there are some pamphlets on the back there and I’ll
give you my–and you can probably find it on the website but I’ll give you my email
address as well if you want to communicate with me later. It’s pretty simple. It’s Neill,
[email protected] Thank you.


  1. Alcohol is continually the cause of road accidents, domestic abuse, child abuse…all kinds of criminal activities..yet we can ADVERTISE THE USE OF ALCOHOL>>>>GOVERNMENT LAWS ARE FUCKED!!!

  2. Should point out that alcohol has increased a lot compared to before and more kids drink alcohol then any point in our history.If you legalize anything don't think you won't make worst.
    Look at the number one drugs used? Alcohol and Cigs.
    Legalizing makes things worst.

  3. You have to be kidding me so keep it illegal and create an underground trade give criminals another thing to make profit off spend millions on trying to stop a problem you can't or legalize it let the goverment regulate it make money to spend on helping people get off it and take away a massive money maker for the criminal underworld

  4. @Thez0mb13s1ay3r

    the only thing bad about weed is that people inhale carcinogens and tar from smoking it traditional ways (rolled up in paper or through a pipe). That being said, these toxins aren't enough to kill anyone, so we can deduce that it mustn't cause cancer or emphysema…and guess what…it doesn't. The only thing bad about weed is inhaling smoke…but that's because it's smoke. Smoking ANYTHING is bad. Consume the drug the right way and there is no risk to health.

  5. @TheGrowisland
    Indeed. Potatoes contain glycoalkaloids which are toxic to the body. "Glycoalkaloids may cause headaches, diarrhea, cramps, and in severe cases coma and death" – Wikipedia

  6. @PieJacker1 Bookmark it for another time. That's what I did when I found out the length and didn't have the time to watch it. Now I'm just getting around to it.

  7. @PieJacker1 I hope you get around to watching it. It's really really good, very informative. We can't inform our friends, family, our community unless we ourselves take the time to retain the information. Maybe watch it in segments? 🙂

  8. @Thez0mb13s1ay3r ok cool so never touch coffee or soda or teas or chocolate bars or energy drinks or put spices on your food… because these are all drugs. 90% of america are drug addicts, consuming one or more caffeinated beverages a day. a hundred thousand people die a year from taking prescription drugs AS DIRECTED. that's more than have EVER died from using marijuana. your statement is terribly ignorant.

  9. Eliminating income tax, and taxing consumption? Sounds like a great way to encourage greater wealth disparity, as those with lots of money invest grossly more of their money then they will ever spend, and thus are not taxed on it, and those who have little must spend it all to survive, and thus are taxed on every dime. This won't fix anything.

  10. Yeah… WOD… we should all be be so blessed… 🙂 Pffft… I will retaliate… correction… already did… the creators and supporter of WOD will die of "Natural causes"… like everyone else… 🙂

  11. "The War on Drugs Has Failed" hmmmm i wonder which presidential candidate has said that for the past 30 years i just wish i knew his name

  12. STOP THE WAR ON DRUGS BEFORE it is too late. Citizens unite, their is strength in numbers.

  13. I am so sick and tired of this war and all the freedoms taken away as it has expanded and is continuing, Now police say they all need helicopters and drones to fight against their fellow Americans. This makes me sick just about ready to vomit at the thought of this never ending attack on individual freedoms. Thank you, and May God Bless.

  14. so why is 90% of crime drug related nowadays… need to look at the whole picture. ALL wars are bad! there are alternatives and to carry on with your head in the sand is futile.

  15. The message is:
    Consume alcohol (that will make you stupid).
    Don't consume Marihuana (that helps you to understand life).

  16. isn't america "land of the free"? guess not if someone or some entity tells me what i can and cannot indulge in. there's only two laws that need be present in society: don't kill; don't steal. that's it!

  17. "It's not a war on drugs, it's a war on personal freedom, it´s what it is ok?. Keep that in mind at all times, thank you."-Bill Hicks

  18. The CIA (through their third world allies) sells the drugs- Customs and Law Enforcement are supposed to stop them from coming into this country. It's that simple. Cut out the CIA and there will be no drugs.

  19. he said"should b legalised+not just in US but worldwide"
    …+that is bcoz US,or maybe the anglosaxon countries push the drug prohibition upon all the countries WORLDWIDE especially the wesstern world,It worths pondering WHY this is such imprtnt issue for USA.!!!
    Now the more dependent the country is upon US,and/or less sensitive (or more brainwashed)the more strict its policies are,- a reproduction of the same US policies.+(of course has similarly big drug problem+is getting worse)

  20. there are countries where ALL "illicit""drugs"are still illegal-where there is no medical marijuana+such,and the problem is as big.
    Legal use is safe use (statistically in ALL USERS that enrolled into programs with use of same substance life has improoved,their financial status(ability2hold job),health.,and ability2support themselves,The rate of thefts(criminality)decreased AND the number of those that stopped using is the HIGHEST among all other options

  21. plus,how do u dare suggest that in a democracy where chlorine ,knives ,alcool +every object imaginable is freely sold,(let alone in US where gun posession is legal(wtf?!)just certain herbs should b illegal+ certain drugs shouldnt b available on the hospitals.
    Obviously the black market will always exist(and all drugs will never be stamped out)bcoz this is the very purpose of their illegal status-to create a black market.What u say will surely b done after legalisation

  22. what is astonishing however is that this vid has 376 likes(in 33.000views)and only 13 dislikes+still war on drugs continues,this means citizens really have no power in their own country

  23. Free? Did you say free? Heavens NO! Every schmuck from Obama to the local dog catcher would lose half their income if the shit was free! The Drug Trade is big business; everybody knows that! But the "War On Drugs" is also big business; thats a little less well known! Addiction is a progressive, chronic, fatal illness! Chronic illnesses do not respond to law enforcement; they are usually made worse by the application of law enforcement solutions! This brave man speaks truth!

  24. Either we are free, or we are not. All men yearn to be free…so, as long as you are not harming someone else, minding your own business…wtf? Get govt out of our lives!

  25. You are partly right in that they should legalise some of the drugs (medicinal cannabis for example). But don't think for a second that it will stop the problem of illegal drug traffic. An example would be cigarettes; they are legal but still people smuggle them illegally and sell them for a ton cheaper than retail. Heroin and coke are dangerous as hell, legalising them is a recipe for a medical disaster in the US (which has pretty bad healthcare).

  26. You clearly are buying your drugs from poor sources.

    Or, by "everything" you mean pot.

    Because there are lots of common street drugs that will make you do all that and more.

  27. Stopping "the war on drugs" does not necessarily mean "anything goes."

    Alchohol as the model: Still illegal to give to under aged persons. Still has to be sold under certain restrictions, though these are not too odious. Can't be distilled by just anybody, though beer and wine are pretty much produced by anybody who wants, for personal use. Taxed and monitored by the govt. And laws about consuming and driving. Could be better, but that model is probably acceptable.

  28. if u dont smoke just put bit in cake mixture and bake cakes …it works ….cannabis cures alot of illness's including cancer when processed to oil….and thats a fact ..:) good luck..

  29. if you think gov doesnt know all this you are naive…its about money. as long as drugs are illegal you can make billions with them. the only one against legalization is the narco mafia and, being one of the biggest industries on the planet, the lobbies and so the govt.

  30. BEWARE: Advocates, please, don't drop your guard!!!!
    They still say it's evil and dangerous and they're demonizing it further.
    The only reason they are talking legalization is because of the violence and the economy.
    Both are good reasons but not the only good reasons.
    Marijuana's benefits, both socially and medically are being sidelined, even totally disregarded as being a lie.
    When are these hypocrites going to realize how wrong they are and how righteous peer reviewed science is?

  31. I hope I am wrong and my skepticism is just getting the better of me. If so, great, but I won't apologize.
    And if any of you wimpy optimists think I should repeal my statement, then fuck you and I hope rip the joint out of your mouth and replace it with a soother. If you think I am at fault for standing guard there is something seriously fucking wrong with you.
    And for you siding with cops in general telling me I'm wrong, that's why I am holding judgement.

  32. Legalize Marijuana, but more so, legitimize it.
    If cops want to be the good guys now, put on a pretty face and whine to us about being the poor, innocent bystander while evil bureaucracy rears it's law breaking head and violates our civil rights then I would estimate there being 100,000,000,000 lbs of marijuana to give back to their respective country's citizens with a HUGE fucking apology before I would even consider LEAP as being authentic and sincere.

  33. Google is a arm of the gov & I would bet most who work for gov & google could not pass a drug test! Stop this war on HEMP & watch the ecconomy come back because the HEMP plant has so many uses that we in the USA could end so many problems like curing cancer, cleaning the air & saving trees & ending the energy crisis very fast, but that wold break up many corps!

  34. yeah but they are messing up every thing. i take opana for back pain but they are not the same now. they got mess up every thing.

  35. Totally agree, these people are not above carrying out the agenda of evil bureaucracy when they're paid to do so, furthermore have each made huge sums of money on the back of unjust drug laws put forward by fascist government. In addition to an apology, we need to demand immediate release and compensation for everyone jailed for any non-violent drug crime. Having said this, their overall message is good and is welcomed nevertheless.

  36. Folks the war on drugs has been a farce since day one. It is a war on you. The govt is getting RRIICCHH on this game. Just remember your govt NEVER has your best interest at heart. It never will. Prison is BBIIGG business and the collateral is you, you are their meal ticket,you make them a fortune while you are in jail.

  37. Read the racist reasons behind criminalizing ALL illegal drugs:

    alternet (dot) org/print/drugs/retired-judge-reveals-surprising-rationale-americas-extremist-drug-laws

  38. Perscription drugs were started at the same time these drugs were made illegal. The heathcare industry (doctors) knew that about 2 to 10% of the population cannot cope through their lives without addiction to something. They wanted those peole to buy those drugs from them. You wonder why the government will not legalize these drugs…It's the medical industry lobbyists that stops our government for legalizing canibas

  39. great stuff. It's too bad, that the message will fall on deaf ears for a few more generations.
    It takes a long time to undo the mass brainwashing that has been the mainstay for so many decades.
    It will take decades to undo it.

  40. It's a safe alternative to legal alcohol consumption which takes lives every day. In fact, since legalization in Colorado, drunk driving deaths have decreased 12% and crime has decreased 6%. Furthermore, prohibition is a racist policy which impacts minorities at a disproportionate rate. It costs over $20 Billion per year to enforce prohibition. We also pay an average of $30K nationwide per year to incarcerate an inmate, and only $12K to educate our children.

  41. Our liberty is at stake. Abraham Lincoln said "A prohibition law strikes a blow at the very principles upon which our government was founded." George Washington and other founding fathers grew hemp and it seems very likely used it for euphoric purposes. Cannabis is much safer than alcohol. In the last 30 years however there have been over 22 million arrests for cannabis, incarcerating non-violent offenders, and branding many youths lifelong criminals driving them to commit more crime.

  42. More lobbyists than that but you're on the right track. Add the private prison industry and police union / industry to that list. Some private prisons are ran by X cops who know the judges and their own "brothers in blue." Filling beds is a number one priority for these people. The top two private prison companies are bringing in over $3 billion a year on bed filling. What would happen if their #1 bed filler were to be treated as a medical rather than criminal issue?

  43. The biggest provider of cash money for the US economy is narcotics acquired and flown in by the CIA using US Navy cargo planes from all over the planet. Not just conspiracy theories but documented cases of weapons out narcotics back to the good old US. The best way to keep the price up and the competition at bay is to have a war on drugs.

  44. The War Against Drugs is working just as its creators intended. Surely by now you realise that it was never intended to stop drugs from entering the USA. The world's biggest drug trafficker/importer is the CIA. The War Against Drugs was created to block their competition and, best of all, to keep the prices nice and high by ridiculously severe penalties.

  45. Before the war on Afghanistan there was no heroin on the streets after the war on Afghanistan and the locals are no longer in control heroin is everywhere

  46. 1965 Tobacco Acts put 500,000 farmers out of work "bible Belt". Then the ppl had to PAY for PSA (public service announcements) about how E-ville Tobacco is (as land was given to developers for immigrant houses). Tobacco is "worst drug." Then revolving door of government-pharma puts 25% of women on SSRIs, telling them they have "mental health issues" (but really health care forced them to go to "counseling" and they have to get a diagnosis for insurance to pay, lol) A scam that hurt many

  47. I have a friend that is very pro legalization of drugs. I wanted to educate myself on the subject, so I started to watch this video – which is so stupid that I don't even know where to begin. You cannot compare 1930 to 2010+ , that is obvious. Murder case solving from 1960 compared to 2013 is also BS. What I want to know is, how can the legal use of drugs benefit the society? How can it contribute with anything valuable at all? The argument I hear all the time is that less drug users will commit crimes. As if! In another statistic, people who did the crimes says they did so because they were drugged. Giving legal drugs to drug users is like giving money who steal because they are poor. 

  48. it sound like slavery to me to make something that god made a plant you make it illegal and lock black people up for what this plant will America ever stop slavery selling brothers from one jail to the other wake up all over this world drugs are being sold for what the use for people we see them selling drugs all day on tv that they make in a lab but a plant is illegal they can bust down my door at any time they please because of a plant take me away from my family my son have no dad for 6yr they lock us away for plants in their plantation and yall say slavery is over yea ok they use to get a so called black man in America just for being black and lock them up in their  chain gain just to build their rail roads its always about money with them and they get some uncle toms to say keep this slavery going end this slavery do what is right release the brothers locked up from this illegal war on humanity the war on drugs is a joke will this government ever stop all of these laws we will all be locked up by 2020 if we don't stop these crooks robing us and our families taking us away from our loved ones lock the doctors up they kill people in the abortion they give drugs that do kill people murder is ok abortion the killing of your kids is ok giving me the pig for meat when god say have nothing to do with that and killing god gave me the herb of the field for meat they took it away they find anything they can to turn you from your god they changed your meat god gave you and give you this filthy pig and make gods meat illegal for you and they put you in jail so you can turn gay after 6yr a lot of them come back on the down low  it don't matter usually after that long your family moves on kids calling someone else dad  the war on drugs destroy black peoples family  END THIS SLAVERY

  49. Is there anywhere I can find some of the sources he's using, I'm doing a report on the war on drugs and some of the numbers he used here are different from what I've found. Like on FBI's website it says the incarceration rate in america is 3,888 per 100,000 here he says 1009. And i can't find info anywhere about the incarceration rates in Europe or any of the countries he mentions. 

  50. Let's take the worst drug you can think of…Meth? Sure, that'll work. Take all the meth addicts and put them on adderall supplied by doctors who do a routine check up when they pick up their drugs. Complaining about the cost? It's a hell of a lot cheaper than putting people in jail. Anyway, back to my argument. So, now, you've shut down meth houses that poison entire neighborhoods, you've freed cops up to actually arrest rapists and thieves and now you've put people back to work. Will people overdose? Yep. Will people get high and do crazy shit? Yep. But, they are doing it anyway, at least now we are taking away the criminal element and showing them compassion and a means to escape instead of throwing them in jail, which doesn't work.

  51. ▬▬► Hi friеnds. If yоu oоr а lovеd оne nееds hеlр with drugs оr аlсоhоl addiсtiоn CАLL ►►► 1-888-966-2616 (Toll-Free)
    Dоn't wаit until its tооoо laааtе whеre thеrе is lifе thеrе is hоре рреeеeаcсе аnd blessings!

  52. Mr. Franklin is a hero of the highest magnitude. Thanks to you sir and all of the other members of law enforcement and the judiciary that are doing all that they can to stop violence and support harm reduction.

  53. The most interesting and telling thing to me is the flyer for legal heroin in 1901 at $4.85 an ounce adjusted for inflation to 2016 that is $131.11. So the real price of heroin should be around $131 for a 100% pure ounce. So you see the profit motive I'm sure a pure ounce of heroin costs in the thousands of dollars if you can even find a 100% pure product.

  54. We all know that the war on drugs was a joke – it is all about profits now – the courts the jails the lawyers ect… – entire organizations created for this – BILLIONS spent on the WAR – what a joke – not a war on drugs a war on drug users ……

  55. 2010…
    8 years later & the amount of stigma surrounding addiction is only growing while segregation is at an all time high. addicts are nowhere to be found heard or seen in usa as the drugwar is only getting worse they are cast out of society, prohibition cracks down harder & harder. when is enough enough!? they live similar to how slaves lived except it’s there own mental plantation where they themselves turn inward from the trauma & abuse they so longingly seek shelter from. if reading this god bless you

  56. The war on drugs never was! It’s all bullshit propaganda the government made up, so they can play both sides of the fence because it’s always about the money, and never about society’s wellbeing! They cornered the market, and nothing more! Politician is just another word, for criminal, and we have a federal mafia full of criminals hiding behind our governing system sucking liberty’s tits dry! No politician will ever make America great because they are the ones responsible, for ruining America in the first place! These criminals have slowly conditioned the people to accept government oppression redtape, or otherwise! Our constitution is only as strong, as the people’s obligation to defend it, and we have been constitutionally castrated by these criminals! We all need to wake the fuck up, and stop believing their lies! We need to find our constitutionally obligated balls, and regain control of our government! Red tape are the invisible chains that enslave is, and our freedom because a government that fears the people is a healthly government that does what’s best, for the people! A feared government is a tyrannical government that must be removed from power! We are responsible, for allowing our government to abuse its power because It is the people’s responsibility to control their government! What America has become is a slap in the face to the whole revolutionary war! Those American patriots died, for nothing, but the creation of England #2! Even more, so now that we have socialism trying to bend liberty’s ass over, for a good old socialist gangbang! It was all a waste, and that is on us!

  57. The elites keep drugs illegal because it abuses the common man. Prison profits, recidivism, law enforcement, rehab industry. It's a scam to hurt people. People have been getting high since the beginning of time, it's a normal part of humanity for some. And how dare anyone have the audacity to tell someone what they can and cannot put in their bodies, it's insulting.

  58. United States War on Drugs is happening about as well as all the other battles we get into cross Seas we're just in it for the money says politicians we don't care about you the public unless you're paying this

  59. Lol I like how people are so delusional about the drug war…a typical in our country goes as follows
    The good old logical drug war…dont do evil meth or heroin its illegal and unsafe plus it's highly addictive, here in the us we don't want any of our citizens messing with anything remotely close to how awful and dangerous those substances are…anyways heres your norco and adderall that'll be 20 bucks through your insurance have a nice sober day america (hopefully you know how to stop using this stuff when your prescription runs out, no were not going to help you, but you better figure it out because if you dont you're gonna have to go buy the illegal stuff)…dont smoke weed though, it will help, but it's also evil

  60. "The US needs to move forth and do the right thing"…. Well there's your problem, we're depending on politicians and…others

  61. There never gonna legalize hard drugs not in are life time but i could care less you wanna be a junkie your choice dont blame anyone eles you choose to stick that needel in your arm

  62. ive been saying for years, the black market is what drives drug violence… I dont look at weed as a drug, I veiw it in the same comparison as coffee.. Honestly, its effects are about as impactful, but a polar opposite.. if coffee helps me wake up, marijauna helps me relax… i dont think weed has ever been the reason its been illegal.. Its the hyper renewable fiber hemp. industries are scared of.. the lumber industry especially..

  63. Please if you liked this presentation. Share it with everyone you know on every platform. Tweet it to every representative that you have. Email your reps, senator's, Mayor's and county executives. Call the locally elected sheriff and tell him the war on drugs failed. Explain that merely knowing the war on drugs failed. Even if only as a secret between them and the person in their mirror. That fact makes them accessories to ever cops murder or at the very least. It makes them guilty of negligent homicide. I hate drugs and death it's caused any same person would. However if you think our course of action is working. You too are lying to yourself.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *