Heather Mac Donald on the marijuana myth
The myth she’s discussing is the one the Democratic Party has been using about how marijuana possession laws are charged and prosecuted in a racist manner, as part of the “systemic racism” so rampant in our society. Biden recently harped on this.
Here’s an excerpt from Mac Donald’s piece:
Biden announced that he was pardoning all individuals who have ever been federally convicted of marijuana possession. His reason for doing so, Biden said, was to “right” the racial “wrongs” that the criminal justice system has allegedly perpetrated. “While white and Black and brown people use marijuana at similar rates, Black and brown people are arrested, prosecuted and convicted at disproportionately higher rates,” Biden said in a video.
This claim—equal marijuana use, unequal criminal justice treatment—has been a cornerstone of the Left’s war on cops for decades. It is routinely trotted out as Exhibit A in the Left’s narrative about racist policing; it got an added boost from Michele Alexander’s disastrously influential book, The New Jim Crow.
Mac Donald goes on to explain why the claim is probably bogus.
Aside from the rationale behind the pardons, what about the legality of pardoning a class of people in a blanket manner? Aren’t pardons usually issued on an individual basis? But although that’s usually the case, there have been some exceptions, described here:
Thomas Jefferson pardoned all those convicted under the Alien and Sedition Acts. And much more recently, in lieu of hoped-for legislation on criminal sentencing reform, Barack Obama used his clemency powers to shorten more than 1,700 individuals’ prison terms he thought harshly skewed by mandatory minimum sentences that punished nonviolent crimes.
On an even larger scale, both Abraham Lincoln and Andrew Johnson issued conditional proclamations of amnesty relating to the Civil War. Ford offered a trade to Vietnam War draft dodgers — clemency in exchange for two years of public service — but in 1977, his successor, Jimmy Carter granted a sweeping blanket pardon to all those who had evaded service in that war. That wiped the slate clean for as many as 210,000 men who had either been convicted or fled the country to avoid prosecution.
Apparently there are approximately 6,500 federal prisoners convicted of marijuana possession. But the pardon wouldn’t affect state offenders, nor would it affect non-citizen illegal aliens in federal prisons for marijuana possession, nor people imprisoned for federal possession laws but who were convicted of additional offenses. And in addition, it only would be retroactive; it doesn’t take the federal laws off the books, although I suppose it might have a chilling effect on future prosecutions.
However, there’s a catch to the whole thing. From Mac Donald’s essay:
Even though federal marijuana possession convictions are a proxy for serious dealing, there is at present no one even serving time in federal prison for marijuana possession. In 2017, only 92 people were sentenced on federal marijuana possession charges, out of nearly 20,000 drug convictions, reports the New York Times. The Biden marijuana initiative is intended to remind the Democratic base that the party remains committed to the systemic racism narrative, recent gestures about “refunding the police” notwithstanding.
I’m assuming Mac Donald actually means, “there is at present no one even serving time in federal prison solely for marijuana possession.” If so, it seems to me that not only would this pardon not apply to as many as 6,500 people, it wouldn’t apply to anyone.
And in fact, lo and behold, that appears to be the case. It doesn’t apply to anyone [emphasis mine]:
“For example, if you were convicted of possessing marijuana and cocaine in a single offense, you do not qualify for pardon under the terms of President Biden’s proclamation,” the Justice Department explained. “If you were convicted of one count of simple possession of marijuana and a second count of possession of cocaine, President Biden’s proclamation applies only to the simple possession of marijuana count, not the possession of cocaine count.”
The move also is not expected to remove any individuals from prison.
The administration official speaking to reporters on Thursday said that “there are no individuals currently in federal prison solely for simple possession of marijuana.”
So we can conclude that the whole announcement is a mere propaganda ploy to play to the ignorant, with no effect whatsoever in the real world on anyone serving time in prison.
I understand there is a better case for unequal racial treatment regarding blacks and crack vs. whites and cocaine.
But so much of the law and marijuana has been reefer madness since “Reefer Madness” (1936), it is hardly surprising there is a bogus racial angle.
We have seen the real dangers of high potency marijuana almost all the mass shooters have consumed it
After the VP praised Brandon’s new policy yesterday, she was reminded of her past history of prosecuting people for simple marijuana offenses when she was San Francisco’s DA. Tulsi Gabbard had already said during an earlier presidential debate, “I want to bring the conversation back to the broken criminal justice system that is disproportionately negatively impacting black and brown people all across this country today. Now Senator Harris says she’s proud of her record as a prosecutor and that she’ll be a prosecutor president. But I’m deeply concerned about this record. There are too many examples to cite but she put over 1,500 people in jail for marijuana violations and then laughed about it when she was asked if she ever smoked marijuana.”
https://legalinsurrection.com/2022/10/vp-harris-jailing-almost-2000-for-weed-comes-back-to-haunt-her-after-she-praises-new-marijuana-policy/
Re: different sentencing for crack vs powder cocaine.
The more severe sentences for crack were a product of lobbying by black interest groups hoping that more draconian punishments for the form of the drug ravaging their communities would help those communities win their local wars on drugs.
You can, if you like, ascribe racist sentiments to the people who actually voted for those laws, but the original impetus for the change was black communities.
@ Boobah > “but the original impetus for the change was black communities.”
I would like to see a citation on that particular point, but I can provisionally believe that you are correct. Just about every story I see on the subject of black criminals includes an observation that the non-criminal part of the Black Community wants them put away.
At some point, the law-abiding black people are going to have to quit playing both sides of the street: begging for the police to clear the thugs out of their community, but condemning them when they do.
There are caveats and nuances, of course, but there has to be some basic agreement on the problem and the solution before anything effective can be implemented.
That kind of rapprochement may not occur until the old generation of race hustlers goes the way of all the earth, in the same way Thomas Kuhn talked about paradigm changes in science.
This is an excellent discussion of Kuhn’s ideas; the quote is near the end.
It’s the only thing most of us political science graduate students remember from the book.
https://www.simplypsychology.org/Kuhn-Paradigm.html
@ PA Cat in re Mary Chastain’s post at LI:
I quibble with her final statement: “So those who Harris charged with state charges will not receive a pardon because Biden’s change only applies to federal charges.
Biden urged governors to follow his lead, though. Hopefully, they do.”
Releasing people jailed for simple possession is not the problem; releasing people who pled down from greater offenses to just possession is a BIG problem.
Mac Donald discusses that point in her post, and Chastain ought to be aware of the topic in general. Powerline’s bloggers were all over it during long discussions of other prison reforms the last couple of years.
https://americanmind.org/salvo/the-marijuana-myth/
@ PA Cat > “Tulsi Gabbard had already said during an earlier presidential debate”
I liked Gabbard best of the Democrats in 2016 (which is not to say I would have voted for her, but I could have accepted her as the winner). She’s positioned as the Last Sane Centrist Moderate Democrat in the Party. There have been a couple of recent stories making the rounds.
Not the Bee links one of her Tweets about a day at the gun range.
https://notthebee.com/article/watch-if-the-democratic-party-had-kept-tulsi-gabbard-she-would-have-easily-won-two-terms-as-president-change-my-mind
This is more serious, and she has my agreement here.
https://hotair.com/david-strom/2022/10/08/tulsi-gabbard-fbi-and-intel-agencies-committed-treason-trying-to-steal-our-democracy-n501826
Also from Chastain, about Harris’s flip-flop: “I guess people can change, but I don’t trust a politician who changes his or her mind. Guess I could have stopped after politician.”
For most politicians, this is indeed a red-flag (for example, Obama was against gay marriage before he was for it; he lied about his real position until it was safe to admit it). Harris may just take whatever position floats her boat at the time (one LI commenter commends her for actually doing her duty at a prosecutor).
However, I think most of us here agree that sometimes the evidence does support a change in beliefs, and a wise person makes that move. Reagan famously did, when the Democrat party “left him.”
I think that reality is mugging a lot of Democrats today, although not all, or even many, are willing to make the swim all the way over to the Republican boat once they’ve jumped out of the Democrats’ dinghy.
However, this might help them along the way:
Californians Move to Texas | Episode 1: Moving Day
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HlDWzN6TW5Y
Californians Move to Texas | Episode 2: The Cookout
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3MOy6Z_UP7c
And as a bonus – JP Sears, a Californian who did move to Texas
How to Think Like a Texan!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FIozed_gcp8
Miguel cervantes on October 10, 2022 at 9:58 pm said:
We have seen the real dangers of high potency marijuana almost all the mass shooters have consumed it
aNd wAtEr !111!!!1!! aNd aiR ZOMG
PA+Cat wrote:
Tulsi Gabbard had already said during an earlier presidential debate, “I want to bring the conversation back to the broken criminal justice system that is disproportionately negatively impacting black and brown people all across this country today….”
Gabbard was pandering.
On Gabbard: as of this morning she has announced she is leaving the Democratic party.
@deadrody Yes, but consumption of water and air does not distinguish a mass shooter from the general population. High potency marijuana may well be a factor. Clue: Uvalde is in Texas, which does not have legal recreational weed.
It is hard to imagine the shooting of large numbers of children in a classroom as anything but psychotic. And there are substantial indicators that marijuana these days is causing an increase in psychosis (Colorado has been experiencing this). I fear the combination of the two-year lockdown and readily available marijuana, especially when applied to already-awkward teenage boys, will turn out to have caused societal ramifications that we are only beginning to see.
@AesopFan at 0255-
Max Planck probably did not say this, but should have:
“Science makes progress funeral by funeral.”
Addiction counselors have said some of the worst psychosis they have ever seen is due to high potency weed. Alex Berenson wrote a book about the dangers of weed a few years ago.
The crack/cocaine disparities were due to pressure from black politicians.
The Democrat talking point follows a standard formulation — misleading claim buttressed by an attribution of racism. sexism, hatred, etc.
Both a big lie and a hateful slander. I can’t think of a single part of the entire Dem narrative that doesn’t employ this Big Lie plus Hateful Slander formula (from global warming to socialized medicine to gender pay gap to min wage to BLM and everything in between).
Thou must not speak ill of weed. Wibertarians will be angwy. deadheads?
Looking back on it was widespread marijuana consumption good or bad a lot of money was made undoubtedly so it was with the opium wars
I understand that this order would apply to no current federal prisoners. Does anyone know how many actual people not-in-prison would be pardoned? If you’ve already served your sentence, does this remove the records? What about people on some sort of supervised release?
Boobah above nails it. We had higher sentences for crack offenses because the Al Sharpton’s and the Congress people representing black districts pushed for such sentences. It’s awfully convenient for those same people to whine about it now.
No sharpton was a mere flea at the time i do think charlie rangel did push for it
You notice the Democrats are pardoning but doing nothing about making it federally legal. Because then the question would be removed from the ATF 4473 form that currently prevents any marijuana user from purchasing a gun.
Another form of gun control.
And there are substantial indicators that marijuana these days is causing an increase in psychosis (Colorado has been experiencing this).
This is true of teenagers and schizophrenia usually appears in males in their teens. Females tend to develop schizophrenia in their 20s.
The consequences of marijuana use are one of those topics that no one wants to talk or write about.
What Biden did is evidence of how desperate Democrats are to keep the black vote.
It is really hard to find non-bogus science on marijuana, whether pro- or con-.
While I’m convinced on unscientific grounds that legal marijuana is a net negative for American society, there are literally millions of people who regularly use high-potency marijuana, and you can count school-shooters on both hands. At minimum, you have to adjust for age and demographics of high-potency marijuana users vs the general population and then calculate the mass murderer rate. I have never seen this done, and if it were done how predictive could such a small set of data possibly be? Maybe high-potency marijuana users are also overrepresented in shark attacks and lightning strikes….
I’m open to being shown these statistics but I don’t think they exist; every time someone has claimed to have them, when I look that’s not what they have…
Rick Happ:
Pardons don’t ordinarily clear a person’s record.
Frederick,
Alex Berenson is a former science reporter for the NY Times. Don’t hold that against him. He’s sometimes very credible. https://alexberenson.com/tell-your-children-the-truth-about-marijuana-mental-illness-and-violence
His wife is a forensic psychiatrist. She’s an MD, double board certified, did residency at Harvard Med School and is a professor at Columbia. IIRC, his interest in writing the book came from her experience as a psychiatrist.
@Stan:Alex Berenson… wife’s qualifications
Thanks, I’ve read about them. Like I said, “at minimum, you have to adjust for age and demographics of high-potency marijuana users vs the general population and then calculate the mass murderer rate. I have never seen this done”, by Berenson or his wife or anyone else, and would be delighted to see it done even by someone with lesser credentials.