JUDGE JAMES GRAY'S VISIT TO THE DRUG POLICY FORUM

On Tuesday, June 12, the New York Times Drug Policy forum hosted Judge
James P. Gray, author of "Why Our Drug Laws Have Failed and What We Can Do
About It." A second chat with Judge Gray will be held in the DrugSense chat
room on Saturday, 23 June, at 10 p.m. Eastern, 7 p.m. Pacific at the
following webpage: http://www.drugsense.org/chat/ You may send questions
for Judge Gray in advance, if you wish, to jo-d@mapinc.org Judge Gray's
website is http://www.judgejimgray.com

Already scheduled for this series of forums are Kevin Zeese (at the New
York Times forum next Wed. June 20, 2001 8 PM Eastern), Kay Lee & Jodi
James, Keith Stroup, and Al Giordano. Please go to
http://www.cultural-baggage.com/schedule.htm for complete schedule details!
DrugSense thanks Dean Becker for organizing these forums!

The transcript of the forum with Judge Gray follows. The nickname of the
person making the statement is in lower case at the start of each statement.

judgegray Good evening. My name is Judge Jim Gray from Orange County
in Southern California. I have finished my calendar for the afternoon,
and would be happy to talk about the most critical issue facing our
great country today: drug policy. I have spent a great deal of my
professional life in the Criminal Justice System as a criminal defense
attorney in the Navy, a federal prosecutor in Los Angeles and as a
trial judge. I know there must be a better way of combatting the major
problem posed by the presence of these often dangerous drugs in our
communities. Please help me/us find it.

donaldway Hello Judge Gray, welcome to the Drug Policy Forum, it's
great to have you here!

beckerd9 Good evening Judge Gray. Welcome to the NY Times Drug Forum.
Our resident anti-drug spokesman, Sinbad dropped by earlier and left
about 2 dozen questions for you, saying he could not be here at 8
central. His questions are at posts 22919 & 22920.

judgegray Sinbad previously stated that Saudi Arabia executes drug
dealers, and asked why we do not. Yes they do, for that and other
things as well. There are several things to remember, such as that
Saudi Arabia also has a drug problem, but, I acknowledge, not as
severe as ours. But more importantly, that country does not have our
Bill of Rights, or our way of government. I choose to live here.
Further, because of the obscene profits to be made by dealing in even
small amounts of drugs, there will always be people who will take
risks of even large terms of imprisonment (we see it everyday) and
even execution in order to make that money. So the plain answer to
Sinbad is that, as long as there is large money in these drugs, they
will be present in our communities.

beckerd9 Judge,

In your book, you give us quotes from dozens of judges that see the
hopelessness of the drug war. After finishing the book, do you hear
even more voices calling for the end of prohibition?

judgegray Yes, I have heard for a long time before publishing the book
about all of the problems we have inflicted upon ourselves because of
our laws of drug prohibition. But now with the publishing of my book,
I am beginning to hear comments of hope, because people are finally
seeing that we have viable options to our present failed policies. And
the comments from all of the other judges around the nation have in a
few cases so far even prompted many individuals and the media to
contact those judges for additional statements. All of this is
furthering this important discussion.

timothymcspay Judge,

What's your opinion on casual recreational useage of
marijuana?

judgegray I have never used marijuana, or any of these other drugs
either, as a matter of fact. And I have never smoked cigarettes. I
believe marijuana is a carcinogenic, and does have other adverse
effects upon the user. However, it is hard for me to be unduly hard
upon marijuana users since I do drink alcohol, and believe that
alcohol is potentially far more harmful to the user than marijuana,
and the actions of people who have used alcohol are potentially far
far more harmful to other people.

celaya Judge Gray

Thank you so much for coming and for your great book!

I guess my biggest question concerns what you feel is the reason for
our government to so zealously pursue this insane prohibition policy.

The most widely used "illegal" drug is marijuana, yet, by every
measure, it is much less harmful than alchol or tobacco. In my 30
adult years, this gross injustice has turned me very cynical toward
the government.

What do you think is their principal motivation for this
persecution?

judgegray Thank you for your comments about my book. I worked hard on
it, and tried to be completely factual yet readable. It is meant to be
a tool to promote discussion, and to bring hope. Because we have
options. And, for the most part, they are not experimental, they are
actually being used successfully in Western Europe.

The drug prohibitionists must have marijuana illegal, because without
that, the raw numbers of the users of all other illegal drugs combined
do not come even close to justifying the prison/industrial complex
that has been spawned to "combat" this drug menace. In my view that is
why the politicians and drug warriors have been so extreme and
heartless in the medical marijuana issue. They simply cannot allow any
hole in the dike, because people then might begin to question the
entire program. But this is changing -- rapidly. Don't lose heart;
continue to help the change.

maryjaneflores Welcome, Judge Gray and hi everyone. Judge Gray, what
is your perspective on what needs to be done politcally to get the use
of marijuana by responsible adults on the table as an issue in 2004?
Or even 2002?

judgegray What can be done to get the issue of the use of marijuana by
responsible adults "on the table?" I believe the initiative process is
the way to go. And, for better or worse, California often leads the
country in ideas.

I am interested in knowing if there would be financial support for an
initiative in California for the strictly controlled and regulated
distribution of marijuana, for adults over the age of 21, to purchase
and use marijuana from a government package store, run on low-bid
contract with the government. No advertising or trade names or
glamour. Reduced cost, but taxed. And the taxes would be spent
completely on drug education and drug treatment. No other laws would
be changed. The use or possession from other sources would still be
illegal, and laws about driving under the influence, assaults (not a
problem for marijuana), or even drunk in public would not be changed.

I believe the public would support such an initiative. But as a judge,
I am prohibited from raising money for any cause except judicial
elections. So what do people think about the chances?

Marijuana has been decriminalized in Holland, and they actually have
less marijuana usage there by half than we have in this country. As a
government official said: "We succeeded in making pot boring." And
they don't have the crime, much less the incarceration, that we do.

You asked my opinion, that is what I am thinking.

jo-dunbar judge gray :)

thanx for all your efforts towards drug policy reform!

what is the best way for us to reach out to our local
judges?

you rock.

judgegray What is the best way to reach out to other judges? Hard
question, because people are different. But many if not most of them
know that what they are presiding over is not working. The problem is
that, just like other public officials, they need political cover.

So you can start by showing them the statements of no fewer than 40
judges from around the country about this critical issue. That will
give them the comfort to know that they have lots of company.

Get on it!

beckerd9 What do you think of the changes that seem to be occuring in
Canada? Will changes there force the hand/cause change in the US
marijuana laws?

judgegray Canada is getting smarter - much more than we are. The idea
that our merchants must import hemp from that "radical" country to our
north is something we must stress. But in other ways, Canada has
fallen victim to the same prison is the answer mentality.

bilib Do you make a moral or ethical distinction between the users of
illegal drugs and the sellers of illegal drugs?

judgegray In my mind, there is a major moral distinction to be made
between a seller of small quantities of drugs to support that person's
habit, and the seller of any amount of drugs that is simply trading
upon human misery for a profit.

I have no difficulty at all in sending the latter person to prison.
But wouldn't it be so much better if there were not such a huge
financial incentive for people to sell drugs? So in a lot of ways, it
really is the system that deserves our moral scorn.

Of course, it is our govenment, so it is our job to change
it.

derek397 Judge Gray, What part should the church be playing in all
this?

judgegray There is a large part to be played by our religious
institutions in this critical issue. Candidly, I have been astonished
that the Black and Hispanic churches have been virtually invisible for
so long on this issue. Without a doubt, it is these minorities that
have been incarcerated much more than others, but the voices of their
religious leaders have not been heard.

Where better to discuss the stark immorality of our present system
than in these churches?

aahpat Judge Gray;

About your state store like proposal.

I live in Pennsylvania where we have state stores. For more than
thirty years I smoked joint. Pot, like wine and whiskey, has vintage
and variety. Branding would happen naturally, I would think.

And allowances would have to be made for the home grower.

Otherwise, yes, a state store system would, I think, work well for
introducing the non pot smoking population to the benign nature of the
pot culture.

Is there no roll for lobbying the congress about the drug policy
reform legislation currently in the House?

Pat

judgegray Pat,

I do not agree that smoking marijuana is benign. (But neither is
eating potato chips.) In addition, I do not advocate home growing
marijuana because it gives up protections for it to wind up in the
possession of children.

The government package store program would be strictly controlled and
regulated (and taxed). But you certainly are right, there would have
to be designations of various types of marijuana, so that people would
not be tempted to go to the black market supplier in order to get the
desired type.

What I want to do is to manage the situation and bring this drug back
under the law. We literally have experienced a total collapse of the
rule of law in this area. Alcohol is regulated and controlled in many
ways, including labeling, purity standards, licensing age
restrictions, and (decreasingly) advertising. If Coors beer
distributors have a problem with distributors of Budweiser, they don't
shoot it out on the streets, they come to our courts. That is not true
with regard to these other drugs.

There's a lot more, and I think I discuss it rather completely in my
book. If you want further details, get my book, or refer to the
website that my son Ky put in for me at

bilib Judge Gray, Thank you for your answer. Do you make a moral or
ethical distinction between the sellers of illegal drugs and the
sellers of alcohol?

judgegray Good question about dealers of tobacco and alcohol for
profit (i.e. all of them). But there is a logical distinction to be
made, for all that their products are certainly harmful to the users.
And, of course, that distinction is that their products are not
illegal for adults.

But let's learn from our experiences with our laws of prohibition
(alcohol as well as other drugs), and design a better system.

adamwiggins Here's a question that has been bothering me for a long
time: Why does the DEA get complete control when it comes to
scheduling drugs? They are a part of the executive branch, which (I
thought) was a branch for *carrying out* the law, not creating it.

Marijuana is an excellent example, of course, being a schedule I drug
despite meeting not a single one of the requirements. Now that we're
discovering it's medical potential, that scheduling gets in the way of
exploring that. (For those that haven't done so already, make sure to
write your House representative in support of HR 1344 to make
marijuana schedule II.)

Another one is MDMA. Despite the fact that it had been used almost
exclusively by the medical community for almost 20 years when they
made it illegal, and despite the fact that a Judge's Finding of Fact
recommending schedule III for the drug, the DEA ignored all that and
made it schedule I, where it remains today. The DEA assigns scheduling
based on popularity, and seem to completely ignore the actual
scehduling guidelines.

What can we do about this? Unlike our legislative representatives, I
doubt that writing a letter to the DEA asking them to actually abide
by the law is going to have much effect. Would a lawsuit against them
be helpful on this matter? Or...what?

judgegray Marijuana being a Schedule I drug is completely
unsupportable from any medical or rational standard. However, the
scheduling of all of these drugs is statutorily vested with the
President. By the stroke of a pen, he could change marijuana to a
Schedule II drug, which, like cocaine and morphine, could then be
prescribed by a medical doctor.

Prior presidents actually delegated this authority to the head of the
DEA!! Any rational thought would dictate that this is a medical issue,
not one for the police. So if it is to be delegated, it should be to
the Surgeon General. But rational thought is not involved.

When I was in Texas a few weeks ago, I told the editorial board of the
Houston Chronicle that they had a great deal of power in this area,
because President Bush very likely continued to receive their
newspaper. So they should emphasize the senselessness of this
situation. That would render unnecessary all of these initiatives for
medical marijuana that have been passed in nine states and the Dist of
Columbia.

So let's put some pressure on the President, Vice President, and
others for this most sensible measure.

aahpat Well judge you are going to need to think about home growing
since it happens already and there is a thriving indoor culture that
has existed for decades. And since commercial elements of this culture
are already in Canada, Europe and America we will not regulate it out
of existance.

What current regulations today adaquetely keep home made beer and wine
out of the hands of minors in those households that could not be
equally applied to cannabis in a closet?

judgegray I agree that allowing people to ferment a certain number of
bottles of wine, or brew some amounts of beer is inconsistent with my
views about growing one's own marijuana. But it still (good choice of
words?) makes sense to me.

But the point is that we need the discussion. I am only one person,
and there is nothing in my background that formally prepared me for
designing a system for the managing of this major problem. Let's put
our heads together, and design a system that takes each drug into
account, as well as the harms from its manufacture, sale and
distribution. Then we can learn from each other.

bilib Judge Gray,

Thanks again for answering my question.

We are aware of the legal distinction between the sellers of alcohol
and the sellers of illegal drugs, but do you think there is a MORAL or
ETHICAL distinction between the two?

judgegray bilib,

In my mind, there is no "ethical or moral distinction" for any of
these substances. They are things. All of them, under some
circumstances, have positive uses, and all of them also have negative
uses.

The distinctions are to be made when a person intentionally violates
the law and trades in a good that is illegal for money. In this case,
fabulous amounts of extra money, simply because the substance is illegal.

Yes, the producers of alcohol and tobacco (and high cholesterol foods)
make money from their products, but they do it within the framework of
an organized and lawful society. And they pay their taxes, and are
held to environmental laws, etc. I understand that if we made toasters
illegal, there would soon be a black market in toasters, and the
profits would go up (as would be the regulation costs, and dangers
from many untested toasters). But I would not shy away from my oath of
office in enforcing the law to punish the illegal sellers (if we could
find them).

timothymcspay Judge,

Is marijuana addictive? In your opinion, that is.

judgegray All of my understanding is that marijuana is not
physiologically addictive. Of course, anything can be sociologically
addictive. Television is the worst. . .

judgegray Thank you for the opportunity of chatting with you this
evening. I have learned a lot, and really enjoyed it.

Also thanks to Dean Becker for taking the initiative for setting this
up. And I look forward to the "Drug Sense" chat on Saturday, June 23
at 10pm Eastern.

Whenever I speak, I am continually reminded that neither I nor anyone
else has all of the answers. But, if we can only get one point across
to our fellow citizens, voters and government officials that just
because we are having a discussion, or just because we understand that
we have options to our present (failed) drug policy, or even just
because we choose to adopt one or more of those options, does not mean
that we condone drug abuse, then we will change our system.

And think of the beneficial changes that will come to our country, and
the world!

We can do this. Don't ever be discouraged. It is happening all around
us -- just another nudge.

Good luck to us all.

Judge Jim Gray

beckerd9 I don't know how you applaud someone in a forum, but might I
suggest that each of us send a message, like: BRAVO! or THANK YOU!