MARIJUANA PROHIBITION AIDS FEW

My tongue was bound. My typing fingers were paralyzed. On July 6,
2009, these acts were performed by a circuit court judge because I am
a visible and ardent advocate of informed personal discretion
regarding one's choice of intoxicant or medical palliative. The Court,
of course, decides such cases in favor of alcohol, without which there
wouldn't be a need for much of current court time.

I was convicted of possession of 3.67 ounces of cannabis. Two ounces
is a felony. I was sentenced to a year in jail, with all suspended
except 45 days, during which I slept nights in the work-release
facility on East North Street in Rapid City. The balance of the year
was spent on probation, with regular visits to a probation officer,
under the constriction that I was to "take no public role in any
program advocating legalization" of currently-illicit "drugs."

Contrary to the beliefs of many, there is plenty of precedent for
court-ordered suppression of the truth. Often recalled is the 40-year
house arrest imposed on Galileo for pointing out that the Earth
revolved around the sun. Millions were burned to death for less.

I'm 62 years old. For 44 years I have observed the incalculably stupid
custom of arresting people for possession of a demonstrably
beneficial, easily cultivated herb. During the past 20 years alone,
over 16 million people have been arrested on marijuana charges in this
country, over 12 million of them for simple possession only.

My statistics are understated, purposefully, because most people
apparently can't face how destructive cannabis prohibition has been.
It's been estimated that each arrest has cost the taxpayers of its
jurisdiction a minimum of $500. If that were the extent of the damage,
prohibition would be a bargain.

It has become common practice for law enforcement to seize peoples'
cash, possessions and children, often based on only an accusation of
cannabis use. Those convicted bear an undeserved social and
income-reducing stigma for the rest of their lives. No one in
government or the financial industry is immune to the lure of the
inconceivable amount of cash generated by the prohibited substance
trade in general, of which cannabis is the most prevalent. Children
find it easier to obtain "prohibited" substances than they do tobacco
and alcohol, because the nature of prohibition is to subsidize an
unregulated and untaxed market.

As for every politician who endorses prohibition, every judge who
sentences someone for possession, every cop who arrests someone for
possession; they all are awash in the blood of the 23,000 Mexicans who
have been killed in the civil war over drug turf in Mexico during the
past three years, and in the less visible detritus of the lives they
have shattered senselessly.

Amid this carnage, there can not be found a shred of benefit, unless
you count (I don't) employment for prison guards, cops, state's
attorneys, judges, probation officers, and urine testers. We'd be
better off if most of these people were forced into productive jobs.

Meanwhile, cannabis on the street is less expensive and better than
ever. Way to win, guys and gals. The Sinaloa cartel thanks us
all-especially the politicians and those who vote for them-for making
drug sales the most lucrative business that has ever existed. Maybe
you, too, owe your job to prohibition, or to not speaking out in opposition.

In a twisted and particularly cruel way of parsing the matter, which
above all else is the hallmark of prohibition logic, it makes sense
for government to stifle the truth.

Bob Newland of Hermosa is editor of Hemphasis.net and moderator of the
local political blog, "Decorum Forum."