Many people assume that marijuana, heroin, cocaine, and opiates were made illegal through some kind of process involving scientific, medical, and government hearings; that it was to protect the citizens from what was determined to be a dangerous drug.
Why are some drugs legal and other drugs illegal today? It's not based on any scientific assessment of the relative risks of these drugs – but it has everything to do with who is associated with these drugs.
The first anti-opium laws in the 1870s were directed at Chinese immigrants. The first anti-cocaine laws, in the South in the early 1900s, were directed at black men. The first anti-marijuana laws, in the Midwest and the Southwest in the 1910s and 20s, were directed at Mexican migrants and Mexican Americans. Today, Latino and especially black communities are still subject to wildly disproportionate drug enforcement and sentencing practices.
From the time of America's founding, hemp (marijuana) was entirely legal. In fact, in 1619, Jamestown Colony passed a law requiring farmers to grow hemp. It wasn't made illegal until 1937. But, WHY, after over 300 years, was it suddenly made illegal? Here are some of the "reasons" given at that time by Harry Anslinger, Director of the Treasury Department's Bureau of Narcotics:
“There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the US, and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos, and entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz, and swing, result from marijuana use. This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers, and any others.”
“…the primary reason to outlaw marijuana is its effect on the degenerate races.”
“Marijuana is an addictive drug which produces in its users insanity, criminality, and death.”
“Reefer makes darkies think they’re as good as white men.”
“Marihuana leads to pacifism and communist brainwashing”
“You smoke a joint and you’re likely to kill your brother.”
“Marijuana is the most violence-causing drug in the history of mankind.”
Heroin, morphine, cocaine and opiates had been made illegal through passage of the Harrison Act back in 1914. Anslinger immediately realized that opiates and cocaine wouldn’t be enough to help build his agency. There simply weren't enough users of those drugs. So he latched on to marijuana and started to work on making it illegal at the federal level.
In June 1971, President Nixon declared a “war on drugs.” He dramatically increased the size and presence of federal drug control agencies, and pushed through measures such as mandatory sentencing and no-knock warrants. Nixon temporarily placed marijuana in Schedule One, the most restrictive category of drugs, pending review by a commission he appointed led by Republican Pennsylvania Governor Raymond Shafer. In 1972, the commission unanimously recommended decriminalizing the possession and distribution of marijuana for personal use. Nixon ignored the report and rejected its recommendations.
Today, people are still told there's drug problem in America. There's a drug problem because there are drug laws. The public wants the police to protect them and lock up everyone caught using drugs, no matter how small the amount. But, "protecting the public" has never been the responsibility of the police, except in a broad sense of providing a general deterrent through the patrol function and apprehending perpetrators after a crime has been committed.
Organized police forces never even existed in either England or America until the 1800s. Our entire legal and cultural tradition has been for citizens to protect themselves. Citizens were not only expected to protect themselves (and each other), but also legally required in response to the "hue and cry" to chase down and apprehend criminals. The very idea of a police was anathema, American and English liberalism viewing any such force as a form of the dreaded "standing army." This view yielded only grudgingly to the fact that citizens were unwilling to spend their leisure hours patrolling miles of city streets and were incapable even of chasing fleeing criminals down on crowded city streets--much less tracing and apprehending them or detecting surreptitious crimes.
The public wants people locked up for two reasons. One is the fear of violence from those wanting to get the money to GET drugs. If the availability of drugs was restricted in any particular locale, users would have to go elsewhere. That means the real people to get off the streets are the dealers and, in the case of methamphetamine, the manufacturers. If the police can't locate and catch these people, the only way to show results is to go after the people they can find - the users. Police arrest people based on a "potentiality", that someone might be dangerous and commit a violent act, so "let's get them off the streets before they can."
Those are police state tactics. Consequently, our jails remain overcrowded.
The second reason is simply that these people have broken the law. But, when one looks at the historical record of why those laws were passed, it is clear that the motivations at the time were moral and racist. There were no great public outcries in 1914 and 1937 to pass such laws, just as there was no public outcry demanding alcohol be prohibited in 1919. The impetus came from the same type of moralizers as The Anti-Saloon League and The Women's Christian Temperance Union - people who wanted to judge the actions of others and impose their own sense of morality on them.
The violence of the 1920s caused us to learn a lesson and Prohibition was repealed. Unfortunately, we failed to recognize that criminalizing drugs would lead to the exact same thing.
Why are some drugs legal and other drugs illegal today? It's not based on any scientific assessment of the relative risks of these drugs – but it has everything to do with who is associated with these drugs.
The first anti-opium laws in the 1870s were directed at Chinese immigrants. The first anti-cocaine laws, in the South in the early 1900s, were directed at black men. The first anti-marijuana laws, in the Midwest and the Southwest in the 1910s and 20s, were directed at Mexican migrants and Mexican Americans. Today, Latino and especially black communities are still subject to wildly disproportionate drug enforcement and sentencing practices.
From the time of America's founding, hemp (marijuana) was entirely legal. In fact, in 1619, Jamestown Colony passed a law requiring farmers to grow hemp. It wasn't made illegal until 1937. But, WHY, after over 300 years, was it suddenly made illegal? Here are some of the "reasons" given at that time by Harry Anslinger, Director of the Treasury Department's Bureau of Narcotics:
“There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the US, and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos, and entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz, and swing, result from marijuana use. This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers, and any others.”
“…the primary reason to outlaw marijuana is its effect on the degenerate races.”
“Marijuana is an addictive drug which produces in its users insanity, criminality, and death.”
“Reefer makes darkies think they’re as good as white men.”
“Marihuana leads to pacifism and communist brainwashing”
“You smoke a joint and you’re likely to kill your brother.”
“Marijuana is the most violence-causing drug in the history of mankind.”
Heroin, morphine, cocaine and opiates had been made illegal through passage of the Harrison Act back in 1914. Anslinger immediately realized that opiates and cocaine wouldn’t be enough to help build his agency. There simply weren't enough users of those drugs. So he latched on to marijuana and started to work on making it illegal at the federal level.
In June 1971, President Nixon declared a “war on drugs.” He dramatically increased the size and presence of federal drug control agencies, and pushed through measures such as mandatory sentencing and no-knock warrants. Nixon temporarily placed marijuana in Schedule One, the most restrictive category of drugs, pending review by a commission he appointed led by Republican Pennsylvania Governor Raymond Shafer. In 1972, the commission unanimously recommended decriminalizing the possession and distribution of marijuana for personal use. Nixon ignored the report and rejected its recommendations.
Today, people are still told there's drug problem in America. There's a drug problem because there are drug laws. The public wants the police to protect them and lock up everyone caught using drugs, no matter how small the amount. But, "protecting the public" has never been the responsibility of the police, except in a broad sense of providing a general deterrent through the patrol function and apprehending perpetrators after a crime has been committed.
Organized police forces never even existed in either England or America until the 1800s. Our entire legal and cultural tradition has been for citizens to protect themselves. Citizens were not only expected to protect themselves (and each other), but also legally required in response to the "hue and cry" to chase down and apprehend criminals. The very idea of a police was anathema, American and English liberalism viewing any such force as a form of the dreaded "standing army." This view yielded only grudgingly to the fact that citizens were unwilling to spend their leisure hours patrolling miles of city streets and were incapable even of chasing fleeing criminals down on crowded city streets--much less tracing and apprehending them or detecting surreptitious crimes.
The public wants people locked up for two reasons. One is the fear of violence from those wanting to get the money to GET drugs. If the availability of drugs was restricted in any particular locale, users would have to go elsewhere. That means the real people to get off the streets are the dealers and, in the case of methamphetamine, the manufacturers. If the police can't locate and catch these people, the only way to show results is to go after the people they can find - the users. Police arrest people based on a "potentiality", that someone might be dangerous and commit a violent act, so "let's get them off the streets before they can."
Those are police state tactics. Consequently, our jails remain overcrowded.
The second reason is simply that these people have broken the law. But, when one looks at the historical record of why those laws were passed, it is clear that the motivations at the time were moral and racist. There were no great public outcries in 1914 and 1937 to pass such laws, just as there was no public outcry demanding alcohol be prohibited in 1919. The impetus came from the same type of moralizers as The Anti-Saloon League and The Women's Christian Temperance Union - people who wanted to judge the actions of others and impose their own sense of morality on them.
The violence of the 1920s caused us to learn a lesson and Prohibition was repealed. Unfortunately, we failed to recognize that criminalizing drugs would lead to the exact same thing.
