Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 30, 2024 Tue
Time: 1:28 am
Time: 1:28 am
Results for marijuana
80 results foundAuthor: Room, Robin Title: Cannabis Policy: Moving Beyond Stalemate Summary: This paper considers the findings of the Beckley Foundation's Global Cannabis Commission Report (Room et al, 2008). An overview of the scientific literature on cannabis, detailing its potential harms and those caused by its prohibition. It moves on to consider the various strategies that different jurisdictions have adopted to deal with cannabis use, before moving beyond the Conventions, arguing that countries should have more autonomy to develop policy best suited to their individual circumstances. Details: London: The Beckley Foundation, 2008, 242p. Source: Internet Source Year: 2008 Country: United Kingdom URL: Shelf Number: 117828 Keywords: CannabisDrug PolicyMarijuana |
Author: U.S. Department of Justice. National Drug Intelligence Center Title: Marijuana and Methamphetamine Trafficking on Federal Lands Threat Assessment Summary: Drug trafficking organizations, criminal groups, and independent traffickers frequently produce and transport illicit drugs, particularly marijuana and methamphetamine, in or through federal lands. The largest seizures of cannabis from federal lands have been in California and Kentucky, where the primary producers are Mexican drug trafficking organizations and Caucasian independent dealers, respectively. Mexican drug trafficking organizations and criminal groups smuggle marijuana across the Southwest Border through federal lands; Canada-based criminal groups, outlaw motorcycle gangs, and independent dealers smuggle marijuana through federal lands along the Northern Border. Details: Johnstown, PA: National Drug Intelligence Center, 2005. 14p. Source: Year: 2005 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 116184 Keywords: CannabisDrug TraffickingMarijuanaMethamphetamineOrganized CrimeSmuggling (Drugs) |
Author: Duffy, Martin Title: Cannabis Supply and Young People: 'It's a Social Thing' Summary: The supply of drugs to young people is an emotive subject and discussion is rarely conducted with much reference to evidence. Research on young people's access to drugs is scarce in the U.K. The evidence that exists, however, shows that many young people gain access to drugs through older brothers and sisters, through friends and friends of friends - so-called social supply networks. This report offers a snapshot view of how young people in a large city and in rural villages get supplies of cannabis. Details: York, UK: Joseph Rowntree Foundation, 2008. 49p. Source: Internet Resource Year: 2008 Country: United Kingdom URL: Shelf Number: 117592 Keywords: Drug Abuse and AddictionDrugsMarijuana |
Author: United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime Title: Afghanistan Cannabis Survey 2009 Summary: This survey is based on survey data from 1,634 villages in 20 provinces. It shows that there is large-scale cannabis cultivation in exactly half (17 out of 34) of Afghanistan's provinces. Details: Vienna: UNODC, 2010. 59p. Source: Internet Resource Year: 2010 Country: Afghanistan URL: Shelf Number: 119181 Keywords: Drugs (Afghanistan)Marijuana |
Author: Kilmer, Beau Title: Altered State? Assessing How Marijuana Legalization in California Could Influence Marijuana Consumption and Public Budgets Summary: To learn more about the possible outcomes of marijuana legalization in California, RAND researchers constructed a model based on a series of estimates of current consumption, current and future prices, how responsive use is to price changes, taxes levied and possibly evaded, and the aggregation of nonprice effects (such as a change in stigma). Key findings include the following: (1) the pretax retail price of marijuana will substantially decline, likely by more than 80 percent. The price the consumers face will depend heavily on taxes, the structure of the regulatory regime, and how taxes and regulations are enforced; (2) consumption will increase, but it is unclear how much, because we know neither the shape of the demand curve nor the level of tax evasion (which reduces revenues and prices that consumers face); (3) tax revenues could be dramatically lower or higher than the $1.4 billion estimate provided by the California Board of Equalization (BOE); for example, uncertainty about the federal response to California legalization can swing estimates in either direction; (4) previous studies find that the annual costs of enforcing marijuana laws in California range from around $200 million to nearly $1.9 billion; our estimates show that the costs are probably less than $300 million; and (5) there is considerable uncertainty about the impact of legalizing marijuana in California on public budgets and consumption, with even minor changes in assumptions leading to major differences in outcomes. Details: Santa Monica, CA: RAND, 2010. 68p. Source: Internet Resource Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 119335 Keywords: Drug LegalizationDrug PolicyDrugs (California)Marijuana |
Author: Macallair, Daniel Title: Marijuana Arrests and California's Drug War: A Report to the California Legislature Summary: For nearly three decades, California’s criminal justice system has devoted ever-increasing resources towards the arrest, prosecution, and imprisonment of drug offenders. Drug offenses typically are categorized as manufacturing, distribution, and possession. Historically, manufacturing and distribution accounted for the preponderance of law enforcement resources as this category of offenders were seen as the greater menace since they were responsible for promoting and maintaining the illicit drug trade. Possession offenders, at least those who committed no additional offenses, were viewed with greater sympathy since they were the drug users who were often seen as the victims of their own addictions. Indeed, prison statistics prior to the 1990s showed imprisonments for manufacturing and sales far exceeding imprisonments for possession (California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR), 2009). However, beginning in the 1990s, prison statistics show a dramatic and unprecedented change in priorities, as possession offenders became the primary target of law enforcement. By 2008, for the first time in recorded history, the number of offenders imprisoned for drug possession exceeded the number of offenders imprisoned for manufacturing and sales. The unprecedented shift in California law enforcement priorities towards targeting the demand side of the drug war is clearly demonstrated by the extraordinary increase in the rate of arrests for misdemeanor possession of marijuana. While continued criminalization of marijuana has financial and social implications, current disparities in arrest point to issues needing careful consideration. If more discriminatory and erratic enforcement of marijuana laws is to be avoided, then the current push for legalization should be seen as an opportunity for comprehensive review of California’s deeply flawed drug criminalization and regulation policies. Current arbitrary, biased, and rising patterns of arrest for small-quantity marijuana possession argue strongly for meaningful reform. (Excerpts from publication) Details: San Francisco: Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice, 2009. 12p. Source: Internet Resource: Legislative Policy Study: Accessed August 22, 2010 at: http://www.cjcj.org/files/Marijuana_Arrests_and_Californias_Drug_War.pdf Year: 2009 Country: United States URL: http://www.cjcj.org/files/Marijuana_Arrests_and_Californias_Drug_War.pdf Shelf Number: 119648 Keywords: Drug OffencesDrug PolicyDrugs (California)Marijuana |
Author: Levine, Harry G. Title: Targeting Blacks for Marijuana: Possession Arrests of African Americans in California, 2004-08 Summary: This report found that across the 25 largest counties in California the pot-holding arrest rate for blacks was often at least double that of whites despite evidence that indicates African-Americans use cannabis at a lower rate. Details: New York: Drug Policy Alliance, 2010. 12p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 22, 2010 at: http://www.drugpolicy.org/docUploads/Targeting_Blacks_for_Marijuana_06_29_10.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://www.drugpolicy.org/docUploads/Targeting_Blacks_for_Marijuana_06_29_10.pdf Shelf Number: 119657 Keywords: African AmericansDrug Arrests (California)Drug OffendersMarijuanaRacial Profiling |
Author: Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland Title: Findings from the UK National Problem Profile- Commercial Cultivation of Cannabis Summary: This report reveals there has been a boom in cannabis production across Britain in the last two years, with nearly 7,000 illegal farms and factories uncovered in 2009/10 alone. The report describes trends in commercial cultivation of marijuana in the UK since 2004, describes the present and potential risks to society, and makes recommendations for stronger law enforcement actions. Details: Glasgow: ACPOS, 2010. 15p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 9, 2010 at: http://www.acpo.police.uk/asp/policies/Data/064a%20UK%20National%20Problem%20Profile%20Cultivation%20of%20Cannabis.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.acpo.police.uk/asp/policies/Data/064a%20UK%20National%20Problem%20Profile%20Cultivation%20of%20Cannabis.pdf Shelf Number: 119773 Keywords: DrugsMarijuana |
Author: Levine, Harry G. Title: Marijuana Arrest Crusade: Racial Bias and Police Policy in New York City 1997-2007 Summary: This report is the first ever in-depth study of misdemeanor marijuana arrests in New York City during the Giuliani and Bloomberg administrations. The NYPD arrested and jailed nearly 400,000 people for possessing small amounts of marijuana between 1997 and 2007, a tenfold increase in marijuana arrests over the previous decade and a figure marked by startling racial and gender disparities. NYPD arrested and jailed nearly 400,000 people for possessing small amounts of marijuana between 1997 and 2007, a tenfold increase in marijuana arrests over the previous decade and a figure marked by startling racial and gender disparities. The report is based upon two years of observations in criminal courts as well as extensive interviews with public defenders; Legal Aid and private attorneys; veteran police officers; current and former prosecutors and judges; and those arrested for possessing marijuana. Details: New York: New York Civil Liberties Union, 2008. 102p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 15, 2010 at: http://www.nyclu.org/files/MARIJUANA-ARREST-CRUSADE_Final.pdf Year: 2008 Country: United States URL: http://www.nyclu.org/files/MARIJUANA-ARREST-CRUSADE_Final.pdf Shelf Number: 119813 Keywords: Drug ArrestsDrug EnforcementDrug OffendersMarijuanaRacial Profiling |
Author: Kilmer, Beau Title: Reducing Drug Trafficking Revenues and Violence in Mexico: Would Legalizing Marijuana in California Help? Summary: U.S. demand for illicit drugs creates markets for Mexican drug trafficking organizations (DTOs) and helps foster violence in Mexico. This paper examines how marijuana legalization in California might influence DTO revenues and the violence in Mexico. Key findings include: 1) Mexican DTOs' gross revenues from illegally exporting marijuana to wholesalers in the United States is likely less than $2 billion; 2) The claim that 60 percent of Mexican DTO gross drug export revenues come from marijuana should not be taken seriously; 3) If legalization only affects revenues from supplying marijuana to California, DTO drug export revenue losses would be very small, perhaps 2–4 percent; 4) The only way legalizing marijuana in California would significantly influence DTO revenues and the related violence is if California-produced marijuana is smuggled to other states at prices that outcompete current Mexican supplies. The extent of such smuggling will depend on a number of factors, including the response of the U.S. federal government. 5) If marijuana is smuggled from California to other states, it could undercut sales of Mexican marijuana in much of the U.S., cutting DTOs' marijuana export revenues by more than 65 percent and probably by 85 percent or more. In this scenario, the DTOs would lose approximately 20% of their total drug export revenues. Details: Santa Monica, CA: RAND, 2010. 57p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 13, 2010 at: http://www.rand.org/pubs/occasional_papers/2010/RAND_OP325.pdf Year: 2010 Country: Mexico URL: http://www.rand.org/pubs/occasional_papers/2010/RAND_OP325.pdf Shelf Number: 119939 Keywords: Drug ControlDrug PolicyDrug TraffickingMarijuanaViolence |
Author: Wood, Evan Title: Tools for Debate: US Federal Government Data on Cannabis Prohibition Summary: Several initiatives in the state of California, including Bill 2254 and the Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis proposition, have fuelled the international discussion about the known impacts of cannabis prohibition and the potential impacts of a regulated (i.e., legal) market. Surprisingly, to date, an impact assessment of cannabis prohibition based on data derived through US federal government surveillance systems has been largely absent from this debate. Drawing upon cannabis surveillance systems funded by the US government, this report summarizes information about the impacts of US cannabis prohibition on cannabis seizures and arrests. The report also tests the assumption that increased funding for the enforcement of cannabis prohibition and subsequent increased seizures and arrests reduce cannabis-related harms, by evaluating US federally funded surveillance systems examining cannabis potency, price, availability and rates of use. Details: Vancouver, Canada: International Centre for Science in Drug Policy, 2010. 25p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 29, 2010 at: http://www.icsdp.org/docs/ICSDP-2.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://www.icsdp.org/docs/ICSDP-2.pdf Shelf Number: 120117 Keywords: CannabisDrug ControlDrug PolicyDrug ProhibitionMarijuana |
Author: Levine, Harry G. Title: Arresting Latinos for Marijuana in California: Possession Arrests in 33 Cities, 2006-08 Summary: The report documents widespread race-based disparities in the enforcement of low-level marijuana possession laws in California. In the last 20 years, California made 850,000 arrests for possession of small amounts of marijuana, and half a million arrests in the last 10 years. The people arrested were disproportionately African Americans and Latinos, overwhelmingly young people, especially young men. Yet, U.S. government surveys consistently find that young whites use marijuana at higher rates than young Latinos. From 2006 through 2008, major cities in California arrested and prosecuted Latinos for marijuana possession at double to nearly triple the rate of whites. Details: Los Angeles: Drug Policy Alliance, 2010. 20p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 4, 2011 at: http://drugpolicy.org/docUploads/ArrestingLatinos.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://drugpolicy.org/docUploads/ArrestingLatinos.pdf Shelf Number: 121225 Keywords: Drug Offenses (California)LatinosMarijuanaRacial Disparities |
Author: Males, Mike Title: Proposition 19: Did “Failure” Build Larger Success? Summary: In November 2010, California's Proposition 19 lost in the midterm election by 700,000 votes out of 10 million cast. This proposition was the latest of two dozen initiative efforts in California beginning in 1966 to propose limited legalization of marijuana for personal use. Its electoral achievement exceeded that of any previous marijuana measure except the 1996 proposition authorizing medical use. Even in losing, Proposition 19 succeeded in several important ways. It received an impressive 46.5% of the vote amid relatively unfavorable electoral demographics. The initiative’s popularity in polls also prompted the legislature to enact a preemptive reform that reduced simple marijuana possession to a citation for all ages. Details: San Francisco: Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice, 2011. 12p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 7, 2011 at: http://www.cjcj.org/files/Proposition_19.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.cjcj.org/files/Proposition_19.pdf Shelf Number: 121270 Keywords: Drug Policy Reform (California)Marijuana |
Author: Alonso, Martin Barriuso Title: Cannabis Social Clubs in Spain: A Normalizing Alternative Underway Summary: Cannabis social clubs (CSC) are noncommercial organisations of users who get together to cultivate and distribute enough cannabis to meet their personal needs without having to turn to the black market. They are based on the fact that the consumption of illegal drugs has never been considered a crime under Spanish legislation. Taking advantage of this grey area, private clubs that produce cannabis for non-profit distribution solely to a closed group of adult members have existed for years. Since their appearance in 2002, CSCs have enabled several thousand people to stop financing the black market and to know the quality and origin of what they are consuming, whilst creating jobs and tax revenue. All of this has happened without having to withdraw from existing UN drug treaties. This article outlines the nature and functioning of these clubs. It also proposes a better route for legalisation of drugs: rejecting the creation of an open trade system, similar to that of alcohol or tobacco and opting instead for a consumer-focused, non-profit model that avoids many of the risks inherent in a market dominated by the pursuit of economic profit. Details: Amsterdam: Transnational Institute, 2011. 8p. Source: Internet Resource: Series on Legislative Reform of Drug Policies Nr. 9: Accessed May 2, 2012 at: http://www.druglawreform.info/images/stories/documents/dlr9.pdf Year: 2011 Country: Spain URL: http://www.druglawreform.info/images/stories/documents/dlr9.pdf Shelf Number: 125118 Keywords: CannabisDrug LegalilzationDrug PolicyMarijuana |
Author: Williams, Jenny Title: Why Do Some People Want to Legalize Cannabis Use? Summary: Preferences and attitudes to illicit drug policy held by individuals are likely to be an important influence in the development of illicit drug policy. Among the key factors impacting on an individual's preferences over substance use policy are their beliefs about the costs and benefits of drug use, their own drug use history, and the extent of drug use amongst their peers. We use data from the Australian National Drug Strategy's Household Surveys to study these preferences. We find that current use and past use of cannabis are major determinants of being in favor of legalization. These results control for reverse causality from favorable attitudes to use. We also find that cannabis users are more in favor of legalization the longer they have used cannabis and, among past users, the more recent their own drug using experience. This may reflect that experience with cannabis provides information about the costs and benefits of using this substance. Finally, we uncover some evidence that peers' use of cannabis impacts on preferences towards legalization. Details: Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research, 2011. 26p. Source: Internet Resource: NBER Working Paper Series, Working Paper 16795: Accessed May 2, 2012 at: http://www.nber.org/papers/w16795 Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w16795 Shelf Number: 125121 Keywords: CannabisDrug LegalizationDrug Policy (U.S.)Marijuana |
Author: Maxwell, Les Title: ‘New Cannabis’: The Cornerstone of Illicit Drug Harm in New Zealand Summary: Cannabis is the most controversial and widely debated illicit drug in the world. Cannabis evokes emotive competing commentary from a globally connected pro cannabis lobby who conduct very focused and articulate campaigns to overturn drug laws and policies. In the last forty years there has been a plethora of assessments and studies that have espoused contrary views on the harms posed by cannabis use which has led to confusion amongst the general population. A number of pre-eminent international agencies have highlighted the increasing threat posed by high potency or ‘re-engineered’ cannabis (‘new cannabis’), particularly from a health perspective. It is no surprise ‘new cannabis’ has been a steadily increasing feature of the New Zealand cannabis environment since the late 1990’s. The New Zealand Government, at Ministerial level, recently formally acknowledged New Zealand had a “drug problem”. The prevalence of cannabis in the Oceania Region, particularly New Zealand, as illustrated in this assessment are amongst the highest in the world and are largely of our own making. New Zealand society appears to have been comfortable with high prevalence levels of cannabis within our communities for at least the last fifteen years. Whilst New Zealand has not totally ignored cannabis issues, the emergence of synthetic drugs since the late 1990’s has been a key distraction. This assessment provides commentary on the successful drug control frameworks operating in other countries that have achieved significant reductions in other illicit drug abuse in recent years through recognising and targeting cannabis as the major contributing first drug in the chain towards other drug abuse. Although New Zealand has been affected to some extent by the general trend of global trivialisation of cannabis, further action should be taken to reduce both the supply and demand for cannabis. The challenge is for government to review and where appropriate strengthen measures to reduce cannabis prevalence over the long term to contribute to reducing the prevalence of other illicit drugs. Details: Wellington, DC: New Zealand National Drug Intelligence Bureau, 2007. 111p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 9, 2012 at: http://www.police.govt.nz/resources/2008/Cannabis_Strategic_Assessment_Final3_2007_mirror.pdf Year: 2007 Country: New Zealand URL: http://www.police.govt.nz/resources/2008/Cannabis_Strategic_Assessment_Final3_2007_mirror.pdf Shelf Number: 117835 Keywords: Drug ControlDrug PolicyIllicit Drugs (New Zealand)Marijuana |
Author: McSweeney, Tim Title: Young People, Cannabis Use and Anti-Social Behaviour Summary: This report by the Institute for Criminal Policy Research, King’s College London, presents findings of a study on young people, cannabis use and anti-social behaviour. To date few research studies have focused on the question of whether young people’s cannabis use has any influence on the incidence or frequency of any anti-social behaviour or criminal activity they may engage in. This research intended to yield a more nuanced understanding of young people’s cannabis use and any associations this use may have with anti-social behaviour. The study found that: · Most of the sixty-one young people questioned acknowledged the potential for harm posed by cannabis, but felt capable of making rational and informed decisions about its use. · Most young people, and around half of the eighty community respondents, knew that cannabis had been reclassified from a Class B to a Class C drug. Two in three professionals opposed the decision to reclassify. · Most of the nineteen professionals interviewed felt that young people smoking cannabis in public caused problems for local residents. However, less than half of young people saw this as anti-social, and two-thirds of residents said they were unaffected by this behaviour. · Almost all young people believed that their age group was routinely accused of acting in an anti-social way, even when they had not been. · Young people believed ASB could be reduced if there were more opportunities and facilities for them. Respondents to the community survey also thought under-investment in local facilities had exacerbated the area’s problems. · Young people wanted a clearer definition of what constituted ASB and better advertising and education about cannabis use. Some professionals supported this, and favoured an integrated approach to tackling deprivation, education, training and employment, and sexual health as well as drugs and ASB. · Opinion amongst residents was divided on whether there is a link between young people’s cannabis use and ASB. Less than half of the professionals thought that cannabis use predisposed young people to anti-social behaviour. · Many community respondents believed that the burden of tackling young people’s cannabis use and ASB should not rest with any single agency. Professionals supported a multi-agency approach to tackling ASB but questioned local agencies’ ability to do this. Details: London: The Institute for Criminal Policy Research, King’s College London, 2007. 55p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 1, 2012 at: http://www.icpr.org.uk/media/5590/young%20people%20cannabis%20use%20and%20ASB.pdf Year: 2007 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.icpr.org.uk/media/5590/young%20people%20cannabis%20use%20and%20ASB.pdf Shelf Number: 126229 Keywords: Antisocial BehaviorAt-risk YouthCannabisDrug Abuse and Crime (U.K.)Juvenile OffendersMarijuana |
Author: European Monitoring Centre for Drugs Title: Cannabis Production and Markets in Europe Summary: This study brings together available evidence to provide a comprehensive analysis of cannabis production and markets across the EU. It combines information from EMCDDA routine reporting — data on patterns of prevalence and use, seizures, police reports, drug-law offences, cannabis potency and retail market prices — with literature on cannabis markets to create an in-depth analysis of the issue in a European context. The analysis presented in this volume covers, as far as possible, the 30 countries that participate in the EMCDDA’s reporting system. That is the 27 EU Member States, Croatia, Turkey and Norway. The information reviewed is based on a number of sources and methodologies. We list below the main sources and data used as a basis for the analysis, and more detailed methodological notes are provided throughout the text. Some of the data used in this report are derived from the EMCDDA’s routine monitoring, based on its Reitox network of national focal points. Data on prevalence and patterns of drug use, drug seizures, police reports of drug law offences, cannabis potency and retail prices are part of the quantitative data sets submitted by reporting countries on an annual basis. Quantitative data are routinely analysed and made available in the online Statistical bulletin (EMCDDA, 2011b), but more in-depth analyses were carried out for this publication. In addition, the EMCDDA’s routine monitoring includes a national narrative report providing an overview of the drug phenomenon and, among other issues, information on drug supply and drug trafficking, drug laws and sentencing practices. Legal texts held in the European Legal Database on Drugs (ELDD) and an ad hoc consultation of the legal correspondents network that informs the database were also used as sources of information for this report. In addition, two independent studies were carried out to obtain more detailed data and other information on specific aspects of cannabis production and markets in Europe. The issue of market shares of different cannabis products was a focus of both of these exercises. First, the national focal points, within the context of a Selected issue data collection exercise (Reitox national focal points, 2009), provided an overview of cannabis production (brief history, plantations seized, ‘grow shops’), distribution of cannabis at national level (structure and actors, wholesale prices, retail outlets, transaction sizes) and cannabis supply reduction responses (law enforcement activities, cannabis seizures, cannabis offences). These national contributions result from an analysis of different sources, including quantitative data, targeted studies, research, expert opinions and information from operational actors such as law enforcement. Second, the EMCDDA commissioned a study (Costes et al., 2009) to provide an overview of cannabis production methods (covering topics such as materials and costs) and typologies of growers, and of cannabis flows and trafficking routes to and within Europe. The authors carried out a survey based on key informants drawn from across Europe as part of this exercise. This report is also informed by an extensive review of the literature, which took in both scientific papers published in peer-reviewed journals and the ‘grey literature’ 16 (including reports from international organisations). For a number of the issues addressed in this report, the literature served as the only information source or as a complement. Analysis of the literature proved to be key in areas where standardised data collections are relatively rare, in particular on the botany of cannabis and on the production of cannabis both outside and within Europe. Chapter 1 reviews the origins of cannabis and its diffusion. Consideration is given to the morphology and anatomy of this interesting plant — which can be characterised by its extreme natural variation. This is accompanied by an analysis of production issues, including cultivation and processing for consumption. Chapter 2 provides an overview of the source countries for the cannabis imported into Europe. It includes a critical review of the considerable, and arguably insurmountable, challenges associated with estimating global cannabis production. The chapter focuses mainly on cannabis production in, and exportation to Europe from, the five regions and countries (the ‘big five’) most often mentioned as a source: North Africa (Morocco), south-west Asia (Afghanistan), the Balkans (Albania), the Middle East (Lebanon) and sub-Saharan Africa (South Africa). Chapter 3 is dedicated to cannabis production in Europe. Starting with the historical context, including the substitution of imported resin by domestically produced herb in some countries, it then reviews available evidence of the extent and type of cannabis cultivation across Europe. A typology of cannabis growers and their motivations is discussed. Distribution, either social or commercial, is addressed, and an analysis of issues related to transactions and prices is presented. Cannabinoid contents, and in particular tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), are addressed in Chapter 4, as are issues affecting the sampling and quantitative analysis of THC in cannabis products. This is followed by a review of the data available on cannabis potency in Europe. Chapter 5 focuses on cannabis consumption. Starting with an overview of the situation and trends in cannabis use in Europe, it then reviews the results of the few studies that have estimated the size of the market for cannabis in Europe. It ends with an analysis of the market shares at consumer level of cannabis herb and cannabis resin across Europe. Differences in the legislations controlling cannabis cultivation and supply in Europe are discussed in Chapter 6, which also provides an analysis of data on cannabis offences reported by law enforcement, and of cannabis seizures across Europe. The chapter ends with a brief overview of the strategies and tactics employed by law enforcement in their fight against cannabis cultivation and cannabis trafficking in Europe. Details: Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 2012. 274p. Source: Internet Resource: EMCDDA Insights Series No 12; Accessed November 9, 2012 at: http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/publications/insights/cannabis-market Year: 2012 Country: Europe URL: http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/publications/insights/cannabis-market Shelf Number: 126911 Keywords: CannabisDrug Abuse and CrimeDrug Markets (Europe)Drug OffendersDrug SmugglingMarijuana |
Author: United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime Title: Afghanistan: Survey of Commercial Cannabis Cultivation and Production 2011 Summary: The 2011 Survey of Commercial Cannabis Cultivation and Production estimated the total area under cultivation in 2011 at 12,000 hectares and a potential production of 1,300 tons. These figures only include commercial, mono-crop cannabis cultivation as the survey tool cannot capture small-scale “kitchen garden” cultivation of cannabis, which is often for localized and/or personal use and is only thought to account for a small percentage of total production. Afghanistan’s importance as a producer of cannabis resin does not necessarily mean that it is the principal supplier of the world’s big cannabis resin markets in North Africa, Europe and South-West Asia, but its relative importance may be growing whereas that of Morocco, though still very considerable, may be on the decline. Likewise, seizure data imply that not even all the cannabis resin trafficked in South-West Asia originates in Afghanistan. Signs of both stabilisation and change In 2011, cultivation and production of cannabis resin in Afghanistan appeared stable and there was no evidence of substantive change in comparison to the previous UNODC cannabis surveys of 2009 and 2010. Nevertheless, the number of cannabis-growing households in Afghanistan increased by 38 per cent, from 47,000 in 2010 to 65,000 in 2011, virtually all of whom were sporadic growers who had chosen that year to cultivate cannabis once again, while only a small amount were first-time cannabis growers. Moreover, commercial cannabis resin cultivation has spread to more and more provinces, being cultivated in almost two thirds of them (21 provinces) in 2011 as opposed to in only half (17 out of 34) in 2009. Principal among the numerous contributing factors to the spread of cannabis cultivation in Afghanistan is the fact that the price of cannabis has increased dramatically in the past few years, with best quality resin rising from US$ 35/kg to US$ 95/kg since 2009. UNODC price monitoring shows that the cannabis price rise has developed in parallel with the opium price hike caused by the opium crop failure in 2010, making its per-hectare income similar to that of opium and thus financially very attractive to farmers. But because cannabis cultivation is less labour intensive — less weeding is involved and the extraction of “garda” (powdered cannabis resin) can be done at home in a matter of weeks with the help of family members instead of hired labour — it is actually more cost-effective than opium. Such advantages contribute to the status of cannabis as a lucrative cash crop. Yet the average area cultivated dropped from 0.4 ha (2009) to 0.29 ha (2011), thus although more households grew cannabis in 2011 they actually cultivated a smaller area than previously, while the per-hectare yield also decreased by 25 per cent from its 2009 level, especially for best quality resin. The increase in the number of households cultivating cannabis may mean that there are more, if smaller scale, cannabis growers who benefit from cannabis as a lucrative sideline on an opportunistic basis. Indeed, the majority of farmers interviewed do not grow cannabis every year, some grow every other year and some do so even less frequently. To a certain extent, the cultivation of cannabis in Afghanistan thus appears to be self limiting — but why? Cannabis is a summer crop and the agricultural area available is much reduced in summer. Indeed, in the south, west and east of the country winter/spring cultivation is predominant, which is when most arable land is available. Cannabis needs irrigation water, which decreases with the arrival of summer and is only sufficient for a partial summer crop. Farmers have to balance different requirements, such as the provision of fodder for livestock, and have risk-minimizing strategies, meaning that they always grow some staple crops and hesitate to devote all their available land to just one crop. Cannabis has a long vegetation period lasting into October/November so no winter crop can be planted on a harvested cannabis field, which must then remain fallow, leading to a loss of income and all the subsequent ramifications. certain portion of farmers do not engage in cannabis cultivation at all because it is forbidden in Islam. The same is true for opium, which, while it is grown by many more households, on much more land and to a far greater extent, often co-exists with cannabis in Afghanistan. For example, commercial cannabis cultivation has shifted over the past half decade from the north to the more insecure south of the country and its cultivation is geographically associated with that of opium. Most cannabis-cultivating provinces also produced poppy in 2011 (15 out of 21 provinces), with the increase in cannabis-cultivating provinces since 2009 mainly being due to poppy provinces commencing commercial cannabis cultivation, to the extent that all major poppy-cultivating provinces also contained cannabis cultivation, while provinces free of poppy and cannabis continued to remain so. Furthermore, to a large extent those involved in cannabis and opium cultivation are actually the same people, even if opium growing households do not grow cannabis every year: in 2011, a large majority of cannabis farmers in Afghanistan (58%) also grew poppy, but only 6% of poppy farmers grew cannabis in that year. Moreover, many opium traffickers also trade in cannabis resin and there seems to be a striking correlation between opium and cannabis farm-gate prices, suggesting a considerable degree of market integration. Another of the principal similarities between poppy and commercial cannabis cultivation is that households growing illicit crops have a much smaller share of remittances than non-growing households, meaning that one or more members of the household works abroad. Cannabis-growing households often do not have to send members abroad as they can earn the necessary cash component by growing cannabis. A similar pattern exists for poppy-growing households. However, there are also some important differences between opium and cannabis production. For example, cannabis garda quality reportedly deteriorates after a couple of months so most farmers sell the complete harvest before that happens (represented by the strong post-harvest dip in prices in the months of January to March). Processing garda into hashish can increase storability but the process is time consuming and adds little value for farmers, who already make a tidy profit by producing garda. Opium, on the other hand, can be stored for years without losing quality, and can be used as a store of value (effectively a bank account), while cannabis, though undoubtedly an attractive cash crop, cannot. The future Another important difference between cannabis and poppy is that there is increasing Government pressure to eradicate poppy cultivation in Afghanistan whereas eradication of cannabis is not underpinned by systematic programmes for eradication and alternative development, nor by the support of financial donors. In addition, the associated lower cost of cannabis cultivation in comparison to poppy cultivation (estimated at 10% and 40% of gross income, respectively) makes it more profitable than opium. The possibility of the commercial production of cannabis gradually playing a much bigger role in the illicit Afghan economy, and eventually replacing opium, is unlikely, but still possible. The huge disparity between the current size of areas under cultivation of the two drugs means that ― even if that were possible ― it would not happen in the short term, while the aforementioned environmental and agricultural limitations of cannabis cultivation would make it difficult. But shedding light on price trend coincidence between opium and cannabis farm-gate prices, cannabis trafficking and export, and cannabis cultivation in neighbouring countries would certainly help understand the future of commercial cannabis cultivation in Afghanistan. Any policy aimed at reducing cannabis production in Afghanistan should, however, take into account the links between the two illicit crops and that there is a large pool of sporadic commercial cannabis farmers who may be prepared to cultivate cannabis more frequently should farm-gate prices remain high. The challenge to policymakers is to understand the decision-making process at the household level regarding the sporadic nature of cannabis cultivation and to develop strategies accordingly. Details: Vienna, UNODC, 2012. 49p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 24, 2012 at: http://www.unodc.org/documents/crop-monitoring/Afghanistan/2011_Afghanistan_Cannabis_Survey_Report_w_cover_small.pdf Year: 2012 Country: Afghanistan URL: http://www.unodc.org/documents/crop-monitoring/Afghanistan/2011_Afghanistan_Cannabis_Survey_Report_w_cover_small.pdf Shelf Number: 126985 Keywords: Cannabis (Afghanistan)Drugs and CrimeMarijuana |
Author: Telesca, Donatello Title: Modeling Criminal Careers as Departures from a Unimodal Population Age-Crime Curve: The Case of Marijuana Use Summary: A major aim of longitudinal analyses of life course data is to describe the within- and between individual variability in a behavioral outcome, such as crime. Statistical analyses of such data typically draw on mixture and mixed-effects growth models. In this work, we present a functional analytic point of view and develop an alternative method that models individual crime trajectories as departures from a population age-crime curve. Drawing on empirical and theoretical claims in criminology, we assume a unimodal population age-crime curve and allow individual expected crime trajectories to differ by their levels of offending and patterns of temporal misalignment. We extend Bayesian hierarchical curve registration methods to accommodate count data and to incorporate influence of baseline covariates on individual behavioral trajectories. Analyzing self-reported counts of yearly marijuana use from the Denver Youth Survey, we examine the influence of race and gender categories on differences in levels and timing of marijuana smoking. We find that our approach offers a flexible and realistic model for longitudinal crime trajectories that fits individual observations well and allows for a rich array of inferences of interest to criminologists and drug abuse researchers. Details: Seattle, WA: Department of Statistics, University of Washington, 2011. 27p. Source: Internet Resource: Technical Report no. 5882: Accessed January 22, 2013 at: http://www.stat.washington.edu/research/reports/2011/tr588.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.stat.washington.edu/research/reports/2011/tr588.pdf Shelf Number: 127347 Keywords: Criminal CareersCriminal TrajectoriesDrug Abuse and CrimeDrug OffendersLongitudinal StudiesMarijuana |
Author: Moriarty, John Title: Peer Effects in Adolescent Cannabis Use: It's the Friends, Stupid Summary: This paper examines peer effects in adolescent cannabis use from several different reference groups, exploiting survey data that have many desirable properties and have not previously been used for this purpose. Treating the school grade as the reference group, and using both neighbourhood fixed effects and IV for identification, we find evidence of large, positive, and statistically significant peer effects. Treating nominated friends as the reference group, and using both school fixed effects and IV for identification, we again find evidence of large, positive, and generally statistically significant peer effects. Our preferred IV approach exploits information about friends of friends friends once removed, who are not themselves friends - to instrument for friends cannabis use. Finally, we examine whether the cannabis use of schoolmates who are not nominated as friends non-friends influences own cannabis use. Once again using neighbourhood fixed effects and IV for identification, the evidence suggests zero impact.In our data, schoolmates who are not also friends have no influence on adolescent cannabis use. Details: Melbourne: University of Melbourne - Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, 2012. 29p. Source: Internet Resource: Melbourne Institute Working Paper No. 27: Accessed January 29, 2013 at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2192259 Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2192259 Shelf Number: 127416 Keywords: Cannabis Use (Australia)Drug AbuseMarijuanaPeer Effects |
Author: Colorado. Task Force on the Implementation of Amendment 64 Title: Task Force Report on the Implementation of Amendment 64 Regulation of Marijuana in Colorado Summary: The Task Force was charged with finding practical and pragmatic solutions to the challenges of implementing Amendment 64. The enclosed report offers up our recommendations, most of which now need to be enacted into law by the Colorado General Assembly or developed into administrative rules by various state departments. We fully appreciate that these recommendations will now need to be perfected through the legislative and rulemaking processes and we offer to you the support and expertise of task force members as you need them in the weeks and months ahead. The Task Force included members of the Colorado General Assembly and representatives of the Attorney General’s office, state agencies, law enforcement, the defense bar, district attorneys, the medical profession, the marijuana industry, the Amendment 64 campaign, marijuana consumers, academia, local governments and Colorado’s employers and employees. Five working groups, comprised of task force members and additional subject matter experts from around the state, met weekly during January and February. The working groups heard testimony from stakeholders and members of the public and then developed and drafted implementation recommendations, which were further vetted, revised, adopted or rejected in the meetings of the Task Force. All meetings of the Task Force and its working groups were open to the public, and there was time set aside at each of the meetings for public input and comment. Details: Denver, CO: State of Colorado, 2013. 166p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 6, 2013 at: http://www.colorado.gov/cms/forms/dor-tax/A64TaskForceFinalReport.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://www.colorado.gov/cms/forms/dor-tax/A64TaskForceFinalReport.pdf Shelf Number: 128309 Keywords: Drug Control PolicyDrug Legalization (Colorado)Marijuana |
Author: Murray, Chad Title: Mexican Drug Trafficking Organizations and Marijuana: The Potential Effects of U.S. Legalization Summary: Mexico's drug war has claimed more than 30,000 lives since 2006. The intensity and duration of this violence has produced an environment in which “few Mexican citizens feel safer today than they did ten years ago, and most believe that their government is losing the fight.” However, the problem of drug violence in Mexico is not domestic, but transnational in nature. President Barack Obama recently noted that “we are very mindful that the battle President Calderón is fighting inside of Mexico is not just his battle; it's also ours. We have to take responsibility just as he is taking responsibility.” It is U.S. demand for illicit drugs that provides the primary incentive for Mexican narcotics trafficking. Therefore, there is a possibility that a change in U.S. drug policy could negatively affect the revenues of Mexican DTOs, and even their ability to wage violence. This paper will examine the validity of that argument, as well as several of the issues that would accompany such a fundamental policy shift. The purpose of this report is to evaluate current U.S. policy on marijuana, extract lessons learned from policy changes in other countries, analyze the effects that legalization of marijuana in the United States might have on Mexican DTOs, and provide recommendations for future U.S. policies. Current U.S. laws will serve as a starting point to determine if existing decriminalization or medicinal marijuana reforms have had any impact on Mexican DTOs. After examining what effects, if any, these policies have had, reforms in other countries will be examined. From the case studies of Portugal, the Netherlands, and Mexico, lessons will be drawn to give context to any possible ramifications or benefits of U.S. marijuana legalization. Finally, concrete recommendations will be made on whether recent marijuana policy reforms should be maintained, improved, or repealed. Details: Washington, DC: George Washington University, Elliott School of International Affairs, 2011. 43p. Source: Internet Resource: Elliott School of International Affairs/Inter-American Drug Abuse Control Commission: Capstone Report: Accessed July 13, 2013 at: http://elliott.gwu.edu/assets/docs/acad/lahs/mexico-marijuana-071111.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://elliott.gwu.edu/assets/docs/acad/lahs/mexico-marijuana-071111.pdf Shelf Number: 129388 Keywords: Drug ControlDrug LegalizationDrug PolicyDrug TraffickingMarijuana |
Author: Jacobi, Liana Title: Marijuana on Main Street: What if? Summary: Illicit drug use is prevalent. While the nature of the market makes it di¢ - cult to determine sales with certainty, estimates are around $150 billion a year in the US. Marijuana is the most common illicit drug used, where the US spends upwards of $7.7 bil- lion per year in law enforcement (Miron, 2005). For the past 30 years there has been a debate regarding marijuana legalization. There are two important avenues through which legalization could impact use: it would make marijuana easier to get, and it would remove the stigma (and cost) associated with illegal behavior. Studies to date have not considered either of these avenues explicitly. However, both are important for policy. We develop and estimate a model of marijuana use that disentangles the impact of limited accessibility from consumption decisions based solely on preferences (and distaste for illegal behavior). We nd that both play an important role and that individuals who have access to the illicit market are of speci c demographics. We nd that selection into who has access to cannabis is not random, and the results suggest estimates of the demand curve will be biased un- less selection is explicitly considered. Counterfactual results indicate that making marijuana legal and removing accessibility barriers would have a smaller relative impact on younger individuals but still a large impact in magnitude. Use among teenagers would (a little less than) double and use among individuals in their thirties and forties would almost triple. Details: Unpublished paper, 2013. 29p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 17, 2013 at: https://economics.adelaide.edu.au/research/seminars/2013-cannabis.pdf Year: 2013 Country: International URL: https://economics.adelaide.edu.au/research/seminars/2013-cannabis.pdf Shelf Number: 129419 Keywords: Drug LegalizationDrug MarketsDrug PolicyIllicit DrugsMarijuana |
Author: Rasul, Imran Title: Crime and the Depenalization of Cannabis Possession: Evidence from a Policing Experiment Summary: We evaluate the impact on crime of a localized policing experiment that depenalized the possession of small quantities of cannabis in the London borough of Lambeth. Theory suggests such a policy will: (i) impact the size of the market for cannabis in Lambeth as well as neighboring boroughs as drug users move to Lambeth to purchase cannabis; (ii) allow the police to reallocate effort towards other types of crime. We investigate whether such changing crime patterns are observed during and after the depenalization policy is introduced in Lambeth using administrative records on criminal offences by drug type, by specific drug offences that proxy demand and supply side criminal activities, and for seven types of non-drug crime. We find that depenalization in Lambeth led to an increase in cannabis possession offences that persisted well after the policy experiment ended. Half of the increase is attributable to drugs tourism into Lambeth from neighboring boroughs after depenalization. We find little evidence that the policy caused the police to reallocate effort towards Class-A drug crime, rather the evidence suggests the police in Lambeth reallocate their effort towards non-drug crime: there are significant reductions in five non-drug crime types, and significant improvements in police effectiveness against such crimes as measured by arrest and clear-up rates. These nuanced results provide new insights for the current policy debate on the regulation of illicit drugs markets. Details: London: University College London, 2011. 41p. Source: Internet Resource: Working Paper: Accessed July 17, 2013 at: http://www.ucl.ac.uk/~uctpimr/research/depenalization.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.ucl.ac.uk/~uctpimr/research/depenalization.pdf Shelf Number: 129421 Keywords: DecriminalizationDrug Control PolicyDrug Law Enforcement (U.K.)Illegal DrugsMarijuana |
Author: Grund, Jean-Paul Title: Coffee Shops and Compromise: Separated Illicit Drug Markets in the Netherlands Summary: Though famous for its coffee shops, where cannabis can be purchased and consumed, the Netherlands has accomplished many enviable public health outcomes through its drug policy. These include low prevalence of HIV among people who use drugs, negligible incidence of heroin use, lower cannabis use among young people than in many stricter countries, and a citizenry that has generally been spared the burden of criminal records for low level, nonviolent drug offenses. Coffee Shops and Compromise: Separated Illicit Drug Markets in the Netherlands tells the history of the Dutch approach and describes the ongoing success of the country’s drug policy. This includes the impact of the Dutch “separation of markets,” which potentially limits people’s exposure and access to harder drugs. Though coffee shops have traditionally commanded the most media attention, the Netherlands also pioneered needle exchange and safer consumption rooms, decriminalized possession of small quantities of drugs, and introduced easy-to-access treatment services. These policies, coupled with groundbreaking harm reduction interventions, have resulted in the near-disappearance of HIV among people who inject drugs and the lowest rate of problem drug use in Europe. Details: New York: Open Society Foundations, 2013. 80p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 5, 2013 at: http://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/reports/coffee-shops-and-compromise-separated-illicit-drug-markets-netherlands Year: 2013 Country: Netherlands URL: http://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/reports/coffee-shops-and-compromise-separated-illicit-drug-markets-netherlands Shelf Number: 129535 Keywords: Drug Abuse and AddictionDrug MarketsDrug PolicyIllicit Drugs (Netherlands)Marijuana |
Author: Macgregor, Sarah Title: Synthetic Cannabis: Prevalence of use among offenders, perception of risk and negative side effects experienced Summary: Key Points -- • Of 871 police detainees surveyed through the Drug Use Monitoring in Australia (DUMA) program, 4 per cent reported recent use of synthetic cannabis. This compares to almost half (46%) who reported recent use of natural cannabis • The most common source for obtaining synthetic cannabis (aside from ‘a friend’) was from some type of shop (42%) such as a tobacconist or sex shop • At the time of interview, several synthetic compounds had been added to Schedule nine of the 2011 Commonwealth Poisons Standard by the TGA and statewide bans on the possession and distribution of synthetic cannabis products had occurred in every jurisdiction. However over half (60%) of users still believed synthetic cannabis was legal to buy at the time • The majority of detainees did not agree that synthetic cannabis is safer to use than natural cannabis, and 33 detainees reported experiencing some type of negative side effect • Most common side effects included dizziness/nausea/vomiting (26%), paranoia/panic (18%) and headaches (15%). Other symptoms included delusional behaviour/anger outbursts, hallucinations and heart palpitations/chest pains requiring emergency care • The range of negative side effects experienced by detainees from using synthetic cannabis products raises concerns for treatment providers and correctional officers who deal with drug-using offenders, given that consumers of synthetic cannabinoids could be placing themselves at risk of harm and displaying unpredictable behaviour • Evidence from overseas suggests that banning a range of specific synthetic cannabinoid compounds has led to the increased availability of more harmful compounds with more severe side effects, on the market. Details: Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology, 2013. 10p. Source: Internet Resource: Criminal Justice Bulletin Series 11: Accessed August 19, 2013 at: http://ncpic.org.au/ncpic/publications/aic-bulletins/pdf/synthetic-cannabis-prevalence-of-use-among-offenders-perception-of-risk-and-negative-side-effects-experienced Year: 2013 Country: Australia URL: http://ncpic.org.au/ncpic/publications/aic-bulletins/pdf/synthetic-cannabis-prevalence-of-use-among-offenders-perception-of-risk-and-negative-side-effects-experienced Shelf Number: 129660 Keywords: Drug Abuse and AddictionDrug Abuse and CrimeMarijuanaSynthetic Cannabis (Australia) |
Author: Bryan, Mark Title: Licensing and Regulation of the Cannabis Market in England and Wales: Towards a Cost-Benefit Analysis Summary: We agree with David Cameron's observation on drugs policy that "it would be very disturbing if some radical options were not at least looked at". Among the radical options that are often proposed is the creation of a system of licensed cannabis supply subject to taxation and regulation of supply and demand sides of the market. In this study, we consider a hypothetical reform of this kind and identify a long list of possible sources of net social cost and benefit that could result. We attempt to quantify them, using the concept of net external benefit as an evaluation criterion. Net external benefit is the total value in cash-equivalent terms of the costs and benefits that cannabis use imposes on society outside the user him/herself, and it therefore excludes the potential net benefits ('enjoyment') accruing to cannabis users in a reformed market. Our evaluation is consequently conservative in that it contains an inherent bias in favour of the prohibitionist status quo. In our view, it is impossible with available UK evidence to produce a credible estimate of net consumption benefits. Despite the bias this entails, it gives a far more reliable picture of the policy question than the many widely-cited estimates of the "social cost of drug use", which include internal costs (potential harms to drug users) but ignore completely the internal benefits which are the reason that recreational drugs are used in the first place. The estimates underpinning our evaluation should not be seen as predictions of what would happen if such a policy were to be introduced in some future period, since they relate to the market situation as it existed in England and Wales in 2009/10, and they abstract from any transitional adjustments (and any accompanying transitional cost). We have not attempted to extend the evaluation to cover Scotland or Northern Ireland, since most of the data resources available to us cover England and Wales only. In constructing the estimates, we consider a wide range of evidence and the difficulties involved in drawing conclusions from that evidence. We provide simple, largely subjective, quantitative indications of the degree of uncertainty involved in our estimates, some of which should be regarded as illustrative calculations rather than formal estimates. Our aim is not to produce a definitive cost-benefit analysis of a licensed and regulated cannabis market - which we believe to be impossible in the present state of knowledge - but to set out clearly the range of considerations that need to be considered in forming a view about this policy, and to indicate which aspects of the evaluation are likely to be critical to the outcome of a full cost-benefit analysis. Details: London: The Beckley Foundation; Colchester, UK; Institute for Social and Economic Research, University of Essex, 2013. 156p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 11, 2013 at: http://www.beckleyfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/BF-CANNABIS-CBA-REPORT.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.beckleyfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/BF-CANNABIS-CBA-REPORT.pdf Shelf Number: 129956 Keywords: CannabisCost-Benefit AnalysisDrug MarketsDrug Policy (U.K.)Marijuana |
Author: Dank, Meredith Title: Legalization of Recreational Marijuana in Washington: Monitoring Trends in Use Prior to the Implementation of I-502 Summary: The Washington State Institute for Public Policy is directed to conduct a benefit-cost analysis of the implementation of I-502, which legalizes recreational marijuana use for adults within the state. As a preliminary step, we analyzed population-level data to begin monitoring four key indicators of marijuana use prior to implementation. We used data from the 2002 to 2011 administrations of the National Survey on Drug Use and Health to examine trends in the prevalence of current marijuana use, lifetime marijuana use, age of initiation, and marijuana abuse or dependency. We examined these trends separately for youth and adults in Washington, and also provide estimates for Colorado (the other state that has legalized recreational marijuana use) and the rest of the United States (US). Examining trends in this manner will allow us to monitor whether the implementation of I-502 appears to affect these key indicators of marijuana use over time. Although more sophisticated analyses will be required for us to evaluate the policy, these initial trends provide a baseline to compare future data against. Findings. The prevalence of marijuana use in the past 30 days - a key indicator of the proportion of people who are current marijuana users - appears to be on the rise in recent years among both youth and adults in Washington, Colorado, and the US. The other indicators of use appear to be relatively stable or increasing slightly over time. In general, the estimates from Washington are slightly higher than the US and slightly lower than Colorado. Next steps. We will continue to monitor these trends over time within the context of our larger benefit-cost analysis to examine whether the new policy appears to affect marijuana use rates within the state. Details: Olympia, WA: Washington State Institute for Public Policy, 2013. 11p. Source: Internet Resource: (Document No. 13-11-1401): Accessed March 12, 2014 at: http://www.wsipp.wa.gov/ReportFile/1540/Wsipp_Legalization-of-Recreational-Marijuana-in-Washington-Monitoring-Trends-in-Use-Prior-to-the-Implementation-of-I-502_Full-Report.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://www.wsipp.wa.gov/ReportFile/1540/Wsipp_Legalization-of-Recreational-Marijuana-in-Washington-Monitoring-Trends-in-Use-Prior-to-the-Implementation-of-I-502_Full-Report.pdf Shelf Number: 131885 Keywords: Cost-Benefit AnalysisDrug LegalizationDrug Reform PolicyMarijuana |
Author: Bewley-Taylor, Dave Title: The Rise and Decline of Cannabis Prohibition: The History of Cannabis in the UN Drug Control System and Options for Reform Summary: The cannabis plant has been used for spiritual, medicinal and recreational purposes since the early days of civilization. In this report the Transnational Institute and the Global Drug Policy Observatory describe in detail the history of international control and how cannabis was included in the current UN drug control system. Cannabis was condemned by the 1961 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs as a psychoactive drug with "particularly dangerous properties" and hardly any therapeutic value. Ever since, an increasing number of countries have shown discomfort with the treaty regime's strictures through soft defections, stretching its legal flexibility to sometimes questionable limits. Today's political reality of regulated cannabis markets in Uruguay, Washington and Colorado operating at odds with the UN conventions puts the discussion about options for reform of the global drug control regime on the table. Now that the cracks in the Vienna consensus have reached the point of treaty breach, this discussion is no longer a reformist fantasy. Easy options, however, do not exist; they all entail procedural complications and political obstacles. A coordinated initiative by a group of like-minded countries agreeing to assess possible routes and deciding on a road map for the future seems the most likely scenario for moving forward. There are good reasons to question the treaty-imposed prohibition model for cannabis control. Not only is the original inclusion of cannabis within the current framework the result of dubious procedures, but the understanding of the drug itself, the dynamics of illicit markets, and the unintended consequences of repressive drug control strategies has increased enormously. The prohibitive model has failed to have any sustained impact in reducing the market, while imposing heavy burdens upon criminal justice systems; producing profoundly negative social and public health impacts; and creating criminal markets supporting organised crime, violence and corruption. After long accommodating various forms of deviance from its prohibitive ethos, like turning a blind eye to illicit cannabis markets, decriminalisation of possession for personal use, coffeeshops, cannabis social clubs and generous medical marijuana schemes, the regime has now reached a moment of truth. The current policy trend towards legal regulation of the cannabis market as a more promising model for protecting people's health and safety has changed the drug policy landscape and the terms of the debate. The question facing the international community today is no longer whether or not there is a need to reassess and modernize the UN drug control system, but rather when and how to do it. Details: Amsterdam: Transnational Institute; Swansea, UK: Research Institute for Arts and Humanities, Swansea University, 2014. 88p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 13, 2014 at: http://www.tni.org/sites/www.tni.org/files/download/rise_and_decline_web.pdf Year: 2014 Country: International URL: http://www.tni.org/sites/www.tni.org/files/download/rise_and_decline_web.pdf Shelf Number: 131900 Keywords: CannabisDecriminalizationDrug ControlDrug EnforcementDrug PolicyDrug ProhibitionMarijuana |
Author: Myrstol, Brad A. Title: The Predictive Validity of Marijuana Odor Detection: An Examination of Alaska State Trooper Case Reports 2006-2010 Summary: This study provides an empirical estimate of the extent to which Alaska State Troopers (AST) investigators' detection of marijuana odors served as a reliable indicator of the presence of illegal quantities of marijuana in suspected structures/buildings. It also provides a detailed description of marijuana grow searches conducted by AST investigators. Data were compiled from the case records for all marijuana grow searches conducted by AST for the years 2006-2010 (n=333). Details: Anchorage, AK: UAA Justice Center, University of Alaska Anchorage, 2012. 61p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 18, 2014 at: http://justice.uaa.alaska.edu/research/2010/1110.02.ast.marijuana/1110.02.marijuana.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://justice.uaa.alaska.edu/research/2010/1110.02.ast.marijuana/1110.02.marijuana.pdf Shelf Number: 131954 Keywords: Drug DetectionDrug EnforcementIllegal DrugsMarijuana |
Author: Kilmer, Beau Title: Before the Grand Opening: Measuring Washington State's Marijuana Market in the Last Year Before Legalized Commercial Sales Summary: In 2012, Washington state voters passed Initiative 502 (I-502), which removed the prohibition on the production, distribution, and possession of marijuana for nonmedical purposes and required the state to regulate and tax a new marijuana industry. Legalization of possession went into effect almost immediately, but the revolutionary aspect of the law - allowing businesses to openly produce and distribute commercial-scale quantities for nonmedical use - is expected to be fully implemented in 2014. Decisionmakers in Washington need baseline information about the amount of marijuana that is currently consumed in the state for many reasons. For example, it is important for making informed decisions about the number of licenses to distribute, to accurately project tax revenues, and to provide a foundation for evaluations of I-502. This report estimates the total weight of marijuana consumed in Washington in 2013 using data from existing household surveys as well as information from a new web-based consumption survey. Although the principal motivation for the study was estimating the size of the market, the report also describes various characteristics of the market, including traits of marijuana users in Washington and how they obtain marijuana. While the Washington Office of Financial Management projected that 85 metric tons (MT) of marijuana would be consumed in the state in 2013, this report suggests that estimate is probably too low, perhaps by a factor of two. There is inevitable uncertainty surrounding estimates of illegal and quasi-illegal activities, so it is better to think in terms of a range of possible sizes, rather than a point estimate. Analyses suggest a range of 135-225 MT, which might loosely be thought of as a 90-percent confidence interval, with a median estimate close to 175 MT. Details: Santa Monica, CA: RAND, Drug Policy Research Center, 2013. 68p. Source: Internet Resource: http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR400/RR466/RAND_RR466.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR400/RR466/RAND_RR466.pdf Shelf Number: 132177 Keywords: Drug LegalizationDrug MarketsDrug Policy ReformMarijuana |
Author: Simms, Nicole Title: Collateral Costs: Racial Disparities and Injustice in Minnesota's Marijuana Laws Summary: Blacks in Minnesota are 6.4 times more likely to be arrested for marijuana possession than whites, one of the nation's highest disparities, according to FBI statistics. Our latest report finds these disproportionate arrest rates further exacerbate equity gaps for individuals and neighborhoods in communities of color. The research set out to determine costs beyond fines and attorney fees to individuals arrested and/or convicted for marijuana possession, including lost economic opportunity, property forfeiture, being removed from social safety net programs, and emotional distress. Even a low-level marijuana conviction can cost someone up to $76,000 over a decade using fairly conservative estimates. As a result, Minnesota 2020 is joining a growing body of legal experts and community activists in calling for marijuana law reform. The report's recommendations range from fairer seizure laws and more accountable enforcement strategy to full legalization. The laws and strategy used to fight the war on drugs have had a devastating impact on communities of color. An honest discussion about marijuana law reform must include all options and acknowledge the reality that deterrents to marijuana use have been ineffective. A variety of factors contribute to the disparities in arrest rates. Over-policing in communities of color, cultural differences in where and how marijuana is used and purchased, and grants and seizure policies that incentivize volume over quality in drug arrests are major factors for the disparity. As a result, blacks in Ramsey County are 8.8 times more likely to be arrested for marijuana possession than whites, the state's highest disparity for 2011. Hennepin and Steele counties follow, with blacks in both places 6.4 time more likely to be arrested. When state and federal policies strip wealth out of communities, it's time to reexamine our approach to social, economic, and criminal justice issues. By highlighting collateral costs individuals and communities suffer from marijuana enforcement disparities, we hope to reframe the debate about marijuana reform. Details: St. Paul, MN: Minnesota 2020, 2014. 40p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 15, 2014 at: http://www.mn2020.org/assets/uploads/article/collateral_costs_web.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://www.mn2020.org/assets/uploads/article/collateral_costs_web.pdf Shelf Number: 132361 Keywords: Drug OffendersDrug Policy (U.S.)Drug Policy ReformMarijuanaRacial Disparities |
Author: United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) Title: Afghanistan: Survey of Commercial Cannabis Cultivation and Production 2012 Summary: The 2012 Survey of Commercial Cannabis Cultivation and Production estimated the total area under cultivation in 2012 at 10,000 hectares and a potential production of 1,400 tons. These figures only include commercial, mono-crop cannabis cultivation as the survey tool cannot capture small-scale "kitchen garden" cultivation of cannabis, which is often for localized and/or personal use and is thought to account for only a small percentage of total production. - In contrast to previous surveys, the 2012 survey consisted of only two instead of three components: an area survey using satellite imagery and a yield survey. There was no socioeconomic village survey and the survey area was reduced. - In 2012, the estimated area under commercial cannabis cultivation declined by 17% compared to 2011; however, the area covered by the survey was reduced compared to 2011, which reduces the comparability of the two area estimates. - Due to higher per-hectare yields, production increased by 8% compared to 2011. - The decrease in cultivation is mainly attributed to lower levels of cannabis cultivation in Uruzgan province. The area under cannabis cultivation in Uruzgan decreased drastically from more than 1,000 hectares in 2011 to less than 100 hectares in 2012. According to reports from the field, the reason for the reduction was a strictly enforced ban by provincial authorities, which was imposed because cannabis fields seemed to have been used by insurgent groups as hiding places. - In the remaining 15 provinces surveyed, no major changes in cannabis cultivation were observed in 2012 and the 2012 levels of cultivation in these provinces are considered to be stable compared to 2011. - The main reason for the increase in potential production in spite of a decline in cultivation is the better yield of cannabis garda compared to 2011. In 2012, the national average of garda yield (all qualities) was 136 kg/ha, an increase by 21% when compared to 2011 (112 kg/ha). Levels of cannabis garda yield are nearly as high as they have been in 2009 (145 kg/ha). - The MCN/UNODC price monitoring showed that the cannabis prices have declined in 2012 after a price hike in 2011, in parallel to the opium price trends. Despite this, cannabis cultivation is still financially very attractive. In 2012, farmers potentially achieved a gross income of US$ 6,400 per hectare from cannabis resin, which was higher than the gross income from opium (US$ 4,600 per hectare) in the same year. Details: Vienna: UNODC, 2013. 30p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 25, 2014 at: https://www.unodc.org/documents/crop-monitoring/Afghanistan/_Afghanistan_Cannabis_Survey_Report_2012.pdf Year: 2013 Country: Afghanistan URL: https://www.unodc.org/documents/crop-monitoring/Afghanistan/_Afghanistan_Cannabis_Survey_Report_2012.pdf Shelf Number: 129922 Keywords: Cannabis (Afghanistan)Drugs and CrimeMarijuana |
Author: Willis, Katie Title: Assessing the impact of police on cannabis markets Summary: - The enforcement of laws relating to the production and distribution of illicit drugs is a major investment for the Australian community, with one recent estimate indicating that the annual direct costs of drug law enforcement (DLE) are around $1.7 billion - Traditional measures of DLE performance are based on drug seizure and arrest data. While these are simple and well-understood measures of DLE effort, they are ambiguous and imperfect - Work undertaken in Australia and overseas to develop more rigorous measurement systems emphasises the use of multiple, cross-sectoral indicators in assessing law enforcement impacts, rather than relying on single indicators of performance - While the police and health sectors use very different strategies and interventions to deal with cannabis-related problems, there is important convergence in what both sectors seek to achieve. That is, a community that is less burdened by cannabis-related crime, illness and injury - The new measures outlined in this bulletin would not only assist to improve DLE's understanding of the cannabis market, but their impact on that market - Work would need to be undertaken to identify or establish suitable data sources for some of the suggested measures - Including new questions in existing population surveys or expanding current agency administrative data sets are two low cost ways to improve the types of data available. There may also be scope for development of new data capture methods that focus on populations that often have high levels of cannabis use, such as youths in juvenile justice settings Details: Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology, National Cannabis Prevention and Information Centre 2010. 11p. Source: Internet Resource: criminal justice bulletin series 7: Accessed December 10, 2014 at: https://ncpic.org.au/media/1937/assessing-the-impact-of-police-on-cannabis-markets.pdf Year: 2010 Country: Australia URL: https://ncpic.org.au/media/1937/assessing-the-impact-of-police-on-cannabis-markets.pdf Shelf Number: 134312 Keywords: Cannabis (Australia)Drug EnforcementDrug MarketsDrug PolicyMarijuana |
Author: Crick, Emily Title: Selling cannabis regulation: Learning From Ballot Initiatives in the United States in 2012 Summary: Key Points - In November 2012, Washington, Colorado, and Oregon voted on ballot initiatives to establish legally regulated markets for the production, sale, use and taxation of cannabis.1 Washington and Colorado's measures won by wide margins, while Oregon's lost soundly. - A majority of voters view cannabis in a negative light, but also feel that prohibition for non-medical and non-scientific purposes is not working. As a result, they are more likely to support well-crafted reform policies that include strong regulations and direct tax revenue to worthy causes such as public health and education. - Ballot measures are not the ideal method for passing complicated pieces of legislation, but sometimes they are necessary for controversial issues. Other states often follow in their footsteps, including via the legislature. - The successful campaigns in Washington and Colorado relied on poll-driven messaging, were well organised, and had significant financing. The Oregon campaign lacked these elements. - The Washington and Colorado campaigns targeted key demographic groups, particularly 30-50 year old women, who were likely to be initially supportive of reform but then switch their allegiance to the 'no' vote. - Two key messages in Washington and Colorado were that legalisation, taxation and regulation will (i) free up scarce law enforcement resources to focus on more serious crimes and (ii) will create new tax revenue for worthy causes. - National attitudes on legalising cannabis are changing, with more and more people supporting reform. Details: Swansea, UK: Swansea University, Global Drug Policy Observatory, 2014. 26p. Source: Internet Resource: Policy Brief 6: Accessed February 12, 2015 at: http://www.swansea.ac.uk/media/Selling%20Cannabis%20Regulation.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://www.swansea.ac.uk/media/Selling%20Cannabis%20Regulation.pdf Shelf Number: 134610 Keywords: CannabisDecriminalizationDrug Policy (U.S.)Marijuana |
Author: Blickman, Tom Title: Cannabis policy reform in Europe: Bottom up rather than top down Summary: With the regulation of recreational cannabis markets in Uruguay and the US states of Colorado and Washington in 2013, and - in November 2014 - the approval of cannabis regulation ballots in the states of Oregon and Alaska, a breakthrough in conventional cannabis policy is emerging. The current policy trend towards legal regulation of the cannabis market is increasingly seen as a more promising model for protecting people's health and safety and has changed the drug policy landscape and the terms of the debate. The prohibitive model has failed to show any sustained impact in reducing the market, while imposing heavy burdens upon criminal justice systems; producing profoundly negative social and public health impacts; and creating criminal markets supporting organised crime, violence and corruption. While in the Americas cannabis policy reform is taking off, Europe seems to be lagging behind. That is to say, in European nations at the level of national governments - where denial of the changing policy landscape and inertia to act upon calls for change reigns. At the local level, however, disenchantment with the current cannabis regime gives rise to new ideas. In several countries in Eu rope, local and regional authorities are looking at regulation, either pressured by grassroots movements - in particular the Cannabis Social Clubs (CSCs) - or due to the involvement of criminal groups and public disorder. This briefing will give an overview of recent developments in Europe. Details: Amsterdam: Transnational Institute, 2014. 24p. Source: Internet Resource: Series on Legislative Reform of Drug Policies No. 28: Accessed March 11, 2015 at: http://www.tni.org/sites/www.tni.org/files/download/dlr28.pdf Year: 2014 Country: Europe URL: http://www.tni.org/sites/www.tni.org/files/download/dlr28.pdf Shelf Number: 134889 Keywords: CannabisDrug LegalizationDrug Policy (Europe)Drug ReformMarijuanaOrganized Crime |
Author: Neill, Katharine A. Title: Marijuana Reform: Fears and Facts Summary: In 1972, a National Commission on Marihuana and Drug Abuse, comprising establishment figures chosen mostly by President Richard Nixon himself, issued a report that declared that "neither the marihuana user nor the drug itself can be said to constitute a danger to public safety" and recommended that Congress and state legislatures decriminalize the use and casual distribution of marijuana and seek means other than prohibition to discourage use. President Nixon ignored the report and Congress declined to consider its recommendations, but during the 40-plus years since its publication, at least 37 states have acted to refashion a crazy-quilt collection of prohibitions, nearly always in the direction favored by the commission. The specifics vary by state, but most reform legislation has followed one of three formulas: decriminalization of marijuana possession, legalization of marijuana for medical use, or legalization of marijuana for adult recreational use. In this issue brief, authors Katharine Neill and William Martin examine the facts and fears surrounding each of these options. Details: Houston, TX: Rice University, Baker Institute for Public Policy, 2015. 8p. Source: Internet Resource: Issue Brief: Accessed March 27, 2015 at: http://bakerinstitute.org/media/files/research_document/1886afae/BI-Brief-020415-MJlegalization.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://bakerinstitute.org/media/files/research_document/1886afae/BI-Brief-020415-MJlegalization.pdf Shelf Number: 134955 Keywords: Drug Abuse and AddictionDrug LegalizationDrug Reform Policy (U.S.)Marijuana |
Author: International Centre for Science in Drug Policy Title: State of Evidence: Cannabis Use and Regulation Summary: Science in Drug Policy (ICSDP) has sought to ensure that policy responses to the many problems posed by illicit drugs are informed by the best available scientific evidence. State of the Evidence: Cannabis Use and Regulation is the ICSDP's contribution to the growing global conversation on cannabis. This report should be read in tandem with Using Evidence to Talk About Cannabis, a complementary guide to having evidence-based discussions on cannabis use and regulation. The regulation of recreational cannabis markets has become an increasingly important policy issue in a number of jurisdictions. Colorado and Washington State made headlines in 2012 when they became the first jurisdictions in the world to legalize and regulate the adult use and sale of cannabis for non-medical purposes. In 2013, Uruguay became the first country to legalize and regulate recreational cannabis markets. Momentum towards regulation continued in the United States in 2014 with successful ballot initiatives in Alaska, Oregon, and the District of Columbia. Globally, the issue of cannabis regulation is front and center in a growing number of jurisdictions, including Canada, Jamaica, Italy, Spain, several Latin American countries, and a number of additional U.S. states, including California, set to vote on legalization initiatives in 2016. Unsurprisingly, given the robust global conversation around the regulation of recreational cannabis markets, claims about the impacts of cannabis use and regulation are increasingly part of the public discourse. Unfortunately, though, these claims are often unsupported by the available scientific evidence. Another reoccurring problem in the public discourse is the selective inclusion of research studies based on their support for a predetermined narrative. The intentional exclusion of studies with contradictory findings does not allow for an objective review and analysis of all the evidence. This "cherry picking" of the evidence is a routine practice that distorts public understanding. By outlining the current state of all the scientific evidence on common cannabis claims, State of the Evidence: Cannabis Use and Regulation strives to ensure that evidence, rather than rhetoric, plays a central role in policymaking around this important issue. The harms of misrepresenting the scientific evidence on cannabis should not be overlooked. Given that policy decisions are influenced by public opinion and media reports, public discourse needs to be well informed. By addressing knowledge gaps with scientific findings, the ICSDP hopes to dispel myths about cannabis use and regulation, and ensure that the scientific evidence on these topics is accurately represented. Only then can evidence- based policy decisions be made. Readers of this report will notice three repeating themes emerge through the discussion of the scientific evidence on common cannabis claims. First, many of the claims confuse correlation and causation. Although scientific evidence may find associations between two events, this does not indicate that one necessarily caused the other. Put simply, correlation does not equal causation. This is a commonly made mistake when interpreting scientific evidence in all fields, and is unsurprisingly a recurring source of confusion in the discourse on cannabis use and regulation. Second, for several of these claims, the inability to control for a range of variables ("confounders") means that in many cases, we cannot conclude that a particular outcome was caused by cannabis use or regulation. Unless scientists can remove all other possible explanations, the evidence cannot conclusively say that one specific explanation is true. Third, many of the claims cannot be made conclusively as there is insufficient evidence to support them. Findings from a single study or a small sample cannot be generalized to entire populations. This is especially pronounced for claims related to cannabis regulation, as not enough time has passed since the regulation of recreational cannabis in Colorado, Washington State, and Uruguay to examine many of the impacts of these policy changes. These three common pitfalls are important to take into account when reading media reports and advocacy materials that suggest scientists have conclusively made some finding related to cannabis use or regulation. In many cases, due to the reasons outlined above, this will actually result in a misrepresentation of the scientific evidence. State of the Evidence: Cannabis Use and Regulation is comprised of two sections: Common Claims on Cannabis Use and Common Claims on Cannabis Regulation. Common Claims on Cannabis Use presents evidence on frequently heard claims about cannabis use, including claims on the addictive potential of cannabis, cannabis as a "gateway" drug, the potency of cannabis, and the impact of cannabis use on the lungs, heart, and brain (in terms of IQ, cognitive functioning, and risk of schizophrenia). Common Claims on Cannabis Regulation presents evidence on frequently heard claims about the impacts of cannabis regulation, including the impact of regulation on cannabis availability, impaired driving, the use of cannabis, drug crime, drug tourism, and "Big Marijuana." For each claim, the relevant available scientific evidence is presented and the strength of the scientific evidence in support of the claim is determined. Readers will notice that none of the claims are strongly supported by the scientific evidence, reinforcing the significant misrepresentation of evidence on cannabis use and regulation. Details: Toronto, ON: The Centre, 2015. 24p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 28, 2015 at: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/64663568/library/State_of_the_Evidence_Cannabis_Use_and_Regulation-international-centre-for-science-in-drug-policy.pdf Year: 2015 Country: International URL: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/64663568/library/State_of_the_Evidence_Cannabis_Use_and_Regulation-international-centre-for-science-in-drug-policy.pdf Shelf Number: 136611 Keywords: CannabisDrug Abuse and AddictionDrug EnforcementDrug PolicyDrug ReformMarijuana |
Author: Mikos, Robert A. Title: On the Limits of Federal Supremacy: When States Relax (or Abandon) Marijuana Bans Summary: he American Constitution divides governmental power between the federal government and several state governments. In the event of a conflict between federal law and state law, the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution (Article VI, Clause 2P makes it clear that state policies are subordinate to federal policies. There are, however, important limitations to the doctrine of federal supremacy. First, there must be a valid constitutional basis for the federal policy in question. The powers of the federal government are limited and enumerated, and the president and Congress must always respect the boundary lines that the Constitution created. Second, even in the areas where federal authorities may enact law, they may not use the states as instruments of federal governance. This anti-commandeering limitation upon federal power is often overlooked, but the Supreme Court will enforce that principle in appropriate cases. Using medical marijuana as a case study, I examine how the anti-commandeering principle protects the states' prerogative to legalize activity that Congress bans. The federal government has banned marijuana outright, and for years federal officials have lobbied against local efforts to legalize medical use of the drug. However, an ever-growing number of states have adopted legalization measures. I explain why these state laws, and most related regulations, have not been-and cannot be-preempted by Congress. I also develop a new framework for analyzing the boundary between the proper exercise of federal supremacy and prohibited commandeering. Although I focus on medical marijuana, the legal analysis applies to any issue pitting permissive state laws against restrictive federal regulations. Recent referenda in Colorado and Washington that legalize the recreational use of marijuana for adults will likely prompt federal officials to respond by touting the supremacy of the federal ban and challenging the constitutionality of state efforts at legalization. Such state reforms should carry the day in the event of such a legal challenge. Details: Washington, DC: Cato Institute, 2012. 44p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 11, 2016 at: http://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/PA714.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/PA714.pdf Shelf Number: 137840 Keywords: Drug Control PolicyDrug PolicyMarijuanaMedical Marijuana |
Author: Lenton, Simon Title: The social supply of cannabis among young people in Australia Summary: Cannabis is the most prolifically used illicit drug in Australia, however, there is a gap in our understanding concerning the social interactions and friendships formed around its supply and use. The authors recruited cannabis users aged between 18 and 30 years throughout Australia, to explore the impact of supply routes on young users and their perceived notions of drug dealing in order to provide valuable insight into the influence that reciprocal relationships have on young peoples access to cannabis. Findings reveal that the supply of cannabis revolves around pre-existing connections and relationships formed through associates known to be able to readily source cannabis. It was found that motivations for proffering cannabis in a shared environment were related more to developing social capital than to generating financial gain. Given this, often those involved in supply do not perceive that they are breaking the law or that they are 'dealers'. This social supply market appears to be built on trust and social interactions and, as such, presents several challenges to law enforcement. It is suggested that there would be benefit in providing targeted education campaigns to combat social supply dealing among young adults. Details: Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology, December 2015. 6p. Source: Internet Resource: Trends & issues in crime and criminal justice no. 503: Accessed March 2, 2016 at: http://aic.gov.au/media_library/publications/tandi_pdf/tandi503.pdf Year: 2015 Country: Australia URL: http://aic.gov.au/media_library/publications/tandi_pdf/tandi503.pdf Shelf Number: 138010 Keywords: CannabisDrug Abuse and AddictionDrug DealingDrug MarketsIllicit DrugsMarijuana |
Author: Reed, Jack K. Title: Marijuana Legalization in Colorado: Early Findings. A Report Pursuant to Senate Bill 13-283 Summary: In 2013, following the passage of Amendment 64 which allows for the retail sale and possession of marijuana, the Colorado General Assembly enacted Senate Bill 13-283. This bill mandated the Division of Criminal Justice in the Department of Public Safety to conduct a study of the impacts of Amendment 64, particularly as these relate to law enforcement activities. This report seeks to establish and present the baseline measures for the metrics specified in S.B. 13-283, codified as C.R.S. 24-33.4-516. The majority of the information presented here should be considered pre-commercialization, baseline data because much of the information is available only through 2014, and data sources vary considerably in terms of what exists historically. Consequently, it is too early to draw any conclusions about the potential effects of marijuana legalization or commercialization on public safety, public health, or youth outcomes, and this may always be difficult due to the lack of historical data. Furthermore, the information presented here should be interpreted with caution. The decreasing social stigma regarding marijuana use could lead individuals to be more likely to report use on surveys and to health workers in emergency departments and poison control centers, making marijuana use appear to increase when perhaps it has not. Finally, law enforcement officials and prosecuting attorneys continue to struggle with enforcement of the complex and sometimes conflicting marijuana laws that remain. Thus, the lack of pre-commercialization data, the decreasing social stigma, and challenges to law enforcement combine to make it difficult to translate these early findings into definitive statements of outcomes. Details: Denver, CO: Colorado Division of Criminal Justice, Department of Public Safety, 2016. 147p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 23, 2016 at: http://cdpsdocs.state.co.us/ors/docs/reports/2016-SB13-283-Rpt.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://cdpsdocs.state.co.us/ors/docs/reports/2016-SB13-283-Rpt.pdf Shelf Number: 138798 Keywords: Drug Abuse and AddictionDrug Abuse and CrimeDrug Law EnforcementDrug LegalizationDrug PolicyMarijuanaOrganized Crime |
Author: Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse Title: Cannabis Regulation: Lessons Learned in Colorado and Washington State Summary: In November 2012, Colorado and Washington state became the first two US states to legalize the personal possession and retail sale of cannabis. The two states developed regulatory frameworks with many common features (e.g., minimum purchase age of 21, ban on public use), and some key differences. For example, Washington bans personal production, while Colorado permits up to five plants per household. The two states began with different contexts: Colorado had a well-established, regulated medical distribution system to build on, and Washington had no existing regulated supply. Retail sales began on January 1, 2014, in Colorado and on July 8, 2014, in Washington. To learn from evidence and experience about the legalization of cannabis for non-therapeutic use and its health, social, economic and public safety impacts, the Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse (CCSA) led delegations to Colorado (February 2015) and Washington state (August 2015). The delegations consisted of partners from public health, treatment and enforcement sectors. The goal was to inform the ongoing dialogue about policy options for the regulation of cannabis in Canada and internationally by observing the effects of the various models and approaches in the two states. The aim was not to take a position on the question of legalization, but to collect the best available information to support evidence-informed policy advice. To this end, the delegation met with stakeholders from a range of perspectives, including public health, regulation, government, enforcement, prevention and the cannabis industry. The overarching lesson that emerged during discussions with stakeholders was that any jurisdiction considering policy change should identify a clear purpose to drive the overall approach. In other words, begin by defining the problem to be solved and the goals to be achieved. Colorado and Washington had to develop a comprehensive regulatory framework taking a substance from criminal prohibition to retail sales. Any new regulatory system for cannabis needs to address considerations across health, public health, enforcement, criminal justice, social and economic sectors. It must account for the administration, monitoring and enforcement of all processes, including production, processing, sales, advertising and taxation. The framework also has to coordinate federal, state, district and municipal orders of government, and their respective roles in such areas as enforcement, taxation and health care. The CCSA delegation learned the following key lessons about developing a regulatory framework from stakeholders: - Reconcile medical and retail markets to promote consistency in such areas as purchase quantities and administration, and to reduce the scope of the grey market, which is the market for products produced or distributed in ways that are unauthorized or unregulated, but not strictly illegal; - Be prepared to respond to the unexpected, such as the overconsumption of edibles in Colorado and an unmanageable volume of licensing applications within a limited time frame in Washington state; - Control product formats and concentrations to ensure there are no unanticipated consequences from unregulated formats and concentrations; - Prevent commercialization through taxation, rigorous state regulation and monitoring, and controls on advertising and promotion; and - Prevent use by youth by controlling access and investing in effective health promotion, prevention, awareness and education for both youth and parents. The need to invest in effective implementation was a common message of stakeholders in both Colorado and Washington. They highlighted the value of allocating a portion of funds generated through retail sales to education, prevention, treatment and research. They also emphasized the need to ensure proactive investment to build capacity before the new regulations are implemented and retail sales begin. These investments fall into several common themes: - Take the time required to develop an effective framework for implementation and to prepare for a successful launch; (Colorado stakeholders recommended taking longer than the one-year period provided in that state. There is also a need to give retailers time to develop capacity to meet consumer demand. Washington stakeholders encountered price escalation as retailers struggled to obtain or produce product within two months of receiving licenses.) - Develop the capacity to administer the regulatory framework, recognizing that a significant investment in staff and administration is required to process licenses, conductcomprehensive inspections and address violations; - Provide strong central leadership and promote collaboration to bring diverse partners to the table from the beginning and to promote open, consistent communication and collaborative problem-solving; - Invest proactively in a public health approach that builds capacity in prevention, education and treatment before implementation to minimize negative health and social impacts associated with cannabis use; - Develop a clear, comprehensive communication strategy to convey details of the regulations prior to implementation, so that the public and other stakeholders understand what is permitted, as well as the risks and harms associated with use, so that individuals can make informed choices; - Ensure consistent enforcement of regulations by investing in training and tools for those responsible for enforcement, particularly to prevent and address impaired driving and diversion to youth, and to control the black market; - Invest in research to establish the evidence base underlying the regulations, and to address gaps in knowledge, such as new and emerging trends and patterns of use; and - Conduct rigorous, ongoing data collection, including gathering baseline data, to monitor the impact of the regulatory framework and inform gradual change to best meet policy objectives and reduce negative impacts. In summary, the consistent message CCSA heard was that any jurisdiction considering regulatory changes to cannabis policy should take the time to set up the infrastructure and allocate the resources needed to get it right, assess impacts along the way and make incremental changes, as needed. Details: Ottawa: Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse, 2015. 23p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 4, 2016 at: http://www.ccsa.ca/Resource%20Library/CCSA-Cannabis-Regulation-Lessons-Learned-Report-2015-en.pdf Year: 2015 Country: Canada URL: http://www.ccsa.ca/Resource%20Library/CCSA-Cannabis-Regulation-Lessons-Learned-Report-2015-en.pdf Shelf Number: 138920 Keywords: CannabisDrug PolicyDrug UseMarijuanaMarijuana Legalization |
Author: Canada. Task Force on Marijuana Legalization and Regulation Title: Toward the Legalization, Regulation and Restriction of Access to Marijuana - Discussion Paper Summary: In the 2015 Speech from the Throne, the Government of Canada committed to legalizing, regulating, and restricting access to marijuana. The current approach to marijuana prohibition is not working: - Youth continue to use marijuana at rates among the highest in the world. - Thousands of Canadians end up with criminal records for non-violent drug offences each year. - Organized crime reaps billions of dollars in profits from its sale. - Most Canadians no longer believe that simple marijuana possession should be subject to harsh criminal sanctions, and support the Government's commitment to legalize, tax and regulate marijuana. The Government understands the complexity of this challenge and the need to take the time to get it right. The Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, supported by the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness and the Minister of Health, has created a Task Force on Marijuana Legalization and Regulation ("the Task Force"). The Task Force is mandated to engage with provincial, territorial and municipal governments, Indigenous governments and representative organizations, youth, and experts in relevant fields, including but not limited to: public health, substance abuse, criminal justice, law enforcement, economics, and industry and those groups with expertise in production, distribution and sales. The Task Force will provide advice on the design of a new framework. The Task Force will receive submissions from interested parties, including individual Canadians, consult widely, listen and learn, and commission any necessary focussed research to support its work. It is supported by a federal secretariat and will report back to the three Ministers on behalf of the Government in November 2016, on a date to be determined by the Ministers. This Discussion Paper is designed to support consultations led by the Task Force. Its goal is to support a focussed dialogue. Details: Ottawa: Government of Canada, 2016. 27p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 20, 2016 at: http://healthycanadians.gc.ca/health-system-systeme-sante/consultations/legalization-marijuana-legalisation/alt/legalization-marijuana-legalisation-eng.pdf Year: 2016 Country: Canada URL: http://healthycanadians.gc.ca/health-system-systeme-sante/consultations/legalization-marijuana-legalisation/alt/legalization-marijuana-legalisation-eng.pdf Shelf Number: 139718 Keywords: Drug Abuse and AddictionDrug Reform PolicyMarijuanaMarijuana Legalization |
Author: Ragany, Meghan Title: Racial Disparity in Marijuana Policing in New Orleans Summary: In national research, self-reported marijuana use is similar across races, but in New Orleans, black people are disproportionately arrested for marijuana offenses, including simple possession. In recent years, some states have legalized marijuana, while the consequences for marijuana possession in Louisiana remain severe-under state law, repeated convictions for simple possession are punishable by multi-year prison sentences. This report illuminates through quantitative analysis the persistent racial disparities in marijuana policing from 2010 - 2015 and discusses the impacts of statutory and policy reforms the city has implemented to date. We are hopeful that these findings will guide state and local policymakers toward further improvements to lessen the harm even seemingly minor police encounters inflict on black communities, and inspire other jurisdictions to examine their own practices. Details: New Orleans: Vera Institute of Justice, 2016. 24p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 21, 2016 at: https://storage.googleapis.com/vera-web-assets/downloads/Publications/racial-disparity-in-marijuana-policing-in-new-orleans/legacy_downloads/Racial-Disparity-Marijuana-Policing-Report-Web-July-2016.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: https://storage.googleapis.com/vera-web-assets/downloads/Publications/racial-disparity-in-marijuana-policing-in-new-orleans/legacy_downloads/Racial-Disparity-Marijuana-Policing-Report-Web-July-2016.pdf Shelf Number: 139756 Keywords: Drug EnforcementMarijuanaRacial DisparitiesRacial Profiling in Law Enforcement |
Author: Mungan, Murat C. Title: Gateway Crimes Summary: Many who argue against the legalization of marijuana suggest that while its consumption may not be very harmful, marijuana indirectly causes significant social harm by acting as a "gateway drug," a drug whose consumption facilitates the use of other, more harmful, drugs. This article presents a theory of "gateway crimes", which, perhaps counter-intuitively, implies that there are social gains to decriminalizing offenses that cause minor harms, including marijuana-related offenses. A typical gateway crime is an act which is punished lightly, but, because it is designated as a crime, being convicted for committing it leads one to be severely stigmatized. People who are stigmatized have less to lose by committing more serious crimes, and, therefore, the criminalization of these acts increases recidivism. Thus, punishing "gateway crimes" may generate greater costs than benefits, and this possibility must be kept in mind when discussing potential criminal justice reforms. This "gateway effect" does not require that, but, is strongest when, people underestimate, or ignore, either the likelihood or magnitude of the consequences associated with being convicted for a minor crime. Therefore, - if potential offenders in fact underestimate expected conviction costs - this theory not only implies previously unidentified benefits associated with decriminalizing acts that cause questionable or minor harms, but also benefits associated with making the costs associated with convictions more transparent. Details: Arlington, VA: George Mason University, Antonin Scalia Law School, 2016. 43p. Source: Internet Resource: George Mason Law & Economics Research Paper No. 16-36 : Accessed September 2, 2016 at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2827880 Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2827880 Shelf Number: 140113 Keywords: Criminal CareersDrug AbuseGateway EffectsMarijuanarecidivism |
Author: Kane-Willis, Kathleen Title: Patchwork Policy: an evaluation of arrests and tickets for marijuana misdemeanors in Illinois Summary: Nationally, the conversation around marijuana has changed significantly. More than 75% of Americans support measures that would end criminal sanctions for those in possession of small amounts of marijuana. According to polling data released in 2014, 63% of Illinois voters support a marijuana decriminalization bill. Despite these changing attitudes, Illinois's dubious distinctions in terms of marijuana possession arrests is evident in nearly every metric when compared with other states and the national average: - Illinois ranked 5th nationally in the number of arrests for marijuana possession in 2010; - Of the 5 states with the largest number of marijuana possession arrests from 2001 to 2010, Illinois' rate of arrest increased the fastest, by nearly one-third ; - Illinois tied with Texas for 1st place for the proportion of marijuana possession arrests (97.8%) compared to all marijuana arrests and including sales, manufacturing, and delivery arrests; - Illinois ranked fourth in the nation for the rate of arrests for marijuana possession per 100K; - Illinois's marijuana possession arrest rate is more than 150% higher than the national average; - Illinois ranked third in the nation for the black to white racial disparity of marijuana possession offenders, despite the fact that marijuana use is the same between these two groups; - In Illinois, African Americans were about 7.6 times more likely to be arrested than whites; - Cook County made the most marijuana possession arrests of any county in the nation with 33,068 arrests in 2010 and also had one of the worst racial disparity rates in the nation; - Illinois' estimated spending for marijuana possession ranged from $78 million to $364 million per year on marijuana possession arrests and adjudications. In Illinois, 84% of all marijuana arrests are for misdemeanor possession and these arrests represent a sizable portion of arrests within the state. For example: - Three year averages for marijuana misdemeanor arrests from 2010-2013 are over 41,000 per year; - In comparison to FBI index crimes, arrests for marijuana misdemeanors were equivalent to 50% of arrests for all index crimes, that is serious and violent crimes; - Compared to all drug arrests, marijuana misdemeanor arrests make up 39% of drug arrests - including sales and possession of controlled substances - in the state of Illinois; - Of marijuana misdemeanor arrests, 85% of arrests were for possession of cannabis totaling less than 10 grams. As part of these changing attitudes, over 100 Illinois municipalities have passed ordinances that provide ticketing alternatives for small amounts of marijuana. Arrests however, can still be made under state law allowing law enforcement personnel to choose between arresting or ticketing individuals in possession of marijuana. An analysis of pre and post ordinance implementation arresting patterns found: - Of the four municipalities reviewed, Chicago had the smallest decrease in arrests, with arrests declining by only 21% while Evanston had the largest decrease (46%); - Marijuana misdemeanor arrests decreased by 40% in Urbana and by over 32% in Yorkville. In order to understand the level of ticketing to arrests within each municipality, we calculated the ratio of tickets to arrests in six municipalities. Large differences were found between cities: - Countryside had the highest level of implementation, with 88% of marijuana possession violations resulted in tickets; - In Champaign, 75% of marijuana misdemeanor offenders received a ticket instead of arrest; - In Evanston, 69% of misdemeanor marijuana possession violations resulted in a ticket; - Urbana was slightly more likely to arrest than administer a ticket for marijuana possession (59% v. 41%); - In Chicago, 93% of misdemeanor marijuana possession violations resulted in an arrest and in only 7% of cases a ticket was issued; Since ticketing has been identified as a way of possibly reducing the negative impact of disproportionate minority contact (DMC), we assessed municipalities that provided race and ethnicity data: - Study results indicated no real change in DMC after ticketing ordinances were implemented; - Individuals receiving the tickets appeared to be a subset of those arrested; - Yorkville showed little disproportionate minority contact prior to and after ticketing, while Evanston demonstrated high levels of DMC. Arrest and ticket rate per 100,000 individuals was calculated in order to formulate accurate comparisons between municipalities of varying population sizes: - Chicago had the highest arrest rate of any municipality in the study, even after the ordinance was implemented, with nearly 590 arrests per 100,000 individuals; - Chicago was the only municipality studied with a marijuana arrest rate higher than the state rate, specifically 150% higher than the state average; and more than 230% higher than the U.S. rate; - Evanston had the lowest arrest rate with 128 arrests per 100,000 individuals; The sizable difference between Chicago's arrest rate and the rates of other municipalities warranted additional analyses. The number of arrests made in Chicago for marijuana misdemeanors drives state totals: - In 2011, Chicago's misdemeanor arrest comprised almost 50% of the state total; - Despite the decrease from 2011 - 2013, the number of arrests was still disarmingly high in 2013, comprising 38% of Illinois total misdemeanor arrests; - Additionally, the decrease in arrests did not represent a fundamental shift - both in 2001 and 2002, marijuana misdemeanor arrests were lower than in the most recent year (2013). Arguments for the ticketing ordinance were focused on police time and costs. We calculated the amount of time and costs spent on marijuana arrests after the ticket was implemented and found: - In 2013, Chicago police spent from 24,000 hours to 63,000 hours arresting marijuana misdemeanants; - In 2013, the costs associated with misdemeanor marijuana arrests ranged from $25 million to upwards of $115 million dollars after the passage of the ticketing ordinance; - If misdemeanor arrests were reduced by half, potential costs savings range from $12.5 million to $57.9 million; if the number of arrests dropped by three quarters, estimated costs savings range between $18.8 million to $86.9 million per year. The low number of tickets given in Chicago in 2013 (only 1,100) resulted in a significant amount of lost revenue: - The amount of revenue generated for 2013 from marijuana tickets was small, around $416,250; - If half of the number of arrests were charged as tickets, the revenue generated would be closer to $2.9 million and if three-quarters of arrest resulted in tickets, the revenue generated would be more than $4.5 million per year. Marijuana misdemeanor rates within community areas prior to and after the implementation of the Chicago ticketing ordinance were also analyzed: - Geographic disparity by community area was found even after the ticketing ordinance was implemented, with marijuana possession rates that are more than 1100% above the national average; - After the ticketing ordinance was implemented, disparities in neighborhood arrest rates increased, for example Fuller Park, East Garfield Park, and West Garfield Park had arrest rates that were 7 times higher than the city of Chicago's average rate; - Compared to the Edison Park (the neighborhood with the lowest arrest rate), neighborhoods such as Fuller Park, East and West Garfield Park had marijuana arrest rates that were more than 150 times higher after implementing the ticket ordinance; - Neighborhoods with a large African American population were found to be predictive of high arrest rates for marijuana misdemeanor arrests (p < .001). Findings Inconsistencies in the implementation of ticketing legislation are the result of disparities in ticket administration from one community area to the next. Discrepancies in the application of the tickets by geography create a patchwork system of policy resulting in an unequal application of justice. Because a two-tiered system still exists, police retain discretion and can choose who to ticket and who to arrest. Geography, not justice, determines whether marijuana possession results in a fine or an arrest. Details: Chicago: Illinois Consortium on Drug Policy, 2014. 79p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 15, 2016 at: https://www.roosevelt.edu/CAS/CentersAndInstitutes/IMA/ICDP.aspx Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: https://www.roosevelt.edu/CAS/CentersAndInstitutes/IMA/ICDP.aspx Shelf Number: 147873 Keywords: ArrestsDrug AddictsDrug OffendersMarijuanaMisdemeanors |
Author: Mungan, Murat C. Title: Stigma Dilution and Over-Criminalization Summary: Criminalizing an act that provides weak signals about a person's productivity and character can dilute the stigma attached to having a criminal record. This reduces the deterrence of serious crimes that do provide strong signals regarding the offender's character. Over-criminalization occurs when the costs associated with reduced deterrence due to stigma dilution off-set potential benefits associated with criminalizing the less harmful act. Identifying conditions under which stigma dilution is likely and comparatively costly allows the determination of factors that affect the desirability of (de)criminalizing various acts. These factors are discussed in the context of marijuana possession offenses to illustrate how over-criminalization may reduce social welfare. The normative desirability of various practices in criminal law are also discussed vis-a-vis their impacts on stigma dilution. Details: Tallahassee: Florida State University College of Law, 2015. 26p. Source: Internet Resource: FSU College of Law, Public Law Research Paper No. 717; FSU College of Law, Law, Business & Economics Paper No. 14-16 : Accessed October 8, 2016 at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2534828 Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2534828 Shelf Number: 145078 Keywords: Criminal RecordsDecriminalizationDrug PolicyExpungementsMarijuana |
Author: LeCroy & Milligan Associates, Inc. Title: Marijuana and Prescription Drug Misuse and Abuse in Arizona Summary: Recent national attention focusing on the heroin epidemic, reported increases in marijuana and prescription drug misuse and abuse among youth and recent policy shifts in our state1 have raised concerns among some policymakers and the public about the extent of the problem in Arizona and the implications for our communities. For example, data relating to Arizona high school students indicate steady increases in the percentage of 12th grade students reporting marijuana use in the past 30 days. In 2014, this percentage reached a five-year high of 23% among Arizona 12th graders, up from 18% in 2010. Nearly half (45%) of Arizona 12th grade students also reported using marijuana at least once in their lifetime, with little change occurring over the past five years. Similar trends can be seen among Arizona undergraduate students (ages 18-25), with annual increases reported in marijuana use in the past 30 days (increased from 15% in 2010 to 19% in 2014). Furthermore, Arizona has experienced steady increases in the rates of marijuana and opioid related emergency department and hospital visits. In response to these trends, the Governor's Office of Youth, Faith and Family (GOYFF) requested data from the Arizona Substance Abuse Epidemiology Work Group regarding marijuana and prescription drug misuse and abuse. The Substance Abuse Epidemiology Work Group is a formal work group of the Arizona Substance Abuse Partnership (ASAP). The purpose of the report is to provide data on the current state of marijuana and prescription drug misuse and abuse in Arizona and, where data exists, show how Arizona compares to trends at the national and regional levels. This represents a first of its kind report for Arizona. The executive summary highlights key findings from descriptive data gathered across seven areas of interest for the Epidemiology Work Group. Details: Tucson, AZ: LeCroy & Milligan Associates, 2016. 63p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 14, 2016 at: http://www.lecroymilligan.com/data/resources/finalgoyff20160603-1.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://www.lecroymilligan.com/data/resources/finalgoyff20160603-1.pdf Shelf Number: 144805 Keywords: Drug Abuse and AddictionMarijuanaPrescription Drug Abuse |
Author: Phillips, Mary T. Title: Misdemeanor Marijuana Arrests New York City 2012-2014 Summary: Changes in the handling of arrests for possession of small amounts of marijuana have taken place at a rapid pace in New York City during the past several years. This report examines some of those changes and their impact on volume and outcomes in misdemeanor marijuana possession arrests. The research also addresses the impact of these changes on ethnic disparities in marijuana arrests and outcomes. The study focuses on arrests for criminal possession of marijuana in the fifth degree, which is a class B misdemeanor under Penal Law §221.10. Persons found in possession of any amount of marijuana, either "open to public view" or "burning" (i.e., being smoked), can be charged under subsection 1 of this law. Possession of more than 25 grams of marijuana is a crime under subsection 2 of the law, which does not require the marijuana to be in public view or burning. In 2014, over 98% of misdemeanor arrests for marijuana possession in New York City were made under PL 221.10. For years this has been the single most frequent criminal offense in the City, with steadily rising arrest volume during much of the past decade. In 2010 and 2011, well over 40,000 cases with a top arrest charge of PL 221.10 were prosecuted each year (Phillips 2014, Table 1). A series of policy shifts beginning in late 2011 reversed this trend, reducing the volume of arrests for misdemeanor marijuana possession and according more lenient treatment to the arrests that were made. In September 2011, in the wake of public criticism of the NYPD's "stop" and "frisk" practices, Police Commissioner Raymond W. Kelly issued a directive instructing officers not to make arrests for small amounts of marijuana unless it is in public view - by the suspects' own volition (Harris 2011). This was aimed at allegations that police officers were ordering suspects to empty their pockets during "stop" and "frisk" operations, and then arresting them if any marijuana was displayed as a result. Although it was framed as a reminder of existing policy rather than a new policy, the directive was followed by a steep decline in the volume of marijuana possession arrests in every borough (Phillips 2014, Tables 1 & 2). In May 2013, the final year of the Bloomberg administration, a new policy directed the police to issue a Desk Appearance Ticket (DAT) in all arrests with a top charge of PL 221.10, as long as the defendant produced adequate identification and had no outstanding warrants. The marijuana DAT policy initiative was aimed at reducing the proportion of low-level marijuana arrests in which the defendant was taken into custody, rather than reducing arrest volume. Since the 1960s the NYPD has routinely issued DATs for a limited number of misdemeanor offenses, historically including large numbers of suspects charged with PL 221.10. A suspect who qualifies for a DAT on the basis of the charge and other criteria is taken to the precinct house for an eligibility check and, if additional eligibility criteria are met, the person is released with a ticket instructing him or her to appear in court for arraignment on a future date, several weeks to several months later. (See Phillips 2014 for a detailed description of charge and other eligibility criteria for DATs.) The proportion of 221.10 prosecuted arrests in which a DAT was issued had been rising prior to 2013 - from 13% in 2003 to 50% in 2012 (ibid., Figure 7) - and the prospect of further extending DATs to virtually all arrests for this offense led to predictions of skyrocketing DAT volume. Those predictions turned out to be inaccurate, for reasons that will be explored in this report. A year and a half after implementation of the DAT policy, a new administration announced yet another policy change. In November 2014 the new mayor, Bill de Blasio, and his new police commissioner, William J. Bratton, announced that suspects found in possession of 25 grams or less of marijuana "in a public place and open to public view" would no longer be arrested, as long as the person was not charged with additional fingerprintable offenses. Instead, these suspects would be issued a Criminal Court summons (summons, - also known as a "pink slip") and charged with a non-criminal violation, PL 221.05. Burning is still subject to arrest for 221.10 under the new policy, as is the possession of a small amount "in a manner that is inconsistent with personal use" (NYPD 2014). Persons found with more than 25 grams (and less than 2 ounces) of marijuana are also still subject to arrest under subsection 2 of PL 221.10. The marijuana summons policy was hailed by The New York Times as "the most significant criminal justice policy initiative by Mr. de Blasio since he was sworn in as mayor" (Baker 2014). Many people hoped that it would alleviate widely acknowledged ethnic disparities in low-level marijuana arrests, which disproportionately fall on black and Latino men. One columnist called the new policy a "sledgehammer" that the administration is now swinging at entrenched racism in the system (Dwyer 2014). The summons policy was not greeted with universal acclaim, however, even by some advocates of more lenient treatment for marijuana offenders. Brooklyn District Attorney Kenneth P. Thompson, whose office had been refusing to prosecute many marijuana possession arrests for months (Clifford & Goldstein 2014), objected that by issuing a summons instead of making an arrest, the police were undercutting his prosecutorial discretion (Baker 2014; Goldstein 2014; Mora 2014). This argument pointed to an unintended consequence of the initiative: cases that would have been dismissed by prosecutors under the old policy now go directly to summons court with no prosecutorial review. Other concerns included a lack of due process in summons court and the inability to monitor ethnic disparity because ethnicity is not collected on the summons form. These and other reservations about the summons policy were summarized in a press release from the Drug Policy Alliance, an advocacy organization for drug law reform, which nonetheless remained "cautiously optimistic" (Drug Policy Alliance 2015). A New York Times editorial declared that getting a summons is "better than being arrested" but expressed skepticism about the overall merits of the reform because it "does not reach the fundamental problem of discriminatory policing." The editorial also expressed concern about exposing people to arrest for missing court dates, and lack of transparency in the summons court system (New York Times, 2014). How has the court system been affected by these policy changes? Although many aspects of the policies' impact lie beyond the scope of this study, we can provide a preliminary assessment of two major parameters: arrest volume and DAT issuance for 221.10 offenses. In the months following November 2014, we anticipated a downturn in marijuana arrest volume but - because the marijuana summons policy does not extend to burning or to arrests under subsection 2 - it was difficult to guess how low the volume would go. (Neither the subsection nor the factual allegations for an arrest are collected in the CJA database, making it impossible to distinguish open view from burning, or from possession of over 25 grams.) We also anticipated a slump in the DAT issuance rate after November 2014 because summonses would go primarily to those who previously would have received a DAT. Some factors that would disqualify a person from receiving a summons - an active warrant or lack of adequate identification, for example - are also disqualifying factors for a DAT. This suggests that if a summons is not issued in a marijuana possession arrest, a DAT will not be issued, either, unless the summons was denied because burning was involved, the amount was over 25 grams, or the suspect was charged with another finger-printable offense. Any of these three factors would disqualify a person from a summons, but a DAT could be issued. Finally, any analysis of recent marijuana arrest volume needs to take into account an anomalous period of about three weeks from late December 2014 to mid-January 2015. The killing of two police officers on December 20, 2014 - and the Mayor's perceived lack of support for the NYPD in the aftermath of those killings - triggered a work slowdown by the police that decreased the number of all arrests to a fraction of normal volume in the weeks that followed. The slowdown did not target marijuana offenses specifically, but our analysis shows that 221.10 arrests dropped by over 80% during this period). Details: New York: New York City Criminal Justice Agency, 2015. 67p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 26, 2016 at: www.nycja.org Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: www.nycja.org Shelf Number: 146015 Keywords: ArrestsDrug OffendersDrug PolicyMarijuanaMisdemeanors |
Author: Garat, Guillermo Title: Paraguay: The cannabis breadbasket of the Southern Cone: A focus on the largest cannabis producer in South America Summary: Key Points - Paraguay is the principal producer of cannabis in South America. Despite its importance as a supplier of cannabis in South America, there has been a surprising absence of serious studies of its impact on its own society, and on the play of offer and demand in neighbouring countries. - After 40 years of an intense "war on drugs", there are now eight departments involved in the business, with spiralling homicide rates, an absence of state policy intervention, drug traffickers infiltrated into local political structures, and millions of dollars which are shared out by terrorist organizations, a new chain of services connected to the illicit trade, and - to a much lesser extent - small farmers suffocated by repeated crises. - Contradictions in productive structures, the lack of agrarian policies, poverty and the absence of perspectives for the rural population led to a gradual, and progressively more blatant, adoption of cannabis cultivation by young. Over time, growing cannabis became one of the few viable economic prospects for large sectors of the population. - Intermediaries who manage contacts with the buyers on the border with Brazil, employ young people to grow, protect, harvest, dry, press, package and even transport the cannabis - not just within Paraguay, but even into nearby countries, using the limited means at their disposal, such as their shoulders, bicycles and motorbikes. - The use of cannabis is looked down on by the general population, particularly in rural areas, and even in the communities where it is grown, it is commonly referred to as the "demon weed" (hierba maldita). Lifetime use of cannabis in Paraguay is the second lowest in all Latin America, only 0.4% admitting to having tried it. - Some politicians, government officials, civil society organisations and farmers' organisations see the benefit of the regulation of the cannabis market in Paraguay, but the debate is still incipient. Details: Bonn, Germany: Friedrich Ebert Stiftung, 2016. 29p. Source: Internet Resource: Drug Policy Briefing, no. 46: Accessed November 2, 2016 at: https://www.tni.org/files/publication-downloads/drug_policy_briefing_46.pdf Year: 2016 Country: Paraguay URL: https://www.tni.org/files/publication-downloads/drug_policy_briefing_46.pdf Shelf Number: 145004 Keywords: CannabisDrug MarketsDrug PolicyDrug TraffickingIllicit TradeMarijuanaWar on Drugs |
Author: Robertson, Robyn Title: Cannabis and Road Safety: Policy Challenges Summary: Drugged driving and strategies to address the problem have been increasingly recognized as a priority in the past decade. Coordinated action across law enforcement, transportation and health sectors at Federal and provincial/territorial levels is needed to keep Canadians safe on our roads. The focus of this study was to identify key strategies, relevant issues, and implementation plans to help inform the development of drugged driving strategies. A total of 46 individuals, that included line staff and managers in 25 agencies representing Federal and provincial stakeholders, were interviewed. Topics explored included: research, laws and penalties, implementation strategies, public perceptions and education, and metrics and evaluation. These results provide practical insight into the knowledge and tools that are needed to help stakeholders address this issue, and the remaining barriers that must be overcome to ensure road safety enhancements. Prevention strategies require adequate resources in the form of capacity, time and funding to support the necessary large-scale modifications to road safety policies and programs to reinforce the emphasis on safety underscored by the Federal government. Details: Ottawa: Traffic Injury Research Foundation, 2016. 30p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 14, 2016 at: http://www.tirf.ca/publications/PDF_publications/TIRF_DruggedDriving_Policy%20Challenges_12_published.pdf Year: 2016 Country: Canada URL: http://www.tirf.ca/publications/PDF_publications/TIRF_DruggedDriving_Policy%20Challenges_12_published.pdf Shelf Number: 146647 Keywords: Driving Under the InfluenceDrugged DrivingMarijuana |
Author: Westermaier, Franz G. Title: The Impact of Lengthening the School Day on Substance Abuse and Crime: Evidence from a German High School Reform Summary: In the 2000s, a major educational reform in Germany reduced the academic high school duration by one year while keeping constant the total number of instructional hours before graduation. The instructional hours from the eliminated school year shifted to lower grade levels, which increased the time younger students spend at school. This study explores the impact of the reform on youth crime rates and substance abuse using administrative police crime statistics, administrative student enrollment data, and a student drug survey. The staggered implementation of the reform in different Lander -age-groups allows for a difference-in-difference approach. I find that the reform resulted in a decline in crime rates, which is almost exclusively driven by a reduction in violent crime and illegal substance abuse. Regarding the latter, the rate of illegal cannabis consumption strongly declined; however, no significant effect is detected on cannabis dealers or the consumption of other illegal drugs. The survey evidence further suggests that decreased cannabis consumption was not driven by a shift of consumption into 'school hours'. The results point to an 'incapacitation' effect of schooling due to the increased instructional hours at lower grade levels. Details: Berlin: DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, 2016. 34p. Source: Internet Resource: Discussion Papers no. 1616: Accessed November 17, 2016 at: https://www.diw.de/documents/publikationen/73/diw_01.c.546486.de/dp1616.pdf Year: 2016 Country: Germany URL: https://www.diw.de/documents/publikationen/73/diw_01.c.546486.de/dp1616.pdf Shelf Number: 144857 Keywords: Crime RatesDrug Abuse and CrimeMarijuanaSchool ReformSubstance Abuse |
Author: High Intensity Drug Trafficking Program Title: Marijuana's Impact on California. California High Intensity Drug Trafficking Report Summary: A growing number of California residents are interested in removing barriers to recreational marijuana use, and this paper will outline the current state of marijuana policy in California and the potential impacts of further legalizing marijuana use. Section One, The Science on Marijuana Marijuana is the most abused illicit drug in the world, but the gap between the science on marijuana and the common perception of marijuana has never been greater. Section Two, California Youth Marijuana Use In 2013, California was ranked 20th in current use among youth, and by 2014 California was ranked 11th in the country. The state's largest average increase in youth past 30-day use of marijuana coincided with the proliferation of marijuana dispensaries in the state; at that time, California’s youth use rate was already 29% higher than the national average. Section Three, California Schools Due to a new program, school expulsion rates in California have greatly decreased, even though the number of students who are caught with drugs has not declined. Section Four, California Marijuana Use Ages 18-25 In 2012 and 2013, adult marijuana use for California adults aged 18-25 years was 22% compared to the national average of 19%. Section Five, Marijuana-Related Emergency Department Visits and Hospital Admissions From 2010 to 2014, after marijuana dispensaries began to proliferate, there was a 116% increase in Emergency Department visits and admissions for any related marijuana use. Marijuana-related exposures for young children (0-5 years old) also increased 513% between 2005 and 2015. During the same time there was a 139% increase among children 6-19 years old. Section Six, Treatment From 2005 to 2015, the rate of admissions to drug treatment programs for marijuana abuse remained steady – so did the fact that teens and young adults make up the largest proportion of people admitted for treatment. Section Seven, California Impaired Driving From 2005 to 2014, total statewide traffic fatalities decreased 29% in California, but fatalities involving drivers testing positive for marijuana increased 17%. Section Eight, Diversion More interdiction events, including those by the United States Postal Service (USPS) Inspection Service, resulted in seized marijuana originating from California than from any other state. Details: s.l.: California High Intensity Drug Trafficking Program, 2016. 65p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed December 20, 2016 at: https://learnaboutsam.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/CA-MJ-IMPACT-REPORT-FINAL1.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: https://learnaboutsam.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/CA-MJ-IMPACT-REPORT-FINAL1.pdf Shelf Number: 147299 Keywords: Driving Under the InfluenceDrug Abuse and AddictionDrug TraffickingDrug TreatmentDrugged DrivingMarijuana |
Author: Canada. Task Force on Cannabis Legalization and Regulation Title: A Framework for the Legalization and Regulation of Cannabis in Canada Summary: On June 30, 2016, the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, and the Minister of Health announced the creation of a nine-member Task Force on Cannabis Legalization and Regulation (“the Task Force”). Our mandate was to consult and provide advice on the design of a new legislative and regulatory framework for legal access to cannabis, consistent with the Government’s commitment to “legalize, regulate, and restrict access.” To fulfill our mandate, we engaged with provincial, territorial and municipal governments, experts, patients, advocates, Indigenous governments and representative organizations, employers and industry. We heard from many other Canadians as well, including many young people, who participated in an online public consultation that generated nearly 30,000 submissions from individuals and organizations. The Task Force looked internationally (e.g., Colorado, Washington State, Uruguay) to learn from jurisdictions that have legalized cannabis for non-medical purposes, and we drew lessons from the way governments in Canada have regulated tobacco and alcohol, and cannabis for medical purposes. A Discussion Paper prepared by the Government, entitled “Toward the Legalization, Regulation and Restriction of Access to Marijuana,” informed the Task Force’s work and helped to focus the input of many of the people from whom we heard. The Discussion Paper identified nine public policy objectives. Chief among these are keeping cannabis out of the hands of children and youth and keeping profits out of the hands of organized crime. The Task Force set out guiding principles as the foundation of our advice to Ministers: protection of public health and safety, compassion, fairness, collaboration, a commitment to evidenceinformed policy and flexibility. In considering the experience of other jurisdictions and the views of experts, stakeholders and the public, we sought to strike a balance between implementing appropriate restrictions, in order to minimize the harms associated with cannabis use, and providing adult access to a regulated supply of cannabis while reducing the scope and scale of the illicit market and its social harms. Our recommendations reflect a public health approach to reduce harm and promote health. We also took a precautionary approach to minimize unintended consequences, given that the relevant evidence is often incomplete or inconclusive. Minimizing Harms of Use In taking a public health approach to the regulation of cannabis, the Task Force proposes measures that will maintain and improve the health of Canadians by minimizing the harms associated with cannabis use. This approach considers the risks associated with cannabis use, including the risks of developmental harms to youth; the risks associated with patterns of consumption, including frequent use and co-use of cannabis with alcohol and tobacco; the risks to vulnerable populations; and the risks related to interactions with the illicit market. In addition to considering scientific evidence and input from stakeholders, the Task Force examined how other jurisdictions have attempted to minimize harms of use. We examined a range of protective measures, including a minimum age of use, promotion and advertising restrictions, and packaging and labelling requirements for cannabis products. In order to minimize harms, the Task Force recommends that the federal government: f Set a national minimum age of purchase of 18, acknowledging the right of provinces and territories to harmonize it with their minimum age of purchase of alcohol f Apply comprehensive restrictions to the advertising and promotion of cannabis and related merchandise by any means, including sponsorship, endorsements and branding, similar to the restrictions on promotion of tobacco products f Allow limited promotion in areas accessible by adults, similar to those restrictions under the Tobacco Act f Require plain packaging for cannabis products that allows the following information on packages: company name, strain name, price, amounts of delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabidiol (CBD) and warnings and other labelling requirements f Impose strict sanctions on false or misleading promotion as well as promotion that encourages excessive consumption, where promotion is allowed f Require that any therapeutic claims made in advertising conform to applicable legislation f Resource and enable the detection and enforcement of advertising and marketing violations, including via traditional and social media f Prohibit any product deemed to be “appealing to children,” including products that resemble or mimic familiar food items, are packaged to look like candy, or packaged in bright colours or with cartoon characters or other pictures or images that would appeal to children f Require opaque, re-sealable packaging that is childproof or child-resistant to limit children’s access to any cannabis product f Additionally, for edibles: Z Implement packaging with standardized, single servings, with a universal THC symbol Z Set a maximum amount of THC per serving and per product f Prohibit mixed products, for example cannabis-infused alcoholic beverages or cannabis products with tobacco, nicotine or caffeine f Require appropriate labelling on cannabis products, including: Z Text warning labels (e.g., “KEEP OUT OF REACH OF CHILDREN”) Z Levels of THC and CBD Z For edibles, labelling requirements that apply to food and beverage products f Create a flexible legislative framework that could adapt to new evidence on specific product types, on the use of additives or sweeteners, or on specifying limits of THC or other components f Provide regulatory oversight for cannabis concentrates to minimize the risks associated with illicit production f Develop strategies to encourage consumption of less potent cannabis, including a price and tax scheme based on potency to discourage purchase of high-potency products f Require all cannabis products to include labels identifying levels of THC and CBD f Enable a flexible legislative framework that could adapt to new evidence to set rules for limits on THC or other components f Develop and implement factual public education strategies to inform Canadians as to risks of problematic use and lower-risk use guidance f Conduct the necessary economic analysis to establish an approach to tax and price that balances health protection with the goal of reducing the illicit market f Work with provincial and territorial governments to determine a tax regime that includes equitable distribution of revenues f Create a flexible system that can adapt tax and price approaches to changes within the marketplace f Commit to using revenue from cannabis as a source of funding for administration, education, research and enforcement f Design a tax scheme based on THC potency to discourage purchase of high-potency products f Implement as soon as possible an evidenceinformed public education campaign, targeted at the general population but with an emphasis on youth, parents and vulnerable populations f Co-ordinate messaging with provincial and territorial partners f Adapt educational messages as evidence and understanding of health risks evolve, working with provincial and territorial partners f Facilitate and monitor ongoing research on cannabis and impairment, considering implications for occupational health and safety policies f Work with existing federal, provincial and territorial bodies to better understand potential occupational health and safety issues related to cannabis impairment f Work with provinces, territories, employers and labour representatives to facilitate the development of workplace impairment policies The Task Force further recommends that: f In the period leading up to legalization, and thereafter on an ongoing basis, governments invest effort and resources in developing, implementing and evaluating broad, holistic prevention strategies to address the underlying risk factors and determinants of problematic cannabis use, such as mental illness and social marginalization f Governments commit to using revenue from cannabis regulation as a source of funding for prevention, education and treatment Details: Ottawa: Health Canada, 2016. 112p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed December 23, 2016 at: http://www.healthycanadians.gc.ca/task-force-marijuana-groupe-etude/framework-cadre/alt/framework-cadre-eng.pdf Year: 2016 Country: Canada URL: http://www.healthycanadians.gc.ca/task-force-marijuana-groupe-etude/framework-cadre/alt/framework-cadre-eng.pdf Shelf Number: 147805 Keywords: CannabisCannabis LegalizationDrug LegalizationDrug PolicyMarijuana |
Author: McCulloch, Lizzie Title: Black Sheep: An Investigation into Existing Support for Problematic Cannabis Use Summary: Black Sheep reveals that a legal regulated market would better support people experiencing problematic cannabis use as the sector is lacking a clear, effective strategy for linking people into support and guidance. With the current illegal and unregulated market reducing the visibility of cannabis users, practitioners have reported that "we're just fumbling around in the dark trying to find them". Among people showing signs of cannabis dependence, only 14.6% have ever received treatment, help or support specifically because of their drug use, and 5.5% had received this in the past six months. Details: London: Volteface, 2016. 38p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 7, 2017 at: http://volteface.me/app/uploads/2017/02/BlackSheeporiginal.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://volteface.me/app/uploads/2017/02/BlackSheeporiginal.pdf Shelf Number: 145130 Keywords: CannabisDrug Abuse and AdditionDrug DecriminalizationMarijuana |
Author: Smart Approaches to Marijuana (SAM) Title: Lessons Learned After 4 Years of Marijuana Legalization Summary: In the wake of multimillion-dollar political campaigns funded with out-of-state money, Colorado and Washington voted to legalize marijuana in November 2012. Though it would take more than a year to set up retail stores, personal use (in Colorado and Washington) and home cultivation (in Colorado, which includes giving away of up to six plants) were almost immediately legalized after the vote. Using marijuana in public, which remains illegal under these new laws, has increased conspicuously in both states. Also, a brand-new marijuana industry selling candies, cookies, waxes, sodas, and other marijuana items has exploded—and with it a powerful lobby to fight any sensible regulation. Though it is still early—the full effects on mental health and educational outcomes, for example, will take many more years to fully develop—these “experiments” in legalization and commercialization are not succeeding by any measure. Colorado now leads the country in past-month marijuana use by youth, with Washington not much further behind. Other states that have since legalized marijuana occupy 4th place (District of Columbia) and 5th place (Oregon). States with lax “medical marijuana” laws occupy 2nd and 3rd place (Vermont and Rhode Island, respectively). Additionally, as explained in greater detail below, the laws have had significant negative impacts on public health and safety, such as: • Rising rates of pot use by minors • Increasing arrest rates of minors, especially black and Hispanic children • Higher rates of traffic deaths from driving while high • More marijuana-related poisonings and hospitalizations • A persistent black market that may now involve increased Mexican cartel activity in Colorado The federal government, through the Department of Justice (DOJ), announced it would initially take a hands-off approach to state implementation of legalization, instead promising to track eight specific consequences—from youth marijuana use to use on public lands—and determine action later. So far, however, neither the federal nor state authorities have implemented a robust public tracking system for these criteria. This failure led the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) to criticize DOJ in 2016 for not appropriately monitoring and documenting legalization outcomes. As of the date of this publication, there has been no word from the Department of Justice about state marijuana program compliance with any of the eight criteria it identified. Quietly, however, state agencies such as the Colorado Department of Public Safety, have released very negative updates on marijuana data and other indicators. In the meantime, the promises of tax revenue windfalls and decreased crime have not materialized. Pot tax revenue comprises a tiny fraction of the Colorado state budget— less than one percent—and after costs of enforcement are subtracted, the remaining revenue is very limited. Some Colorado school districts, such as Denver's, have not seen a single dollar of new funding from state pot taxes. And in Washington, half of the marijuana tax money legalization advocates promised for prevention and schools has been siphoned off into the state's general fund. Details: Alexandria, VA: SAM, 2016. 30p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 13, 2017 at: https://learnaboutsam.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/SAM-report-on-CO-and-WA-issued-31-Oct-2016.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: https://learnaboutsam.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/SAM-report-on-CO-and-WA-issued-31-Oct-2016.pdf Shelf Number: 145017 Keywords: Drug Abuse and AddictionDrug Abuse PolicyDrug LegalizationMarijuanaMarijuana Legalization |
Author: Ramsey, Geoff Title: Uruguay: Marijuana, Organized Crime and the Politics of Drugs Summary: Uruguay is poised to become the first country on the planet to regulate the production, sale, distribution, and consumption of marijuana. This report looks at the political, economic, and criminal challenges to Uruguay's new marijuana regulations. Details: s.l.: Insight Crime, 2013. 16p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 15, 2017 at: http://www.insightcrime.org/images/PDFs/2016/uruguay_legalization.pdf Year: 2013 Country: Uruguay URL: http://www.insightcrime.org/images/PDFs/2016/uruguay_legalization.pdf Shelf Number: 145101 Keywords: Drug Control PolicyDrug MarketsMarijuanaOrganized Crime |
Author: Dragone, Davide Title: Crime and the Legalization of Recreational Marijuana Summary: We provide first-pass evidence that the legalization of the cannabis market across US states may be inducing a crime drop. Exploiting the recent staggered legalization enacted by the adjacent states of Washington (end of 2012) and Oregon (end of 2014) we find, combining county-level difference-in-differences and spatial regression discontinuity designs, that the legalization of recreational marijuana caused a significant reduction of rapes and thefts on the Washington side of the border in 2013-2014 relative to the Oregon side and relative to the pre-legalization years 2010-2012. We also find evidence that the legalization increased consumption of marijuana and reduced consumption of other drugs and both ordinary and binge alcohol. Details: Bonn, Germany: Institute of Labor Economics (IZA), 2017. 18p. Source: Internet Resource: Discussion Paper Series no. 10522: Accessed March 8, 2017 at: http://ftp.iza.org/dp10522.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: http://ftp.iza.org/dp10522.pdf Shelf Number: 141374 Keywords: Drug Abuse and CrimeDrug LegalizationMarijuana |
Author: Corda, Alejandro Title: Cannabis in Latin America and the Caribbean: From punishment to regulation Summary: Cannabis (or marihuana) is one of the most widely consumed psychoactive substances in the world. According to the United Nations World Drug Report, 183 million people, or 3.8% of the world's population, used cannabis in 2014. Its cultivation was also reported by 129 countries. Cannabis is subject to the United Nations System for International Control of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (hereafter "drugs") and is the most widely consumed of all the drugs. According to that control system, cannabis is among the substances with the strictest legal status; they are the most prohibited, supposedly because of the harm they cause and their lack of medical usefulness. Nevertheless, its medicinal, spiritual and social use has been recorded in different places and times in human history, without serious associated consequences. Its prohibition began in the early 20th century, even though there were - and are - no records of overdose deaths, and public health risks are relatively low, even compared to other psychoactive substances with less strict legal status, such as alcohol and tobacco. Unlike other substances subject to control, which are produced in only certain regions of the world, cannabis is cultivated, produced and consumed worldwide. Some countries, however, have historically been regional producers or have a longer history or closer ties with the plant. On the American continent, this is true of Mexico in North America, Jamaica in the Caribbean, and Paraguay and Colombia in South America. Proposals for regulation of the cannabis market have been on the table for a number of years. The movement of users and growers has placed the issue on the social, political and media agenda, and there have been some reforms. One example is Uruguay, where the decision was made to regulate the market for cannabis for any kind of use. In other countries, however, reforms have been limited to regulating systems of access to cannabis for medicinal or therapeutic use. Although the international drug control system considers the possibility of "medical and scientific" use of cannabis, prejudices about the substance have hampered the development of regulations and acceptance by Western medicine. In fact, many "reforms" related to medicinal cannabis required only modification of low-level regulations. This means that a proposal being presented as novel is actually something that should always have existed. Key points The prohibitionist approach imposed on cannabis by the international drug control system still persists in nearly all of the Latin American and Caribbean countries examined. In almost all of them, possession falls under criminal law. Some countries' legislation establishes thresholds below which cannabis possession should not be considered a crime. Only in Uruguay does the law include regulation of the entire chain. Although cannabis organizations and other groups have managed to place the issue on the agenda, in most countries reforms are still pending or have been inadequate. The inclusion of relatives and users of cannabis for medicinal and therapeutic purposes has helped give impetus to the movement and to raise awareness among both political stakeholders and the public. Many of the reforms under way do not recognize the need to regulate the recreational and cultural use of cannabis and run the risk of perpetuating the current consequences, with the persistent impact on health, security, institutionality and human rights that the prohibition of cannabis and the lack of state regulation allow and encourage. The countries of Latin America and the Caribbean should prepare for future reform scenarios, instead of considering temporary measures that will perpetuate the same harmful consequences. Limiting reform solely to medicinal cannabis is only a partial, inadequate and temporary solution. If change is truly sought, it is necessary to move toward models of state regulation of cannabis for all purposes. Details: Amsterdam: Transnational Institute, 2016. 32p. Source: Internet Resource: Drug policy Briefing no. 48: Accessed April 6, 2017 at: https://www.tni.org/files/publication-downloads/dpb_48_eng_web_def.pdf Year: 2016 Country: Latin America URL: https://www.tni.org/files/publication-downloads/dpb_48_eng_web_def.pdf Shelf Number: 144729 Keywords: CannabisDrug Abuse and Addiction Drug Offenders Drug Policy Drug ProhibitionDrug Reform Marijuana |
Author: Blickman, Tom Title: Morocco and Cannabis: Reduction, containment or acceptance Summary: This policy briefing discusses whether or not the aim of reducing cannabis cultivation is realistic or beneficial for Morocco, what it would actually mean for the major production area the Rif - one of the poorest, most densely populated and environmentally fragile regions in the country - and what that could imply for meaningful sustainable development. The briefing will give some historical background, discuss developments in the cannabis market, and highlight environmental and social consequences as well as the recent debate about regulation in Morocco and about European policies. KEY POINTS - Morocco continues to be the world's largest producer of cannabis resin (hashish). Over the past 50 years, the Moroccan cannabis growers shown a remarkable resilience to government attempts to eradicate or reduce cannabis cultivation as well as a noteworthy ability to adapt to changing international market conditions. - Since Morocco's independence the government has practiced a policy of containment regarding cannabis cultivation, allowing no new areas but tacitly allowing those already in production to be maintained. - The rapid increase in illicit cannabis cultivation in the Rif during the last decades, as well as poor soil conservation practices, have taken a heavy toll on the Rif's already threatened forests and fragile ecosystems. - The unregulated cannabis market in Morocco has negative social consequences. Some 48,000 growers have arrest warrants hanging over their heads, which is a source of corruption and repression. An amnesty and decriminalization could be effective measures to diminish negative social consequences and open the debate about regulation. - Cannabis farmers in Morocco should have access to emerging legally regulated cannabis markets that are gaining ground worldwide. The challenge is to find a sustainable development model that includes cannabis cultivation in Morocco, instead of excluding cannabis and ignoring the realities of more than 50 years of failed attempts to eradicate the only viable economic option in the region. Details: Amsterdam: Transnational Institute, 2017. 28p. Source: Internet Resource: Drug Policy Briefing, no. 49: Accessed April 6, 2017 at: https://www.tni.org/files/publication-downloads/dpb_49_eng_web.pdf Year: 2017 Country: Morocco URL: https://www.tni.org/files/publication-downloads/dpb_49_eng_web.pdf Shelf Number: 144730 Keywords: CannabisDrug Abuse and Addiction Drug MarketsDrug Offenders Drug Policy Drug ReformMarijuana |
Author: Putri, Dania Title: Cannabis in Indonesia: Patterns in consumption, production, and policies Summary: Key Points - Traditional use of cannabis in Indonesia has mainly been found in the northern part of Sumatra, particularly in the Aceh region. Restrictions in production, use and distribution of cannabis were initiated by the Dutch colonial government in the 1920s following international actions on cannabis control. - Cannabis is the most widely used illicit substance in Indonesia, with approximately two million users in 2014. Under the current narcotics law cannabis is included in the mostrestrictive Schedule I list, along with substances such as heroin, and crystal meth or shabu. Penalties for cannabis-related offences are comparable to shabu- or heroin-related offences, in spite of the common perception that cannabis is less harmful. - The ambiguous nature of the narcotics law often triggers the victimisation of cannabis users who are either falsely accused as dealers, or have limited or no access to legal support during legal proceedings. Entrapment and extortion by law enforcement and security officers are widespread. - Government attempts to alleviate prison overcrowding by sending users to rehabilitation centres have triggered many criticisms, mainly due to their problematic methods (such as forced urine tests and breaches of patient confidentiality) and the questionable effectiveness of mandatory rehabilitation programmes, especially as the majority of cannabis users do not develop problematic use. - Decriminalizing use, possession for personal use and small-scale cannabis cultivation for personal use may help resolve various issues ranging from prison overcrowding to extortion of users by law enforcement officers, and may also free up human and financial resources to tackle problematic use. Details: Amsterdam: Transnational Institute, 2016. 24p. Source: Internet Resource: Drug Policy Briefing no. 44: Accessed April 12, 2017 at: https://www.tni.org/files/publication-downloads/dpb_44_13012016_map_web.pdf Year: 2016 Country: Indonesia URL: https://www.tni.org/files/publication-downloads/dpb_44_13012016_map_web.pdf Shelf Number: 144819 Keywords: CannabisDrug Abuse and AddictionDrug OffendersDrug PolicyIllicit DrugsMarijuana |
Author: Apfel, Rachael Title: Implementing Proposition 64: Marijuana Policy in California Summary: The Law and Policy Lab practicum is an important innovation in the curriculum at Stanford Law School. Policy Lab students address important public policy questions for a real-world client, under the supervision of a SLS faculty member. In some ways, the Policy Lab is similar to a traditional legal clinic, but the focus is on the general public interest rather than advocacy on behalf of a particular individual or organization. This report is the work of a Policy Lab on marijuana regulation, a subject of extraordinary current importance in California. After 20 years of unregulated medical marijuana, the legislature passed a comprehensive set of rules governing how the industry should operate. Shortly thereafter, the voters approved Proposition 64 (The Adult Use of Marijuana Act), which legalized recreational marijuana. This new environment creates challenges and opportunities for policymakers, including Assemblyman Jim Wood, whose district includes most of the states' marijuana production. Our Stanford policy lab was very fortunate to have Dr. Wood as our client for this semester. Dr. Wood posed three questions that our students, with our guidance, tried to answer: (1) What are the conflicts between the recently passed medical marijuana regulations and Proposition 64, and how can they be reconciled within the constraints of the State Constitution? (2) How serious a problem is cannabis-impaired driving, and what technologies and policies could combat it? (3) How can policymakers protect the environment from destructive marijuana grows, and how can environment protection officials hold destructive growers responsible when they are shielded under multiple limited license corporations (LLCs). Details: Palo Alto, CA: Stanford Law School, Law and Policy Lab, 2017. 71p. Source: Accessed April 21, 2017 at: https://www-cdn.law.stanford.edu/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Implementing_Prop_64_Stanford_Law_School.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: https://www-cdn.law.stanford.edu/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Implementing_Prop_64_Stanford_Law_School.pdf Shelf Number: 145136 Keywords: Drug LegalizationDrug PolicyMarijuanaProposition 64 |
Author: Monaghan, Geoffrey Title: Practical implications of policing alternatives to arrest and prosecution for minor cannabis offences Summary: The purpose of this report is not to present a comparative study of legal rules and policies pertaining to cannabis in these or other countries, but to examine an issue largely neglected in the academic literature and by those advocating drug policy reform: namely the practical implications of policing and enforcing these developments. The report provides an overview of some of the many difficulties that may - and do - confront police services when tasked to implement such measures (including the exercise of discretion) through examination of the rules and experiences of four jurisdictions, namely, Australia, England and Wales, Portugal and Switzerland. Along with some examples from the USA, specific aspects of each case study are scrutinised with the intention of highlighting points likely to be of interest to policy makers and practitioners alike. Details: London: International Drug Policy Consortium, 2013. 32p. Source: Internet Resource: Modernising drug law enforcement - Report 4: Accessed May 19, 2017 at: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/566349360/library/MDLE-report-4_Practical-implications-of-policing-alternatives-to-arrest.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/566349360/library/MDLE-report-4_Practical-implications-of-policing-alternatives-to-arrest.pdf Shelf Number: 131376 Keywords: CannabisDrug EnforcementDrug PolicyDrug ReformMarijuana |
Author: Gettman, Jon B. Title: Racial Disparities in Marijuana Arrests in Virginia (2003-2013) Summary: Marijuana possession arrests in Virginia have increased dramatically over the last ten years, especially among black communities. Indeed, in the three years from 2011 to 2013, marijuana possession arrests increased by 1,987 in the Commonwealth - from 19,697 arrests in 2011 to 21,684 in 2013 and black Virginians accounted for 82% (or 1,627) of this increase. The net effect of consistent annual increases in marijuana arrests and related criminal justice costs can be assessed both in terms of the failure of this approach to curtail marijuana's use and availability in Virginia and more prominently with respect to increasing racial disparities in marijuana possession arrests. Increasing marijuana arrests have not resulted in a decrease in marijuana use. According to data from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health, 9.1% of Virginians used marijuana on (at least) an annual basis in 2002 and 2003. By the years 2010/2011 annual marijuana use in the state had increased to 9.7%. According to the same survey, more than half (57.6%) of Virginians found marijuana to be easy or fairly easy to obtain in 2010/2011 - including three-quarters (76.3%) of those age 18 to 25. Police throughout Virginia have been enforcing marijuana laws in racially disparate ways that have steadily increased the arrest of black people much more so than the arrests of white people. Overall marijuana possession arrests in Virginia consistently increased from 2003 to 2013. However, the racial disparity in arrest rates in the state has increased as well. In 2003 the arrest rate for black residents was 344 per 100,000 people, compared to 144 for whites a ratio of 2.4 to 1. By 2012 the arrest rate for black residents had risen to 636, while the arrest rate for white residents had increased to 191 a ratio of 3.3 to 1. This report is based primarily on data from the Federal Bureau of Investigations Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) program. It documents the statewide increase in marijuana arrests from 2003 to 2013, and provides greater detail on marijuana arrests by race in the 50 jurisdictions (counties and cities) that account for 90% of Virginia's marijuana possession arrests. Details: New York: Drug Policy Alliance, 2015. 13p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 19, 2017 at: https://www.drugpolicy.org/sites/default/files/Racial_Disparities_in_Marijuana_Arrests_in_Virginia_2003-2013.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: https://www.drugpolicy.org/sites/default/files/Racial_Disparities_in_Marijuana_Arrests_in_Virginia_2003-2013.pdf Shelf Number: 145602 Keywords: Arrests Drug Enforcement Drug Offenses MarijuanaRacial Discrimination Racial Disparities |
Author: Hughes, Brendan Title: Cannabis Legislation in Europe: An Overview Summary: Cannabis is the drug most often mentioned in reports of drug law offences in Europe. In 2014, the drug accounted for 57% of an overall estimate of 1.6 million offences (EMCDDA, 2016). Cannabis is also Europe's most commonly used illicit drug. It is estimated that at least one in every eight young adults (aged 15-34 years) used cannabis in the last year across the European Union. At the national level, these rates range from less than 1% to over 20% of young adults. The most recent data suggest that 1% of the adult population (aged 15-64 years) of the European Union and Norway, or about 3 million individuals, are smoking cannabis on a daily or near- daily basis. The trends in use also vary between countries. In surveys since around 2005, Germany, Spain and the United Kingdom have shown decreasing or stable trends in reported use, while upward trends can be observed in Bulgaria, France and three of the Nordic countries (Denmark, Finland and Sweden). A renewed debate about the laws prohibiting or permitting cannabis use and supply around the world has been fuelled by the legalisation of supply and use of cannabis for 'recreational' purposes in some US states and Uruguay since 2012. Proposals to legalise the drug have raised concerns they may lead to increases in cannabis use and related harms, and questions about the ways in which cannabis for non-medical purposes could be regulated to mitigate these concerns. In the European Union, a system of unlimited distribution has evolved in the Netherlands since the 1970s, and this has seen further developments in the last few years. The advantages and disadvantages of these regulated systems are being closely observed. The model of 'cannabis social clubs' has been increasingly mentioned in drug policy debates. Its advocates argue that the decision to not prosecute individuals for cannabis use in some countries can also be applied to registered groups of individuals, in order to permit a closed system of cannabis production and distribution. At present, the model is rejected by national authorities in Europe. Throughout Europe there is media and public discourse on the issue of changing cannabis laws. However, national administrations are concerned about the public health impact of cannabis use and generally oppose the decriminalisation or legalisation of cannabis for recreational use. Nonetheless, cannabis laws and the medical and scientific research that informs policy-making can be regarded as entering a period of change, the direction of which is still unclear. It is with this background in mind that the EMCDDA has decided to produce this report. Incorporating and building on earlier EMCDDA work (see Resources, page 30), the present study outlines the legislation relating to cannabis around the European Union (with a focus on 'recreational' use, rather than production and use for medical or industrial purposes). Written for a broad audience, the report aims to give brief answers to some of the more frequently asked questions raised in the discussions about cannabis legislation. These have been grouped into four parts: 1. What is cannabis and what are countries' obligations to control it? 2. What do the laws and associated guidelines say? 3. What happens to cannabis offenders in practice? 4. Where is cannabis legislation going? Details: Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2017. 32p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 25, 2017 at: http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/system/files/publications/4135/TD0217210ENN.pdf Year: 2017 Country: Europe URL: http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/system/files/publications/4135/TD0217210ENN.pdf Shelf Number: 145791 Keywords: CannabisDrug LegalizationDrug PolicyIllicit DrugsMarijuana |
Author: Mawani, Fatima Title: Measuring Illicit Cannabis Seizures in Canada: Methods, Practices and Recommendations Summary: The measurement of illicit cannabis seizures in Canada was not previously studied in detail. Measuring seizures is important because the data can be analyzed to develop an understanding of many areas of cannabis regulation and enforcement - from trends in criminal methods or enforcement efficiency, to the size and value of illicit markets. This report examines the current methods of measuring the metric of cannabis seizures in Canada, with particular attention paid to the way seizure information is recorded by law enforcement officials. A discussion of potential improvements to the way Canada currently measures the metric of cannabis seizures is presented, including a critical review of which analyses could be undertaken if improvements to seizure reporting were introduced. Details: Ottawa: Public Safety Canada, 2017. 72p. Source: Internet Resource: RESEARCH REPORT: 2017-R002: Accessed September 7, 2017 at: https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/rsrcs/pblctns/2017-r002/2017-r002-en.pdf Year: 2017 Country: Canada URL: https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/rsrcs/pblctns/2017-r002/2017-r002-en.pdf Shelf Number: 147141 Keywords: CannabisDrug EnforcementIllegal DrugsIllicit marketsMarijuana |
Author: Jelsma, Martin Title: Balancing Treaty Stability and Change: Inter se modification of the UN drug control conventions to facilitate cannabis regulation Summary: Key Points - Legal tensions are growing within the international drug control regime as increasing numbers of member states or jurisdictions therein move towards or seriously consider legal regulation of the cannabis market for non-medical purposes, a policy choice not permitted under the existing UN legal framework. - Reaching a new global consensus to revise or amend the UN drug control conventions to accommodate cannabis regulation, or that of other psychoactive plants and substances currently scheduled in these treaties, does not appear to be a viable political option in the foreseeable future. - The application of dubious or 'untidy' legal arguments to accommodate regulated cannabis markets does little for the integrity of the regime, undermines respect for international law more broadly and is not sustainable. - Appealing to human rights obligations can provide powerful arguments to question full compliance with certain drug control treaty provisions, but does not in itself resolve the arguable conflict between different treaty obligations. - States may wish to adopt a stance of respectful temporary non-compliance as they pursue legally valid and appropriate options for the re-alignment of international obligations with domestic policy. - The nature of the international drug control regime's internal mechanisms does much to limit avenues for modernisation and forces states to consider extraordinary measures, such as the rightful choice made by Bolivia in relation to coca to withdraw and re-adhere with a new reservation. - Amongst reform options not requiring consensus, inter se modification appears to be the most 'elegant' approach and one that provides a useful safety valve for collective action to adjust a treaty regime arguably frozen in time. - Inter se modification would require the like-minded agreement to include a clear commitment to the original treaty aim to promote the health and welfare of humankind and to the original treaty obligations vis-a-vis countries not party to the agreement. - A legally-grounded and coordinated collective response has many clear benefits compared to a chaotic scenario of a growing number of different unilateral reservations and questionable re-interpretations. - Among other things, inter se modification would provide opportunities to experiment and learn from different models of regulation as well as open the possibility of international trade enabling small cannabis farmers in traditional Southern producing countries to supply the emerging regulated licit spaces in the global market. - Inter se modification would facilitate the development of what, within an international policy environment characterized by faux consensus, is increasingly necessary: a 'multi-speed drug control system' operating within the boundaries of international law, rather than one that strains against them. Details: Swansea, UK: Global Drug Policy Observatory, Swansea University, 2018. 46p. Source: Internet Resource: Policy Report 7: Accessed April 5, 2018 at: https://www.wola.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/Stability-Change-Inter-Se-Modification_GDPO-TNI-WOLA_March-2018.pdf Year: 2018 Country: International URL: https://www.wola.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/Stability-Change-Inter-Se-Modification_GDPO-TNI-WOLA_March-2018.pdf Shelf Number: 149703 Keywords: CannabisDrug ControlDrug MarketsDrug PolicyIllegal DrugsMarijuana |
Author: Pulido Moreno, Rodrigo Title: Cannabis in Uruguay. A case study of the regulated cannabis market in Uruguay Summary: This study deals with the impact of the legislative bill that enabled the creation of a regulated cannabis market in Uruguay as a means to combat organized crime in the country. This study will also explore the hypothesis that this legislative bill changed the legal character of criminality as well as reformulating narcotic issues from being a criminal issue into a public health issue. Analyzing the very specific case of Uruguay's current narcotic policies becomes a means to explore the ideas that constitute Law Nr 19.172 "Marijuana and its derivatives" which might be indicative of the attitudes in society regarding criminality. This ties into the new iteration of the dichotomy between law and democracy as a result of this legislative reform in Uruguay and the possible new role of legal theory in a democratic country which is discussed in this article. Details: Stockholm: Department of Romance Studies and Classics Institute of Latin American Studies, University of Stockholm, 2017. 31p. Source: Internet Resource: Thesis: Accessed April 17, 2018 at: http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1069404/FULLTEXT01.pdf Year: 2017 Country: Uruguay URL: http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1069404/FULLTEXT01.pdf Shelf Number: 149841 Keywords: CannabisDrug EnforcementDrug MarketsDrug PolicyMarijuana |
Author: Arnold, Lindsay S. Title: Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol and Marijuana: Beliefs and Behaviors, United States, 2013-2015 Summary: The purpose of this study was to provide estimates of the prevalence of self-reported use and driving under the influence of alcohol and marijuana, and related perceptions and beliefs among drivers 18 and older in the United States, and to present an analysis of changes in these behaviors between 2013 and 2015. The data analyzed were collected via nationally-representative surveys administered during this period. From 2013-2015, an estimated 14.0 percent of drivers drove with a BAC close to or over the legal limit in the past year, and 4.6 percent drove within an hour of using marijuana. Drivers are divided with regard to their perceptions of the effect of using marijuana an hour prior to driving on ones risk of causing a crash: 58.3 percent believe this risk is increased, 6.2 percent believe it is not affected, 3.6 percent believe it is decreased, and 31.8 percent indicated that they do not know how using marijuana an hour before driving affects crash risk. Drivers who reported using marijuana, and those who reported driving within an hour of use in the past year were less likely to believe that using marijuana increases crash risk, and more likely to believe that such use does not affect or decreases crash risk. Awareness of per se DUI laws for marijuana was low: in states that did have a per se law, only 48.5 percent were aware of it; in states without a per se law, 44.7 percent indicated incorrectly that their state had such a law. Irrespective of whether their state actually had a per se law for marijuana, more than half of all drivers reported that they did not know whether or not their state had such a law. Details: Washington, DC: AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety, 2016. 21p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 26, 2018 at: https://aaafoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/TSCIDUIBeliefsAndBehaviors_1.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: https://aaafoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/TSCIDUIBeliefsAndBehaviors_1.pdf Shelf Number: 149895 Keywords: Driving Under the Influence Driving While Intoxicated Drugged Driving Drunk Driving Marijuana |
Author: Tefft, Brian C. Title: Prevalence of Marijuana Involvement in Fatal Crashes: Washington, 2010-2014 Summary: The purpose of this study was to quantify the prevalence of marijuana involvement in fatal crashes in the state of Washington in years 2010 2014 and to investigate whether the prevalence changed after Washington Initiative 502, which legalized recreational use of marijuana for adults aged 21 years and older and also created a new per se limit for driving under the influence of marijuana, took effect on 6 December 2012. The data examined were obtained from the Washington Traffic Safety Commission and comprised a census of all motor vehicle crashes that occurred on public roads in the state of Washington and resulted in a death within 30 days. This study examined the presence and concentration of delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (hereafter THC), the main psychoactive chemical in marijuana, in the blood toxicological test results of drivers involved in fatal crashes. THC presence and concentration in the subset of drivers whose blood was not tested or whose test results were unavailable were estimated using the method of multiple imputation. The imputation method explicitly accounted for changes implemented during the study period in the cutoff levels used in the state laboratory for detection of THC. Statewide, 3,031 drivers were involved in fatal crashes in years 2010 2014. Overall, considering both the actual blood toxicology test results and imputed results, an estimated 303 drivers10.0% of all drivers involved in fatal crashes in Washington between 2010 and 2014had detectable THC in their blood at or shortly after the time of the crash. Of all THC-positive drivers involved in fatal crashes, an estimated 34.0% had neither alcohol nor other drugs in their blood, 39.0% had detectable alcohol in addition to THC, 16.5% had other drugs in addition to THC, and 10.5% had had both alcohol and other drugs in addition to THC in their blood. From 2010 through 2013, the estimated number and proportion of drivers involved in fatal crashes who had a detectable concentration of THC in their blood ranged from a low of 48 (7.9%) to a high of 53 (8.5%); the number and proportion both approximately doubled from 49 (8.3%) in 2013 to 106 (17.0%) in 2014. Analysis of trends over time before and after Initiative 502 took effect indicated that the proportion of drivers positive for THC was generally flat before and immediately after Initiative 502 took effect, but began increasing significantly at a rate of 9.7 percentage points per year approximately 9 months after Initiative 502 took effect. It was not clear whether this increasing trend was attributable to Initiative 502 or to other factors that were beyond the scope of the study. THC levels in blood fall rapidly shortly after cannabis consumption, thus, it is possible that some surviving drivers in fatal crashes may have had a detectable concentration of THC in their blood at the time of the crash but that their THC levels had fallen below the minimum detectable level by the time a blood sample was drawn. Also, results of this study do not indicate that drivers with detectable THC in their blood at the time of the crash were necessarily impaired by THC or that they were at-fault for the crash; the data available cannot be used to assess whether a given driver was actually impaired, and examination of fault in individual crashes was beyond the scope of this study. Details: Washington, DC: AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety, 2016. 26p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 26, 2018 at: https://aaafoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/PrevalenceOfMarijuanaInvolvement.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: https://aaafoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/PrevalenceOfMarijuanaInvolvement.pdf Shelf Number: 149915 Keywords: Driving Under the Influence Drugged Driving MarijuanaTraffic Offenses |
Author: Oregon State Police. Drug Enforcement Section Title: A Baseline Evaluation of Cannabis Enforcement Priorities in Oregon Summary: Oregon has had a state-authorized medical cannabis system since 1998, and in November 2014, Oregon voters approved the Control, Regulation, and Taxation of Marijuana and Industrial Hemp Act, commonly known as Measure 91 to legally commercialize non-medical retail cannabis in the state. The Drug Enforcement Section at the Oregon State Police created this report to survey currently available data in an effort to evaluate state compliance with the federal guidance for enforcement priorities, issued by former Federal Department of Justice Deputy Attorney General James M. Cole, on - Preventing the distribution of marijuana to minors; Preventing revenue from the sale of marijuana from going to criminal enterprises, gangs, and cartels; Preventing the diversion of marijuana from states where it is legal under state law in some from to other states; Preventing state-authorized marijuana activity from being used as a cover or pretext for the trafficking of other illegal drugs or other illegal activity; Preventing violence and the use of firearms in the cultivation and distribution of marijuana; Preventing drugged driving and the exacerbation of other adverse public health consequences associated with marijuana use; Preventing the growing of marijuana on public lands and the attendant public safety and environmental dangers posed by marijuana production on public lands; and Preventing marijuana possession or use on federal property. To this end, this report examines Oregon's compliance on mitigating these threats and analyzes areas of concern specifically related to these enforcement priorities. Details: Salem: Oregon State Police, 2017. 40p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 30, 2018 at; https://mass-cannabis-control.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/A-Baseline-Evaluation-of-Cannabis-Enforcement-Priorities-in-Oregon_.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: https://mass-cannabis-control.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/A-Baseline-Evaluation-of-Cannabis-Enforcement-Priorities-in-Oregon_.pdf Shelf Number: 149963 Keywords: Drug Enforcement PoliciesMarijuanaMarijuana Legalization |
Author: Grondel, Darrin T. Title: Driver Toxicology Testing and the Involvement of Marijuana in Fatal Crashes, 2010-2014: A Descriptive Study Summary: The Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) contains significant limitations in analyzing drug positive drivers involved in fatal crashes. Most notable to Washington, this data does not offer a cannabinoid code set that distinguishes between delta-9-THC and the metabolite, carboxy-THC. The levels of drugs present in blood are also not recorded in the FARS system, although they are provided in toxicology reports. In response to this limitation, Washington FARS Analysts, in collaboration with the State Toxicologist, manually abstracted cannabinoid drug results for deceased and surviving drivers involved in fatal crashes when toxicology analysis was performed. This report is a description of this newly compiled data. The following is a summary of key observations gleaned from this more detailed fatal crash information with a focus on cannabinoid-positive drivers: From 2010-2014 there were 3,027 drivers involved in fatal crashes, of which 1,773 (58.6 percent) were tested for both alcohol and drugs with known results. Of the 1,773 drivers analyzed 1,061 (59.8 percent) were positive for alcohol and/or drugs. In 2014, 84.3 percent of drivers positive for cannabinoids were positive for THC, compared to only 44.4 percent of cannabinoid-positive drivers in 2010. In 2014, among the 75 drivers involved in fatal crashes positive for THC, approximately half (38) exceeded the 5 ng/ml THC per se limit. The frequency of drivers in fatal crashes that tested positive for THC, alone or in combination with alcohol or other drugs, was highest in 2014 (75 drivers) compared to the previous four-year average (36 drivers). The frequency of drivers with alcohol greater than/equal to BAC .08 and no other drugs was lowest in 2014 (51 drivers) compared to the previous four-year average (98 drivers). From the 1,061 drivers who tested positive for alcohol and/or drugs, mutually exclusive driver categories were established. This report focuses on a subset of these driver comparison groups (547 total drivers): o Only THC (56, 5.3 percent) o Only carboxy-THC (37, 3.5 percent) o THC and alcohol greater than/equal to BAC .08 (83, 7.8 percent) o THC, alcohol greater than/equal to BAC. 08, and drugs (18, 1.7 percent) o THC and other drugs (39, 3.7 percent) o Only alcohol greater than/equal to BAC .08 (314, 29.6 percent) Among drivers in fatal crashes that tested positive for only THC or only carboxy-THC, the largest proportion are ages 16-25. This age group also had the highest proportion of drivers with alcohol greater than/equal to BAC .08. Of drivers that tested positive for the combination of THC and alcohol greater than/equal to BAC 0.08, 39.8 percent were ages 16-25. Similar to drivers with only alcohol greater than/equal to BAC .08, drivers with the combination of THC and alcohol greater than/equal to BAC .08 were involved in fatal crashes that occurred most frequently on the weekends. Drivers with only THC were involved in fatal crashes that occurred equally between weekends (48.2 percent) and weekdays (51.8 percent). Drivers with alcohol greater than/equal to BAC .08, alone or in combination with other drugs, were involved in fatal crashes that occurred most often during the nighttime hours (6 p.m. 5 a.m.). Drivers with only THC or only carboxy-THC were involved in fatal crashes that occurred most often during the daytime hours, similar to drivers with no drugs or alcohol. Drivers with only alcohol greater than/equal to BAC .08 were involved in fatal crashes that occurred most frequently on rural roads (58.6 percent), whereas the majority of drivers with only THC were involved in fatal crashes that occurred most frequently on urban roads (58.9 percent). Drivers with alcohol greater than/equal to BAC .08, alone or in combination with other drugs, were most frequently the only unit (no other vehicles or non-motorists) involved in the fatal crash. In contrast, over 70 percent of drivers with only THC or only carboxy-THC were involved in multiple unit fatal crashes, similar to the frequency of drivers with no drugs or alcohol. Drivers involved in fatal crashes with no drugs or alcohol and drivers with only carboxy-THC had the highest frequency of no reported crash contributing circumstances (approximately 44 percent). Among drivers with only THC, 28.6 percent had no other crash contributing circumstances reported, compared to 17.5 percent of drivers with only alcohol greater than/equal to BAC .08. The most frequently reported driver error among drivers in fatal crashes with only THC was lane deviation (12.5 percent), followed by overcorrecting (8.9 percent). More than half of drivers with only alcohol greater than/equal to BAC .08 involved in fatal crashes were speeding. Over 60 percent of drivers with alcohol greater than/equal to BAC .08 and THC combined were speeding. The observations described in this report are insufficient for determining the link between THC and crash risk. The full limitations of this information as it is presented in this report are detailed in the following section. Details: Olympia, WA: Washington Traffic Safety Commission, 2016. 61p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 3, 2018 at: http://wtsc.wa.gov/wp-content/uploads/dlm_uploads/2015/10/Driver-Toxicology-Testing-and-the-Involvement-of-Marijuana-in-Fatal-Crashes_REVFeb2016.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://wtsc.wa.gov/wp-content/uploads/dlm_uploads/2015/10/Driver-Toxicology-Testing-and-the-Involvement-of-Marijuana-in-Fatal-Crashes_REVFeb2016.pdf Shelf Number: 150044 Keywords: Driving Under the Influence Drugged Driving Marijuana Traffic Safety |
Author: Mungroo, Pat Title: Cannabis Regulation: The World is moving forward, what is stopping us? Summary: The conference was perfectly timed to coincide with a transformation in the international outlook for cannabis. For some 50 years the question has been, will it ever be possible for people to buy relatively safe cannabis from a legal outlet. Today the question is quite different. Now everyone is asking which of the models of cannabis regulation will be the most safe and effective. So far we have at least five options. Cannabis regulation in Washington, Colorado, Uruguay, the Netherlands and Spain all differ one from the other. There are of course other questions too. Will the Federal Authorities take a different view of cannabis regulation once President Obama leaves the White House? It seems likely that so many States will have introduced regulation by 2016 that it will be difficult to put the gene back in the bottle. Or will the federal banking laws continue to undermine the cannabis industry and ultimately kill it? In the UK politicians have been persuaded by psychiatrists that cannabis causes psychosis and memory loss and controls should therefore not be relaxed. Professor Curran's work and contribution to the conference is of great importance. Professor Curran used scientific methods to show that the balance between THC and CBD in cannabis is important in determining the level of risk of the drug. Regulation, which could control the potency of legally available cannabis, would thus create a much safer world for our young people. Professor Curran's work is supported by Dr. Robin Murray who also emphasised the key importance of the THC strength of cannabis in determining the risk of psychosis. Melissa Bone's contribution on medical consumption of cannabis, particularly for the treatment of cancer, underlines the need to re-schedule cannabis to support research into its medicinal uses. John Churchill is right to emphasise the need to create a fire wall between cannabis use and drug dealers; at the same time separating the hard and soft drugs markets. The arguments of Peter Reynolds and Peter Moyes also deserve to be taken seriously. What we need is public education about the facts presented in this helpful report, to replace the myths which have dominated public thinking for so long. Details: Cambridge: Qualitative Cannabis Research Forum, 2014. 61p. Source: Internet Resource: Conference Report: Accessed October 11, 2018 at: https://www.academia.edu/9535332/Cannabis_Regulation_The_World_Is_Moving_Forward_What_Is_Stopping_Us Year: 2014 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.academia.edu/9535332/Cannabis_Regulation_The_World_Is_Moving_Forward_What_Is_Stopping_Us Shelf Number: 151474 Keywords: CannabisDrug PolicyDrug ReformMarijuana |
Author: Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment Title: Monitoring Health Concerns Related to Marijuana in Colorado: 2016 Summary: The state's Retail Marijuana Public Health Advisory Committee has released its second set of findings from the committee's review of the scientific literature currently available on the health effects of marijuana use. The report, "Monitoring Health Concerns Related to Marijuana in Colorado: 2016," also provides survey data about marijuana use in Colorado and data from hospitals and the poison center on potential marijuana-related health effects. Senate Bill 13-283 requires the committee to monitor the emerging science and medical information about marijuana use and report its findings. "Just as with tobacco and alcohol, continued monitoring of marijuana use and potential health effects help guide our work to protect the health of Colorado's citizens," said Dr. Larry Wolk, executive director and chief medical officer at the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment. "We want to base policy decisions and educational campaigns on sound science." The report recommends continued monitoring of several trends, including: About 6 percent of pregnant women choose to use marijuana while pregnant. This percentage is higher among those with unintended pregnancies as well as younger mothers or those with less education. Using marijuana during pregnancy is associated with negative effects on exposed children, including decreased cognitive function and ability to maintain attention on task. Effects may not appear until adolescence. At least 14,000 children in Colorado are at risk of accidentally eating marijuana products that are not safely stored, and at least 16,000 are at risk of being exposed to secondhand marijuana smoke in the home. The committee found strong evidence such accidental exposures can lead to significant clinical effects that, in some cases, require hospitalization. More than 5 percent of high school students use marijuana daily or nearly daily. This has been the case since at least 2005. The report finds weekly marijuana use by adolescents is associated with impaired learning, memory, math and reading, for as long as 28 days after last use. Weekly use also is associated with failure to graduate from high school. In addition, adolescent marijuana users are more likely to develop cannabis use disorder or be addicted to alcohol, tobacco or illicit drugs in adulthood. In Colorado, one in four adults ages 18-25 reported past-month marijuana use and one in eight use daily or nearly daily. These numbers have been consistent since marijuana's legalization. There are indications that policy and education efforts about the potential health effects of marijuana are working. For example, marijuana exposure calls to the Rocky Mountain Poison and Drug Center have decreased since 2015. This includes calls about accidental exposures in children under 9 years old. In addition, the overall rate of marijuana-related emergency department visits dropped 27 percent from 2014 to 2015. (2016 data is not available yet.) The report also cited these trends: Past-month marijuana use among adults and adolescents has not changed since legalization either in terms of the number of people using or the frequency of use. Based on the most comprehensive data available, past-month marijuana use among Colorado adolescents is nearly identical to the national average. Daily or near-daily use of marijuana among adults in Colorado is much lower than daily or near-daily use of alcohol or tobacco. Based on its findings, the committee also recommends continuing to use survey, poison center and hospital data to monitor trends in marijuana use and health effects; state support of research to fill important gaps in public health knowledge; and continued public education about the potential risks of marijuana use. Details: Denver: The Department, 2017. 304p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 21, 2018 at: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0tmPQ67k3NVQlFnY3VzZGVmdFk/view Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0tmPQ67k3NVQlFnY3VzZGVmdFk/view Shelf Number: 153528 Keywords: Drug Abuse and AddictionDrug PolicyMarijuanaMarijuana LegalizationPublic Health |
Author: Traffic Injury Research Foundation Title: Marijuana Use Among Drivers in Canada, 2000-2015 Summary: Public concern about drug-impaired driving in general and marijuana-impaired driving in particular has increased in recent years. Marijuana studies have shown that the psychoactive chemical delta9-tetrahydrocannabinol (or THC) enters the user's bloodstream and brain immediately after smoking or consuming marijuana, and has impairing effects. In addition, research on drivers in fatal crashes has shown that THC-positive drivers are more than twice as likely to crash as THC-free drivers (Grondel 2016). There is also evidence from surveys of Canadian drivers suggesting that the prevalence of marijuana use is greater among drivers aged 16 to 19 years than drivers in other age groups (Robertson et al. 2017). With the legalization of recreational marijuana in Canada, continued monitoring of this road safety topic is timely. This fact sheet, sponsored by Desjardins, examines the role of marijuana in collisions involving fatally injured drivers in Canada between 2000 and 2015. Data from TIRF's National Fatality Database were used to prepare this fact sheet which explores trends in the use of marijuana among fatally injured drivers, and the characteristics of these drivers. Other topics that are examined include the presence of different categories of drugs among fatally injured drivers in different age groups as well as comparisons of the presence of marijuana and alcohol among this population of drivers. Details: Ottawa: Traffic Injury Research Foundation, 2018. 6p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 25, 2018 at: http://tirf.ca/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/Marijuana-Use-Among-Drivers-in-Canada-2000-2015-7.pdf Year: 2018 Country: Canada URL: http://tirf.ca/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/Marijuana-Use-Among-Drivers-in-Canada-2000-2015-7.pdf Shelf Number: 153029 Keywords: Alcohol Driving Under InfluenceDriving While IntoxicatedLegalizationMarijuanaRecreational MarijuanaSubstance UseTraffic AccidentsWeed |
Author: Alabama Appleseed Title: Alabama's War on Marijuana: Assessing the Fiscal and Human Toll of Criminalization Summary: Kiasha Hughes dreamed of becoming a medical assistant. Now, she works an overnight shift at a chicken plant to support her children. Nick Gibson was on track to graduate from the University of Alabama. Now, he works at a fast-food restaurant. Wesley Shelton spent 15 months in jail and ended up with a felony conviction - for having $10 worth of marijuana. Like thousands of others, they're casualties of Alabama's war on marijuana - a war the state ferociously wages with draconian laws that criminalize otherwise law-abiding people for possessing a substance that's legal for recreational or medicinal use in states where more than half of all Americans live. In Alabama, a person caught with only a few grams of marijuana can face incarceration and thousands of dollars in fines and court costs. They can lose their driver's license and have difficulty finding a job or getting financial aid for college. This war on marijuana is one whose often life-altering consequences fall most heavily on black people - a population still living in the shadow of Jim Crow. Alabama's laws are not only overly harsh, they also place enormous discretion in the hands of law enforcement, creating an uneven system of justice and leaving plenty of room for abuse. This year in Etowah County, for example, law enforcement officials charged a man with drug trafficking after adding the total weight of marijuana-infused butter to the few grams of marijuana he possessed, so they could reach the 2.2-pound threshold for a trafficking charge. Marijuana prohibition also has tremendous economic and public safety costs. The state is simply shooting itself in the pocketbook, wasting valuable taxpayer dollars and adding a tremendous burden to the courts and public safety resources. This report is the first to analyze data on marijuana-related arrests in Alabama, broken down by race, age, gender and location. It includes a thorough fiscal analysis of the state's enforcement costs. It also exposes how the administrative burden of enforcing marijuana laws leaves vital state agencies without the resources necessary to quickly test evidence related to violent crimes with serious public safety implications, such as sexual assault. The study finds that in Alabama: - The overwhelming majority of people arrested for marijuana offenses from 2012 to 2016 - 89 percent - were arrested for possession. In 2016, 92 percent of all people arrested for marijuana offenses were arrested for possession. - Alabama spent an estimated $22 million enforcing the prohibition against marijuana possession in 2016 - enough to fund 191 additional preschool classrooms, 571 more K-12 teachers or 628 more Alabama Department of Corrections officers. - Black people were approximately four times as likely as white people to be arrested for marijuana possession (both misdemeanors and felonies) in 2016 - and five times as likely to be arrested for felony possession. These racial disparities exist despite robust evidence that white and black people use marijuana at roughly the same rate. - In at least seven law enforcement jurisdictions, black people were 10 or more times as likely as white people to be arrested for marijuana possession. - In 2016, police made more arrests for marijuana possession (2,351) than for robbery, for which they made 1,314 arrests - despite the fact that there were 4,557 reported robberies that year. - The enforcement of marijuana possession laws creates a crippling backlog at the state agency tasked with analyzing forensic evidence in all criminal cases, including violent crimes. As of March 31, 2018, the Alabama Department of Forensic Sciences had about 10,000 pending marijuana cases, creating a nine-month waiting period for analyses of drug samples. At the same time, the department had a backlog of 1,121 biology/DNA cases, including about 550 "crimes against persons" cases such as homicide, sexual assault and robbery. While Alabama continues to criminalize people who use marijuana either recreationally or medicinally, an increasing number of states have come to treat marijuana like alcohol and tobacco. Nine states and the District of Columbia now allow recreational use. The early evidence strongly suggests that this approach benefits public safety and the criminal justice system. In those states, arrests for marijuana possession have been virtually eliminated, freeing up officers to focus on crimes of violence. Drunken-driving arrests are down as well. And, there's no evidence of a spike in crime or increased marijuana use among youth. These states have also enjoyed a corresponding fiscal and economic windfall. Across the country, thousands of jobs are being created where marijuana has been legalized. Three of the states where it has been legal the longest - Colorado, Washington and Oregon - have thus far collected a total of $1.3 billion in new revenue. And, as the human toll discussed throughout this report falls disproportionately on black people, legalization offers an opportunity to begin to address the disproportionate harms that Alabama's criminal justice system causes to its African-American population. It's time for Alabama to join an increasing number of states in taking a commonsense, fiscally responsible approach to marijuana policy. Details: Montgomery, Alabama: Alabama Appleseed Center for Law and Justice, 2018. 56p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed January 30, 2019 at: https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/marijuana_law/2018/10/alabamas-war-on-marijuana-assessing-the-fiscal-and-human-toll-of-criminalization.html Year: 2018 Country: United States URL: https://www.splcenter.org/sites/default/files/com_decriminalization_of_marijuana_web_final.pdf Shelf Number: 154308 Keywords: African AmericansDrug EnforcementDrug LegalizationMarijuanaMarijuana ProhibitionRacial DisparitiesSubstance AbuseWar on Drugs |
Author: Capler, Rielle Title: Cannabis Use and Driving: Evidence Review Summary: Cannabis is widely used in Canadian society (used by 12% of Canadians in 2011) for both medical and recreational purposes. Recently, the federal government announced its intention to legalize cannabis, with the implementation of new laws expected in early 2018. The federal government's stated intention of the new laws is to mitigate potential risks of cannabis use. A potential risk that is of great concern is driving after using cannabis. Public education pertaining to the use of cannabis and driving must be based upon current research knowledge if it is to be effective and relevant. To this end, we have undertaken a scoping review of available research evidence in order to: 1. Synthesize current research regarding risks associated with cannabis use in the context of driving; 2. Identify research that points to effective strategies for mitigation of this risk. Details: Burnaby, BC: Canadian Drug policy Coalition, Simon Fraser University, 2017. 67p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 3, 2019 at: https://drugpolicy.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/CDPC_Cannabis-and-Driving_Evidence-Review_FINALV2_March27-2017.pdf Year: 2017 Country: Canada URL: https://drugpolicy.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/CDPC_Cannabis-and-Driving_Evidence-Review_FINALV2_March27-2017.pdf Shelf Number: 155277 Keywords: Driving Under InfluenceDriving While IntoxicatedDrugged DrivingLegalizationMarijuanaRecreational MarijuanaSubstance UseTraffic AccidentsWeed |
Author: McMichael, Benjamin Title: The Impact of Cannabis Access Laws on Opioid Prescribing Summary: While recent research has shown that cannabis access laws can reduce the use of prescription opioids, the effect of these laws on opioid use is not well understood for all dimensions of use and for the general United States population. Analyzing a dataset of over 1.3 billion individual opioid prescriptions between 2011 and 2017, which were aggregated to the individual provider-year level, we find that recreational and medical cannabis access laws reduce the number of morphine milligram equivalents prescribed each year by 6.9 and 6.1 percent, respectively. These laws also reduce the total days supply of opioids prescribed, the total number of patients receiving opioids, and the probability a provider prescribes any opioids net of any offsetting effects. Additionally, we find consistent evidence that cannabis access laws have different effects across types of providers and physician specialties. Details: Working Paper, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3320778 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3266629 2019. 51p. Source: Internet Resource: U of Alabama Legal Studies Research Paper No. 3320778; Vanderbilt Law Research Paper No. 18-60; Accessed April 15, 2019 at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3320778 Year: 2019 Country: United States URL: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3320778 Shelf Number: 155418 Keywords: Cannabis MarijuanaOpioids Prescription Drug Abuse |
Author: Rosen, Alana E. Title: High Time for Criminal Justice Reform: Marijuana Expungement Statutes in States with Legalized or Decriminalized Marijuana Laws Summary: As states continue to legalize or decriminalize recreational marijuana, there is a chasm within our society. One segment of the population can use, possess, transport, and cultivate marijuana without fear of prosecution. Another segment of the population suffers from the collateral consequences of previous marijuana-related offenses. This Article argues that any state that enacts marijuana legalization or decriminalization statutes should automatically include an expungement provision that clears the criminal record of individuals who engaged in activities now deemed lawful under the new legalization and decriminalization laws. This Article proposes model language for an expungement statute that serves as a guide for legislators, judges, and attorneys. The proposed expungement statute will help individuals obtain access to opportunities and benefits now denied them because of their marijuana-related criminal records including employment, professional licenses, financial aid, public housing, travel abroad, firearms' purchases, the right to vote, and jury service. Changes to the law will also benefit communities that have been disproportionately targeted by the War on Drugs and marijuana prohibition. Details: Lubbock, Texas: Texas Tech University School of Law, 2019. 53p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 8, 2019 at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3327533 Year: 2019 Country: United States URL: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3327533 Shelf Number: 156259 Keywords: CannabisCriminal RecordDecriminalizationExpungementLegalizationMarijuanaWeed |