Drug Law Reform to disbandNot enough money, interest to continue, S.C. group says By Schuyler Kropf (Contact)
The Post and Courier
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
A pro-legalization-of-drugs lobbying group that gained notoriety after Charleston County Council allocated it $500 several years ago has been snuffed out. South Carolinians for Drug Law Reform is disbanding, its president said Monday. The group made what it considers some gains in recent times, he said, but in the end there simply wasn't enough money or interest to tackle the issue effectively in this state. "I'm sad about that because we are the only organization in South Carolina that is devoted exclusively to reforming our cruel, racist, counterproductive drug laws," SCDLR President Skip Johnson of Charleston said in an e-mail to supporters. Reached by phone, Johnson said his reform efforts will continue, though they don't come under the mantle of SCDLR. "We know the cause is right, we know something is going to happen some day," he said. "We've lost the battle but certainly not the war." Founded in 2003, the group contends the war on drugs has been a failure. It advocates legalization of drugs in a method similar to that of alcohol and tobacco, for sale to adults. No membership list was assembled, Johnson said, in part out of fear of the negative response group members might have faced from employers or family members. Little was known of the group's existence until May 2006, when Charleston County Councilman Henry Darby wanted $500 in taxpayer money to go to their efforts. At the time, council had a practice of giving contributions to outside agencies. When council went to single-member districts, individual members could make selections of preferred outside agencies to help, though the full council made the final vote. The practice has been eliminated for the budget year beginning in July. SCDLR eventually gave the money back. Darby defended the contribution, saying he supported allowing terminally ill patients to use marijuana medically. He also said at the time that the state's prison sentences were stiffer for crack cocaine users, who tend to be economically disadvantaged, than they were for heroin or cocaine users, who are more likely to be from the upper or middle class. Reached Monday, Darby said he regretted the group wouldn't be around anymore to advocate the use of medical marijuana in South Carolina. Johnson said the group did make some in-roads during its brief history. Members testified before state Senate subcommittees, he said, and helped to halt an effort that would have denied lottery scholarships to anyone who had a drug arrest on their record. "We've changed the minds of at least a few people, and we've raised questions in the minds of others," Johnson said. Reach Schuyler Kropf at skropf @postandcourier.com or 937-5551. |
Article tools |
|
Notice about comments: Charleston.net is pleased to offer readers the ability to comment on stories. We expect our readers to engage in lively, yet civil discourse. Charleston.net does not edit user submitted statements and we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted in the comments area. Responsibility for the statements posted lies with the person submitting the comment, not charleston.net. If you find a comment that is objectionable, please click "suggest removal" and we will review it for possible removal. Please be reminded, however, that in accordance with our Terms of Use and federal law, we are under no obligation to remove any third party comments posted on our website. Full terms and conditions can be read here. |
Comments
This article has 16 comment(s)
Posted by Chief_SittingBull on January 29, 2008 at 5:18 a.m. (Suggest removal)
This is good news; the 'reform' should have been disbanded. I would like to see organizations put their time and efforts into issues that will be beneficial to the majority of citizens [i.e. education, health care], the legalizations of drugs does not rank high as an issue of importance in my opinion. CA is a place where “medical marijuana” is legal and Proposition 215, the ‘program,’ is out of control. Eleven years into the program, even those who lobbied for it have expressed regret for the outcome.
Posted by moonpie on January 29, 2008 at 6:29 a.m. (Suggest removal)
AMEN C_SB.
Ditto that it's not showing up on my radar either. All though the stiffer penalty for crack cocaine the article pointed out, I do not understand. Drugs are Drugs as far as I'm concerned and the law for selling/using both should be the same. I like the 3 strikes your out law. Give people the chance to rehabilitate and if they can't put them away before they hurt us.
Posted by commonsence on January 29, 2008 at 8:57 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The line of thinking this group produced was counter- productive to say the least. They loved to say that the war on drugs was a failure. It may not have wiped out drug use (or significantly reduced use) but can you imagine how much WORSE the drug problem (and the ensuing collateral damage such as accidents, violence and health problems) would be if the policies they advocated for were adopted into law. Easier accessibility of substances = more problems. Just look at what we deal with already with tobacco and alcohol.
Posted by lexylady on January 29, 2008 at 9:14 a.m. (Suggest removal)
early, can some of that be sent by email? lol
This guy is clearly an enigma!!
Posted by bubbbie on January 29, 2008 at 9:17 a.m. (Suggest removal)
We are already dealing with the crime and health issues of drugs. The difference between drug users and the alcohol and tobacco users is that the latter two groups help support our government programs through the taxes they pay.
Let's face it, if I want pot, coke, crack, meth, X, or whatever all you have to do is take a drive to a bad neighborhood, call a friend or go to a bar and find it. But guess what, most of us don't want to do that stuff and just because it's now sold at Walgreens doesn't mean I'm going to do it! Making it legal didn't increase the number of alcoholics when prohibition ended, it just made what people were already doing legal and the taxes helped fund the necessary government programs to deal with the people that do abuse it.
I'm not advocating everyone should go out and get high I just don't think our current strategy is working and something needs to change.
Posted by commonsence on January 29, 2008 at 9:32 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Making tobacco more accessible to soldiers during WWI and II didn't increase the number of nicotine addicts?
Bubbie...thanks for making my point. Drugs are very accessible now and we see more and more people turning to use and developing addiction. If this organization had their way, drugs would become even more accessible and be more "legitimized by it's legality - despite its addiction potential and risk for impairment problems.
And on the economic side - legalization would mean taxation and regulation. Not many dealers or users want to be regulated or taxed so all that would be accomplished would be the development of a black market driven by greed and more crime.
Posted by Cid95 on January 29, 2008 at 9:51 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I don't think legalization of everything would be beneficial. However, partial legalization certainly hasn't caused social collapse in The Netherlands (Moslem immigration is coming close in some areas though, but that's another story!),
But, to be fair, the post above is wrong. The "black market" already exists! That's what happens when you make something ILLEGAL. Like alcohol during prohibition.
Legal manufacturing / growing and distribution networks, even with taxation, would still be way less expensive than illegal ones (which have a lot of risk, and thus a very high profit margin). That's economics.
Posted by bubbbie on January 29, 2008 at 9:58 a.m. (Suggest removal)
commonsence- you need another screen name!
Tobacco is still legal and usage is at an all time low. Educating our youth and health programs are working, slowly, but working!
Drugs are readily available to anyone who wants to use and abuse them. Legalizing it makes it easier for the government to control just like it did with alcohol. Drunk driving deaths are down and teens using it are also down. It's a hell of a lot easier for a high school or college student to buy a bag of dope than it is to get a carton of cigarrettes or a 6 pk of beer. Where do you buy alcohol from, a government controlled store or the Duke brothers out of the back of an orange Charger? The end of prohibition got rid off all the illegal smuggling. the same could happen with drugs.
Posted by tbo on January 29, 2008 at 10:06 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I'm very sorry to see this group go. I helped create a PR campaign for them as part of one of my college courses, having heard of them through some local publications. They are unfortunately right that there is just not enough (vocal) support to keep a group like this together for long, no matter how noble the cause may be.
Most of you that have posted are ignoring, or are ignorant to the fact that drugs are a problem BECAUSE they are illegal. They are associated to a criminal element BECAUSE they are illegal. Drug lords & dealers stand to make lots of money BECAUSE they are illegal. We don't have Al Capones running booze & armed with automatic weapons today for the simple fact that booze is legal now - when it wasn't, it was controlled & supplied via organized crime.
This may run counter to the "Puritanical" values that have been shoved down America's throat since about 1930, mainly because of Anslinger's ridiculous early propaganda in an effort to make a name for himself, but it's simple logic. Just step back & connect the dots.
Posted by 512c on January 29, 2008 at 10:36 a.m. (Suggest removal)
500$? that's all they got?
Stupid! When drug laws are so funded by private jails....
Posted by 512c on January 29, 2008 at 10:41 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I will be looking for a new group, maybe have to start one myself! But this time: Lobbyist! Fight fire with fire.
These drug laws hurt so many.
Posted by gcmadness on January 29, 2008 at 11:21 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I agree with Cid95, bubbie, & tbo.
Early, thanks for making my day!
Posted by KidYendor on January 29, 2008 at 11:27 a.m. (Suggest removal)
We should legalize per person purchase of 1 to 1.5 grams of cocaine at the drug stores on Fridays for weekend use after a long week at work to party with at home, do housework and watch movies. Two fingers of marijuana should be available for purchase per week or two. Put a $10 tax per purchase and our streets will be safer. Drug legalization lobbying groups are A-OK and I feel that many posters here feel the same way exemplifying the fact that we are tired of the war on drugs, harsh sentences, and police propaganda.
Posted by 512c on January 29, 2008 at 5:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)
IT'S TRUE! KidY
Posted by charleston_grown on January 29, 2008 at 6:21 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Legalize it!!!
we are throwing way to much money away persecuting people for ridiculous crimes. marijuana is much safer than alcohol and tobacco, yet it still remains illegal. the war on drugs does many things, but stop, prevent, or retard their use is not one of them. The war on drugs leads to crime, murder, corruption, scandal, abuse, and our nation throwing away billions of dollars every year. it is time we grew up as a nation and face the facts. many drugs are illegal due to powerful lobby groups that wanted to promote their interests and by propaganda spread by the US government. its time for a change in the right direction.
Posted by farfallaspeaks on August 5, 2008 at 12:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)
charleston_grown!
right on!