3 Pieces of News to Start 2022

Who would like to begin 2022 with some speculation on humanity’s next large-scale war? Me neither but we got it anyway.

Russia is flexing it’s muscles again with a warning to a couple of its neighbors against joining the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (N.A.T.O.).

“It is quite obvious that the ascension of Finland and Sweden to NATO would have serious military and political consequences that would require an adequate response from Russia,” said a Russian foreign ministry spokeswoman, Maria Zakharova, not revealing exactly what action Russia would take in response.

The N.A.T.O. is primarily a military alliance between the United States and several western European nations and it was created as a bulwark against the Soviet Union during the Cold War. Finland and Sweden officially hold a stance of neutrality on the world stage but Sweden has increased it own defense spending since Russia annexed Crimea from Ukraine back in 2014. I’m sure eastern Europe remembers an aggressive Russia all too well.

A moment of silence.

Microsoft sun-setting online services for multiple XBOX 360 Halo games marking the end of an era.

The “golden age of Halo” might be when Bungie Studios still held the reins of the iconic video game franchise. Perhaps Microsoft was waiting for the release of the XBOX One X/S consoles to finally move on from its classic Halo games.

All Halo games that have housed online services on XBOX 360 will be shutting down come January 13, 2022.

Anthony James Devetis, GAMERANT, 2022

Fans of the franchise will still able to get their fix of classic Halo through the anthology entitled The Master Chief Collection.

Cannabis industry hindered by incongruity.

New Mexico’s fledgling cannabis industry is being impeded by the federal prohibition of the plant that continues to plague the nation with needless authoritarianism. The Village of Questa governing council is currently attempting to attract cannabis entrepreneurs to its tiny northern New Mexico area but stipulations attached to federal funding is hindering the prospects of one such entrepreneur, Michael Nezi of Roots & Herbs Farms.

The prohibition against cannabis by the U.S. government is an embarrassment to the nation, nothing more than a power-grab by police forces run amok that disproportionately affects historically impoverished citizens and residents. I’m surprised more conservative-leaning Americans are not jumping at this easy opportunity to denounce “big government” in favor of entrepreneurship.

Cannabis Business & Prohibition

Incongruity between national laws and state laws.

By Dylan R.N. Crabb

New Mexico is set to become the latest state to legalize cannabis for adult, recreational use next year in April and entrepreneurs are already gearing up for business. However, barriers continue to inhibit full economic exploitation of this incredibly versatile plant. One such entrepreneur in Questa, New Mexico, is being forced to relocate his proposed cannabis factory to neighboring Taos because his initial location is dependent on federal funding from the U.S. Economic Development Administration (E.D.A.) and cannot support a cannabis business. One would think that conservative-leaning politicos would jump on this as a classic example of excessive government regulations interfering with one’s entrepreneurial freedom. It would be a talking point with which I’m in agreement.

The legalization of cannabis in New Mexico pushed the duty of regulating legal cannabis onto individual municipalities in the state which I believe is congruent with the original concept for American democratic-republicanism. Regional “laboratories for democracy” may be the best way to ensure a sense of representation for different populations just as long as the over-arching national government presents a clear set of basic civil rights for lower governing bodies to follow. Federal cannabis prohibition defies this ideal by enforcing an authoritarian edict on regional governments.

The beginning of the twenty-first century has seen cannabis regulations slowly relax over the decades and Americans are now privy to a growing cannabis market across the nation. According to statistics from <www.flowhub.com>, the overall cannabis industry is worth approximately $61 billion, 68% of Americans are now in support of cannabis legalization, and 12% of Americans are “active cannabis users.” This super-majority support for cannabis legalization would be beneficial in a nation with a functioning democratic system. Alas, Americans are trapped within a psuedo-democracy corrupted by oligarchy.

Why is cannabis illegal anyway?

By Dylan R.N. Crabb

(I wrote this essay in college and it has been in my Google Drive since. After submitting it to two local newspapers two weeks ago, I finally just came to the conclusion, “fuck it! I’ll publish it myself!” So, here it is.)


The cannabis plant is relatively easy to grow, it can grow almost anywhere on the planet, and humans have neural receptors that respond specifically to cannabinoids (THC and its relative chemicals in the plant).  Cannabis possesses multiple medicinal properties as a pain and stress reliever and it seems to be impossible to overdose on it.  The fiber from the plant can also be used for multiple industrial and commercial purposes.  Why would a government criminalize such a versatile plant?

In the first half of the twentieth century, three legislative acts defined American drug policy: the Harrison Narcotics Act, passed in 1914 under President Woodrow Wilson; the Marijuana Tax Act, passed in 1937 under President Franklin Roosevelt; and the Boggs Act, passed in 1951 under President Harry Truman.  The Harrison Narcotics Act and the Marijuana Tax Act were designed to control movement of opium, coca leaf (cocaine), and cannabis products throughout the nation.

The flaws in these acts of legislation involved limitations on medical professionals to assist so-called “non-patients” with addiction troubles and drove a sector of the drug market underground.  Medical professionals came out against these two acts of legislation in a plethora of medical journals.  The federal government, recognizing an increased national issue with drug addiction, passed the Boggs Act in 1951, which set criminal penalties for drug possession.  Naturally, this punitive measure did not help in reducing addiction.  On the contrary, it increased drug crime by inadvertently placing more value on black market products.  While the Marijuana Tax Act was eventually declared unconstitutional in 1969, it was soon replaced with the Controlled Substances Act of 1970, which created categories for different drugs.

Cannabis was placed in the most restrictive category supposedly temporarily while President Richard Nixon commissioned a report on the drug’s level of danger.  However; despite the Shafer Commission’s recommendations, President Nixon kept cannabis under the “Schedule 1” classification arguably to push back against the counter-culture that emerged from the 1960’s.  In the decades following the Controlled Substances Act, cannabis’ “Schedule 1” classification severely limited scientific research on the plant.

Momentum for reform grew out of citizen-led movements like the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws at smaller government levels.  The states of Maine, Oregon, and Alaska were the first to decriminalize (not legalize) cannabis after President Nixon’s Controlled Substances Act.

The past efforts by the United States government to regulate drugs have been about controlling the crop and regulating the behavior of individuals; this does not fostering a safe environment for entrepreneurs.  Drug usage is an issue that revolves around a human conditioning for instant gratification, which comes from arguably the strongest part of our brain: the limbic system, which houses our emotions.  Governments are not going to rewire human emotions with punitive laws against drug use.  A more pragmatic method for dealing with drug use and the issue of addiction is to place it exclusively under the jurisdiction of medical professionals rather than law enforcement agencies.  Driving a product into the black market just creates more issues for our society, issues that are more dangerous than the original issue of drug addiction.  As a society, we should not be pushing the weakest among us into the arms of violent criminal enterprises, we should be shining a light on the black market with a benevolent domestic policy of liberty and justice for all.

New Mexico Relaxes Criminality of Cannabis, Maintains Control of Distribution

By Dylan R.N. Crabb

 

Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham signed Senate Bill 406 into law this week, the new law institutes several measures into effect this year regarding the criminality of cannabis as well as its distribution.

“. . . local school boards and the governing bodies of charter schools shall authorize by rule the possession, storage and administration of medical cannabis by parents and legal guardians, or by designated school personnel, to qualified students for use in school settings . . . (NM SB406, page 1).”

The state will implement cannabis into schools for medical use under strict supervision and only to designated students.

The new will also amend the Lynn and Erin Compassionate Use Act (the successful bill that legalized medicinal cannabis) to widen it’s umbrella for who can qualify as a cannabis patient/producer in the state, an individual cannabis patient/producer must still be licenced with the state’s Department of Health.

“. . . EXEMPTION FROM CRIMINAL AND CIVIL PENALTIESFOR THE MEDICAL USE OF CANNABIS. –

A.  A qualified patient or a qualified patient’sprimary caregiver shall not be subject to arrest, prosecution or penalty in any manner for the possession of or the medical use of cannabis if the quantity of cannabis does not exceed an adequate supply; provided that a qualified patient or the qualified patient’s primary caregiver may possess that qualified patient’s harvest of cannabis.

B.  A reciprocal participant shall not be subject to arrest, prosecution or penalty in any manner for the possession of or the medical use of cannabis if the quantity of cannabis does not exceed the limit identified by department rule.

C.  The following conduct is lawful and shall not constitute grounds for detention, search or arrest of a person or for a violation of probation or parole, and cannabis products that relate to the conduct are not contraband or subject to seizure or forfeiture pursuant to the Controlled Substances Act or the Forfeiture Act:

  1. a qualified patient or primary caregiver possessing or transporting not more than an adequate supply or a reciprocal participant possessing or transporting not more than the limit identified by department rule;
  2. a qualified patient or primary caregiver purchasing or obtaining not more than an adequate supply from a lawful source or a reciprocal participant purchasing or obtaining not more than the limit identified by department rule;
  3. a qualified patient using or being under the influence of cannabis; provided that the qualified patient is acting consistent with law;
  4. a qualified patient or primary caregiver transferring, without financial consideration, to a qualified patient or primary caregiver not more than two ounces of cannabis; or
  5. with respect to cannabis cultivated under a personal production license, a qualified patient or primary caregiver possessing, planting, cultivating, harvesting, drying, manufacturing or transporting cannabis plants or cannabis products as allowed by department rule; provided that a qualified patient or primary caregiver who possesses a personal production license shall not manufacture cannabis products using an oil extractor solvent that is stored under pressure unless the qualified patient or primary caregiver holds a separate license from the department permitting the person to manufacture cannabis products using an oil extractor solvent that is under pressure (NM SB406, pages 14-16).”

Individuals under 18 years of age can qualify for the medical cannabis program but it must go through the parents/guardian.

SB406 was sponsored by Senator Gerald Ortiz y Pino, a long-time advocate for cannabis as a medicinal and commerical product in the state legislature.

 

Drug usage, individualism, and the spirit of a libertarian.

By Dylan R.N. Crabb

 

Since I’ve been old enough to question the meaning behind the words, “land of the free and home of the brave,” I have pondered over classic American ideas of freedom , specifically the apparent contradictions between the idea that Americans enjoy more freedom from tyranny than any other rationalized peoples and the punitive practices of American law enforcement agencies against non-violent criminals.  If America really is the “land of the free,” why is it a crime to light up a pipe filled with cannabis in the privacy of one’s own home?  What exatly is the American ideal of freedom?

In the interest of fairness, I do acknowledge that (in general) the United States of America is a decent place to live compared to many other countries across the globe.  While it is not logical to act prideful in the facts of your birth (no human chooses the circumstances of their birth), I am a little prideful about the relative prosperity of Western Civilization.  No society is perfect but there is prosperity relative to other countries.  The West’s top rankings on global freedom indexes are no accident – they are partly due to a a general culture that respects individualism and democratic-republicanism.

However; the United States has also been catalogued with the highest prison in the planet’s western hemisphere.  (See the International Centre for Prison Studies: World Prison Population List – ICPS).  Amongst Western nations, that is a poor ranking and Americans can do better.  I think a major factor in this high population of prisoners is the so-called “war on drugs,” which was initiated under President Richard Nixon.

The argument in favor of drug prohibition is an emotional one consisting of exclamations like, “we need to prosecute these drug addicts,” “get these lazy pot heads off the street,” people shouldn’t be using drugs,” and more.  All of these exclamations are irrelevant to individual freedom.  A legal case may be argued for limiting drug use in on public property reserved for the general population but, on private property, it is a simple case of individual property rights and personal freedom.  Regardless how one feels about drug use, it affects no one but the individuals involved and, if tobacco and alcohol use are not criminalized actions (two drugs much more dangerous than other drugs like cannabis) there is no consistent reasoning to criminalize less dangerous drugs.

Fortunately, there seems to be a growing shift in American cultures regarding durg use (at least regarding cannabis use).  More than half of the states in the union have legalized medical-based cannabis; eight states and the District of Columbia have legalized it recreationally.  Opinion polls show that more than half of the general public is now in favor of full legalization at the federal level.  Trends are moving in a more libertarian direction.

Content creator and YouTube pundit Wizard of Cause expresses his satisfaction towards this trend in the following video:

I think any person harboring some preconceived ideas about drugs and drug users should at least make an attempt to flip the argument around onto themselves and then ask themselves if they would want anyone else busting down their doors in a police raid for a minimal amount of cannabis.  Is that kind of environment really in line with an American ideal of freedom?  Are citizens really free if we have to fear law enforcement because of a personal decision on private property?

The US government’s “War on Drugs” makes no sense.

By Dylan R.N. Crabb

 

If you care about liberty, personal autonomy of the body, and individualism, than you should not be in support of the drug war because drug use affects one person only: the person using the drugs.  If you are concerned about public safety, you should not be in support of the drug war because prohibition of drugs creates a black market of drugs which is more dangerous to a society than the drugs themselves.  If you care about public health, you should not be in support of the drug war because any substance can have a benefit in the medical community through careful research, especially cannabis.  The only thing that the drug war proves is that a rich person can get away with certain non-violent behavior that would get a poor person arrested for breaking the law.  Any kind of non-violent behavior (behavior that does not physically affect anyone but the person performing such behavior) should not be a crime.

Cannabis may be the most beneficial and least dangerous substance a person can use, and yet the United States government currently classifies it as a “Category 1” substance, on the same level of caution as highly processed drugs such as cocaine and heroin. – Thanks to @JaclynGlenn for the video.

America’s #WarOnDrugs is an illogical abuse of government power and it needs to end.