The Drug Dealer Who Would Be Attorney General

Jacob Sullum | October 9, 2006

J.B. Van Hollen, the Republican candidate for Wisconsin attorney general, brags that he has "experience fighting crime," while his opponent, Democrat Kathy Falk, does not. Given the details of Van Hollen's crime-fighting career, that might count in her favor. A couple years ago, when he was U.S. attorney for the Western District of Wisconsin, Van Hollen helped pioneer the online drug sale sting, taking over a dealer's website to trap customers trying to buy Ritalin, Adderall, OxyContin, Ketamine, and cocaine for nonmedical purposes. The beauty of it, from Van Hollen's perspective, was that he could charge the would-be buyers not just with attempted drug possession (maximum sentence: one year) but with using the Internet to facilitate illegal distribution of a controlled substance (maximum sentence: four years). "We want to make sure that people out there know that even though they're sitting in their offices, there is a great risk of being found out," Van Hollen proudly explained to the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel. "We're trying to make sure that the Internet doesn't get used for inappropriate purposes." Some people, possibly including Wisconsin voters, might consider posing as a drug dealer to bust people for attempted drug possession—which is about as far from real crime fighting as you can get—to be an inappropriate use of the Internet.

[Thanks to Randy Vizyak for the tip.]

Comments

dhex|10.9.06 @ 1:43PM|#

i wish there was an effective way to wish horrible diseases on people rather than just saying "wouldn't it be awesome if this asshole died a long and horrible death from some terrible disease and couldn't get the painkillers he needed?"

but then i remember the rules for the rubes are not the rules for the ruling class. oh well.

|10.9.06 @ 1:46PM|#

Some people, possibly including Wisconsin voters, might consider posing as a drug dealer to bust people for attempted drug possession�which is about as far from real crime fighting as you can get�to be an inappropriate use of the Internet.

Keep dreaming.

|10.9.06 @ 2:21PM|#

Hmmm...

I have heard of several people who use illegal drugs or who have close friends or family members who use illegal drugs who are planning on voting for a Democrat or Republican or some other supporter of the war on drugs. If they don't care, why is it likely that the voters in Wisconsin will care?

Perhaps J.B. is opposed to the war in Iraq, or is in favor of it, or electing him would promote gridlock. Perhaps he's opposed to torture; perhaps he's against coddling terrorists; or perhaps he's obviously going to win anyway, so voting for someone else would be throwing one's vote away.

I will not vote for anyone who supports the war on drugs, but I don't live in Wisconsin.

|10.9.06 @ 3:01PM|#

Remember when police duping people into committing crimes then busting them was called entrapment?

|10.9.06 @ 3:43PM|#

Remember when police duping people into committing crimes then busting them was called entrapment?

I do, David. Back in the '70's a lot of people were actually concerned about this. Nowadays it's become Standard Operating Procedure. (Although I understand that there is some sort of 'means test' that law enforcement now has to pass, with rules for how they can run a sting before busting folks for a crime that would not have taken place without their promotion of it.)

I remember once about, oh, '77. I was down in Oakland CA or someplace, sitting in my car in a parking lot, killing some time. This woman came up to my window and asked if I 'wanted a date'. I told her no, and she trotted off. About ten minutes later the cop car came out of it's hiding place. The officers quizzed me a bit about what I was doing there, then told me to move along, move along... I was spoiling their fishing grounds.

|10.9.06 @ 4:08PM|#

Remember when police duping people into committing crimes then busting them was called entrapment?

Yup. But that was back in the Dark Ages.

Napolitano's "Constitutional Chaos: What Happens When the Government Breaks Its Own Laws" is well worth the read.

|10.9.06 @ 4:19PM|#

Anti-drug warriors would get better results by appealing-or trying to- straight to their main opponents, the American people, then by bitching about the "business as usual" folks or welfare queens. Handing out "Legalize Marijuana" bumper stickers at gun shows seems a good, energetically-charged place to start.

|10.9.06 @ 4:53PM|#

As mayor of the altered state of Druggachusettes, I declare this pizza to be, awesome!

|10.9.06 @ 6:01PM|#

Van Hollen is a tool, but at least he is opposed to setting up roadblocks/checkpoints to attempt to find inebriated drivers, unlike the Rep he defeated in the primary or his Democratic foe. Falk will use the AG's office to sue businesses for looking at her funny. Blech!

There's no Libertarian running, so I may have to write in NOTA if I can't bring myself to vote for either Clown A or Clown B.

Kevin

|10.10.06 @ 12:24AM|#

What Mr. F. Le Mur said, which was:

Napolitano's "Constitutional Chaos: What Happens When the Government Breaks Its Own Laws" is well worth the read.

Kevin,

I was just about to decide that Falk would be the lesser evil in this race given no libertarian candidate. What do you mean by: Falk will use the AG's office to sue businesses for looking at her funny.

|10.10.06 @ 2:27AM|#

Falk's prosecutorial experience revolves around her former post, since abolished, of "public intervenor." If she gets in there will be more of the sort of crap the current AG/Lush goes in for, like the lawsuit against the cranberry farmers.

State Chamber of Commerce take

|10.10.06 @ 2:30AM|#

That link was supposed to be to:

http://www.wmc.org/display.cfm?ID=1413

Kevin