D.A.R.E., America's Most Famous Anti-Drug Program, Will No Longer Talk to 10- and 11-Year-Old Children About Marijuana

D.A.R.E., the national nonprofit that has promoted "Drug Abuse Resistance Education" to elementary, middle, and high school students since the early 1980s, will all but drop anti-drug material from its curriculum for fifth and sixth grade students, according to a state chapter leader and a letter released by D.A.R.E.*

"D.A.R.E. America has determined that anti-drug material is not age-appropriate," the state affiliate leader, who asked not to be identified, told Reason. "The new curriculum focuses on character development."

News of a major curriculum change was first reported in early November when an elementary school resource officer in Kennewick, Washington told KNDU25, "The new curriculum starts as of December for us...it does not bring up the subject of marijuana at all." (Marijuana is the only illicit drug that D.A.R.E. claims to have reduced the use of through its educational programs. Drug reform advocates have slammed D.A.R.E. for its characterization of pot.)

I emailed D.A.R.E. America's headquarters in California on Nov. 6 (the same day Washington legalized recreational marijuana) hoping to learn more about the alleged curriculum change. I also emailed the head of the Washington chapter and the head of the regional chapter. I didn't hear back from any of them. 

Then late last week, a state affiliate contacted me to say that the Kennewick officer's claim was true. 

I called D.A.R.E. America to confirm. "There's a one-page document that explains all this," the D.A.R.E. America staffer told me. He then said, "Are you the guy who emailed about Washington?" I told him I was. He promised to email me the document explaining the curriculum change. We hung up. The document never arrived. 

UPDATE: A third party just sent me the D.A.R.E. one-pager outlining the curriculum change. Here's what it says about marijuana: 

Recent press reports regarding the new D.A.R.E. keepin’ it REAL (kiR) elementary curriculum not addressing marijuana are incorrect.

The subject of marijuana is attended to in the new D.A.R.E. kiR elementary curriculum. The topic, however, is addressed only after it has been established to be an age appropriate topic for the individual concerned classroom. 

A wealth of research data substantiates the two most common and dangerous drugs with which elementary aged students have knowledge or familiarity are alcohol and tobacco. These are the substances, across all segments of the population, with the highest use levels at this age group. The experience or knowledge of alcohol and tobacco creates an environment in which it is appropriate to talk with young students about these drugs.

The D.A.R.E. kiR elementary curriculum provides information about drugs, focusing on alcohol and tobacco. Students learn to apply the information, within the constructs of a decision-making model, and to employ resistance skills in making safe and responsible decisions about drugs. While we do not focus individually on all possible drugs which can be abused, we believe the students can apply the learned decision-making model and developed resistance skills to other substances such as methamphetamine, prescriptions drugs, cocaine/crack, heroine, etc. 

For the general population of 5th/6th grade students, the topic of marijuana is not age appropriate. Most students in this age group have no basis of reference to the substance. Research has found that teaching children about drugs with which they have never heard of or have no real life understanding may stimulate their interest or curiosity about the substance.

The curriculum change is likely part of an ongoing attempt by the organization to restore its credibiliy with the scientific community. In 1999, the American Psychological Association conducted a study of D.A.R.E. graduates and concluded that its curriculum was ineffective. The Office of the Surgeon General made the same pronouncement in 2001, and the Government Accountability Office announced in 2003 that D.A.R.E. programming had actually correlated with increased drug use among some adolescents. As a result of these reports, D.A.R.E. America's revenue declined from $10 million in 2002, to $3.7 million in 2010 (the last year for which the organization's 990 records are publicly available) causing D.A.R.E. America  to rack up million-dollar operational deficits in 2010 and 2009. To reverse this trend, D.A.R.E. America unveiled Keepin' it Real in 2011. The program was developed by researchers at Penn State, and is, according to D.A.R.E., evidence-based. 

D.A.R.E. America's difficulties aren't limited to promoting its new curriculum, however. The group is also being sued--by D.A.R.E. New Jersey.

According to a lawsuit filed in L.A., and first reported by Courthouse News, D.A.R.E. New Jersey is suing D.A.R.E. America for "put[ting] thousands of New Jersey school children at risk by revoking the state affiliate's charter, because it used its own drug abuse prevention program in elementary schools."

"D.A.R.E. America claims that D.A.R.E. New Jersey implemented the 'Too Good For Drugs' program surreptitiously, even though D.A.R.E. New Jersey has attempted to correspond with D.A.R.E. America about the program since 2011 and, in 2012, discussed the option in person with [nonparties] D.A.R.E. America's President and CEO Charlie Parsons and D.A.R.E. America's Executive Director, Frank Pegerous," the complaint reads.

The suit goes on to say that the decision "flies in the face of the unparalleled success of D.A.R.E. New Jersey and its commitment to drug abuse prevention education for hundreds of thousands of New Jersey school children and thousands of school administrators, teachers, and police officers who are united in the fight against drug abuse. It also is inconsistent with the management across the country because, virtually none of the programs affiliated with D.A.R.E. America exclusively offer D.A.R.E. Programs."

D.A.R.E. New Jersey isn't just any old D.A.R.E. outfit, however. According to 990 forms, The New Jersey group's revenue was $20 million in 2010, and $21.3 million in 2011. That makes it one of the few nonprofit affiliates in the country--possibly the only one--that has a budget five times the size of its national organization. 

Kevin Sabet, currently of the University of Florida and formerly of the Office of National Drug Control Policy, says "It is clear that DARE is moving in the right direction -- learning from its past challenges and recognizing the need to integrate evidence-based principles in its work. It started down this path more than ten years ago when it brought together the country's top scientists -- and indeed its harshest scientific critics -- to begin to change its curriculum. For this reason, it should be encouraged, not bamboozled by folks who never liked DARE to begin with. DARE remains the most popular drug education program in the history of drug education. Fixing it is a good thing."

*This report originally said that D.A.R.E. would drop marijuana from its curriculum for young children. The story has been updated since obtaining an internal document from D.A.R.E., in which the group says it will not teach fifth and sixth grade children about marijuana. 

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Almanian.||

    The children - why does DARE hate them?

  • deified||

    I went through DARE in NJ in the early '90s.

    I learned about substances like Quaaludes and Barbituates that I had never encountered and have never encountered since.

    Bottom line: DARE taught me that drugs were an option, something I ought to think about.

  • ||

    So they're going to change their acronym?

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    DARE EIDI - Do A Reefer, Everyone Else is Doing It!

  • Coreyah23||

    This has to be one of the dumbest comments I have ever read. How do you "smoke A reefer"? Reefer is a general name for marijuana. It's not a singular thing. Plus marijuana isn't a drug

  • Gene||

    Pedant

  • R C Dean||

    "Character Development Resistance Education"?

    Lacks a snappy acronym. I'm baffled.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    Character Adjustment Reinforcing Education

  • R C Dean||

    Maybe

    "Bullying Activity Resistance Education", or "B.A.R.E."?

  • Bardas Phocas||

    Special Human Educational Enhancement Program.

  • ||

    Nice.

  • PACW||

    Yep.

  • ||

    Character Overcoming Negative Communal & Environmental Reinforcement Norms.

  • ||

    Totalitarian Reinforcement Of Life Lessons

  • ||

    And it is Groovster and Hazel with the one-two punch. Well played.

  • Ted S.||

    DARE to keep kids off Ritalin.

  • Jordan||

    Caring and Understanding for a New Tomorrow.

  • ||

    People's Educational Awareness Remedial Learning Concerning Life Utterances That Cause Harm

  • ||

    That is fantastic.

  • A Mathematician||

    Drugs Are Really Exciting

  • Paul.||

    Likely as a result of these reports, D.A.R.E. America's revenue declined from $10 million in 2002, to $3.7 million in 2010[...]
    D.A.R.E. America racked up million-dollar operational deficits in 2010 and 2009.

    So, looks like they didn't cut spending after the revenue decline? I know, I know, a government budget isn't like a household budget. Deficits don't matter.

  • Paul.||

    So, I sort of skimmed the second half of this. If they don't talk about drugs, what's left? Fatty foods, trans fats and tobacco?

  • Bardas Phocas||

    Bullying.
    It's all the rage apparently.

  • anon||

    Anybody that even brings up "bullying" as a potential problem in today's society gets one punch to the face for free, courtesy of me.

    God damned wimps. "Oh no! SOMEONE SAID SOMETHING BAD ABOUT ME ON TEH INTERNETS!"

  • Adam||

    Bullying's a problem!

  • AuH2O||

    Yeah. As someone who was actually socially ostracized and bullied (to be fair to them, I suck at dealing with children, even as a child. I have always found post-college adults so much easier to deal with, and my social life is a lot better now that I am only involved with them), fuck them.

  • Ted S.||

    Actually, bullying is a problem, at least when it's the State doing the bullying.

  • Zeb||

    Indeed. If someone gets beat up or something, then the bully should be charged with assault. If someone hurts your feelings, tough shit. Whatever happened to "sticks and stones...".

  • Doktor Kapitalism||

    As someone who was verbally bullied, you should be able to switch classes etc (Grade school context for me) to achieve peace of mind.

    It didn't help that my teacher was appallingly apathetic about the matter.

  • Zeb||

    Yeah, sure. That sounds reasonable. I was thinking of what legal recourse should be available. If the school has a policy to help make some kids' lives less hellish, good for them.

  • Doktor Kapitalism||

    I always get into violent agreement with people...

  • Coreyah23||

    Right especially the kids that kill themselves over it, I mean come on grow up.

  • Hyperion||

    I hear that 32 oz sugary drinks is currently a popular choice.

  • Stormy Dragon||

    "The new curriculum focuses on character development."

    Drug cops are pretty much the last people I want teaching children about character.

  • nicole||

    Yeah, the thing I wish most we had more information on is what "character development" is supposed to be. I really hate that shit--public schools think "oh, who could possibly object to character development?" but I don't know, how about...anyone who doesn't agree with your idea of good character? Fucking a. There is just no way to make anything in a public school not terrible.

  • NoVAHockey||

    Not that I plan to send my son to a public school, but if circumstances dictate that I do, i'm sure i'll be on a first name basis with the administrators.

  • anon||

    Yeah, same here. Except my first name will probably be "Asshole."

    Actually, it probably is my first name anyways and I just don't know it yet.

  • sarcasmic||

    Mine will be "Oh", as in "Oh no, not him again."

  • nicole||

    That was my name when I was in public school.

    My boyfriend still thinks "socialization" is important and bullshit like that, but I don't think that's a fight I'm willing to lose.

  • anon||

    Socializing is for those that need the constant adulation and approval of others. I suffer no such need.

  • sarcasmic||

    but I don't think that's a fight I'm willing to lose.

    In relationships you can be right or you can be happy. Pick one.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    If this is still the same boyfriend we've heard about before, then she's already given up on being right.

  • nicole||

    I thought the other thing was less something you can be right or wrong about, and more something to do with mutual compromise blah blah blah.

    Whereas public schools are just motherfucking wrong.

  • nicole||

    But I so like being right.

    Seriously though, I try to explain that the "socialization" is what made me hate people so much--it's really not for the best! Although then again, maybe it is, because what if I didn't hate everyone? I might be a statist or something crazy like that! As if people needed more reasons not to have kids. Not even any surefire way to make them liberty-loving misanthropes.

  • anon||

    My SO and I just have different groups of friends, and pretty much only hang out with each other a couple of nights a week. I have my shit that I want to do, she has hers. All of her friends are idiots anyways, so no big loss.

  • NoVAHockey||

    have him read this:

    PJ ORourke on public schools

    “Don’t kids need to experience the full range of human diversity that public schools provide?” No. And if you don’t understand the process by which modern kids become socialized, you seriously need to update your Facebook page. Also, let the Statistical Abstract tell you something about the diverse experience provided by public schools.

  • nicole||

    I have to say, in his case, I thank goodness he went to public schools--because if he hadn't, he really wouldn't have known anyone normal until he was an adult. But that's because his parents live in the bubble known as academe.

  • nicole||

    Should clarify--went to them briefly, in an area where they were actually diverse, because of a parental teaching appointment. Otherwise, he was in schmancy prep schools. With that kid of Valerie Jarrett's who just had Obama show up at her wedding.

    Without public schools, he may not have come out hating those people.

  • ||

    My boyfriend still thinks "socialization" is important and bullshit like that, but I don't think that's a fight I'm willing to lose.

    If calmly stating your POV on a topic causes him to pick a fight, instead of changing the topic of conversation, perhaps you should change boyfriends.

  • nicole||

    Oh well I wouldn't call it that kind of fight, but peeps need to agree on how they're going to raise kids if they're going to raise kids.

  • mad libertarian guy||

    Stick to your guns. Don't EVER let your kids to government schools.

    I will NEVER send my children to government schools. I have them in private school for now. If I should have to remove them, for whatever reason, it's home schooling all the way. Government schools aren't even an option, and never will be.

  • R C Dean||

    If their first name is "Fuckhead", sure.

  • AuH2O||

    I left the Catholic Church... but for any hypothetical children I sire, I am thinking a Jesuit Catholic school.

  • ||

    Especially the fact that everyone is going see it as an OPPORTUNITY to try to inject their ideas of good character, even if it doesn't start that way. So it will instantly become a platfirm to indoctrinate kids with every variety of PC bullshit.

    Sensitivity training (not being a racist is good character). Environmentalism (respecting the earth is good character). Socialism (sharing is good character).

    I suppose it will be somewhat more God oriented in the Red states (going to church is good character, not having sex before marriage is good character).

  • mad libertarian guy||

    Sensitivity training (not being a racist is good character). Environmentalism (respecting the earth is good character). Socialism (sharing is good character).

    I suppose it will be somewhat more God oriented in the Red states (going to church is good character, not having sex before marriage is good character).

    Like differing states are going to have any input on it. It's centralized all the way down. It will be the same character building in MS as in WA.

  • anon||

    Wait, you mean the people that steal other people's property to resell at a profit after they shoot your dog aren't the people you want your children learning from? What could -possibly- be the problem?

  • ||

    Anon -- you win one internetz for that gem, sir.

  • sarcasmic||

    "You must first gain their trust before you betray them."

  • H. Reardon||

    Drug cops are pretty much the last people I want teaching children about character.

    My six year old boy, in first grade, tells me a policeman was in his classroom. I ask why, he say 'to talk about feelings (eyeroll).

  • The Late P Brooks||

    "The new curriculum focuses on character development."

    So... anti-bullying.

    Where will our next generation of law enforcement professionals come from, then?

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    "And it's very important *not* to engage in the practice known as swirlies, which is described in detail as follows..."

  • The Late P Brooks||

    Maybe they will go with a more Hitler Youth ethos:

    Dork And Retard Eradication

  • Tim||

    Family dinner recently with discussion of the town's plan to bring drug sniffing dog to the High School. Surprisingly I was the only one against it. Even my wife wants them to do "everything" to get drugs out.
    My niece on the other hand said that they'll end up busting a lot of teachers- starting with an art teacher, of whom she said he reeks of weed and smokes it in his supply closet.
    Could be interesting.

  • R C Dean||

    Even my wife wants them to do "everything" to get drugs out.

    TSA style grope-searches on entry to the school?

    Daily blood and urine checks?

    Random "knock and kick the door in" raids on student's homes?

    She'd be down with all that?

  • anon||

    I guess, as long as she doesn't have to worry about actually having to trust her child to make good decisions.

  • anon||

    That came out wrong; I in no way meant to imply that smoking pot or drinking (or any other drug choice) were bad decisions in and of themselves.

  • Tim||

    No, I know better than to go that route. She thinks with her feelings. You can not reason with a mother's feelings.

  • Tim||

    She doesn't want drugs in her child's school. I don't want my child to have stand still and be humiliated while a German Shepard sniffs him down like he's a prisoner in a chain gang.

  • Ted S.||

    I thought that she, being a woman, thought with her vagina. Wasn't that the lesson of the recent election?

  • anon||

    So, anti bullying. They're going to teach kids to "Just say no" to bullies?

    Personally, I think bullies build a little character. When I was growing up, eventually you get fed up with their shit and kick their ass, and they learn not to bully anymore, and you learn to not take any shit from random assholes.

    Instead, I imagine a progressive dystopia where everyone just hands over their shit on demand.

  • NoVAHockey||

    "ed up with their shit and kick their ass"

    yep. it finally occurred to me and some other kids on the bus that 5 1.

    the best part was the pre-planned lie of "he fell" when questioned.

    well, i guess the best part was punching him.

  • Doktor Kapitalism||

    There is a zero-tolerance policy for self-defense in public schools.

    I've been there. You get skewered by administration if you fight back.

  • anon||

    Even better; no education is better than government education.

  • Doktor Kapitalism||

    Basically, public schools (even the good ones) are dungheaps of institutionalized coercion. Let's just say my children won't be subjected to that horror.

  • Death Rock and Skull||

    I kind of want my kid to witness the institutionalized horror that made me who I am. If I wanted to have a kid.

  • Doktor Kapitalism||

    Won't the stories be enough?

  • mad libertarian guy||

    no education is better than government education.

    This. Too bad it took a government education to realize this.

  • GILMORE||

    Why is it I went through school literally being punched multiple times a day, and !@()#*$@ kids now get sued for 'behaving aggressively'?

    Frankly, I think my experience was more 'educational'. Who wants a generation of super-touchy annd repressed jerks?

  • Doktor Kapitalism||

    If I had to guess, I'd actually say that it's probably the parents of bullies, not the victims, who are behind this, because they didn't want to face the fact they raised little monsters.

  • NoVAHockey||

    i think it's just easier to proclaim everyone guilty than figure out what happened and how to address it.

  • Doktor Kapitalism||

    That too. Had a recent incident on my floor (dorm life isn't exactly the height of justice, either) where this overgrown elementary school bully fellow was messing with an international student and the international student slapped him. He got all whiny, and despite me as a witness, the RA just made them agree to ignore each other. Perfect example.

  • sarcasmic||

    My stepson had some kid start swinging at him last year. Like fifth grade or something. Anyway, he thought he was doing the right thing by fending the kid off without striking him, and by policy they both were suspended. That's right, he was suspended for not fighting back.
    His takeaway was that next time some kid hits him he's going to get suspended anyway, so he may as well take the opportunity to do some damage.

  • Doktor Kapitalism||

    I wish him all the luck in the world. But I won't bet on a happy outcome...

  • sarcasmic||

    His dad is a cop. Gives him an advantage.

  • Doktor Kapitalism||

    My parents are bureaucrats who raised an asthmatic nerdy kid. I didn't have such advantages. Thus my position on the matter.

  • ||

    By "dad", do you mean his biological father then? I never got the impression you were a cop.

  • GILMORE||

    that next time some kid hits him he's going to get suspended anyway, so he may as well take the opportunity to do some damage

    See = Learning is *still* happening in the hallways!

    That's the joke = all this desperate over-control probably results in far more 'serious' violence because they know that repercussions are so severe. Probably end up gouging each others eyes out and biting ears off.

    You ever get in a fight with a kid who instantly goes feral and starts biting and going for eyeballs? I have. You stop and go, "what the fuck man? its a fight. You're trying to *eat* me. Jeez. you weirdo"

    people who take shit too seriously = dangerous.

  • NoVAHockey||

    this was a long time ago. like 20+ years

  • Doktor Kapitalism||

    Were things better back in the halcyon days of incoming Clinton?

  • BelowTheRim||

    +1. I was never afraid of losing a fight/taking a few punches.

    I was afraid of permanent record blemishes, especially considering I never start fights.

  • Doktor Kapitalism||

    Never been in a full-on fight (thank my fragile, weak-boned stars), but fear of academic rather than physical consequences kept me to explaining just where the line between aggression and non-aggression is.

  • Jordan||

    Getting assaulted does not build fucking character. Enforce the law and charge bullies with battery. And allow kids to defend themselves.

    When I was growing up, eventually you get fed up with their shit and kick their ass, and they learn not to bully anymore, and you learn to not take any shit from random assholes.

    Let me tell you how it works in my experience. They never mess with you without numerical superiority. If they actually do, and you manage to fight back successfully, they will be waiting for you outside of school with plenty of backup and possibly weapons.

  • Doktor Kapitalism||

    ^^^THIS

    Bullying is a criminal offense which happens to be committed by minors. It should be treated as such.

  • ||

    SOME forms of bullying are criminal. many others are called "being an asshole".

    overbroad bullying laws are trying to tie in all sorts of behaviors, but the bright line exists. all sorts of name calling for example. bullying? yes. criminal? no. schools, of course, can ban all sorts of bullying behavior that don't rise to criminal levels, on an administrative basis, and they do

    fwiw, i do not think handling crimes "as such" iow through the criminal justice system, especially when de minimus and committed by minors is a good thing

    yes, i am against the overcriminalization and overenforcement of such. call me an enemy of law and order, but imo save egregious or repetitive examples, garden variety assaults and such committed by kids should be dealt with administratively by the school and should not be dealt with by cops and the court system

    technically speaking, shoving a kid is an assault. does anybody honestly believe ofc. krupke should be called in to the local high school because dipshit 1 shoved dipshit 2 during an argument over sally sass-a-lot? get real.

  • Doktor Kapitalism||

    What else do they keep the police at school for?

  • ||

    thats a seperate issue, but fwiw, absent an extremely high crime environment (rarely the case), i don't think they SHOULD have cops at school

  • Ted S.||

    SOME forms of bullying are criminal. many others are called "being an asshole".

    Those committed by agents of the state are in the second category; those committed by people not agents of the state are in the first category.

  • sarcasmic||

    In seventh grade I fought back against this bully, and he caught me on the way home with his older brother and at least ten of his high school buddies.
    They beat me down pretty good, but at least the bully's father gave him a good whooping when he found out.
    The school then made us share a locker in hopes that we'd work things out. I just kept everything in my backpack and never used the locker again.

  • Doktor Kapitalism||

    Your school went full on bloody drooling on the linoleum idiot with that idea.

  • gaoxiaen||

    I caught a bully out of school and beat the shit out of him. He stopped bullying.

  • ||

    Let me tell you how it works in my experience. They never mess with you without numerical superiority. If they actually do, and you manage to fight back successfully, they will be waiting for you outside of school with plenty of backup and possibly weapons.

    Not my experience. I was getting bullied by a large overmuscled football player. Finally had enough, punched him hard in the nose when he stepped off the bus, then covered up and played defense until adults arrived and broke it up.

    Got called into principal's office. Told him about the bullying, and how I'd had enough. He let me go, surprised that a seemingly meek kid would fight back.

    No one messed with me after that.

  • Robert||

    Probably they intend to teach kids not to be bullies.

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    Speaking of bullying, I bet Aslan would give that DARE lion a nasty wedgie, except DARE lion isn't wearing any pants, he's just wandering around in a T-shirt like Ted Kennedy at a party.

  • ||

    We call those 'Shirtcockers' at Burning Man.

    Alternatively, Donald Ducks.

  • Tim||

    He should get together with "porky" pig.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    a progressive dystopia where everyone just hands over their shit on demand.

    Dystopia? That a paradise, in the minds of the people who come up with this shit.

  • ||

    OT: Unicorn lair 'discovered' in North Korea! The text of the original press release (that my link cites):

    Archaeologists of the History Institute of the DPRK Academy of Social Sciences have recently reconfirmed a lair of the unicorn rode by King Tongmyong, founder of the Koguryo Kingdom (B.C. 277-A.D. 668).

    The lair is located 200 meters from the Yongmyong Temple in Moran Hill in Pyongyang City. A rectangular rock carved with words "Unicorn Lair" stands in front of the lair. The carved words are believed to date back to the period of Koryo Kingdom (918-1392).

    Jo Hui Sung, director of the Institute, told KCNA:

    "Korea's history books deal with the unicorn, considered to be ridden by King Tongmyong, and its lair.

    The Sogyong (Pyongyang) chapter of the old book 'Koryo History' (geographical book), said: Ulmil Pavilion is on the top of Mt. Kumsu, with Yongmyong Temple, one of Pyongyang's eight scenic spots, beneath it. The temple served as a relief palace for King Tongmyong, in which there is the lair of his unicorn.

    The old book 'Sinjungdonggukyojisungnam' (Revised Handbook of Korean Geography) complied in the 16th century wrote that there is a lair west of Pubyok Pavilion in Mt. Kumsu.

    The discovery of the unicorn lair, associated with legend about King Tongmyong, proves that Pyongyang was a capital city of Ancient Korea as well as Koguryo Kingdom."
  • Doktor Kapitalism||

    An fossil evidence of unicorns? No? Then why should I care.

  • Brett L||

    You don't understand, the unicorn fart powered economy will explode in N. Korea, jettisoning past all the capitalist, imperial, running-dog lackey nations and making lil' Kim the emperor of the world.

  • Doktor Kapitalism||

    Oh. Sorry for seeing such an obvious answer.

  • Doktor Kapitalism||

    *Not seeing. I must be more brainfried than I thought...

  • mr simple||

    Dude, there's a sign that says "Unicorn Lair." What more evidence could you possibly need? They can't put up a sign that says Unicorn Lair unless it's an actual unicorn lair.

  • GILMORE||

    Is Marijuana the Next Big Commodity to Invest In?

    http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs.....59110.html

    For the cops who spent a few decades telling people only dopes smoke dope and putting lots of black people in jail, this must seem somewhat embarrassing

    Oh, and I agree with comments above, re: bullies - useful character developers. Also, they do often grow up to be cops.

  • WWNGD?||

    When I was a young lad I was told the best place to score some weed was from the D.A.R.E. officers.

  • anon||

    DARE is actually what made me -want- to try LSD and pot.

  • WWNGD?||

  • gaoxiaen||

    I never even thought about drugs until the school started handing out leaflets in gym and health class. I thought "Wow! Amphetamines can help me swim faster!"

  • sarcasmic||

    I knew a guy who claimed to have broken into the home of a cop, and all he stole was drop guns and drugs.

  • ||

    I guess they are going to have to change their name.

    A program focusing on character development sounds harmless enough, though I suspect what they mean by that is "blind obedience to authority"

  • Adam||

    "Marijuana is the only illicit drug that D.A.R.E. claims to have reduced the use of through its educational programs"

    That must be a typ-o, 'cause Marijuana is THE gateway drug, well along with hard alcohol, and if you reduce that you reduce the rest.....right?

    I must be missing something important...such as a logic re-engineering class.

  • GILMORE||

    I also want to say = I approve strongly of the girl in the "I used to CARE..." t-shirt-advert on the right.

    that is all.

  • ||

    She is awesome. And the lighting only makes her look hotter.

  • ||

    i really hate to keep saying "i told you so" to the ignorant naysayers, but this is yet another data point to support my claim that the war on mj prohibition is done. state after state (not necessarily all, but hey whether or not- most) will legalize and the feds aint doing jack shit

    the feds are already overhauling their propaganda structure for pete's sake.

    seattle pd just came out with a quite funny and well written (gained national attention) entry on their site confirming several things including (as i said) they will NOT assist the feds in any actions thaqt run counter to prop 502 -- legalized mj

    despite the fact that it helped millions of people, obama's raidin' aside, medical mj got little celebration here. celebration is so WRONG. better to moan how horrible everything is, in a nation where some rights are vastly expanding - at the state level on many fronts , and even at the federal level - on drugs and guns for instance.

    DARE is symbolic as well as practical example of the feds making that HUGE change. MJ is no longer the dangerous horrible thing it was last year even.

    i would not be surprised if mj is moved out of schedule I, or other federal chicanery is introduced to justify NOT pursuing people in states where it's legalized. the feds do NOT want that battle and they are giving every indication the fight is over

  • sarcasmic||

    they will NOT assist the feds in any actions thaqt run counter to prop 502 -- legalized mj

    What will they do when the feds start raiding growers and retailers that are in full compliance with state law?

  • iggy||

    http://www.politico.com/politi.....50696.html

    So our Secretary of State says she doesn't like the idea of legalization and Obama has a history of allowing raids on medical marijuana dispensaries, but a random press release from the Seattle PD means we should be jumping for joy.

    So far, the only response the administration has made to the state laws has been to reiterate that this does not change federal drug law. That hardly sounds like an endorsement of the ballot initiatives or the states' rights to choose for themselves.

  • sarcasmic||

    I figure the feds will act as if the state initiatives don't exist, and will gleefully bust growers and sellers who have lots of assets to steal.

    The state and local police will not stop them, and I bet many will join in for a share of the loot.

    Users won't have anything to worry about, except their favorite supplier being busted by the feds.

  • ||

    you figure wrong.

  • sarcasmic||

    All statements from the federal government to this point indicate that I am right.

  • ||

    history will indicate that you were wrong.

    and i am also confident that if i am wrong, and the feds do raid 502 compliant dispensaries, that they will receive no help from locals btw

  • sarcasmic||

    and i am also confident that if i am wrong, and the feds do raid 502 compliant dispensaries, that they will receive no help from locals btw

    Who won't get any help? The feds, or the people who the local law enforcement has sworn to serve and protect?

    Or both? Yeah. Both.

  • ||

    both. under dual sovereignty

  • iggy||

    There has literally not been one positive statement from the federal government. Not one. A Seattle PD press release is completely irrelevant. If they're willing to ignore state law, then why wouldn't they be willing to ignore a random press release from one police department?

    I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm just saying that there isn't enough evidence yet for either side. We shouldn't assume they'll be busting the doors down on dispensaries, but you also can't assume they'll totally change course after decades of behaving abhorrently on the drug issue.

  • ||

    i *am* assuming they will change course

    it's a bold prediction, but i'm willing to make it

    look, i started buying gold when it was $250/ounce

    that was my greatest financial success, and i saw metric assloads of evidence it was a good investment and metric assloads of naysayers saying it wasn't

    i went with my gut

    and i am damn glad i did.

    i am doing the same here. i see a lot of knownothings saying this is the same as medical MJ.

    ironically, the 'it's different this time" argument is ALMOST always wrong in finance. crashes are crashes. bubbles are bubbles. shit remains the same

    but sometimes SOMETIMES shit is different

    i'm just storing away i told you so chits here so that when the feds roll over for recreational MJ i can cash them in. i think, like gold, it's a bold but supportedbyevidence plan

  • sarcasmic||

    it's a bold prediction, but i'm willing to make it

    You're making a gut call that the arrogant pricks in the federal government will admit to being wrong for decades, and they'll change laws that affect the records of tens of millions of people and result in thousands and thousands of people being released from prison?

    Yeah, that is pretty bold.

    Stupid bold.

  • iggy||

    Apparently, bold prediction is secret code for "I have no evidence."

    Seriously, sometimes shit is different is not an argument. I also love your gamblers fallacy. I was right this other time when I made a prediction completely sans evidence, how could I be wrong this time? I'm on a roll that will never end!

  • Auric Demonocles||

    Actually, he said he had a ton of evidence for his gold buying. Which means this situation is nothing like that one.

  • Robert||

    Who said they'd admit anything? It'll simply be "no comment".

  • gaoxiaen||

    Public policy always lags public opinion. MJ legalization will play out the same way, but it won't be a smooth road.

  • ||

    this is not medical mj. and there is NO indication the feds intend to pull the bullshit they pulled with medical MJ

    and a metric assload of indication they intend to act differently

    for fucks' sake, read THIS article. they are changing their very propaganda structure. note: they did not do this for medical MJ

    medical MJ seriously pissed off big pharma. the feds, crony capitalists they we are as a nation, responded in kind

    there is no big pharma devil in the recreational soup

  • sarcasmic||

    this is not medical mj. and there is NO indication the feds intend to pull the bullshit they pulled with medical MJ

    Even many ardent drug warriors are willing to make an exception for someone on their death bed with cancer.

    You're saying they'll be more lenient for recreational dope?

    What have you been smoking?

  • iggy||

    That's exactly my thought. The argument for medical weed is 'this can ease people's pain and has medical uses.' There's no such argument for recreational weed, other than the fact that people just enjoy it. How can you possibly argue that they'd be more likely to bust medical weed than recreational weed?

  • ||

    again, big pharma

    that was the push behind the raids and the pushBACK against medical MJ

    they aren't IN the recreational MJ fight

    not to mention if you actually open your eyes and read some stuff you will see a VERY different response by fed talking heads to recreational mj vs. medical MJ

  • ||

    big pharma

    i am kind of surprised how few people here (plenty of others do) fail to understand that the feds were (and are) driven by big pharma. they are immensely powerful. medical MJ directly challenged pharma by legalizing a drug that frankly WORKS for a host of ailments and SERIOUSLY threatens their bottom line.

    this is NOT medical MJ

    you can keep ignoring the substantial differences.

    or you can open your fucking eyes and see ALREADY a COMPLETELY different reaction by the feds, etc.

  • sarcasmic||

    big pharma

    Big Corporate Conspiracy!

    Oooooooooooooo!

    Booga booga!

    or you can open your fucking eyes and see ALREADY a COMPLETELY different reaction by the feds, etc.

    The only reaction from the feds that I've seen is that the state initiatives do not change federal law, that federal law will not change, and that it will continue to be enforced.

    You're going to owe me twenty bucks.

  • ||

    jesus christ, you are ridiculing the fact that crony capitalism rools?

    in the OBAMA ADMINISTRATION?

    jesus fucking christ.

  • R C Dean||

    there is NO indication the feds intend to pull the bullshit they pulled with medical MJ

    Actually, there is. They have said exactly the same thing about legalized pot as they said about medpot. Which is evidence, in my mind, that they will act the same way.

    What there is zero evidence for is the proposition that they will act differently.

  • gaoxiaen||

    Not yet. Remember "Rollerball"?

  • Zeb||

    Well, he blatantly lied about his policy toward medical MJ. So maybe he is lying this time too.

  • ||

    obama has yet to say in regards to recreational mj that he intends to raid jackshit

  • Zeb||

    Well, whoever it was who said federal policy would not change.

  • ||

    growers and retailers at this point CAN'T be in compliance with state law. right now, there is no way to lawfully SELL nonmedical mj or grow it. that won't exist for a while. as wiki explains

    After approval, Initiative 502 implements over a period of a year or more. Legal possession and DUI limits go into effect on December 6, 2012, and the state has until December 1, 2013, to establish other key rules.[7] Until rules are established and licenses issued, retail sales to the general public are not allowed. Such future businesses must be located 1,000 feet or further from public schools, and public use of marijuana becomes a civil infraction.[8]

    of course, as i said, i don't think the feds will raid those in full compliance with state law

    this is not medical MJ and as data point after data point keeps confirming day after day, the feds are giving every indication taht they intend to roll over on this

  • sarcasmic||

    i don't think the feds will raid those in full compliance with state law

    If they are making lots of money and have assets the feds can steal, you can bet your badge the feds will be busting them.

  • ||

    and i keep telling you, i disagree. if you want to put quatloos on it, then let's lay it down, man!

    this is qualitatively different than medical MJ

  • sarcasmic||

    I've told you many times I'll bet you twenty bucks.

    All those pills must be affecting your memory.

  • Randian||

    I can already see how this is going to play out: a rec-weed retailer is going to get raided, and dunphy is going to argue it wasn't fully compliant with state law. sarcasmic will argue that it was, and nobody is going to get paid.

  • sarcasmic||

    You're likely right. Goalposts will be moved.

  • R C Dean||

    dunphy is going to argue it wasn't fully compliant with state law.

    As in CA, where any pretext re: state law will do. Including compliance with state sales tax, if memory serves.

  • ||

    fair enuf.

  • T||

    I'll make that bet. I've been following Colorado more closely. The first state-licensed pot shop in Colorado will be busted by the feds less than 6 months after opening. It doesn't matter what for, because anything the feds do is a pretext.

    20 bucks to a charity of your choice if I'm wrong.

  • ||

    i am only going to monetary bet on WA. i admittedly have NOT been following colorado enough. i have been diligently following WA.

    y'know what? \\\

    fuck it, i'll take the bet

  • T||

    All right, it's on. Just so we're clear: 20 bucks (to charity) says the feds bust the first CO legal pot shop in under 6 months. I have the yes, you are saying no.

  • Robert||

    Dunphy will win because in Wash. it's going to be state stores. Officers enforcing a state or local law on controlled substances are allowed to distribute them without registering with federal DEA. That is, the feds are not going to bust state police.

    What they may do, however, is camp outside state stores and confiscate whatever people buy after searching them based on probable cause.

    In Colo. because I raised this issue they decided to designate the employees of the distributors as peace officers, but I don't know if that'll fly in the case of a private biz. It didn't in one case in Calif, although the guy there was deputized after the fact, which may have made it seem pretextual.

  • Randian||

    Neither side in this absolutely asinine argument has an iota of proof for its respective argument.

    This is dunphy trolling Some People, and Some People are very foolishly feeding him.

    I think dunphy's input can be valuable, but this is literally the dumbest argument I have ever seen on the Internet.

  • R C Dean||

    Neither side in this absolutely asinine argument has an iota of proof for its respective argument.

    Well, those of us who are skeptical can point to the history and practice of local law enforcement eagerly assisting the feds in shutting down medpot retailers and producers. We merely asky why would this change for funpot?

  • ||

    among other reasons, seattle PD didn't come out with such a statement vis a vis medical MJ and they have ALREADY (the law isn't even in effect yet) for recreational MJ

    people here are failing to recognize the substantial differences betweent this and medical MJ. Medical MJ pisssed of big pharma. and the feds responded, lapdogs to big pharma that they are, in kind

    there is no big pharma "big dog" to lead THIS fight. it's OVER. we are seeing the almost EXACT opposite response thus far from the feds to recreational MJ vs. medical MJ

    again, something the naysayers refuse to acknolwledge

    for fuck's sake, they are changing DARE.

    we've had congressmen already working on changing federal law to better accomodate recreational MJ too

    this is not medical mj

  • R C Dean||

    there is no big pharma "big dog" to lead THIS fight.

    Not sure why not. If medpot cuts into big pharma, why wouldn't funpot? Why wouldn't the loss of market share when people stop buying pharma because they can self-medicate with pot be even bigger with funpot?

    we are seeing the almost EXACT opposite response thus far from the feds to recreational MJ vs. medical MJ

    We are? Its too early to know if their actions will be different one way or the other, but I keep seeing the exact same rhetoric, except for the new expressions of concern that pot will be exported from CO and WA, which is what they would say if they are planning on cracking down on state-legal suppliers and growers.

    I hope you're right, d, but I think it is the height of naivete to say that "its OVER". It ain't over 'til the federal law changes, and I have seen zero movement on that front.

  • Robert||

    There has been a noticeable difference. Re medpot, the feds kept insisting it's not medicine. Re funpot, they never claim it's not fun.

  • Randian||

    Well, those of us who are skeptical can point to the history and practice of local law enforcement eagerly assisting the feds in shutting down medpot retailers and producers. We merely asky why would this change for funpot?

    But we'll just have to wait and see, won't we?

  • Zeb||

    Yes, this. I don't know why anybody does anything (unless it's because they're stupid). I don't know why they keep the current policy and I don't know why they would change it. So let's wait and see. Hopefully it will at least be interesting.

  • Ptah-Hotep||

    but this is literally the dumbest argument I have ever seen on the Internet.

    You must be new to this site.

    /I keed.

  • ||

    no, this is called making a prediction and supporting it.

    it's not trolling, merely because there is not one other person on here (apparently) who agrees with me that

    1) this is qualitatively different than medical MJ
    2) the war on MJ is over

  • Randian||

    no, this is called making a prediction and supporting it.

    The only way to support a prediction is to see if it actually happens.

    "I predict Alabama will win the National Championship Game, and here are some reasons why: X, Y, and Z"

    Then see if it plays out.

    You've stated your position, and yet you come around to repeat it over and over, even in threads where it isn't relevant.

    We get it. Just stop.

  • ||

    well, it is CERTAINLY RELEVANT in this thread

  • Randian||

    Except this is how you started it:

    i really hate to keep saying "i told you so" to the ignorant naysayers, but this is yet another data point to support my claim that the war on mj prohibition is done.

    Both 'sides' are "ignorant", because the fucking future hasn't happened yet, so shut yer yap already.

  • ||

    oh man the fuck up. wah wah wah

  • gaoxiaen||

    Well, we can hope this is a turning point. Not all libertarians are pessimists.

  • Zeb||

    I'm optimistic (I've decided that there is no point being otherwise). But this is definitely a situation where we will have to wait and see. I don't know why everyone seems so attached to their preferred prediction to what the feds will do. There is no prize for being right, you know.

  • R C Dean||

    Well put, Zeb.

  • PACW||

    "but this is literally the dumbest argument I have ever seen on the Internet"

    I envy the sheltered life you lead.

  • Killazontherun||

    Hey, who needs to hear a bus coming up behind you when doing a traffic detail? Crank up the Rage Against the Machine, man!

  • ||

    derp derp derp

  • Killazontherun||

  • Pro Libertate||

    Z.O.D. - Zeroing in On Delinquents. Or, in the alternative, Zoning Out on Drugs.

  • ||

    heroine

    I thought female lead characters are in vogue.

  • ||

    they are, whereas heroin is SO passe (insert accent egu please)

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=APrpB-i4d_E

  • Almanian.||

    Cops Helping Organize Drugless Endeavors

    CHODE

  • ||

    posting this video because it's so representative of something we often do, but i've never seen a reason cop video of us doing it.

    it's the circ where one civilian tries to use the police to have another's 1, 2, 4, th etc amendment violated

    here we have an airport admin try to use the police (sheriff deputies) to remove some opt out information disseminators ... and the cops give him whatfor

    ultimate professionalism on the part of the police AND the first amendment advocate, the operative lesson - be polite and respectful to all, and it usually pays off.

    work(s) for me for 20+ yrs

    reposted from weekend

    http://blutube.policeone.com/p.....mendment-/

    and man , if ever a kid DESERVED (note: not just justified. this kid NEEEDS to be pepper sprayed, he deserves it, he begs for it)

    it's this kid. the best part is the whole incident is apparently filmed by his brother. thanks, bro...

    http://blutube.policeone.com/p.....trol-teen/

    (i like the way it's filed under police HUMOR videos)

  • Auric Demonocles||

    posting this video because it's so representative of something we often do, but i've never seen a reason cop video of us doing it

    Two things:

    1) That cop did his job. Why would you expect news coverage someone doing their job and not breaking the law? I do that every day.

    2)

    the operative lesson - be polite and respectful to all, and it usually pays off

    Fuck you. Be a dick to cops and they should still treat you the way the cop in this video did.

  • Kyfho Myoba||

    1) It's not newsworthy when you do your job and don't break the law, because you do that every day. The news-people are implying that when a cop does his job w/o breaking the law, that it is newsworthy, as it doesn't happen every day, something the readers of this site already know.

  • gaoxiaen||

    I'm very polite to cops. If it wasn't too big of a fuckup, they might let you go, or have reason to cooperate when you get your ticket fixed.

  • ||

    ) "That cop did his job. Why would you expect news coverage someone doing their job and not breaking the law? I do that every day."

    the point is that a very substantial %age of cases are us protecting others from their rights being violated as in here. iow, we are at the front lines of protecting people, such as this advocate and their civil rights, something rarely acknowledged
    "Fuck you. Be a dick to cops and they should still treat you the way the cop in this video did."

    yes, in a perfect world. and we'd all have lollipops too

    this is representative of why it doesn't surprise me at all how many anecdotes of bad cop experiences reasonoids have. because they think going through life being a dick makes them special

    the reality is IN ALL HUMAN ENCOUNTERS you get better results by being police

    it's also a moral imperative to treat people with respect.

    don't do that, and don't go bitching to me when people don't bend over backwards to give you the result you want

  • ||

    by being "polite". although being police - iow great upstanding defenders of justice is a good things too.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    Actually, being police would get you better results in basically all encounters, because the other party is going to be aware that you can fuck them with impunity.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    this is representative of why it doesn't surprise me at all how many anecdotes of bad cop experiences reasonoids have. because they think going through life being a dick makes them special

    I've never been a dick to a cop. I've rarely been a dick to anyone. That doesn't change the fact that you're demanding people treat police like heroes for doing their fucking job, and are implicitly admitting that (legally) being a dick to a cop can result in bad things for you.

  • Sevo||

    "I've never been a dick to a cop. I've rarely been a dick to anyone. That doesn't change the fact that you're demanding people treat police like heroes for doing their fucking job, and are implicitly admitting that (legally) being a dick to a cop can result in bad things for you."

    This is the reason I stopped replying to Dunphy.
    He doesn't understand that cops are janitors; they are charged with keeping the streets clean. Some of that work means they get to use guns, but that's irrelevant; they're society's janitors.

  • Robert||

    What this proves is that nonprofits never die, even after their reason for existence goes away or is repudiated.

    Actually, though, if propaganda is their purpose, focusing on tobacco & liquor puts them more at odds with society than before. That is, the nature & effects of the propaganda are going to be worse than when they focused on illegal drug use.

  • gaoxiaen||

    I was never interested in dope until my high school "educated me".

  • sohbet||

    very super blogos thanks admin sohbet & sohbet odaları

  • cinsel chat||

    earned that one "Sharon Levy" cares more for boot licking than the Hip sohbet odaları & cinsel sohbet

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Progressive Puritans: From e-cigs to sex classifieds, the once transgressive left wants to criminalize fun.
  • Port Authoritarians: Chris Christie’s Bridgegate scandal
  • The Menace of Secret Government: Obama’s proposed intelligence reforms don’t safeguard civil liberties

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement