cannabisnews.com: Former DEA Agent, Journalist To Square Off





Former DEA Agent, Journalist To Square Off
Posted by CN Staff on October 23, 2002 at 07:43:21 PT
By Jon Custer, Alligator Writer
Source: Independent Florida Alligator
In a "Heads vs. Feds" debate billed as "guaranteed to create a buzz on campus," the editor of High Times magazine will face off tonight against a former drug enforcement kingpin.Journalist Stephen Hager will argue legalization of marijuana with former New York Drug Enforcement Agency head Robert Stutman, whose 25-year career led to nearly 15,000 arrests.
"It's a huge hit all around the country," said Jordan Miller, a spokesman for Wolfman Productions, which manages the long-running debate series.Miller said past attendance has been high, with debates drawing more than 700 students at other universities.Tonight's face-off will take place at 8 in the Reitz Union Ballroom.Hager, who has headed the counterculture magazine since 1988, will discuss five points in favor of legalizing the popular drug, including its usefulness in medicine and hemp-based products and its effects on the economy and criminal justice system.While Miller admitted most audiences initially favored Hager, Stutman's well-researched arguments allowed the former drug agent to hold his own."He's an extremely good speaker," Miller said. "Bob has definitely made the debate a huge part of what it is."Added Hager: "He takes a lot of punishment, but the crowd usually ends up liking him."While Stutman opposes outright legalization, he is against prison sentences for minor drug possession and supports hemp products and medical marijuana research.The high-profile ex-cop, who started a large drug rehabilitation company after retiring from the DEA, has argued in the past that education and treatment, not enforcement, are the best ways to reduce drug use.Heath Wintz, president of UF Students for Sensible Drug Policy, helped promote the debate but questioned its relevance and the seriousness of some of the arguments."Although they are credible individuals, they are not the best people to be debating it because neither of them are directly influencing policy," Wintz said."They know each other's arguments forward and backward," he added. "It's not so much of a debate as it is an entertainment."Miller said part of the series' popularity stemmed from its balanced viewpoint and the intellectual caliber of the opponents."They respect each other so much they make it about the issues," Miller said."As long as you're arguing the issues, the people feel it is very balanced." Source: Independent Florida Alligator, The (FL Edu)Author:  Jon Custer, Alligator WriterPublished: October 23, 2002Copyright: 2002 Campus Communications, Inc.Contact: letters alligator.orgWebsite: http://www.alligator.org/Related Articles & Web Site:High Times Magazinehttp://www.hightimes.com/Ganja Debate Draws Crowd http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread14427.shtmlExperts Debate High Times and Crimeshttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread14288.shtmlEx-Drug Agent Debates Marijuana Legalization http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread12557.shtml
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #6 posted by DANA on October 24, 2002 at 02:45:06 PT
...Four and Twenty Blackbirds....
...Mmmmm,,a nice hot wedge of blackbird pie,,,,,,and the strangest part,,is "when the pie was opened,the birds began to sing.."...I'd say they should have left that pie in the oven a bit longer!,,,or at least removed the beaks and feathers from these birds before making the pie.....This staged debate thing is a fun idea...alot like "Point Counterpoint"...(Jane,,You ignorant slut!)...If nothing else,it's a good way to bring the matter out into the open,,,.....It is f*%#*&g maddening,,,,that no actual empire drug pig officials will engage in a serious debate....It makes me really mad. ..The "discussion",is not allowed on the anti side,,or it's limited to news release propaganda....No one in the empire can be held directly accountable....BUT,,,,If my old ass gets busted ,,,then the 'accountability' factor zeroes right on in!..No wiggle room there for that 'accountability'!.........that's one of the main problems .... there's no problem finding ways to bust you,,but there is a problem,when you want to find answers for why ,or who busts you.......wasnt that a crazy dish to put before the king? 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #5 posted by knox42897 on October 23, 2002 at 22:42:45 PT:
Vaporize it
I went to te 14th annual cannabis cup and one of my favorite things is to vaporize marijuana. It is so much cleaner. So if the DEA's only opposition is that its too harmful to smoke then I agree to only vaporize it as long as you don't arrest me or take my medicine from me.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #4 posted by druid on October 23, 2002 at 12:59:51 PT:
It came to my University but I missed it 
Here is the article the University Paper wrote:Monday night the Program Board sponsored its great debate for 2001. Heads versus Feds discussed the legalization of marijuana to a packed crowd of ISU students.Steve Hagar, 12 year editor-in-chief of High Times magazine represented the legalization proponents. He started Freedom Fighters, a legalization group, and is a member of the Rainbow Family and Cannabis Cup.Representing the other side was former Drug Enforcement Administration agent Robert Stutman. While in the DEA, Stutman was one of the highest profiled agents. The Columbian cartels had an assassination warrant against him. He is credited with bringing the crack epidemic of the 1980s to the forefront of American Society.Each speaker had 10 to 12 minutes to give opening statements and then the microphone was opened up to the audience for a question-and-answer period. The original format of the debate was to be traditional, but it was changed mainly to a question-and-answer period because both speakers thought it would be more interesting.Hagar’s opening statements consisted of his reasons for supporting legalization: marijuana is a medicinal resource; it decreases prison populations; hemp is a renewable resource, such as paper and cloth; and the end of corruption from illegal drugs. He said that legalization would get marijuana out of the hands of children and regulate it through pharmacies and alcohol stores.Hagar’s main reasons for supporting legalization centered around medical purposes and the use for religious ceremonies in the counter culture, such as the Rainbow Family. In the groups marijuana is used in conjunction with the sacrament part of the religious service.“There is no better way to persecute a religion than to outlaw their sacrament,” said Hagar. “The counter-culture isn’t a bad thing; we’re a good thing, a culture of peace.”Stutman’s opening statement mostly consisted of agreeing with or rebutting most of Hagar’s statements. “The vast majority of Americans don’t agree that marijuana should be legal; most medical professionals don’t think marijuana should be legal. They do not think it is ever appropriate to smoke marijuana for medical purposes,” noted Stutman.Stutman charged Hagar with using emotional appeals and stated, “We should never make policy decisions based on emotions; it is a very slippery slope.”Stutman also used studies to prove that marijuana is more carcinogenic than smoking cigarettes, provoking a great deal of response from the audience in questions and laughter. The majority of questions from the audience were queries to Stutman for proof of his stance.Hagar argued that one of the main reasons marijuana isn’t legal is because of the lack of profit for pharmaceutical companies who can produce synthetic drugs that cost more.“You can’t patent marijuana, and if it was legal it would only cost dollars to produce,” stated Hagar.“I’m all for medical uses for marijuana, as long as it is not smoking,” countered Stutman; he again affirmed that smoking marijuana is more carcinogenic than smoking cigarettes.One of the last questions presented to Stutman was if he has ever used marijuana.“How can you be an expert without experimenting?” the person asked.“I have never used marijuana, but when women are pregnant they go to a doctor who is an expert. He as a male has never had a baby, but women trust him. It is the same thing for me,” he said.Hagar countered by inviting Stutman to attend the Cannabis Cup in Amsterdam this year and to smoke with him.
And here is the papers official "Our View":Our View
America doesn't have room for marijuanaMarijuana legalization is a broad and complex issue, as the Heads versus Feds debate on April 2 exemplified. But after hearing both sides of the argument and doing some extra study, we’ve decided that we agree with the antilegalization contingent. It would be difficult to explain all of the reasons for our position in the space available, but we’ll share some of the stronger points that persuaded us to agree that marijuana should continue to be considered an illegal substance. We recognize that there are several pertinent side issues associated with this debate — medical marijuana and production of hemp to name two — but we will focus on why marijuana should not be legalized as a recreational drug. Legalization of marijuana implicitly carries with it the legalization of other drugs. We believe legalization would adversely affect national economic and social issues, health care, crime and violence. Proponents of legalization contend that the federal government’s war against drugs is a waste of money and time. We agree that the current laws are not doing much to curb the pandemic drug problem, but legalizing drugs is certainly not the answer. Legalizing drugs would send the message that drug use is acceptable and would encourage drug use among people who don’t currently use drugs. Legalization would create more addicts, which would necessitate more drug treatment facilities at even higher costs to taxpayers. According to the Drug Enforcement Administration, the federal government spent $17 billion on drug control, including enforcement, prevention education and treatment in 1999. In comparison, drug and alcohol abuse costs the United States in excess of $246 billion each year.People who were against alcohol prohibition in the 1920s argued that crime and other social problems would be solved if alcohol were legal. However, there are 11 million alcoholics whose behavior has contributed fetal defects, traffic fatalities, domestic violence and other crimes. Legalization of marijuana would just add to these problems.Statistics from the DEA state that only 10 percent of drinkers become alcoholics, while up to 75 percent of regular illicit drug users become addicted. Dr. Herbert Kleber, a Yale University psychiatrist and staff member at the Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University, stated in a 1994 article in the New England Journal of Medicine: “There are over 50 million nicotine addicts, 18 million alcoholics or problem drinkers and fewer than 2 million cocaine addicts in the United States. Cocaine is a much more addictive drug than alcohol. If cocaine were legally available, as alcohol and nicotine are now, the number of cocaine abusers would probably rise to a point somewhere between the number of users of the other two agents, perhaps 20 to 25 million ... the number of compulsive users might be nine times higher ... than the current number. When drugs have been widely available — as ... cocaine at the turn of the century both use and addiction have risen.”Why would legalization of marijuana be any different? If drugs are made legal, more people will use drugs.Most drugs we consider illicit today were once legal in the United States and could even be purchased through the Sears catalogue. But when Americans recognized that these legal drugs were harmful to individuals and society, drug laws were enacted. Misconstrued examples of how legalization works in other countries are often used to explain how it might work in the United States. In 1987, Zurich, Switzerland allowed drug use and sales in a part of the city dubbed “Needle Park.” The experiment was abandoned five years later after an influx of addicts, violence and drug-related deaths. Zurich Municipal spokesman Andres Ohler told the New York Times that the number of regular drug users at the park had swollen from a few hundred in 1987 to 20,000 by 1992.Drug-related crime and violence would increase as a result of legalization. An anti-legalization forum composed of law enforcement agents said that most drug-related crime is not the result of people who want to buy drugs, but by people who use drugs. Legalization will lead to more use and consequently more criminal activity. Legalization of marijuana would be bad policy for America. It would lead to more economic and social problems, as well as increased crime and violence.T.R.P. Ratified 6-1
sucks :(On a side note I had an anonymous person walk up to me while I was taking a smoke break at work and indentify themselves as being from the journalism department on campus and they wanted to know if the term "four twenty" had any meaning to me besides the time of day. Well having waked-n-baked that morning I was a bit shocked at the question and instead of answering "hell yea! 4:20 is my favorite time of day and April 20 is a day of world wide cannabis celebration" I answered "Yea a line from a poem, 4 and 20 black birds baked in a pie." Oh well. I was a bit paranoid and it sure made my heart beat faster when I heard that question.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #3 posted by malleus on October 23, 2002 at 11:22:37 PT
I'm glad someobody else said it first.
This is becoming a real cute little show. The anti scores points, the fluffy-headed 'reformer' waxes lyrical about religious use...and nothing gets settled. I'd nail that anti's feet to the floor and ask him really hard questions, get him mad, make him show his true (fascist) colors by causing him to say something outside of his comfortable little script. It won't happen so long as the really sharp, cutting questions - like why someone should be thrown in jail for cannabis for 20 years, but a murderer gets 7 years for 'good behavior' and then goes out an kills again - are not being asked. This fluff doesn't serve the movement at all.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by WolfgangWylde on October 23, 2002 at 09:12:47 PT
No offense to the movement...
...but this is just a dog and pony show. These two are buddies, taking their show on the road.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by Dark Star on October 23, 2002 at 08:29:53 PT
A Proper Debate
A proper debate might better include a current government official (Ashcroft, Walters, Hutchinson) vs. a doctor that supports medical marijuana.
[ Post Comment ]


Post Comment