In 1962 President John F. Kennedy declared May 15th as Peace Officers Memorial Day and the week in which it falls, as Police Week. He did this to set a day and week during the year to acknowledge and honor the sacrifice made by law enforcement officers and their families. Ironically and tragically, the following year Kennedy was assassinated and Dallas Police Officer JD Tippit was murdered the same day by the same man accused of killing Kennedy.  Officer Tippit would be honored during the 1964 Police Memorial Day ceremony.

We are all here today because we all have something terrible in common: We all know of someone in law enforcement who gave their life serving the people of their community.

As I see it, memorials are held to accomplish two things:  (1) They provide a time and place for friends and family to mourn.  (2) Memorials provide a time and place for us to remember and honor those whose lives were lost, or stolen.

So we’re all here together this day and this week because it has been set aside for us – to take time out of our routines and busyness to pay respects, remember, and mourn.  Otherwise, I am quite sure we would never do that, because we do routine and busyness quite well.  We in law enforcement tend to set aside our emotions and our feelings and find something to take our minds off of whatever is bothering us, sometimes at the expense of our families.  We’re so good at it JFK had to give us our own day and week so that we could do it right.  And it worked because we are all here today, together.

I have personally known four law enforcement officers who have lost their lives in the line of duty. Trooper Oren Hindman, whose last conversation with me had to do with him jokingly bragging about his report writing prowess and how the DUI suspect who crashed through a fence wouldn’t stand a chance after he put his pen to paper.  Officer Les Hollers, who in his last conversation with me on the night he was injured, offered to buy me coffee later because he was so tired from the day’s events with his family.  Officer Nick Armstrong, who was smiling ear to ear when we talked the last time, about his assignment guarding a water main break and how somebody had to do it.  And Ryan McCandless who in his last conversation with me shared his ideas about some of the things I was doing wrong (he was right by the way).  These four men and their tragic end span some 27 years and have undoubtedly had an impact on me and many others.  This is how I know how some of you feel.  This is that commonality we all share here today.

The heroes on the memorial wall are gone forever, but remembered always.  They inspire us by their actions, their courage, their heroism.  They continue to inspire us, long after they are gone.

I don’t know about you, but sometimes I have bad feelings about the way these brave men and women were taken from us.  I sometimes feel a rush of anger or guilt or sorrow.  I hope I am not the only one who feels that way.

I said I sometimes feel those things, but I always feel fortunate to have known them, I always feel motivated by their sacrifice, I always feel a sense of duty, or maybe even an obligation to continue to do what we always do, to continue what they were doing when they were taken from us.  And no matter how sad or guilty or angry I may feel, I know my feelings are but a fraction of those felt by the spouses, sons and daughters, parents, and siblings left behind.

I can tell you something I have learned the hard way and have seen with my own eyes:  That when a law enforcement officer falls, the impact goes deep. Not only are friends, family and colleagues affected, entire communities are affected.  Grade school kids and grandparents are afraid.  Average ordinary citizens share a feeling of loss and a renewed sense of vulnerability.  It devastates a community, and for good reason – law enforcement officers take care of and protect every man woman and child and when they lose their life doing so, it causes us all to focus on those things we are afraid of.

It’s tragic, it’s hurtful, it’s wrong and it shouldn’t happen but it does.  But why?  I’ll tell you why: Because there is evil in this world and there are brave honorable men and women who are willing to put themselves at risk to make the world a better place.  I am so proud to part of a profession whose members are dedicated and hard working and take risks to serve total strangers every day.

We are all here today because we all have something beautiful in common: We all know of someone in law enforcement who gave their life serving the people of their community.

Thank you and God bless you.

This week in Cleveland, Ohio three women were rescued after being held captive for roughly 10 years.  One was kidnapped in 2002, one in 2003 and the other in 2004 – from the same street!  They were found in a house owned by Ariel Castro, a 52 year old former school bus driver.  Castro was arrested on counts of rape and kidnapping.  Apparently, Castro impregnated one of the women who now has a six year old daughter.  Police found ropes and chains in Castro’s house and as the days and weeks go on we are sure to learn more and more horrific details from this tragic case.  A fourth woman from the same area was kidnapped in 2007 but never found.

Can you imagine the trauma inflicted on these three women and their families in the time they have been held prisoner by this animal?  It’s the thing horror movies are made of.

We are so desensitized to this level of evil that we can simply ignore it and turn the channel.  The three victims however, will never turn the channel and will likely think of Castro all the days of their lives.

The media is already starting to question whether the police may have done something wrong in the last 10 years – because hey, it’s been 10 years – how could you not have found them in that amount of time? I have a hunch they failed to find them due to their requirement to strike a balance between the constitutional rights of law abiding citizens and the safety and security of the victims.  Perhaps they could have found them 10 years ago had they done a house to house search of every property in Cleveland, but people can refuse such a search without drawing suspicion to themselves – it’s a constitutional right.

Now, authorities will subject Castro to a criminal justice system which gives him rights and government-funded lawyers and more trauma to the victims will be the result.  Castro doesn’t deserve access to the same system we use for ‘normal’ people who make legal mistakes and have to be held accountable.  It makes a mockery of our system and the people who designed it.  But…he will get the same treatment as everyone else because the sophistication of the American legal system will guarantee it. 

It doesn’t seem that the Constitution could have been written to protect people like Castro. It must have been written to protect the rest of us from him.  I would be fine with revoking his constitutional rights and treating him the way he deserves to be treated but for one thing: Who will judge who is deserving and non-deserving of constitutional protections, and when will that moveable standard catch up to the rest of us?  Let’s be thankful for the Constitution and all that it means to us.

This case is a tragedy and nothing will restore the victims to their original condition.  The question is, can Castro be punished to the extent that we all feel safer?  I say no, because by the time he is sentenced, our attention will be diverted by the new monsters we are watching on TV.

Last year we took 624 reports of runaway children in Rapid City.  That’s 1.7 per day, every day.  So far we are on course to top 700 runaway reports in 2013.  These aren’t kids who are 30  minutes late coming home from school; they have left home, leaving worried parents with no other option than to call police.  Running away from home is not a crime, and when caught, children are not arrested.  They are temporarily detained while arrangements can be made to take them home.  Sometimes that takes minutes or hours, sometimes it takes days or weeks, but the goal is to reunite the family and that is almost always the final resolution.

A runaway child is a family issue and parents should be in charge of how much or how little people know about it.  That’s why we do not issue press releases on runaways, or post their photos on social media.  We respect the family’s privacy.

Child abductions are another issue altogether. In 2012 we received several reports of suspicious behavior (creepy guys offering candy kind of thing)  and a few reports involving child custody issues, but there were no confirmed child abductions in Rapid City. Child abduction is a crime.  Child abduction occurs when someone steals a child and takes them away (I know this is a basic explanation but I am making a point here).

Besides the obvious, there is a huge difference between a runaway child case and an abducted child case: the AMBER ALERT.  Amber Alert is a mass communication plan devised to facilitate the safe return of an abducted child.  Named after nine-year-old Amber Hagerman who was abducted and murdered in Arlington, Texas in 1996, the Amber Alert system involves communication on TV, radio, traffic condition signs, billboards, e-mail and text messages, emergency alert systems and NOAA weather notification systems.  Oh, and newer Walgreens billboards.  It’s a big deal, and it should be.  The use of the Amber Alert system is not permitted for runaway children.

Can you imagine using Amber Alerts on 700 runaway kids in Rapid City alone?  You would be so desensitized to it you would do anything to avoid having to hear another one…meanwhile, the ONE time we needed it, it would be ineffective.  Get the picture?

(But wait! How do we know whether a missing child has run away or been abducted? In truth, many of these runaway reports involve the same children, over and over. Many of them have rough family situations, and they run away for a reason. We will always err on the side of caution, and if the case meets the criteria for an Amber Alert, we won’t hesitate to issue one. However, those cases are blessedly rare.)

Amber Alerts are meant to be taken very seriously. Recently, a do-gooder made a poster about a runaway girl he didn’t know, using third-party information, titled it ‘Amber Alert,’ and posted it on his Facebook page (and ours).  He’s an activist and has nearly 5,000 Facebook friends, so the fake poster was shared on literally thousands of Facebook pages.  If that’s not bad enough, he insinuated that there were racial reasons for the police not taking it as seriously as he thought we should have.  This, in turn, sparked many other racially accusatory statements from some of his followers.  And why?  Because of ignorance and a penchant for spreading rumors.  He and/or his band of followers even took the time to phone the mayor, and the U.S. Attorney’s Office who in turn contacted the FBI who in turn contacted us (pssst – the FBI does not investigate runaway children).  What a waste of time and energy and all done without any truthful firsthand information of what was happening. What he didn’t know was that the mother wouldn’t even speak to us about reporting her daughter as a runaway.

When the runaway’s mother finally agreed to speak to us, it took about two hours to locate the girl and return her home.  Families are messy, imperfect and full of conflict – and those are the normal ones.  Some families are so dysfunctional that their normal would shock most of us into unconsciousness.  We should have empathy for those who suffer from family problems and we should certainly try to protect their privacy as much as possible.  Most times, it’s better to leave things up to the professionals. Rest assured that when the circumstances call for an Amber Alert to be issued, we will not hesitate to share that information.

For the most up-to-date information on Amber Alerts, check out the SD Amber Alert Facebook page.

I believe social media has been, for the most part, a positive evolution in the technological age. I started our department Facebook page in 2009 and Twitter the following year. Our YouTube channel started around the same time and presto! We were involved in social media. In mid-2011 I reluctantly started my own Twitter account and have been warming up to it ever since. While it’s become a distraction for some people, it’s a way of life for others.  It has also changed the way media organizations conduct business, if not revolutionized it.

I agree that social media allows the public to be better (and faster) informed. You can get news headlines on your mobile device in real-time, along with breaking news, current events and many other things, literally at your fingertips. It is truly the information age.

Of course, nothing good comes without challenges. Social media is also responsible for the facilitation of wholesale rumors at the speed of light. Never before have there been such large doses of B.S. delivered to so many people. Ever. Websites such as http://urbanlegends.about.com/ and www.snopes.com can’t keep up with the volume of bologna coming from social media.

Almost immediately following the bombing at the Boston Marathon, a Facebook post began circulating with a photo of a little girl supposedly running in the marathon moments prior to the bomb blast. The caption read that the little girl was killed while running in memory of the Sandy Hook Elementary shooting victims. That was possibly the first, but certainly not the last, bit of false bombing information delivered via social media.

In the first 24 hours following the Boston bombing, there were countless false reports offered by news agencies reporting the status of the investigation. Competition between media has reached its peak and, in this case, created an environment of misinformation and doubt. Otherwise professional, upstanding media companies who used the ‘rather be wrong than second’ philosophy have found the perfect way to insert fear and uncertainty into every trending event. It seems that people really don’t care if the information is true or not– they just want to share it first.

So what could possibly be the point of this story? It’s not really to critique the media and their practices – I am not qualified to do so. I am just complaining, whining and wishing things were different. Government service is already difficult with the amount of scrutiny that comes with it, and when false information is reported as fact, it can be incredibly damaging. The public has gotten so used to following stories in real time on social media that they now expect it. Lately, citizens are confusing the concepts of immediate delivery of breaking news and public information and government transparency.  The increased pressure on the media to ‘report it first’ hasn’t helped.

In short, the advent of real-time reporting through social media has its positives (you get to follow along as an event unfolds, and you get valuable public safety info quicker), but the downside is the public expectation that all information will be released immediately, when it’s not always feasible. The other negative is the increased competition among media companies to get the info out first, which means sometimes the information is wrong. Reliability of information and respect of other’s privacy should always outweigh unnecessary or premature release of information.  Right?

Recently our agency experienced an officer-involved shooting. The suspect in this case used a knife to attack two police officers and as a result was shot several times by one of the officers. As of this writing, the suspect is recovering, and is expected to face serious criminal charges for his actions.  No police officers were hurt in the attack.

For the most part our department enjoys widespread community support. There will always be those who don’t support us, even hate us, and as much as we would like to, we won’t be able to change their minds about this. My job is to provide the same service to everyone regardless of their feelings toward us.

Generally speaking, there is a small percentage of people who speak negatively about the police after a deadly force incident and the same is true for our agency. Even more so when the suspect “only” uses a knife. We get some negative comments after using deadly force on a knife-wielding attacker, such as:

• “I thought the police were supposed to disarm people with knives.”
• “The police should have used a Taser or martial arts, not a gun.”
• “Why did they shoot him so many times?”

And one of my favorites:

• “Why didn’t they shoot him in the leg?”

My first response to these comments is: Thanks, Hollywood!

Bruce Willis, Matt Damon and Steven Segal are actors and when they shoot people in movies, special effects are used. Shooting victims fly backward and almost always die instantaneously.  Sometimes these actors shoot people in the arm or leg and the results are dramatic. Real life is different. Real life is…real.

Police officers are trained to shoot until the threat stops.  Once the situation deteriorates to the point of using deady force, only three things can stop a suspect once an attack has begun:

• The attacker must receive an injury that disrupts electrical activity in the brain or spine. When this occurs, the person will stop.
• The attacker must receive an injury that causes loss of blood pressure.  When he passes out, he will stop.
• The attacker must decide to stop the attack, i.e. receives an injury or realizes he’s been shot and changes his mind.

Based on this, aiming for the arms or legs will be ineffective. There is little hope that martial arts will work.  Tasers are only effective if the suspect is within 25 feet and both of the electrodes penetrate the skin of the assailant and the device works properly. Bean bag shotguns only work as well as a baseball bat and can therefore only serve to change the attacker’s mind, mid-attack. The bottom line: All of these alternatives place the officer in greater danger and increase the chances of being seriously hurt or killed.

Police officers are trained in defensive tactics, offensive arrest tactics, use of Tasers, bean-bag shotguns, and firearms.  A good portion of the training has to do with technique and accuracy.  A larger portion and the more important part of the training centers on WHEN to use force, how much force to use, and which weapon, if any, to use.  All of this must be decided under the stress of a rapidly deteriorating situation.

We give police officers training, weapons, communication equipment and protective equipment. We empower them to deal with the element of society that no one else wants to, or is equipped to deal with. We expect them to treat citizens with respect and dignity and act in a professional manner at all times. We expect them to do these things in the heat, the cold, the wind and rain, the snow, during all hours of the day and night including weekends and holidays. Police officers leave their families to go out into the streets to find and eliminate threats to the citizens they are sworn to protect.

Just for the record, and this should really go without saying: I expect those police officers to return to their families, safe and sound.  I expect them to stay alive, even if that means taking a life to protect their own.

Knives are deadly weapons. We know this because 13.4% of all murders committed last year were committed with knives.  You can believe what you want, but in the final analysis someone attacking a police officer with a knife is taking his own life in his hands, and if the incident cannot be resolved any other way, I expect the police officer to respond in a manner consistent with his or her training.

To the people who expect us to use Kung-Fu on a would-be cop-killer with a knife or other weapon: My police officers’ #1 priority is to stay alive.  Their #2 priority is to protect the lives of innocent citizens.  Their last priority is to worry about the health and well-being of someone trying to kill them.

For the rest of you, thank you for your understanding and support.

We should be able to agree on something:  This country will remain divided on the issue of gun control.  Emotional tragedies like the Sandy Hook shooting only amplify this division.

Right now, our country is in the beginning phase of banning certain weapons and magazines, in response to the Sandy Hook shooting and others similar to it.  I submit to you that we are motivated by emotion and not facts.  Allow me to share some facts¹ that are not otherwise likely to make their way into this argument:

All Murders – 2011

• There were 12,664 murders in the U.S. in 2011. 
• 8,583 or 68% of those murders were committed with firearms.
• 1,694 or 13.4% of all murders were committed using a knife or cutting instrument.
• 728 or 5.7% of all murders were committed using only personal weapons such as hands or feet.
• 496 or 3.9% of all murders were committed using a blunt object. 
• About 8% of the murders were committed with “other” weapons, presumably some of them unknown.  

Firearm Murders – 2011

• 6,220 or 77.1% of firearm murders were committed using handguns.
• 356 or 4.1% of all firearm murders involve the use of shotguns.
• 323 or 3.8% of all firearm murders involve the use of rifles.
• About 15% of all firearm murders are committed by “other” firearms or by firearms that are “not stated.”  Perhaps not specifically reported.

So if we conclude we have a murder problem that needs to be further addressed with laws and restrictions, which is the most logical cause to start with based on the knowledge we possess?  In rank order of death toll:

1. Handguns
2. Knives
3. Blunt objects
4. Shotguns
5. Rifles (including assault rifles)

In what order will lawmakers likely attack this problem?  In rank order of emotional distress and voter pressure:

1. Assault rifles
2. Large capacity magazines for pistols and rifles

I am not sure what more I can add to the senseless argument that is taking place now and will continue throughout 2013, other than to state what I believe is obvious:

Some guns and ammunition should never be made available to the public.  The best examples of this are cheaply made assault weapons which can be purchased for a few hundred dollars.  There is no redeeming quality to these weapons in a civilian setting, no matter what anyone says - even the NRA.  The cost, availability, and destructive ammunition they use all contribute to their ridiculousness.  On the other hand, systematic and broad-brush restrictions on firearms are not the answer and should not be pursued by the government.     

The constitutional argument is becoming the default tactic for nationwide patriotic manipulation.  Americans get emotional about guns.  There will be someone reading this post that will allege treason and use the word “tyranny” in his comments.  The Supreme Court has heard many arguments regarding the second amendment and has upheld it.  Let’s keep the argument about the facts today and stop labeling people because they don’t agree with you.  I believe that in order to intelligently argue the issue of gun control and the second amendment, you must spend time on both sides of the fence.

No law ever suppressed the free will of man.  More laws will not solve the issue of gun violence.  It’s already against the law to kill people and has been since Moses received the 10 commandments.  The problem is already being solved mysteriously at the rate of 2% to 3% per year.  Murders continue to decrease from a peak in 1991 of 24,700 to a 44 year low of 12,664 in 2011.  That’s a 49% decrease in murder in 20 years!  Violent crime in general has been on a ten+ year downward trend.  It is time to examine what is working, rather than using our imagination and fears to project what is wrong.  Plus – only law abiding people abide by laws. 

Arming teachers will only present a greater threat to our students.  This extreme measure should be weighed by the parents of the students, not the National Rifle Association.

Do we believe schools in America are being targeted by mass murderers?  If so, why wouldn’t we address the physical and procedural security of our school buildings?   Why do all of the “experts” have to come from Washington D.C?  Why does the President have to become emotionally involved before he takes action?  I suspect the answer to our Nation’s problems are right here within our grasp, but unfortunately we have our attention focused elsewhere, and we are in the habit of concluding it’s someone else’s problem to solve.

I recommend we first identify the problem.  Is it gun violence or school shootings?  They are not the same problem, nor do they require the same treatment.  Once we know what the problem is, let’s have national collaboration, emphasizing local action.  Tap the National Sheriffs Association and International Association of Chiefs of Police to work with federal authorities to identify a number of options that will be appropriate and effective in combating the issue.  These two organizations should be among the first-string problem solvers; after all, this is a public safety issue, not a political one.  Lawmakers and the federal government do have a role however, and that is to find the needed funding to support the solutions.   

 ¹ Source: FBI Murder Data Tables

It makes no sense for someone to unleash rage on innocent children; but the 27 dead are not the only victims.  There are hundreds of local students and family members who will suffer from this for years, maybe a lifetime.  There are no words to describe the loss or the senselessness of such a terrible incident.  A tragedy of this magnitude traumatizes an entire nation.  The mass media coverage and continuous display of images of terrified and heartbroken parents sends a signal to us that something is wrong in America.  Maybe something is wrong WITH America.

Officials and lawmakers will now start applying their knowledge and expertise to devise a plan to prevent these types of massacres from happening in the future.  There are two main opponents in this debate: Those for gun control and those against it.  The arguments are ridiculous from both corners: If the teachers were armed, they could have stopped it; if there were less guns, it never would have happened.  Neither of these extremes will stop this tragedy from being repeated.  There must be a balance.

Gun control people have a point:  If there were less guns, there would be less shootings.  THAT, is a decision that needed to be made 221 years ago when the constitutional amendments were written.  Today with 300 million guns in the hands of 315 million men, women and children, I predict using anything less than martial law to get those guns back will take 100 years and risk civil war in the process.

Gun advocates have a point also: if a properly trained and armed person were at the location of more active shooter incidents, maybe they would be able to stop some of these incidents from unfolding.  But this isn’t TV.  It could take mere seconds to shoot 30 people in a crowd; in other words, in less time than an armed person can react, reach target acquisition and put rounds on that target.  Humans are the sneakiest and deadliest predator on the planet.  They will find a way around the rules.

Gun advocates or gun control people will not solve this issue.  The things in the middle of both extremes are being ignored because they are not political or idealistic.  Things like mental health issues, laws protecting citizens rights i.e. (medical disclosures), people’s aversions to getting in other people’s business and sloppy security measures that are allowed because politicians don’t want to offend or put public employees behind brick and bullet-proof glass.

Tonight, we are a nation in mourning.  Tomorrow, we better wake up and get serious about solving this issue.  But in order to make any progress, we will have to quit arguing and join together.  I for one am sick and tired of it.

As I read the article about the incident, I picked up a few things that seem common when reporting this type of tragedy:

First of all, the institution and local authorities are not releasing the names of the deceased, pending notification of relatives.  Believe me, the families probably know.  Most times, keeping the names close is a courtesy to the families, who are obviously overcome with emotion at this point, and justifiably so.  Inevitably, the release will catch someone by surprise, but the delay in release will be equally troublesome.  Rumors are terrible in times like this.

There is a public obsession with the type of weapon used.  The people want to know, and the authorities are only saying it was “an edged weapon”.  Sometimes, this detail can be an investigative nugget kept secret to aid in the investigation, but I think this one could be an example of the police trying to soften the blow to the community.  I believe this drives the media crazy.

The personal feelings of the college president were reported in the article: “I can say without a doubt, this is the worst day of my career” college president Walter Nolte said.  You bet it was and the worst day so far in the lives of many students, families and faculty as well.

The media controls some of the information that is released based on the content they believe their readers or viewers want to see.  The police are busy trying to do their jobs and tend to the needs of all involved and are likely overwhelmed with the task at hand.  The community demands information but a constant balance of public information, sensitivity to the families and keeping the integrity of the investigation must be accomplished.  I applaud Casper Police Chief Chris Walsh and all of the Casper area first responders; they are to be commended for their willingness to run in, while others must run out.

Our thoughts and prayers should be directed to the families who are suffering as well as the friends, faculty and the community at large.  They have just experienced something most of us have not, and hope we never will.

This type of thing wounds a community.  It leaves those even loosely related to the scenario feeling scared and unsure, and for humans that is a destructive feeling.  Every second spent looking around corners and wondering what that noise was, takes away from who we are…or were.

• Changing roles of the police
• Social media
• Prisoners re-entering the community
• Gun control
• Hookah issues
• Downtown festivals
• Boll Weevils
• Violence
• Any many more!

My most-read post is about bogus complaints against the police, the least read, about the need for social media in government.

My blogging experiment has netted 25,000 views in the U.S. and 69 other countries, and more than 200 comments from citizens.

It has been fun writing about various topics.  I have found that writing about things is therapeutic for me.  In fact, the three most therapeutic articles…were the three I didn’t have the guts to publish.  In hindsight, I should have held onto a couple more.

I have learned something about myself in the process:

• I like to crack wise.
• I have a slight, barely noticeable, mostly latent tendency to use sarcasm in my writing.
• I have an opinion about things.

I have learned something about some of you as well:

• You like posts that are controversial.
• You like posts that piggyback on nationally trending issues.
• You do not like posts about Boll Weevils.
• You do not like posts in which I have an opinion that is, well, overly opinionated.

Overall, I think the goals that I outlined in my very first post are being met.  I have initiated interactions with citizens that I would not have had the opportunity to converse with otherwise.  I think some of you have gotten to know me better and perhaps have realized that I am human, and more precisely, an imperfect human.

The real questions have yet to be answered:  Have these interactions added value?  Are either of us better off because of the blog? Hmmmm.  Good questions.

We, and I, will continue our on-going social media experiment, but I can’t guarantee I will write the kind of articles that provoke fire-breathing responses.  I may have gone a little overboard a time or two, and it was all in fun – except for the wound-licking that followed.  I think it’s ok that I have an opinion – even better that I express it, but let’s be honest here – you don’t need to know everything I’m thinking.

My on-going goal is to find topics that interest you (and me), are informative, and are fun to write about.  Feel free to submit ideas for blog posts – I would enjoy hearing from you.

You’re right, and I am right, and we decide based on the prejudices of our social environments.  It’s not an argument that can be won (but I am going to make mine anyway).

I could list statistics on this page related to the negative effects of marijuana, the healthcare costs transferred to taxpayers related to it, the added deaths on our highways because of it and so on, but those who have made up their minds and believe what they read in High Times magazine or what they see on a Cheech and Chong movie would not benefit from it, and the rest of us do not need to benefit from it, so I’ll skip it.

Before those of you supporting legalization get your rage on, let me tell you how I agree with you first:

Drug use crimes should be dealt with differently.  Those users who are addicted should be getting treatment, over and over until it works.  Those users who are not addicted, should be given community service, work release, fines or some other alternative sanctions prior to using up jail space.

Here’s where we may not agree:  Drug dealers should get stiff prison time and all of their assets seized.

Then, there are the “legalize it, tax it, fix the economy with it” people.  This is merely a case of competing interests.  Why not legalize child porn?  There’s definitely a market; people who are prone to using it will use it with or without rules in place; it’s addictive so the demand will always be there; and it takes up more and more prison space each year.  Well, that’s different, Mr. dope smoker says:  “Marijuana doesn’t hurt or exploit anyone”.  Wrong.  You need to see the world without the aid of your weed-colored glasses.  Marijuana is not the miracle drug it’s supporters have made it out to be, and its wholesale use is a threat to public safety.  There is propaganda out there suggesting that marijuana is the only substance/drug that has never killed anyone.  Hogwash.

The dumbest argument for the legalization of marijuana comes from the “well, alcohol is legal and it’s worse than pot” group. That’s right, it is, and I bet each one us, if given the chance to reflect, would wish for alcohol to be un-invented.  All of us know someone, or are someone whose life has been negatively affected by alcohol.  Ten thousand people die each year from alcohol related automobile crashes not to mention other crimes such as assaults.  But, no matter how much devastation alcohol has caused over centuries, it is now “normal” and we simply accept the mayhem that comes with it.  That shouldn’t and doesn’t lessen the severity of the implications of legalized pot.  If pot follows the legalization path of alcohol, we will learn how bad of a decision it was, but it will be too late to change it.

The last group I will poke is the “what about pain killers and other prescription drugs?” group.  You are right, prescription drugs and their hyper-availability is becoming a huge problem.  The difference is that oxycontin has been medically proven to control pain and the benefit to risk assessment has been weighed and approved by the Food and Drug Administration.  At least the controls are in place, the medical research is clear and you can’t grow oxycontin in your home.  I am sorry if you disagree, but the pursuit of public safety (that’s the safety of all the public, not just you) demands that someone govern the use, distribution and manufacture of prescription drugs.  And let’s face it, marijuana is an uncontrolled herbal remedy.

Here’s another minor detail one might want to consider:  Marijuana is still considered a schedule I drug according to the federal government, which means it is just as illegal as LSD.  The Drug Enforcement Administration can arrest and prosecute anyone using or selling it at any time.  The government can also sanction states for allowing it, initiated measure or not.

I would like to leave you with this thought:  What if those who can’t live without it for one reason or another, chose to pack up and move to Colorado or Washington?  How would the economies of those states be affected?  How would the crime, traffic safety and productivity issues change?  That’s a question I think both sides of the argument should think about for a moment.  It could be the one thing both sides could agree on.

When South Dakota faces another opportunity to vote on the issue of legalized marijuana, we will hear dramatic arguments from both ends of the spectrum.  I just hope we get to hear some truth at the same time; and if we hear it, I hope we can recognize it.  I hate to think that some day the pro-pot groups will wear the government down and get their way.  The only question remaining then, will be how long will it be until we accept the consequences as normal.