Drugs, inequality and a US-backed dirty war
--aljazeera--
Barack Obama visits El Salvador to talk security cooperation while the facing the ghosts of past dirty wars.
Chris Arsenault Last Modified: 23 Mar 2011 16:31

US President Barack Obama arrived in El Salvador to talk about drug violence, but he also tried to make peace with history, visiting the tomb of Oscar Romero, a popular Archbishop gunned down by a US-linked death squad in 1980.

Despite cutting his visit short to deal with the situation in Libya, Obama still made time to visit the tomb, showcasing its symbolic importance.

"Obama is sending a message, taking a moderate approach to the region, and getting big points for going to Romero's grave," says Carlos Velazquez, an El Salvadorian political researcher at York University in Canada. "It is an emotional thing for Salvadorians."

Twelve years of internal conflict, between leftist rebels from the Farabundo Marti National Liberation Front (FMLN) and the right-wing US-supported government, ended with a peace deal in 1992.

But violence continues to grip the country. "El Salvador has one of the highest homicide rates in the world," according to the US State Department, as violence between rival gangs and drug cartels is far worse on a per capita basis than neighboring Mexico, where killings draw more media attention.

Violence and inequality

Today’s violence has similar root causes to the issues which started the political conflict in the 1980s, including judicial impunity, economic inequality and social fragmentation, says Ivan Briscoe, a conflict researcher and Latin America expert at the Clingendael Institute in the Netherlands.

"In El Salvador, there was an absolutely brutal conflict that has been passed down to gang violence," he says. "Inequality led to the insurgency, but now this inequality has found expressions in other forms."

Archbishop Romero, a theologian who mixed ideas of heaven in the next life and liberation on earth, was highly critical of US military aid. In a letter to then-US president Jimmy Carter, Romero said aid would "sharpen injustice and repression against the people’s organisations" which were struggling for "respect for their basic human rights". After his murder, least 75,000 people died in El Salvador's dirty war.

In some respects, times have changed. Obama has shown a willingness to work with some democratically elected leftist leaders in Latin America, analysts say.

Mauricio Funes, El Salvador's current president, who is supported by the FMLN, told Al Jazeera that he welcomes American security assistance. "I will ask president Obama for more funds to strengthen our police, army, and the judiciary but also to get more involved in fighting our structural problems like poverty and social inequality," Funes, a former TV host, said.

During his visit, Obama promised $200mn to Central American governments to fight drug cartels, as part of a package to "strengthen courts, civil society groups and institutions that uphold the role of law" while addressing the "social and economic forces that drive young people towards criminality".

Competing security concerns

But those lofty goals of poverty reduction and institutional empowerment are inhibited by broader US interests, according to one security analyst. "I think the US operates with a double agenda in Central America," says Ivan Briscoe.

"The US says it is supportive of judicial reforms, strengthening police forces ect. But it is constantly willing to militarise regions, applying states of emergency [where legal regiments are suspended], applying the full force of local power in a very Manichean version of good versus evil," Briscoe told Al Jazeera.

A more subtle version of that "Manichean struggle" may have been on display during Obama's visit. Despite the focus on security and the so-called war on drugs, Obama refused to meet with Manuel Melgar, El Salvador's Justice and Security Minister.

US diplomats accuse Melgar of having "blood on his hands", linking the security minister to the 1985 killings of four US marines in an upscale restaurant in San Salvador, the capital.

Melgar was once an FMLN guerrilla. Today, US diplomats see him as a hard-liner, closely allied to Venezuela's Hugo Chavez.

Obama's decision to visit Romero's tomb may be linked to divisions within Latin America's left, analysts say.

"President Funes looks to Brazil and Chile for his models," says Briscoe. "His rivals in the same party were front line guerrillas who look to Venezuela. There is a divide."

To gain support from so-called moderate Latin American leftists, Obama may be trying to distance himself from US-backed violence and destabilisation campaigns during the Cold War.

Military responses

Despite Obama's attempts to reach out to some Latin American leftists, Ivan Briscoe, the security analyst, believes elements within the US military’s Southern Command are advocating a "hard-line military response" to security problems in the region, even though this strategy has failed in the past.

Guatemala, another impoverished Central American country, recently followed this "hard-line" approach when authorities declared a state of emergency to battle drug gangs.

Maximo Ba Tiul, a professor at the Universidad Rafael Landivar in Guatemala, watched as the Guatemalan government imposed a two-month-long state of siege, which prohibited public gatherings, allowed for warrantless searches and suspended other constitutional protections in Alta Verapaz state where he lives.

"This state of emergency was decreed through legislation written during the era of military dictatorships," said Tiul, during an interview at his home in January. The siege, which ended in mid-February, netted at least 20 arrests, hardly a major victory against a drug trade worth tens of billions of dollars.

Professor Tiul, who lived through Guatemala's dirty war, doesn’t believe that suspending constitutional protections is the way to enhance the institutional reforms Obama advocated during his El Salvador visit.

"The [Guatemalan] government has creates a situation of marginilisation. This has permitted narco traffickers to assume roles that should be dealt with by the state," Tiul said, referring to the schools, social events and health clinics that cartels finance in some rural areas.

The lack of public services pushes many young people into the arms of cartels, analysts say. Other central Americans simply move to the US.

Obama recognised this dichotomy. "I thought that President Funes gave a very eloquent response to one of my questions during our bilateral meeting, He said: 'I don’t want a young man in El Salvador or a young woman in El Salvador to feel that the only two paths to moving up the income ladder is either to travel north or to join a criminal enterprise,'" Obama said.

With a total population of about 6 million, more than 2.5 million El Salvadorians live in the US. Las Maras, El Salvador's fearsome, heavily tattooed street gangs, first formed in Los Angles, drawing their ranks from expatriate El Salvadorians in the city's prisons.

The gangs were then exported back to El Salvador through migrant networks. More than 500 Salvadorians leave the country every day, says Velazquez, and the country uses the US dollar instead of a national currency.

Oligarchic power

Structural problems in Central America, leaving average people with few viable options, can be traced to the mentality of local elites, says Carlos Velazquez, the El Salvadorian political researcher.

"Elites are oligarchic in their mentality. They want the state to benefit their interests only. They despise the idea of social justice, the idea of paying taxes," says Velazquez, who left El Salvador as a teenager to get a better education.

In Brazil and Chile, countries with strong economic growth, elites have a different mentality, says Ivan Briscoe.

"In Brazil, the upper classes realize that to reach the next stage of development, a country needs to create a mass internal market. That requires a level of egalitarianism, to create consumers, to create equality of opportunity," he says. "In Central America, the geopolitics meant that extremely conservative, unenlightened, elites, were in charge of the situation."

Income taxation, to redistribute wealth from rich to poor, is often seen as a fairly simple way to combat inequality and entrenched elites. The US favors a higher tax rate in El Salvador, as it would result in better public institutions and thus fewer migrants sneaking into the US, Velazquez says.

But President Funes has his hands tied.

If he confronts the oligarchy, he risks being associated with Hugo Chavez’s socialist policies, Velazquez says. But if Funes doesn’t confront elites, important reforms to the country’s political economy will remain stalled.

A sniper killed Archbishop Oscar Romero because he promoted social justice and reform; he criticised the status quo. Carlos Velasquez thinks El Salvador’s current security and economic stability depends on someone else taking up that mantra. "The oligarchy has to be confronted there is no other way.”

Despite the difficulties, Ivan Briscoe sees hope in the democratistion and economic development happening in South America. "Structures can be changed," he says. "There is evidence of that in Latin America."

Follow Chris Arsenault On Twitter: @AJEchris

Official High Times Kind Bud Price Index by half ounce 
(including popular strain)

National U.S.  Kind Bud Average - $214 ($223 last month)
Florida
 *Tallahassee- $200 (Mango)
 *Dunedin- $150 (AK-47)
 *Lockahatchee- $138 (Blue Widow)

New York

 *Plattsburgh- $213 (Big Buddha Cheese)
 *Queens- $300 (Gravity)

California
 *San Diego- $100 (Headband)
 *San Jose-   $125 (Sugar Lemon)
                    $113 (Blue Dream)
Hawaii
 *Kihai- $200 (Trainwreck)
             $200 (Headband)
             $200 (Chocolope)
Canada

 *Montreal- $127 (Master Kush)
 *Toronto-  $157 (Sour Diesel)
                 -$292 (Kush)
- Courtesy of High Times; prices from January 2011- May 2011
(stats listed are from the May 2011 issue)

Report of the International Narcotics Control Board for 2010
(excerpts from...)


Law enforcement and customs authorities throughout the world are highly vulnerable to drug-related corruption. Drug control units are at risk of being infiltrated by criminal groups, which often have at their disposal enormous resources and sophisticated technology. Regulatory agencies are also exposed to drug-related corruption, as drug traffickers must engage in money-laundering to hide their huge profits. If military units are used in illicit crop eradication and border control, they may also be exposed to drug-related corruption. The judicial system may also be affected by drug-related corruption and intimidation. (v)

The highest levels of consumption of opioid analgesics (opium derivative) are reported in countries in North America and Europe. (vi)

390. The United States continues to be the main country of destination for illicit drug shipments. In the United States, in the case of all controlled drugs except cannabis and methamphetamine, most of the drugs have been illicitly manufactured outside of the country and then smuggled into the country. Drug trafficking organizations based in Mexico dominate the illicit supply of cocaine, heroin and methamphetamine at the wholesale level in the United States, in addition to playing a significant role in the illicit supply of cannabis. The number of drug-related deaths increased sharply in the United States. The Board is deeply concerned about the fact that the United States
recorded for 2009 an increase in the abuse of all drugs except cocaine. From 2006 to 2009, the abuse of cocaine declined in the United States. (62)

392. Canada remains one of the world’s primary source countries for illicitly manufactured synthetic drugs, particularly MDMA (“ecstasy”) and methamphetamine, and a significant supplier of high-potency cannabis. The Board notes the decline in drug abuse in Canada, in particular among youth, reported by the Canadian Alcohol and Drug Use Monitoring Survey. (63)

404. In the United States, disparities in the amounts of cocaine and “crack” required for the imposition of minimum sentences were reduced significantly by the Fair Sentencing Act, signed in August 2010. The Act also eliminated the minimum prison term for simple possession of “crack” and significantly increased monetary penalties for major drug trafficking. (65)

6. Plant material containing psychoactive
substances
284. Many plants that contain psychoactive substances with stimulating or hallucinogenic properties, as well as preparations made from those plants, have traditional uses in some countries or regions; for example, some are used in religious rites. Under the 1961 Convention and that Convention as amended by the 1972 Protocol, plants that are the sources of narcotic drugs, such as cannabis plant, opium poppy and coca bush, are subject to specific control measures. In contrast, although some active stimulant or hallucinogenic ingredients contained in certain plants are controlled under the 1971 Convention, no plants are currently controlled under that Convention or under the 1988 Convention. Preparations (e.g. decoctions for oral use) made from plants containing those active ingredients are also not under international control.

285. Examples of such plants or plant material include khat (Catha edulis), whose active ingredients cathinone and cathine are listed in Schedules I and III of the 1971 Convention; ayahuasca, a preparation made from plants indigenous to the Amazon basin of South America, mainly a jungle vine (Banisteriopsis caapi) and another tryptamine-rich plant (Psychotria viridis) containing a number of psychoactive alkaloids, including DMT; the peyote cactus (Lophophora williamsii), containing mescaline; magic mushrooms (Psilocybe), which contain psilocybine and psilocine; Ephedra, containing ephedrine; “kratom” (Mitragyna speciosa), a plant indigenous to South-East Asia that contains mitragynine; iboga (Tabernanthe iboga), a plant that contains the hallucinogen ibogaine and is native to the western part of Central Africa; varieties of Datura containing hyoscyamine (atropine) and scopolamine; and Salvia divinorum, a plant originating in Mexico that contains the hallucinogen salvinorin A. (46)

Arresting Blacks for Marijuana in California: Possession Arrests in 25 Cities 2006-08 (part 5)

[note: the following is direct from the report]

As this report was going to press, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed Senate Bill 1449. Beginning in 2011, possession of 28.5 grams (an ounce) of marijuana will be an infraction rather than a misdemeanor. People found possessing a small amount of marijuana are to be given a summons and fined, but the offense will not automatically create a permanent criminal record easily found on the Internet. This is certainly a less punitive policy and a victory for criminal justice reform.

But this one important change leaves in place other unfair consequences of the marijuana possession offenses and of the policing strategy that produces them. And making marijuana possession an infraction creates other undesirable consequences. In what follows we briefly review some of what can be anticipated at this early stage. In discussing the shift from misdemeanor to infraction, one perceptive observer quoted in the Oakland Tribune pointed out: "There's no reason to believe policing practices are going to change simply because the technical nature of the offense has." Indeed, as has happened in other U.S. cities, police may well feel free to give out more summonses for an infraction.

Both misdemeanors and infractions are results of routine policing practices which disproportionately focus on low-income black and Latino neighborhoods and their young people. Police departments have "productivity goals" (or quotas) for the summonses and arrests that patrol officers should make. Because the routine police stops are much more frequent in black and Latino neighborhoods, they unfairly produce more marijuana infractions and misdemeanors for young people in those neighborhoods. And this goes on despite the fact that U.S. government studies repeatedly find that young whites use marijuana at higher rates than young blacks and Latinos. None of this will change because of the new legislation.

If young people stopped by police are found to have a bit of marijuana in their pockets or possessions, and do not have sufficient identification papers, they can still be handcuffed and taken to the police station to check their fingerprints on a database. In the course of the police stop, the officers may add other charges including disorderly conduct or resisting arrest. In 2009 the New York Times reported that police in San Jose, California made many arrests in which the only charge was "resisting arrest." Latinos are 30% of San Jose's population, but Latinos were 60% of the people arrested when "resisting arrest" was the only charge. A reporter for the San Jose Mercury News told the Times that:

"Some people call these 'contempt of cop' or 'attitude arrests.' Contempt of cop arrests are not about committing an underlying crime but disrespecting or disobeying officers. A large segment of the city’s Latino population feels particularly targeted." (See: NY Times, "In San Jose, Resisting Arrest Is Often the Only Reason for an Arrest" By Michelle Quinn, Nov 1, 2009. At: http://bayarea.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/11/01/san-josepolice-and-resisting-arrest-cases/?emc=eta1)and-resisting-arrest-cases/?emc=eta1

Again, the "contempt of cop" arrests often come about when the police are writing summonses for infractions, or just investigating the suspicion of an infraction. And that happens much more often in only certain neighborhoods. Although infractions usually can be paid by mail, many young people, especially those from low-income families, do not have credit cards or checking accounts and will therefore go to the court to pay them. Many will not easily be able to make it to court by the required day because of demands of jobs, school, and family. Under California law, failure to pay the fine for an infraction is itself a misdemeanor, a "fingerprintable" offense. When the person eventually appears before a judge or magistrate, the infraction charge may be dropped if the person pleads guilty to the "failure to pay" misdemeanor. This results in a criminal record and often a period of probation for an open criminal offense, with a new set of damaging collateral consequences.

Contrary to some media reports, making marijuana possession an infraction is not technically or legally "decriminalization." Under California law, an infraction is still a criminal offense, a crime. Although an infraction does not produce a police "rap" sheet, there are court records of infractions for marijuana possession that may still appear in some criminal justice databases. For immigration status, credit reports, occupational licensing, and other official purposes, the infraction can still show up as a "drug offense" with some of the same consequences as a misdemeanor. As this report has documented, all the above consequences that can follow from being stopped by the police and given a marijuana infraction are two to twelve times less likely to happen in California's white middle-class neighborhoods.

In his signing statement, the Governor indicated what he regards as the impact of the new law. "The only difference," between a misdemeanor and an infraction, he wrote, "is that because it is [currently] a misdemeanor, a criminal defendant is entitled to a jury trial and a defense attorney." From the Governor's perspective, changing the offense from a misdemeanor saves money by denying defendants in marijuana possession cases access to a public defender and the right to have a jury trial. Moving marijuana possession from a misdemeanor to an infraction reduces some punitive consequences, but it comes at the considerable cost of depriving people of fundamental rights.

Finally, there is one other effect of the change of marijuana possession from a misdemeanor to infraction with serious consequences for public debate and policy. When marijuana possession becomes an infraction, there will be no way for reporters or researchers to find out how many summonses for the infraction of marijuana possession are being given out. Misdemeanor arrest data is available from the California Department Justice, but not data on infractions. Without a change in law or policy, the basic information presented in this report will not be available. In 2012, one year after the infraction goes into effect, nobody will be able to prepare a report like this one showing in each California county and city how many blacks, Latinos, or young people were given summonses and fined under the new law. In effect, the policing of marijuana possession will become even more hidden and invisible.

Arresting Blacks for Marijuana in California: Possession Arrests in 25 Cities 2006-08 (part 4)

[note: the following is direct from the report]




Police departments deploy most patrol and narcotics police to certain neighborhoods, usually designated "high crime." These are sproportionately low-income, and disproportionately African American and Latino. It is in these neighborhoods where the police make most patrols, and where they stop and search the most vehicles and individuals, looking or "contraband" of any type in order to make an arrest. The item that people in any neighborhood are most likely to possess, which can get them arrested, is a small amount of marijuana. In short, the arrests are ethnically- and racially-biased mainly because the police are systematically "fishing" for arrests in only some neighborhoods, and methodically searching only some "fish." 6 This produces what has been termed "racism without racists."

In California, most people arrested for marijuana possession have been charged with violating section 11357 of the California Health and Safety Code, because they possessed less than an ounce of marijuana, typically much less. This is legally a crime and produces a criminal record or "rap sheet." Most people found by the police possessing small amounts of marijuana were given a court summons requiring them to appear before a judge at a specified date and time.

For those who failed to appear, the court issued an arrest warrant. When they were next stopped by the police for any reason, including a routine traffic stop, their names were searched in the criminal databases. When the "failure to appear" warrant showed up, they were handcuffed, arrested and jailed. When people with a summons appeared in court at the required date and time, they went before a judge. If they plead guilty – which happened in the vast majority of cases – they were ordered to pay a fine up to $100, plus court costs as high as $360.8 People unable to pay may have been given time to raise the money, but if they could not pay they were usually arrested, handcuffed, and jailed. In the low-income and heavily black and Latino district of Central Los Angeles, for example, people given a court appearance summons were ordered to appear at the Central Arraignment Court on Bauchet Street. The defendants often did not realize that they had been charged with a crime because the summons looks like a traffic ticket. They appeared before a judge who told them they had been charged with a misdemeanor, and that if they plead guilty they would be fined up to $100. The judges routinely recommended defendants waive their right to a trial. The vast majority of defendants wanted to be released and put this experience behind them. They accepted the judge’s recommendation and plead guilty. Most people found the money to pay the fine and court costs and gave it little thought until they applied for a job, apartment, student loan or school and were turned down because a criminal background check revealed that they had been convicted of a “drug crime.”

Twenty years ago, misdemeanor arrest and conviction records were papers kept in court storerooms and warehouses, often impossible to locate. Ten years ago they were computerized. Now they are instantly searchable on the Internet for $20 to $40 through commercial criminal-record database services. Employers, landlords, credit agencies, licensing boards for nurses and beauticians, schools, and banks now routinely search these databases for background checks on applicants. The stigma of a criminal record has created huge barriers to employment and education for hundreds of thousands of people in California.

At some arraignment courts, people are played a video tape that introduces the arraignment process and says they can have their conviction record "expunged.” Those who return to court to do so learn they have to file their own expungement petition with a $120 filing fee. Unless they speak to an attorney, most people are not told that, contrary to popular belief, an expungement does not erase a criminal record – it merely changes the finding of “guilty” to a “dismissal.” The criminal record simply states that the case was dismissed after conviction. So, although people can legally say that they have not been convicted of a crime, they still have a “rap sheet," and a simple background check will show they were arrested and convicted.

A criminal record lasts a lifetime. The explosive growth of criminal record databases, and the ease with which those databases can be accessed on the Internet, creates barriers to employment, housing and education for anyone simply arrested for drug possession. As a result, an arrest in California has serious consequences for anyone, including white, middle class, and especially young people. For young, low-income blacks and Latinos – who use marijuana less than young whites, and who already face numerous barriers and hurdles – a criminal record for the "drug crime" of marijuana possession can seriously harm their life chances. Some officials, such as U.S. Representatives Steve Cohen and Sheila Jackson Lee, have termed the stigmatizing effect of criminal records for marijuana possession a modern "scarlet letter." 10 These marijuana possession arrests, which target young, lowincome Californians, serve as a "head start" program for a lifetime of unemployment and poverty.

As this report was going to press in October 2010, California reduced the legal status of a marijuana possession arrest from a misdemeanor to an infraction, which is also a crime. This change will go into effect in 2011 and we have addressed some of what this means in a brief

Arresting Blacks for Marijuana in California: Possession Arrests in 25 Cities 2006-08 (part 3)

San Bernardino County: African Americans are 9.5% of San Bernardino County’s

1,977,000 residents, but they made up 23% of the people arrested for possessing

marijuana.

City of San Bernardino arrested blacks for marijuana possession at almost seven

times the rate of whites. Blacks are 15.5% of the city's population but 49.6%

marijuana arrestees.

Kern County: In Kern County, just north of Los Angeles, blacks were 19% of the

marijuana arrests but only 6.4% of the population.

Bakersfield is the eleventh largest city in California. Blacks are 8.2% of Bakersfield's

population but 34.1% of the people arrested for marijuana possession. Police in

Bakersfield, arrested blacks at more than six times the rate of whites.

Fresno County: Fresno is north of Bakersfield in central California. African Americans

are 5.8% of the county population but they made up 18% of marijuana arrests. Blacks

were arrested for marijuana possession at over three time the rate for whites.

City of Fresno, the fifth largest city in California, arrested blacks at five times

the rate of whites. Blacks make up 7.7% of Fresno's population, but they are 24.6%

of those arrested for possessing marijuana.

9

Santa Clara County: Santa Clara, in the southern Bay Area, is only 2.8% black. But

blacks were 11% of the people arrested for possessing marijuana.

San Jose, the third largest city in California, is only 2.9% African American. But

San Jose arrested blacks for marijuana possession at more than five times the rate

of whites. San Jose arrested 619 blacks per 100,000 blacks compared to 121 whites

per 100,000 whites.

Solano County: Solano County, about half way between San Francisco and Sacramento,

is 15.3% black. But 39% of the people arrested for marijuana possession are

blacks.

Fairfield, the Solano county seat, arrests blacks at three and a half times the rate of

whites. Fairfield's population is only 16.4% black, but 42.4% of those arrested for

marijuana are black.

Vallejo’s population is 21.4% black, but 63.4% of those arrested for marijuana

possession are black. Vallejo arrests blacks at five and a half times the rate of

whites.

Sacramento County: African Americans make up 10.4% of the county's population

but 38% of those arrested for marijuana. Blacks are arrested at 4.1 times the arrest

rate for whites.

Sacramento is the seventh largest city in the California. Blacks are 13.7% of Sacramento's

population but more than half of all the city's marijuana possession

arrests. Sacramento, the state capitol, arrests blacks at 5.7 times the rate of whites.

Arresting Blacks for Marijuana in California: Possession Arrests in 25 Cities 2006-08 (part 2)

Los Angeles County: Los Angeles County has nearly ten million residents and over

a quarter of California's population. Blacks make up 10% of the county's population,

but they constituted 30% of the marijuana possession arrests. Within specific cities,

the disparities are even greater.

Los Angeles 3.8 million residents, arrested blacks at seven times

the rate of whites. Blacks make up 9.6% of Los Angeles' population but they were

almost 35% of the people arrested for marijuana possession.

Pasadena arrested blacks for marijuana possession at 12.5 times the rate of whites.

Blacks are 11.4% of the city's population but 49.2% of those arrested for marijuana.

Long Beach the sixth largest city in California, arrested blacks for marijuana possession

at 5.9 times the rate of whites. Blacks are 13.2% of the city’s population but

42.4% of marijuana arrests.

Inglewood blacks are 43.8% of the population but 76.7% of those arrested for

marijuana possession. Blacks were arrested at 6.3 times the rate of whites.

Burbank blacks are less than 3% of the population, but over 9% of the people

arrested for marijuana possession. Burbank arrested blacks at 3.5 times the rate of

whites.

Torrance with a population of 140,000, had the highest racial disparity

of the 25 cities. Blacks are only 2% of the population but they made up almost

24% of the people arrested for marijuana possession. Torrance arrested blacks at

over thirteen times the rate for whites.

San Diego County African Americans are 5.6% of the county’s three million residents,

but 20% of the people arrested for marijuana. The possession arrest rate for

blacks was three and a half times higher than the arrest rate for whites. The three

cities we studied show even great disparities:

San Diego, the second largest city in California, blacks were arrested at nearly six

times the rate of whites. African Americans are only 6.5% of San Diego’s

population but they made up 29.5% of those arrested for marijuana possession.

8

Oceanside, blacks are only 4.6% of the population but 17.6% of those arrested

for marijuana possession. Police arrested 184 whites per 100,000 whites for

marijuana possession, compared to 774 blacks per 100,000 blacks.

El Cajon, blacks are 6.2% of the population but more than 20% of those

arrested for possessing marijuana. The city arrested 326 whites per 100,000 whites

compared to 1153 blacks per 100,000 blacks for marijuana possession.

Riverside County: Blacks are 6.6% of this large southern California county, but

blacks make up 17% of the people arrested for marijuana possession.

Riverside blacks are 6.3% of the 12th largest city in California, but are 24% of the

those arrested for marijuana possession. Riverside arrested blacks at almost five

times the rate for whites.

Moreno Valley are 16.7% of the population, the 23rd largest city in the state.

But blacks made up 39.1% of the city's marijuana arrests. The marijuana arrest rate

for blacks was almost three and a half times more than the rate for whites.