Taxi Driver Remanded: Cocaine Charge
Yesterday [Jan.23] a 37-year-old taxi driver who was found in possession of over $13,000 worth of cocaine while in his taxi was remanded into custody pending sentencing.
Hewvonnie Brown pleaded guilty to possession of 42.3 grams of cocaine, said to have a street value of over $13,000. In addition, he was found to have a scale, a box of clear Ziploc bags and over $50,000 in cash. The offence occurred in March of last year in an Increased Penalty Zone.
The Court heard that police officers stopped and searched Mr Brown after receiving specific information that he was selling drugs from his taxi. Mr Brown was remanded pending pre-sentencing reports.
Read More About
Category: All, Court Reports, Crime, News
Hopefully Prime Minister David Cameron takes heed to Sir Richard Branson’s message to change the UK’s drugs policy. If the Prime Minister does we should follow suit & trash our U.S. influenced drug policy. This would take profits from dealers, curb gang feuds, reduce addict numbers, lower HIV infection & lower taxes like Sir Richard said its a win win all around. It baffles me how Bermuda Parliament dresses up & act like they are British Parliament while the laws reflect U.S. government. Are we trying to become the 51st state of the land of gangster kings?
So you’re for taxi drivers selling cocaine from their cab? Or the Government should take over cocaine sales?
I’m a bit confused.
I’m for the decriminalization of all controlled substances so addicts are not thrown in jail with dealers who use them as a means of continued economy. Also with decriminalization clinics can be set up by government where addicts can get there fix & clean needles that are to stay in the clinic the same as MAWI administers certain drugs already that are considered as addictive as cocaine. Government will not charge the addict for the drugs they will come from our taxes. Yes, OUR TAXES!!! Now that I’m about to go in front of the firing squad for this last statement please let me explain before before being executed. Our taxes at the moment go to lawyers, judges, police, prison officers & many other services because of gang crime, burglaries, drug dealers trials, addicts trials & other drug related issues. Supplying addicts with fixes would be a small drop in the tax bucket compared to what’s paid out by the previous mentioned expenses. What we must be bear in mind is that the street price of drugs are dictated by dealers not reality of manufacturing price so dealers charge addicts way more then what the drug should be. Decriminalization along with safe drug administration would take profits from dealers putting them out of business, take away gangs territorial issues because it won’t be profitable to sell on the block anymore & reduce HIV cases because uninfected users will not have to share needles with infected ones.
And how does this reduce addict numbers????? It will be less expensive for them to get drugs? The key word is “addicted”! Users are not addicted because of the high price of drugs! How will decriminalizing cocaine lower the addiction numbers. Do we have less alcoholics now than we would if we banned all alcohol? Tommy ..love your passion, but addiction doesn’t work that way. The more money you have (or less it costs) the longer you can use and hide your addiction. That is one of the reasons why crack use took off in the 80′s especially in poorer communities.
Most addicts are introduced to drugs by their peers that get them illegally. Taking the profit away from dealers who sell illegally puts them out of business. Hence less drugs on the street makes it harder for addicts to introduce drugs to first time users. I realize decriminalization will not get addicts clean but it will at least stem the number of new addicts. Decriminalization will also slightly reduce the number of existing addicts because a trained nurse administering drugs will be able to try to ween the user off while a dealer at present does the opposite. Of curse weening users off drugs is very difficult as you pointed out but even a small percent reduction is still a reduction & is better than what it is at present. I don’t see your parallel between the present supply of alcohol & clinically supplied drugs. Alcohol is not supplied by a nurse its supplied by bartenders who sometimes can be just as harmful as a drug dealer. The only drug that should ever be allowed public distribution other than the present alcohol, tobacco, caffein & pharmaceuticals is cannabis which all need better control policies looked at.
Your reason for why crack use took off in the 80′s especially in poorer communities is misinformed. The real reason crack use took off in the 80′s especially in poorer communities is due to the cia & reagan administrations attempt to use it as an ethnic cleansing tool. CIA chemist are the first to develop the process of converting the chemical in the coca plant to cocaine which is crack in a non freebased form. Development of cocaine was part of cia’s plan to create a super soldier drug. Although cocaine did have the quality’s cia was looking for of making a human painless & fearless plus the ability to suppress hunger & fatigue it prove to be too highly addictive. Since U.S. couldn’t have addict soldiers they needed to find another use for the drug. At the time the biggest problem Ronald Reagan had to deal with was communism & the growing number of poor people. CIA tried to solve both these problems with Reagan’s consent with cocaine. By giving the Contras the recipe for cocaine production cia could now trade weapons for cocaine & the Contras could use the weapons to kill communist supported Sandinistas & the cia could use cocaine/crack to addict & eventually kill the poor solving the two issues Reagan faced.
Tommy,
We are not that smart
Correction, they are not that smart & we are not that powerful but we can still light up the darkness.