BajaNomad - Mexico decriminalizes small-scale drug possession

Mexico decriminalizes small-scale drug possession

Packoderm - 8-21-2009 at 05:15 AM

From Associated Press:
"MEXICO CITY — Mexico decriminalized small amounts of marijuana, cocaine and heroin on Friday — a move that prosecutors say makes sense even in the midst of the government's grueling battle against drug traffickers."
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iP1GlMCOzY...

The Gull - 8-21-2009 at 08:41 AM

Tourism resurgence cannot be far behind. Mexican vacations for American drug users. What could be better for the economy?

shari - 8-21-2009 at 08:47 AM

wonder if news got published in High Times :biggrin:

is that paper still published?? anything to boost tourism eh! oh oh...here come the wrath of Skeet!

DENNIS - 8-21-2009 at 08:51 AM

Well, Gull mentioned this on another thread and I replied as to the legality of selling drugs on the street. Was this covered in the new legislation or is it a big diabolical trap?

Taco de Baja - 8-21-2009 at 08:58 AM

Quote:

The new law sets out maximum "personal use" amounts for drugs, also including LSD and methamphetamine. People detained with those quantities no longer face criminal prosecution.

Anyone caught with drug amounts under the new personal-use limit will be encouraged to seek treatment, and for those caught a third time treatment is mandatory.

Treatment in Mexico, bet that's a blast.

Hola, mi nombre es ____. Soy un ____.

Skeet/Loreto - 8-21-2009 at 08:59 AM

Shari; No Wrath!

What will happen when all of your customers are Druggies??
Will you accept payment for the Panga in Drugs?

Drugs are for the Weak minded. I feel very sorry for them and their Children..

Suffer the Children!

Martyman - 8-21-2009 at 11:05 AM

Amsterasunciondam here I come!! :lol:

Don't drink the bong water!

[Edited on 8-21-2009 by Martyman]

Dave - 8-21-2009 at 11:18 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by DENNIS
Well, Gull mentioned this on another thread and I replied as to the legality of selling drugs on the street. Was this covered in the new legislation or is it a big diabolical trap?

Why would you buy in Mexico when you could just bring it down? Every druggie knows the s**t is better in the States. :cool:

DENNIS - 8-21-2009 at 12:35 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Dave
Why would you buy in Mexico when you could just bring it down? Every druggie knows the s**t is better in the States. :cool:

And, when the College Grad Patrol finds it when they look through your car at the border, are you arrested for smuggling drugs into Mexico? hmmmmmm............this is going to be Catch-22 at its best.

Dave - 8-21-2009 at 12:41 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by DENNIS

Quote:

Originally posted by Dave
Why would you buy in Mexico when you could just bring it down? Every druggie knows the s**t is better in the States. :cool:

When you get searched 'at the border' you're already in Mexico.

DENNIS - 8-21-2009 at 12:44 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Dave
[When you get searched 'at the border' you're already in Mexico.

I'm not so sure that arguement would work. Remember, the days of the twenty dollar bill in the shirt pocket are over. :tumble:

arrowhead - 8-21-2009 at 01:09 PM

Well, I just read the new regulations. You can read them here:

http://dof.gob.mx/nota_detalle.php?codigo=5106093&fecha=...

I don't think tourists have much to hope for. The program is designed to divert early drug users into drug avoidance training. It's really aimed at Mexicans...I don't think they will have much sympathy for gringos. Besides, it is a change to the federal law. State narcotics laws have not been changed. The states have one-year to change their laws to conform to federal law and another three years after that to implement it. So the local fuzz can still arrest gringos (and Mexicans) for possession. They can also still hammer you for being drunk (or stupid) in public or while driving. Also, there is no look-back in the new law. Everybody currently in jail for possession or under arrest and awaiting trial are to be treated under the old law.

If you come over the border with drugs, no matter how little, that is importing and they can throw the book at you.

Cypress - 8-21-2009 at 01:15 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by arrowhead
Well, I just read the new regulations. You can read them here:

http://dof.gob.mx/nota_detalle.php?codigo=5106093&fecha=...

I don't think tourists have much to hope for. The program is designed to divert early drug users into drug avoidance training. It's really aimed at Mexicans...I don't think they will have much sympathy for gringos. Besides, it is a change to the federal law. State narcotics laws have not been changed. The states have one-year to change their laws to conform to federal law and another three years after that to implement it. So the local fuzz can still arrest gringos (and Mexicans) for possession. They can also still hammer you for being drunk (or stupid) in public or while driving. Also, there is no look-back in the new law. Everybody currently in jail for possession or under arrest and awaiting trial are to be treated under the old law.

If you come over the border with drugs, no matter how little, that is importing and they can throw the book at you.

Woooosh - 8-21-2009 at 01:38 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Dave

Quote:

Why would you buy in Mexico when you could just bring it down? Every druggie knows the s**t is better in the States. :cool:

Chronic is $80/ounce and plentiful right now... so my nephew and his surfer buddies tell me. posession of 5 grams of marijuana for personal use is now legal. :saint:

[Edited on 8-21-2009 by Woooosh]

055.JPG - 49kB

Shhhh!

Dave - 8-21-2009 at 01:51 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by arrowhead
If you come over the border with drugs, no matter how little, that is importing and they can throw the book at you.

Let's not tell.

BajaBruno - 8-21-2009 at 02:48 PM

New York Times re Mexican law change:

"The maximum amount of marijuana considered to be for “personal use” under the new law is 5 grams — the equivalent of about four marijuana cigarettes. Other limits are half a gram of cocaine, 50 milligrams of heroin, 40 milligrams for methamphetamine and 0.015 milligrams of LSD."

JESSE - 8-21-2009 at 03:09 PM

Not so fast flowerchilds, this law does not mean you can just walk around with your stash in hand. They can arrest you and register you as a drug addict, off course you would never spend any actual time in jail, but you would now have a "record" of drug use. Its not as easy as you think.

If you get caught 3 times with drugs, the benefits of this law does not apply.

If caught within 300 meters of any school, park, or public building, the law does not apply.

If caught sharing a line, joint, with others etc, it wont apply and you could get charged as a supplier.

DENNIS - 8-21-2009 at 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by JESSE
They can arrest you and register you as a drug addict

Wouldn't immigration just love that. That's where your penalty will become evident.
This whole issue is best forgotten.

k-rico - 8-21-2009 at 03:23 PM

Far out man!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I'm going to go into business selling nifty little battery-powered personal scales that will fit on your keychain. Guarenteed 0.001 mg (1 microgram?) accuracy. You can recharge it with a black light. It will also have a little stash compartment.

Has anybody heard the reasoning behind this bizarro change in the law?

JESSE - 8-21-2009 at 03:24 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by DENNIS

Quote:

Originally posted by JESSE
They can arrest you and register you as a drug addict

Wouldn't immigration just love that. That's where your penalty will become evident.
This whole issue is best forgotten.

It wouldn´t be such a great thing for many Mexicans as well. I can think of many situations where a record would hurt you.

Wich is why i aprove this law. Its aimed at the poor, so that the goverment can stop wasting resources arresting drug addicts over and over again, and focus more on trafficking.

shari - 8-21-2009 at 03:30 PM

K-rico...hey maybe you could market them in the Nomad Store

Woooosh - 8-21-2009 at 03:39 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by shari
K-rico...hey maybe you could market them in the Nomad Store

You should really consider complete packages with rooms (meals and snacks may or may not be included). The Pot/Coke Weekend Retreat. A Tweeker ball. The LSD weekend baja desert escape for six. Lot's of pharma-tour potential. :saint:

Skeet/Loreto - 8-21-2009 at 04:39 PM

Larry:
Acholh; Yes!! There is io difference! It probablu takes more drionks to get into a car and Kill someone on the way Home. Gut with DOPE it takes less time!

To try to say that Drugges are O. K. because of Drinking is a Cop Out. It is all Bad if your Drink too much or DOPE too much and kill innocent People on the Streets.!

What if it where your Child that was on the street and you killed it because of Drink or DOPE??

Doot be so weak minded that you think that you can say "Stll those peop[le drink" therefore it is O.K. if I smoke DOPE and Kill People//

If you committ an act that kills people from Drink or DOPE then you should Killed> No Question -- Eye for and Eye

fishbuck - 8-21-2009 at 04:48 PM

That settles it! Check into a hotel room and have the hookers bring some dope and everything is cool.
No harm no foul! Lifes good in Mexico!

k-rico - 8-21-2009 at 05:57 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Skeet/Loreto
Larry:
Acholh; Yes!! There is io difference! It probablu takes more drionks to get into a car and Kill someone on the way Home. Gut with DOPE it takes less time!

To try to say that Drugges are O. K. because of Drinking is a Cop Out. It is all Bad if your Drink too much or DOPE too much and kill innocent People on the Streets.!

What if it where your Child that was on the street and you killed it because of Drink or DOPE??

Doot be so weak minded that you think that you can say "Stll those peop[le drink" therefore it is O.K. if I smoke DOPE and Kill People//

If you committ an act that kills people from Drink or DOPE then you should Killed> No Question -- Eye for and Eye

CLASSICO!!

I need a drionk.

vgabndo - 8-21-2009 at 11:52 PM

I absolutely LOVE it when Skeet produces an argument with which I disagree and he presents it in such a clear and educated manner. How does one debate such an intellectual? :lol:

I recommend you re-read the statistics, Tex. I judge that you will find that you have misinterpreted the data, amigo mio. :no:

duke62 - 8-22-2009 at 01:38 AM

(Acholh; Yes!! There is io difference! It probablu takes more drionks to get into a car and Kill someone on the way Home. Gut with DOPE it takes less time!

To try to say that Drugges are O. K. because of Drinking is a Cop Out. It is all Bad if your Drink too much or DOPE too much and kill innocent People on the Streets.!

What if it where your Child that was on the street and you killed it because of Drink or DOPE??

Doot be so weak minded that you think that you can say "Stll those peop[le drink" therefore it is O.K. if I smoke DOPE and Kill People//

If you committ an act that kills people from Drink or DOPE then you should Killed> No Question -- Eye for and Eye )

Skeet, I love you, as you are a Patriot (I hope you are not a fan of the team), but, I don't know anyone who has hurt/maimed/killed someone because they were smoking Mota. On the other hand, J.D., Tequila (only among spring break kids who don't know no bedda), prescription drugs, meth, yeah, a problem.

Mota was only made illegal because it was the drug of choice in Jazz clubs in the '20s-'30s, and, our esteemed leaders at that time were afraid their daughters would get stoned, and, Dios mio, have relations with Jews, perhaps, even, OH NO!, Negros. At the same time, Coca Cola was peddlin' a nice concoction that had Cocaine as a main ingredient. That is where the name came from. This is why I drink Diet Pepsi (Well, except in Baja, because that pure cane sugar makes me drink that Mexican Coca Cola. My sons say it has a peppery taste as well??).

Love your feistey comments Skeet/Loreto. Come visit us up in Ruidoso, New Mexico

Packoderm - 8-22-2009 at 06:11 AM

Now the question is whether the U.S.A. government will allow Mexico to make such a decision. I somehow predict that the hand of the U.S. will move behind the scenes to force a loophole out so that the legislation will be annulled on some sort of technicality of how it was drafted. Or, perhaps Obama won't do such a thing.

bajaguy - 8-22-2009 at 06:37 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by duke62
.......... I don't know anyone who has hurt/maimed/killed someone because they were smoking Mota.....

Hey, Duke, here are a couple......

NTSB Identification: DEN90FA043 .
The docket is stored on NTSB microfiche number 40891.
Nonscheduled 14 CFR
Accident occurred Wednesday, January 17, 1990 in LEADVILLE, CO
Probable Cause Approval Date: 9/21/1992
Aircraft: CESSNA 208A, registration: N835FE
Injuries: 1 Fatal.
PM AIR FLT 824, A FEDERAL EXPRESS SCHEDULED DOMESTIC CARGO FLT, DEPARTED DENVER, CO, AT 0642, IFR TO MONTROSE, CO. FLT WAS CLEARED TO FL 180, BUT PLT CANCELLED IFR AT 0653. RADAR SHOWED ACFT LEVELED OFF AT 14,500 FT ON SW HEADING. ACFT MAINTAINED RELATIVE CONSTANT ALT AND HEADING BEFORE CRASHING 50 FT BELOW SUMMIT OF 14,221-FT MT MASSIVE, SECOND TALLEST PEAK IN CO, AT APRX 0719. WX WAS CAVU. TOXICOLOGICAL TESTS REVEALED MARIJUANA METABOLITE LEVEL OF 37 NG/ML IN URINE AND 1 NG/ML IN BLOOD. PLT WAS ONCE CONVICTED IN 1974 FOR POSSESSION OF CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE, BUT HAD NO OTHER ALCOHOL/DRUG CONVICTIONS.

1-23-05 RENO -- A woman convicted of causing the death of a Reno police officer has been sentenced to two years in prison.

Anna Marie Jackson was convicted of having marijuana metabolite in her system when she pulled out from a commercial driveway into the path of motorcycle officer Mike Scofield in September 2002.

Scofield, who was responding to an accident, died at the scene.

fdt - 8-22-2009 at 08:14 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Packoderm
Now the question is whether the U.S.A. government will allow Mexico to make such a decision.

vgabndo - 8-22-2009 at 12:56 PM

I wouldn't expect that anything in this ten year old report would be contrived to DECREASE the prevalence of ALL drug use as it relates to crime statistics. Bear in mind that THC, being essentially non-addictive (5-7%), users don't generally steal to get it. As a result, I judge that only a small portion of the crimes recorded in this study relate to cannibis.

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/ac.pdf

Myths

Dave - 8-22-2009 at 01:15 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by duke62
our esteemed leaders at that time were afraid their daughters would get stoned, and, Dios mio, have relations with Jews

As a lifelong Jew I can tell you this usually doesn't work.

And it especially doesn't work with Jewish girls.

vgabndo - 8-22-2009 at 01:32 PM

Here are a couple of studies that Skeet's research missed.

7. Studies find alcohol use contributes to the likelihood of domestic violence and sexual assault and marijuana use does not.

Of the psychoactive substances examined, among individuals who were chronic partner abusers, the use of alcohol and cocaine was associated with significant increases in the daily likelihood of male-to-female physical aggression; cannabis and opiates were not significantly associated with an increased likelihood of male partner violence.

…the odds of any male-to-female physical aggression were more than 8 times (11 times) higher on days when men drank than on days of no alcohol consumption. The odds of severe male-to-female physical aggression were more than 11 times (11 times) higher on days of men’s drinking than on days of no drinking. Moreover, in both samples, over 60% of all episodes occurred within 2 hours of drinking by the male partner. (page 1557)

Source: Fals-Stewart , William, James Golden, Julie A. Schumacher. Journal of Addictive Behaviors. 28, pages 1555-1574. Intimate partner violence and substance use: A longitudinal day-to-day examination. Research Institute on Addictions, University at Buffalo, State University of New York

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

8. Studies find alcohol use contributes to aggressive behavior and acts of violence, whereas marijuana use reduces the likelihood of violent behavior.

Alcohol is clearly the drug with the most evidence to support a direct intoxication-violence relationship.

Cannabis reduces likelihood of violence during intoxication…

Source: Hoaken, Peter N.S., Sherry H. Stewart. Journal of Addictive Behaviors. 28, pages 1533-1554. Drugs of abuse and the elicitation of human aggressive behavior. Dept. of Psychology, University of Western Ontario. Dept. of of Psychiatry, Dalhousie University.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

9. Alcohol use is highly associated with violent crime, whereas marijuana use is not.

About 3 million violent crimes occur each year in which victims perceive the offender to have been drinking at the time of the offense.

Two-thirds of victims who suffered violence by an intimate (a current or former spouse, boyfriend, or girlfriend) reported that alcohol had been a factor.

Among spouse victims, 3 out of 4 incidents were reported to have involved an offender who had been drinking.

Source: U.S. Department of Justice. Bureau of Justice Statistics. National Crime Victimization Survey 2002.

An interesting social note: At the time that Anslinger set out to criminalize cannibis, the only organized group of people who stood to defend its legality were in the pigeon raising industry. Marijuana seed was at the time a major source of bird food for their industry. :lol:

I found no statistics for rape and domestic violence in the pigeon population in the 1930's. :spingrin:

Bajahowodd - 8-22-2009 at 01:40 PM

There are exceptions to all norms. but it is true that alcohol does have a much higher incidence of invoking aggressive behavior than does cannabis. Something to keep in mind, however, is that any intoxicant, by its very definition, will impair motor skills. It is no less foolish to drive, boat, fly, or whatever under the influence of pot or cocaine than alcohol.

Along these same lines, it wasn't too long ago that many states considered .16% as the level where one would be considered legally drunk. The feds basically coerced states to lower the level to .08% by threatening to withold federal highway money. I wonder if any of you stat jockeys have any numbers on whether there has been any measureable drop in alcohol related highway deaths since the change in the percentage.

[Edited on 8-22-2009 by Bajahowodd]

Fair and balanced

Dave - 8-22-2009 at 01:42 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by vgabndo

…the odds of any male-to-female physical aggression were more than 8 times (11 times) higher on days when men drank than on days of no alcohol consumption.

I would venture a guess that the odds of female-to-male mental aggression on days when these men didn't drink is 1 to 100.

Bob H - 8-22-2009 at 02:32 PM

Time to relax....

:wow:

====~~

By the way, that's my cigar up there!

Bob H

[Edited on 8-22-2009 by Bob H]

vgabndo - 8-23-2009 at 04:07 PM

Bajahowodd...The statistics do not conclusively show that the change to .08 BY ITSELF had a significant effect on highway mortality due to drinking drivers. However, coupled with more strict penalties for such crimes, the death rate has come down.

http://www.gao.gov/archive/1999/rc99179.pdf

Bajahowodd - 8-23-2009 at 04:23 PM

Thanks for the link. I am in no way an advocate of indiscriminate drinking. But I come from a time and place where it seemed there was a great deal more drinking and driving, drugs and driving, and I really wondered if all the efforts put forth had a palliative effect. From what I see in this link, the jury is out except for the harsher and more enforced penalties. I personally have a problem with roadblocks. And some of the commercials they play on TV appear to glamourize their effectiveness. No one should drive while impaired. But at the same time, I see a creeping encroachment over the daily habits of the citizenry.

Ricardo - 8-24-2009 at 06:36 PM

Here's a question for you, how many of the states in America have decriminalized marijuana?

toneart - 8-24-2009 at 08:59 PM

Skeet,
What were you drinking when you posted? :rolleyes:

Yew wudda spelt all bedder if you'd had a toke. Then tri the spillchuker. And don't fall prey to Reefer Madness. :lol:

Sharksbaja - 8-24-2009 at 09:43 PM

Thanks Perry, it's a tough argument to compare apples and oranges tho it seems one must.

Mexico Relaxes Personal Possession Drug Laws

sancho - 8-26-2009 at 03:59 PM

Don't know of this has been posted before

Mexico's New Drug Law May Set an Example
By Ioan Grillo / Mexico City Wednesday, Aug. 26, 2009

No dreadlocked revelers smoked celebratory reefers in the streets, no armies of conservatives protested, the Mexican media raised no hullabaloo. Quietly and with little ado, Mexico last week enacted a law to decriminalize possession of small amounts of all major narcotics, including marijuana, cocaine, heroin, ecstasy and crystal meth. Anyone caught in Mexico with two or three joints or about four lines of cocaine can no longer be arrested, fined or imprisoned. However, police will give them the address of the nearest rehab clinic and advise them to get clean.

Most surprising was how easily and painlessly the reform slipped into Mexican law. The bill was originally filed in October by President Felipe Calderón, a social conservative who is waging a bloody military crackdown on drug cartels. Congress then approved the bill in April — as Mexico's swine-flu outbreak dominated media attention. And finally the law went into the books without any major protests either in Mexico or north of the border.

Another reason for the ambivalence is that the new law is predicted to have little effect on the Mexican street. Police officers would rarely arrest people caught with small amounts of drugs anyway, although they would often use it as an opportunity to extract handsome bribes.

Mexican officials argue the legislation is designed less to change the situation than to clarify the law and go after the traffickers harder. Indeed, while using small amounts of drugs may now be fine, selling drugs is still illegal. The law clearly states any person dealing narcotics will be sent to prison. Any place that sells drugs will be liable for punishment, a provision that is likely to prevent the opening of any Amsterdam-style "coffee shops" in the country.
has legalized it for limited medical use.

Pescador - 8-27-2009 at 04:23 PM

Check this one out. Pretty accurate article

http://www.bajainsider.com/baja-life/general-information/mex...

In Mexico, Ambivalence on a Drug Law

BajaNews - 8-30-2009 at 09:20 PM

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/24/world/americas/24mexico.ht...

By MARC LACEY
August 24, 2009

TIJUANA, Mexico — Yolanda Espinosa’s eyes darted this way and that. Her hands trembled. For Ms. Espinosa, a cocaine and heroin addict in desperate need of a fix, a new Mexican law decriminalizing the possession of small quantities of drugs had a definite appeal.

“That’s good,” she said in her mile-a-minute speaking style. “Real good.”

But as someone fed up with her life in Tijuana’s red light district, where she and hundreds of other addicts live in flophouses and traipse through the streets in search of their next dose, Ms. Espinosa also had her doubts about what Mexico’s politicians had done.

“No one should live like I live,” she said. “It’s an awful life. You do anything to satisfy your urge. You sell your body. It ruins you. I hope this won’t make more people live like this.”

Ms. Espinosa’s ambivalence reflects her country’s. Under siege by drug traffickers, Mexico took a bold and controversial step last week when it opted to no longer prosecute those carrying relatively small quantities of marijuana, cocaine, heroin and other drugs. Instead, people found with drugs for “personal and immediate use,” according to the law, will be referred to free treatment programs where they will be considered patients, not criminals.

The decriminalization effort, which many lawmakers endorsed with little enthusiasm, is intended to free up prison space for dangerous criminals and to better wean addicts away from drugs. It is not the only legislation put forward that would probably never have been considered were the country not in the midst of a bloody and seemingly endless drug war.

Capital punishment, which has not been carried out in Mexico for nearly 50 years, is now being offered by some lawmakers as an answer to the nation’s ills. In April, Congress debated whether to make marijuana legal altogether, a measure President Felipe Calderón fiercely opposes.

Under the new law, a police search that turns up a half-gram of cocaine, the equivalent of about four lines, will not bring any jail time. The same applies for 5 grams of marijuana (about four cigarettes), 50 milligrams of heroin, 40 milligrams of methamphetamine or 0.015 milligrams of LSD.

“I could have all that and they wouldn’t touch me?” Ms. Espinosa asked with surprise. She was hardly the only one who missed the government’s announcement, which was intentionally low-key. Fearful that the law would be misconstrued, the government enacted it with little fanfare on Thursday.

“This is not legalization,” Bernardo Espino del Castillo of the attorney general’s office told The Associated Press. “This is regulating the issue.”

The battle against the drug cartels, which has resulted in more than 11,000 deaths since Mr. Calderón took office in December 2006, will continue unabated, officials insist. Revising drug possession laws, in fact, will help focus the drug war more effectively, they say.

Besides taking the focus of law enforcement officials off small-time users, the law allows the state police to arrest those with up to 1,000 times the personal consumption amounts, people who would be considered dealers. Anyone with larger amounts would be seen as trafficking drugs, and would be handed over to federal authorities.

“With this reform we will make the combined capability of enforcement against this crime a legal and operational reality,” Attorney General Eduardo Medina-Mora told a conference of state prosecutors last week.

Mexico’s approach won praise from organizations that consider the jailing of users a waste of resources that does not reduce drug consumption. In the United States, some states have decriminalized the possession of small amounts of marijuana but not other drugs.

“The decision by the Mexican government to decriminalize the consumption of small amounts of drugs constitutes a step in the right direction after decades of failed policy,” said Juan Carlos Hidalgo, the Cato Institute’s project coordinator for Latin America. “It is in line with efforts by other Latin American leaders and governments who are increasingly skeptical of Washington’s prohibitionist drug policies.”

Ethan Nadelmann, executive director of the Drug Policy Alliance, said the approach in Mexico “contrasts sharply with the United States, where arrests for marijuana possession hit a record high last year — roughly 800,000 annually — and now represent nearly half of all drug arrests nationwide.”

Even before the new law went into effect, Mexicans caught with small amounts of drugs were not routinely prosecuted, officials said. But the change takes the discretion of whether to throw drug users in jail away from police officers, who frequently shook down people by threatening them with arrest.

As Ms. Espinosa spoke, a police car went by and she hopped up from the curb. “Let’s move,” she said.

Under the law, people caught with drugs for the third time would be forced to go to treatment. Mr. Calderón had proposed a tougher version that would have jailed people who repeatedly failed to follow through with treatment. The version that Congress passed specified no penalties for noncompliance.

A similar law passed in 2006, but the president at the time, Vicente Fox, rejected it under pressure from the United States. Now, Mr. Fox is speaking of the need to consider legalizing marijuana, and the United States government has remained largely silent on the change.

At one Tijuana drug treatment center, a former addict was not convinced that going easy on those found with drugs was the right approach. “With everything that’s happening, we need to distance ourselves from drugs,” said the former addict, Luis Manuel Delgado, 50, who is also the center’s assistant director. “Imagine if I told the people in here that it was now legal for them to have a little. No way.”

Jailing addicts helps them reach rock bottom and decide to turn their lives around, Mr. Delgado said. Others, however, contend that prison time in Mexico only exposes users to even more dangerous prisoners, who can then recruit them into the drug business. And drug use is rampant behind bars in Mexico, making it no real refuge from the streets.

Besides an upsurge in drug-related violence tied to traffickers supplying the lucrative United States market, Mexico also finds itself grappling with many more domestic users. One government survey put the number of addicts at 460,000, over 50 percent more than in 2002.

Like Ms. Espinosa, a 50-year-old mother who has not seen her children in years, many addicts live dismal lives. In border cities like Tijuana, poverty, proximity to the United States and an ample supply of drugs make the addiction rates among the highest in all of Mexico. A recent study showed that as many as 67 percent of the more than 1,000 intravenous drug users tested in Tijuana were positive for tuberculosis. Other researchers have put HIV rates in Tijuana at more than triple the national average.

Ms. Espinosa, deported nine years ago from the United States, where her family remains, wants to leave her life of high highs and low lows behind. “I’ve gotten clean before,” she said. “I lasted three years. Then I relapsed.”

As her eyes scanned the street scene, she continued: “It’s hard. But I’m going back. Really. I’m going to go back.”