End the War on Drugs
We have recently heard many shocking stories of brutal killings and ruthless violence related to drug cartels warring with Mexican and US officials. It is approaching the fever pitch of a full blown crisis. Unfortunately, the administration is not likely to waste this opportunity to further expand government. Hopefully, we can take a deep breath and look at history for the optimal way to deal with this dangerous situation, which is not unprecedented.
Alcohol prohibition in the 1920’s brought similar violence, gangs, lawlessness, corruption and brutality. The reason for the violence was not that making and selling alcohol was inherently dangerous. The violence came about because of the creation of a brutal black market which also drove profits through the roof. These profits enabled criminals like Al Capone to become incredibly wealthy, and militantly defensive of that wealth. Al Capone saw the repeal of Prohibition as a great threat, and indeed smuggling operations and gangland violence fell apart after repeal. Today, picking up a bottle of wine for dinner is a relatively benign transaction, and beer trucks travel openly and peacefully along their distribution routes.
Similarly today, the best way to fight violent drug cartels would be to pull the rug out from under their profits by bringing these transactions out into the sunlight. People who, unwisely, buy drugs would hardly opt for the back alley criminal dealer as a source, if a coffeehouse-style dispensary was an option. Moreover, a law-abiding dispensary is likely to check ID’s and refuse sale to minors, as bars and ABC stores tend to do very diligently. Think of all the time and resources law enforcement could save if they could instead focus on violent crimes, instead of this impossible nanny-state mandate of saving people from themselves!
If these reasons don’t convince the drug warriors, I would urge them to go back to the Constitution and consider where there is any authority to prohibit private personal choices like this. All of our freedoms – the freedom of religion and assembly, the freedom of speech, the right to bear arms, the right to be free from unnecessary government searches and seizures – stem from the precept that you own yourself and are responsible for your own choices. Prohibition laws negate self-ownership and are an absolute affront to the principles of freedom. I disagree vehemently with the recreational use of drugs, but at the same time, if people are only free to make good decisions, they are not truly free. In any case, states should decide for themselves how to handle these issues and the federal government should respect their choices.
My great concern is that instead of dealing deliberatively with the actual problems, Congress will be pressed again to act quickly without much thought or debate. I can’t think of a single problem we haven’t made worse that way. The panic generated by the looming crisis in Mexico should not be redirected into curtailing more rights, especially our second amendment rights, as seems to be in the works. Certainly, more gun laws in response to this violence will only serve to disarm lawful citizens. This is something to watch out for and stand up against. We have escalated the drug war enough to see it only escalates the violence and profits associated with drugs. It is time to try freedom instead.
Search My Preserving Freedom Blog
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
Time to End the War on Drugs
Weekly message from Texas Congressman Ron Paul:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
Government has RESPONSIBILITIES to the protect the freedoms of the PEOPLE. Sir, I hope you do not need an education on that subject. Because it was the govt. that DEMANDED you to be instituted in educational systems. Our govt. levies taxes from each of our paychecks. Our govt. makes sure there is LIFE (sometimes), liberty and the pursuit of happiness for each of it citizens. Our laws are structured around such ideology.
DRUGS are DRUGS!! They incapacitate Americans from being functional citizens just as lack of education and tax evasion prevent others from their OWN pursuits of happiness. Drugs cripple a nation!!
Mexico is not the #1 consumer of drugs WE ARE! But they are country is ON its KNEES because they cannot control those deranged blood-thirsty murderers on the border. Mexico is immersed in drug use.
Anyone who buys illegal drugs is in bed with such people. They support the deaths of not only innocent servicemen but Mexican children and our own youth. Innocent kids in the crossfire or O.D in a playground are victims of Americans horrific demand .
Without our youth OUR nation will meet the same events as Mexico. We can't even RESPONSIBLY control alcohol, tobacco, and other pharmaceuticals- drugs will just posed even more threats to our well-being and lets criminals on that border further attack the weak and innocent.
Hopefully truth.org and other groups can teach moderation and someday abstinence of illicit substances. People need to move from a substance-addicted mentality and deal with life. Rather than end up like Mexico by ignoring it till bodies are stacked in the lands because it will make it way here.
Americans have always risen to the challenge from Dr. King to Lincoln, FDR and even Reagan. They did so regardless of victory but principles, ideals and beliefs. Drugs will not enslave this country without a fight (I wish Mexico or Colombia would have that same unified front and not be mired in such despair)
With hope Obama will follow these footsteps and remain vigilant to changing things for the better and not embracing failure. He quit smoking...
Don't tread on me - in Amsterdam they smoke all the weed they want but THEY pay to take care of drug-addicted citizens with Universal Health-care. Are we willing do that??
Legalization of marijuana enhances govt. authority and more responsibility to protect citizens with an 'approved' product.
Well if you think the problems in Mexico and Columbia are due to drugs being legal there or that there is no "war on drugs" in those countries, you better read up some more.
Sir, Mexico-Colombia are losing their War On Drugs and the fight is far from over, it is only begun. But the depths these nations are sinking to mired in corruption and lawlessness is very real.
If people think that murderers behind these cartels do not have the same levels of destruction in store for the United States.
Then they need to read up some more.
These men are blood-thirsty and ruthless murderers. If people want to use drugs and thus support these kind of people, then our fate will be the same as Mexico's.
Mexico-Colombia governments are riddled with corruption. Streets are engulfed in all-out warfare that cartels are accustomed to engaging in. Children and our youth as well are the innocent victims.
Read up...
Drugs have corrupted Mexico to the point that they are on their knees fighting an enemy FUELED BY US. Our demand will galvanize these murderers' lust for riches and wealth at the expense of countless lives, peace, and our future.
A future that will left to the SELF-CONSUMED culture that cripples Mexico today. America is just fortunate enough to have the riches not to feel the effects of its even greater hedonistic ways. But, Mexico and Colombia do.
Legalization WON'T WORK because we STILL can't moderately approach alcohol as a culture to this today after Prohibition.
Ah, so you wish to return to alcohol prohibition also. That is just a peachy idea. It will really give the criminals another way to make money.
You do realize that there were no illegal drugs in the US until after 1913 with the passage of the Harrison Act. Even then drugs weren't illegal, just regulated. Marijuana was not illegal or regulated until the passage of the Marijuana Tax Act of 1937. Once again, it wasn't made illegal just taxed.
Just as alcohol prohibition led to gangs running liquor and killing people over territory, drug prohibition has led to the same problem today. Drugs are obtainable in maximun security prisons in the US. You can never stop the drug trade in a free society.
To eliminate the crime and the killing, drugs should be made legal again and addiction treated as a health issue, not a crime.
Look, alcohol prohibition failed as it was bound too. Everyone knows that because gangsters easily capitalized on demand out there for consumption and the people behind it wanted to repress a ridiculous moral agenda. Instead of a PUBLIC HEALTH MANDATE it was just bound to fail.
BUT the Differences from today are
-Alcohol is a dangerous substance but there were not 'alcohol-houses' (crack-dens) riddled in urban communities.
-It was the 1940s-- the art of developing dangerous substances was in its INFANCY
-That Harrison Act you mentioned so aptly was in 1913! I should not have to type this out for you but, in 1913 substance abuse was no where near the immense levels it is at today. Budweiser had just got their feet wet.
-And if you forgot Prohibition soon followed the Harrison Act because groups like Budweiser and Coors did not have the connections to challenge such reform. (they do today) Adolphus Coors even killed himself today he would have personally generated 5 billion a year.
-In 1913 and years before 1937 OUR COUNTRY had completely different outlook on SUBSTANCES. Back then alcohol magnates killed themselves and, now their substances kill people.
The repeal of Prohibition was effective as it stopped AMERICAN gangsters from peddling around 'booze'. Ending a black market...
?? The drug war is not about bringing American gangsters to justice. To stop 'booze' from forming alcohol-dens in our communities. And institutionalizing 'AA' to take addicts from an 'extremely powerful' substance like alcohol.
These murderers are not backed by American-based groups. They are not 'gangsters'. These organization are of complexities we can only begin to imagine, unlike PROHIBITION these 'men' can bring nations to there knees. Alcohol is powerful but, nowhere near the potency and as addictive that these DESTRUCTIVE SUBSTANCES are. This a black market that extends far beyond any preconception. Heads of state bend to will of these 'murderers'
And as an alleged conservative, who do you think will pay for the care of addicts. Yes, I agree with prison reform just as Joe Biden does- there is a big problem with prison and drugs. Amsterdam rehab is free but they have universal health-care. F.y.i alcohol has not corrupted people to the point that govt. must personally 'rehab' addicts- A.A is private group.
I think institutionalizing universal health-care to take care 'drug addicts' which there will be large occurrences of will proven VERY COSTLY. Have you ever known/seen a crack addict and seen alcohol addict? One needs to make sure he doesn't drive much the other if he can change the diaper of his child. Or better yet even want to.
-Don't trust a substance you don't control, FDR got rid of it as he himself was a drinker. I don't think or at least I would like to think our leaders were at their desks rather than in a circle. -Breweries were functioning before Prohibition in AMERICAN, and were not illegally imported during Prohibition- "moon-shined".
--Today we know MUCH MORE about the negative effects of alcohol but, we are pragmatic enough to know how immersed it is with popular culture. That same pragmatism provides the UNDERSTANDING that America has a SUBSTANCE ABUSE problem. And it is just with the ones that are LEGAL right now, our demand for these substance knows no limits.
These murderers, for better or worse, are CAPITALISTS legalize weed, they innovate to other substances. With our OWN labs discovering METH and ECTASY, foreign dealers are adding even more INNOVATIVE techniques to efficiently MARKET even better substances. Latin America is home to the world's best suppliers and most VILE characters
--the bottom-line FDR 70 yrs. ago could never imagine an emerging popularity of other substances with alcohol firmly in place. "Why, enjoy other substances with alcohol around?"- he would likely ask.
"The reason is that this stuff is even better, maaannn."
The stuff just gets better and better AND it doesn't end with weed. Even if there is a successful transition and the next thirty years are great. Somewhere along the line a new substance POPS up. And now there are synthetic threats and pharmaceuticals are mired in controversy.
Some accept that, BUT at what price. What are we going to pay for an even greater affinity for that NEW substance.
Our demand has galvanized legends like Capone, Escobar, even Harvard's own Timothy Leary. But who has paid the price on the path that these 'legends' have trail blazed. The casualties are countless as immense as our DEMAND.
Americans has been fortunate enough to have the riches to ignore the consequences and avoid the troubles, just like an alleged user named Ashley Biden. But when WILL effects become to large to ignore and impossible to avoid our- ABUSE of SUBSTANCES. Regardless of legal or illegal just substances themselves.
There are people that actually want to legalize even more substances. WHAT??!! They can't even SEE how wrong it is to have pitchers of beer at a kids'- Chuck E. Cheese party. We can't even moderate our behavior but, who cares
''tune out, tune in, drop out''
But Mexico knows the effects all too well, and users in the States should know how they are INVOLVED.
Better yet responsible ...
War on drugs may fail as prohibition did but our addiction to substances will grow ever stronger. I hope there are Americans who will have the fortitude to fight on and the vision to see how SELF-CONSUMED our society is from Madoff to sociopath drug dealers causing chaos on our borders.
Well you keep repeating the same emotional argument ignoring facts and reality. Even a minor perusal of the internet will quickly reveal that alcohol is a much more dangerous drug than pot.
No one has EVER died from a marijuana overdose. People die from alcohol overdoses EVERY day.
The problems you cite with crackhouse, drug cartels, government corruption are ALL due to the drugs being illegal. If the drugs were legal and regulated, these problems would be reduced to the same level as moonshining is today.
Opium, morphine, herion, pot and cocaine were in existence back in 1913.
From the Drug Policy Alliance:
A century ago opiates and cocaine were freely available and used both medicinally and recreationally by people throughout the U.S. Scores of patent medicines, elixirs and liquid concoctions contained substantial amounts of opium or cocaine. Studies published between 1871 and 1922 paint a striking portrait of the typical opiate or cocaine addict in the early 20th century: a middle aged, rural, middle- or upper-class White woman.(1) The peak of opiate dependence in the United States occurred near the turn of the century, when the number of addicts was estimated at close to 250,000 in a population of 76 million -- a rate never again equaled.(2) Yet despite the relative prevalence of addiction, the prevailing attitude at the time was that drug addiction was a health problem, best treated by physicians and pharmacists.
Public attitudes about drug use began to change as perceptions about drug users shifted. Opposition to opium smoking grew as it was increasingly linked to Chinese immigrants in the western United States. Strong anti-Chinese sentiment, exacerbated by a growing fear of competitive cheap Chinese labor, led to the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882, which forbade further immigration. Reports that the upper classes were taking up opium smoking in New York and other cities led to heightened alarm. Fears that respectable white women were being seduced into a life of prostitution and debauchery in opium dens were inflamed by vivid reports. In 1902, the Committee on the Acquirement of the Drug Habit of the American Pharmaceutical Association declared: "If the 'Chinaman' cannot get along without his 'dope,' we can get along without him." In 1909 the United States' international war on drugs began when California prohibited the importation of smokeable opium.
In 1910 Dr. Hamilton Wright, considered by some the father of U.S. anti-narcotics laws, reported that U.S. contractors were giving cocaine to their Black employees to get more work out of them.(3) A few years later, stories began to proliferate about "cocaine-crazed Negroes" in the South who had run amuck. The New York Times published a story that alleged "most of the attacks upon white women of the South are the direct result of the 'cocaine-crazed' Negro brain." The story asserted that "Negro cocaine fiends are now a known Southern menace." Some southern police departments switched to .38 caliber revolvers, because they thought cocaine made Blacks impervious to .32 caliber bullets.(4) These stories were in part motivated by a desire to persuade Southern members of Congress to support the proposed Harrison Narcotics Act, which would greatly expand the federal government's power to control drugs.(5) This lie was also necessary since, even though drugs were widely used in America, very little crime was associated with the users.(6)
When marijuana was popularized in the 20s and 30s in the American jazz scene, Blacks and Whites sat down as equals and smoked together. The racist anti-marijuana propaganda of the time used this crumbling of racial barriers as an example of the degradation caused by marijuana. Harry Anslinger, head of the newly formed federal narcotics division, warned middle-class leaders about Blacks and Whites dancing together in "teahouses," using blatant prejudice to sell prohibition.(7) In 1931 New Orleans officials attributed many of the region's crimes to marijuana, which they believed was also a dangerous sexual stimulant. During the Great Depression, the 1937 Marijuana Tax Act came into law, again using racism as its chief selling point. The same Mexicans who were vying with out of work Americans for the few agricultural jobs available, it was said, engaged in marijuana induced violence against Americans.
In regards to crack in the 1920s that stuff ain't up to POTENCY of today. Even in 'blessed' Amsterdam people keep going after the COLOMBIAN brand. And crack-houses are no joke, regardless of color a crack-house is a scene like no other.
While, there are many points that you have established to support the safety of widespread marijuana use, you have ignored the key issues of this country reliance on SUBSTANCES themselves.
The question is when does it stop? When are people going to stop clamoring for the next wonder "drug"? Aren't there enough drugs?
And ultimately, the answer lies in the extent in which future production and innovation can be controlled to combat more and more consumption.
You cannot control the creation of methamphetamine, ecstasy, and all the other junk out there. Because that would take even more government control and exuberant spending than what we have now.
Legalizing marijuana adds fuel to the ever-growing fire and as you have mentioned and I agree, criminalizing all substances (alcohol, etc.) starts a lot more other fires (more crime, resentment, and corruption).The war is not against drugs but, a war against substances.
But, there has to be a LINE and if people cannot even MODERATELY control alcohol, tobacco, and other drugs- how can they handle another addition to their already indulgent diet. And we must agree our diet of substances is large and diverse ...
I love when people like joshvn_715 run their mouth about things they have no idea about. All you know about drugs is what has been brainwashed into you by your government. First drugs are practically legal, anywhere you go in the USA. In high school the hardest drugs to get was cigarettes and alcohol all other drug were easy. That means criminals are making a lot of money and it is the money that creates the violence.
"They incapacitate Americans from being functional citizens" Huh??? I did a lot of drugs, but I would say I am a functional citizen. I have never been addicted to any substance. I have not done any drug in years, except alcohol about once every 4 or 5 months. How do drug cripple a nation?? I am a software engineer and my wife is doctor of microbiology. My social group consist of some of the top minds in the county, most who have used drugs for fun before. "Legalization WON'T WORK because we STILL can't moderately approach alcohol as a culture to this today after Prohibition." If you personally knew anything about drugs you would know alcohol is by far the worst drug at there. People on alcohol are more dangerous than people high on any other drug. "Alcohol is a dangerous substance but there were not 'alcohol-houses' (crack-dens) riddled in urban communities." Yes, there are they are called BARS."But, there has to be a LINE and if people cannot even MODERATELY control alcohol, tobacco, and other drugs". If you knew about the real world you would know most people use alcohol, tobacco, and other drugs MODERATELY. Most people do NOT become addicts. There are some people who can't say no to pleasure and become addicted, but these people are the type who give into any pleasure(TV,sex,food...) far more then they should.
Why should you tell me what I can put into my body?
Post a Comment