Posted on 12/04/2005 1:38:56 PM PST by libertyman
Sometimes people in law enforcement will hear it whispered that I'm a former cop who favors decriminalization of marijuana laws, & they'll approach me the way they might a traitor or snitch. So let me set the record straight.
Yes, I was a cop for 34 years, the last six of which I spent as chief of Seattle's police department.
But no, I don't favor decriminalization. I favor legalization, & not just of pot, but also of all drugs, including heroin, cocaine, meth, psychotropics, mushrooms, & LSD.
(Excerpt) Read more at seattletimes.nwsource.com ...
You tried to access the address http://www.seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/opinion/2002661006_sunstamper04.html, which is currently unavailable. Please make sure that the Web address (URL) is correctly spelled and punctuated, then try reloading the page.
legalize all drugs but ALSO close EVERY treatment center. If we are going the way of social darwinism, we need to do it right.
This should be fun to watch
Personally, I would decriminalize pot and hashish but certainly not methamphetamine.
Let Those Dopers Be
A former police chief wants to end a losing war by legalizing pot, coke, meth and other drugs
Norm Stamper | LA Times | 10/16/2005
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-op-legalize16oct16,0,4914395.story?coll=la-news-comment-opinions
Before we legalize crack, wouldn't we have to do away with the whole "prescription" system for legitimate medicines. Penicillin, diabetes drugs, blood pressure meds, should all be available over the counter before we let heroin and crack go that way.
Cops don't want to enforce nanny state laws... they want to protect the people they serve. The prime beneficiaries of the illegal status of drugs are smugglers and pharmaceutical companies, not the people that most cops sign up to serve. I have had cops in NYC tell me the same thing - their time is far better spent chasing rapists and murderers than junkies and college kids.
Could some informed individual show me the place in the Constitution where government is given the right to regulate recreational drugs?
While I prefer other forms of recreation, as I remember, the Founders were very sure that they had created a form of government which allowed for the fullest possible freedom for "Life", Liberty", and "the Pursuit of Happiness".
My cognitive dissonance alarm is ringing - Help, please.
Legalize them and tax them, worked just fine for alcohol....
legalize 'em all - just make penalties for misbehavior and mistakes while intoxicated rather dire and inescapable, and end all government funding and insurance liability for users (and I mean this for alcohol as well)
then... let fools perish and the cautious live as they will.
Point?
If federal funds are being used for treatment centers (which I suspect they do, considering how many federal tentacles have weaved their way into American life), I would say ABSOLUTELY....it is unconstitutional for the feds to spend our $ for such purposes, & the 10th Amendment leaves that issue for the states to decide.
How about if we legalize them all......just in Seattle.
What does that mean and how does it invalidate the views of Seattle's polic chief?
There's nothing explicit, certainly. But that hasn't kept presidents and congresscritters from passing such laws anyway in order to look like they're "doing something" on an important issue.
But then there also isn't anything to keep state or local governments from doing it, either.
I think you would have a harder time proving the unconstitutionality of non-federal drug laws.
It means that Seattle has become a bastion of libtards.
IDIOTIC AND IGNORANT
ALSO, UNWORTHY OF FREEREPUBLIC
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.