Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The war on the war on drugs
The Reporter ^ | feb 3, 2012 | jimshi

Posted on 02/03/2012 4:11:23 PM PST by jpsb

Since President Nixon declared war on drugs in 1971 the United States has jailed tens of million of its' citizens. In 2008 alone 1.5 million American were arrested and 500,000 were imprisoned. At a cost of $45,000 per prisoner per year over 22 billion dollars were spent in prison costs alone for just those busted in 2008. I would imagine the costs to the courts, parole officers and police departments are equally large. And then there is the unmeasurable societal cost of a lost income to a community and the breakup of families effected should it be a mom or a dad imprisoned. These are grim figures and even grimmer when one realizes that well over half of all drug busts are marijuana related. That's right pot smokers and pot dealers. We are spending 40 billion plus a years to throw pot heads in jail.

While the direct costs to us are huge there is still the question of indirect costs. Most of the pot heads avoid arrest and most of the money they spend on pot goes to the Mexican Drug Cartels. One needs only look to Mexico to see what that money and the corruption it brings has done to Mexico. Legalizing marijuana would go a long ways towards denying the drug cartels their life blood of US dollars. I feel certain American farmers would be more then happy to meet domestic cannabis demand and do so within the law.

There is also an argument to be made that our federal drug laws are in fact unconstitutional. A the turn of the 19th century there were no federal drug laws. When Congress foolishly prohibited alcohol in 1913 it felt compelled to amend the Constitution to do so, believing correctly in my view, that the federal government lacked the authority to prohibit any American from consuming any substance. Similarly a Constitutional amendment should be necessary to enable the federal government to prohibit the use of recreational drugs. Since there is no such amendment federal drug laws are unconstitutional. Prohibition of drugs is a state issue, not a federal issue. If states like California wish to allow the use of marijuana the federal government is not authorize by our Constitution to prevent it. And should cities and towns in a marijuana friendly California wish to enact local laws prohibiting marijuana they a free to do so.

I can certainly understand the moral and health arguments against highly addictive hard drugs like heroin and cocaine. But I am unimpressed when those same arguments are used against marijuana legalization. While I do not smoke pot I know a great many people that do, regularly. They all go to work, pay their bills and raise their children just like everyone else. The only bad thing I have noticed is they tend to eat more junk food then the rest of us. They love potato chips and twinkles. Yuck.

All things considered I think it is time to declare a war on the war on drugs. The war costs us billions where we could be making billions instead. It is empowering a corrupt and violent anti American culture right on our border . The federal government has no authority to wage this war and the tools it uses property seizures, no knock raids and such endanger our individual liberty and property. Marijuana users are not drug crazed criminals looking to rob and mane. They just hungry munchkins out to get a bag of chips.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Chit/Chat; Society
KEYWORDS: drug; marijuana; prohibition
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041 next last
To: Darth Reardon
You might want to think about that again.

Ok, 95%. After all, that stuff is expensive.
21 posted on 02/03/2012 6:45:34 PM PST by microgood
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change
It’s always other peoples fault. An uncorked and sour whine

This is coming from someone who blames drug users for the actions of drug dealers? Seriously?
22 posted on 02/03/2012 6:47:29 PM PST by microgood
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: jpsb
We are spending 40 billion plus a years to throw pot heads in jail.

But if it saves one conservative child from a lifetime of listening to the Grateful Dead, it's all worth it. /s

23 posted on 02/03/2012 6:52:52 PM PST by Mr. Jeeves (CTRL-GALT-DELETE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jpsb

Cold frosty beer is my preference but I do know people that are pot smokers. Compared to the dope smokers I know, there are worse criminals roaming the halls of congress.


24 posted on 02/03/2012 7:11:44 PM PST by Pipe Dog (Need a helping hand.... check the end of your own arm first.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye

But it’s cheaper. and, less overdoses.


25 posted on 02/03/2012 7:55:26 PM PST by donna (I want to live in a Judeo/Christian country where we know that, before God, men & women are equal.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: microgood

Would you hire any of them to drive your daughter’s school bus?


26 posted on 02/03/2012 7:57:00 PM PST by donna (I want to live in a Judeo/Christian country where we know that, before God, men & women are equal.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: jpsb

No need. Locking up criminals is good enough.


27 posted on 02/03/2012 7:58:19 PM PST by donna (I want to live in a Judeo/Christian country where we know that, before God, men & women are equal.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: donna

It’s cheaper to give them all a free ride than to let them make their own way in the world? That makes no sense. I don’t know where you get the idea that there are less overdoses in prison but what difference does that make?


28 posted on 02/03/2012 7:59:54 PM PST by TigersEye (Life is about choices. Your choices. Make good ones.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: donna

Drugs are readily available in prison, which proves the utter futility of drug prohibition in the first place.

If they can’t keep drugs out of PRISON (a true police state), how can anyone believe drug prohibition in a FREE society will be any more successful?


29 posted on 02/03/2012 8:06:47 PM PST by rottndog (Be Prepared for what's coming AFTER America....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye

Who do you think feeds, clothes and shelters drug users now? They may as well be in prison where the medical care will be cheaper.


30 posted on 02/03/2012 8:11:08 PM PST by donna (dRUG USERS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: donna

Most of them feed, clothe and shelter themselves. Obviously.


31 posted on 02/03/2012 8:19:30 PM PST by TigersEye (Life is about choices. Your choices. Make good ones.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: donna

They are only criminals because you call them criminals, other then smoking pot they do nothing illegal. Just think how many fewer people we would have to incarcerate if we just let them smoke pot.


32 posted on 02/03/2012 8:30:10 PM PST by jpsb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: microgood
It may be difficult to comprehend but without drug USERS there would be few drug DEALERS.

One hand washes the other, one hand is willing to murder wholesale and the other hand really doesn't care as long they can get what they want.

33 posted on 02/03/2012 10:09:33 PM PST by count-your-change (You don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: donna
Would you hire any of them to drive your daughter’s school bus?

Not if they were going to smoke pot and drive the bus. If, on the other hand, they did at home on their own time it is really no different than alcohol. I would not want anyone to drink before they drive the bus either.
34 posted on 02/03/2012 10:12:15 PM PST by microgood
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Downinthedixie
Same argument, make it legal and it's not a crime by definition.

Drug traffickers would no longer traffic in drugs without the partnerships of the users.

35 posted on 02/03/2012 10:31:03 PM PST by count-your-change (You don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change
It may be difficult to comprehend but without drug USERS there would be few drug DEALERS.

That is not difficult to understand at all. And if pot was legalized there would not be any pot dealers either. There would still be drug dealers, but instead of having to deal with 25 million users, they would only have to deal with 2 or three.

One hand washes the other, one hand is willing to murder wholesale and the other hand really doesn't care as long they can get what they want.

They just do not make the connection. They are doing something they enjoy and are not directly harming anyone. And it depends on where you live as well. In Washington state where I live, all of it is either grown here or imported from Canada. No violence there.

And it is not like the DEA gives a hoot how many people are getting killed in Mexico. In fact that the DEA head actually said that the increase in the murder rate was a sign that the efforts in Mexico were working. And even with all the money they spend, by their own numbers they catch less than 1% of the pot coming into this country.

Since the only way to stop usage would be to drug test everyone in the country every day and throw the Constitution in the waste basket, I think it makes sense to legalize pot and concentrate efforts on the more harmful ones used by a lot less people.

When Nixon started the war on drugs, the panel he appointed to come up with the regulations (lead by a very conservative governor from Pennsylvania) recommended not outlawing pot because there were too many users, it it a fairly mild drug, and that it would breed corruption and lack of respect for the laws, which has come true.
36 posted on 02/03/2012 10:33:30 PM PST by microgood
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change

One wouldn’t buy from dealers. Why not go to a convenience store?


37 posted on 02/03/2012 10:41:57 PM PST by Downinthedixie (ABO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: 50mm; TheOldLady; darkwing104; Old Sarge; DarthVader

n00b for your watch list.


38 posted on 02/04/2012 11:20:17 PM PST by reaganaut (Ex-Mormon, Now Christian - "I wasn't brainwashed, just brain pre-soaked.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Downinthedixie; count-your-change
Count-your-change is pointing out the common fallacy in your thinking. You are saying that in order to eliminate a crime, all we have to do is make it legal.

If that were true, then in order to eliminate all crime, we have only to eliminate all laws. The syllogism is not true, so your argument is deeply flawed.
39 posted on 02/05/2012 4:52:57 AM PST by TheOldLady (FReepmail me to get ON or OFF the ZOT LIGHTNING ping list)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: jpsb; reaganaut; TheOldLady

40 posted on 02/05/2012 6:46:56 AM PST by Old Sarge (RIP FReeper Skyraider (1930-2011) - You Are Missed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson