Posted on 01/02/2010 5:35:36 PM PST by Graybeard58
It’s not that simple. Lots of things used to be legal in this country, including owning human beings, and it certainly didn’t make it moral, let alone rational. As for murders, I’ve already cited many times what my former classmate did during his hardcore drug habit, and he wasn’t in the middle of a deal, either. There’s a reason this garbage is illegal, and why it should remain so.
You’re joking me! For real?
Yep, as well as “Never Been To Spain” and “Joy To the World”. His mother Mae Axton wrote “Heartbreak Hotel”, too. I’ve heard that the movie “Honeysuckle Rose” was supposed to be his deal, but he quit after arguing with the director and Willie Nelson was brought in. Later the title was changed to “On The Road Again” after that song went so big. I think Hoyt also wrote the old Kingston Trio song “Greenback Dollar” and did some bit part on the old Bonanza series.
So making drugs illegal prevented your classmate from doing what? My point is that stupid behavior cannot be prevented, no matter how illegal you make it. Didn’t someone say that only a fool thinks that crime can be eliminated with laws?
Personally, I think that we are all better off with a government that has FEWER ways to steal our freedom instead of more.
The central argument often made by the pro-legal crowd is that crime related to drugs will magically disappear, and everything will be neatly managed, and I’m here to tell you it won’t. And you’ll excuse me when I don’t consider using garbage that IS a threat to the public safety to be a God-given right.
No, that’s a straw man. No one is utopian about legalization of drugs. No person who is truly rightist thinks in terms of panaceas or immanentizing the eschaton.
The goal is liberty, whether it’s a decision you admire or not. The goal and the process create a more mature society and a freer one but not a paradise without flaw.
There are people killed by drunks (not just driving, either) or people who use alcohol to get their courage up to shoot someone. That’s not really an argument to ban a substance and yet never succeed in doing anything but harming the citizenry, ripping up the Constitution AND giving the anti-gunners an argument for their own agenda.
And uh, there are already people abusing LEGAL drugs and dying in the thousands.
Plenty of pro-legals are utopian and nearly all have these delusional notions of how everything will be sunshine and buttercups “if only...”, as for the rest, they’re just selfish and think their actions don’t harm others, and they’re just as delusional. And I don’t consider it the legitimate pursuit of liberty, you could make that same argument removing age of consent laws or laws against sex with barnyard animals. Want the real pursuit of liberty ? How ‘bout pushing the government to cut the obscene tax rate, because that’s real tyranny.
“The men who murdered that Dead Marines family at midnight, or who leave 8 beheaded bodies beside a road, arent going to go straight and honest if their product was legalized.”
You are spot on - Evil people looking for a quick buck will always find a product to push on others who are weak minded. I would rather that Law enforcement draw the line at these drugs which are harmful to the individual and insidious in their effect on society. Sadly as long as there are people who are stupid enough to take drugs then there will be those happy to supply them and make sizable money doing so!
Mel
>> The goal is liberty, whether it’s a decision you admire or not.
The same argument is made about abortion.
Drug use is an inescapable one-way street for many of its victims. That’s entrapment, not liberty.
First off, it states:
(I)f I were the president of this land ... I'd declare total war on The Pusher man/I'd cut him if he stands, and I'd shoot him if he'd run/Yes I'd kill him with my Bible and my razor and my gun," sang Steppenwolf in 1968), to legalization, the solution preferred by many leftists and libertarians.
But neither European-style tolerance nor American enforcement can claim much success.
Yet the 'European-style' tolerance that he refers to has never been tried in America. Also, that 'tolerance' has never actually been very tolerant. While in Europe, the user may not spend time in jail, the seller certainly does.
So there is no legalization in Europe, despite the author's attempts to argue otherwise.
---
Secondly, the author claims that American drug use killed drug chieftain Arturo Beltran Leyva.
Again, this is faulty reasoning. The only reason drug cartels resort to extra-legal measures is because the entire business is extra-legal. They cannot settle disputes through normal channels without being arrested. Therefore, there is no other options available to settle disputes.
Much like how mob violence and murder were endemic during Prohibition, but immediately after it was repealed... murders due to the importation of liquor dropped to nearly nothing. All because importers of liquor had multiple, legal options to deal with competitors who did them wrong.
True, those guys are murderous thugs.
What drug legalization would do, however, is remove a large sector of people from needing to employ them.
Then these rat-b@st@rds will spend a lot more time in the unemployment office, as they won’t have as many people hiring them. And with less job opportunities (and less money from them), they won’t be able to afford all the weapons and explosives to continue their line of work.
Well, at least not in Mexico, that is.
Most drug kingpins and their organizations do not actually *USE* their own product. Sometimes the local street dealer does, but they tend not to last long - as their use cuts into their profits until they can no longer afford to both buy and sell the dope.
Most of the drug kingpins, who pay farmers to grow the coca/opium/whatever have invested a large amount of time and money in the operation, so they aren't going to simply drop it. Furthermore, it will also be much cheaper - ie: legal - for them to distribute the product, so they can shutter their entire illegal transshipment operation (you know, the drug boats/airplanes/semi-submersables).
Though, the drug-runners and hired muscle would move on to the next illegal operation, but the big kingpins wouldn't really have any reason to.
The pro-legalization crowd tends to give reasons why they believe legalization would reduce drug-related crime.
Where is your rationalization as to why it wouldn't?
Soldiers escort the body of fellow soldier Melquisedet Angulo during his funeral in Pariaso, Mexico, on Monday. After the funeral, gunmen opened fire on Angulo's family, killing his mother, two siblings, and an aunt. Angulo was killed in a raid that took down drug cartel boss Arturo Beltran Leyva. Carlos Sobrino/AP
I won't mention the Constitution or personal responsibility, the definitions of Liberty, FORCE, natural law, or victimless crime.
I'm still shocked that so many people got suckered into the this authors POV. Really? Blame the user for the Mexican Cartel? I liked someones response that “its the homeowner who is responsible for criminal activity of the Federal Reserve and its member banks”
Oh, and anybody who knows anything about weed doesn't bother with the Mexican weed. It's called Dirt weed or Brick weed for a reason. It's dirty and nasty; It gives you a sore throat, headache and makes you angry. Most weed comes from indoor operations in the US and Canada.
But forget about Marijuana and THC, what about hemp? Why is it illegal to plant in the US?
It is totally that simple. What does “LIBERTY” mean? What is “FORCE”. You must be smart enough to know the difference bewteen human slavery and personal drug use. If you don’t already, you should understand better once you learn the meanings liberty and force.
Also, so you understand, I don’t pay any attention to “personal experiences” like you describe about your former classmate. Hey guess what, I have former classmates too, I have parents, grandparents, sisters and brothers, extended family, friends, aquaintances and co-workers...
Some of them have stolen, lied, cheated, killed, done drugs and not done drugs, paid taxes and not paid taxes, molest children, become teachers, etc. My frind’s uncle molested all his nieces and covered it up for 40 years.
My point is that your story and your reasoning are worthless, but you illustrate how biased and/or ignorant most people are.
“The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants”
Nice post Blood. Thanks for your reponses
“God-Given rights” what would those be? Do you think any of those god-given rights has anything to do with Liberty?
excellent reply Skywalk. I wish my similar posts about understanding liberty, FORCE, and limitations on government authority had actually been approved and posted. Will this one make it?
gosh, you’re so right..we need government to force us into specific ways of thinking so that government can help weak minded people be strong. I get it now. Government is the answer to solving the drug problem. We should start a “war” on drugs so that we help those people and society. First plan of action, put pot smokers in jail. That should save us.
lol, how can you look at the war on drugs in isolation? You speak as though complaints about government overstepping its constitutional authority are just cute little philosophical discussions that have no bearing on REAL LIFE issues. Wake up sleepyhead, Government IS the problem. The LAW is the CRIME.
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.