Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The "War on Drugs" has failed - time to consider legalisation?
The Sun (UK) ^ | NIGEL INKSTER, Ex-Assistant Chief of MI6

Posted on 04/18/2012 1:18:55 PM PDT by sussex

A FORMER British MI6 chief has joined growing calls to end the “war on drugs” and consider legalising them. The battle has left tens of thousands dead in Latin America but failed to reduce drug-use around the world. Here Nigel Inkster, of the International Institute For Strategic Studies, argues that we need to rethink our approach to narcotics.

(Excerpt) Read more at thesun.co.uk ...


TOPICS: Health/Medicine; Politics; Society
KEYWORDS: courts; criminals; drugs; drugwar; police; warondrugs; wod; wodlist; wosd
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-90 next last
To: icwhatudo

“Besides, its just a way for the government to get involved in our personal lives. They should just tax it.”

As if taxing it isn’t a way for them to get involved in personal lives.


41 posted on 04/18/2012 3:56:17 PM PDT by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: To-Whose-Benefit?

“Because the Prohibition of Alcohol was what Created the Crime Syndicates”

No, organized crime predates prohibition. Without it they’d still have had plenty of government interference to exploit: prostitution, gambling, labor laws, etc. Banning booze made for boom times, is all.

“AND the Expansion of the unholy Commerce Clause fits Everything rule.”

Actually, that was caused by the New Deal. Drug Warriors used Wickard to fuel their mothering.


42 posted on 04/18/2012 4:03:29 PM PDT by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: AnAmericanAbroad

There is nothing moral or Christian about putting people in jail for marijuana, it is oppression..most likely driven by the federal “G” gangsta for the business..folks are much better off not involved with drugs, but to judge others on such an issue is to invite judgement,,there has been a lot of pain issued on decent folks in the name of mistaken morality..
the ten commandments are the rules for our lives, it displays God’s desire for our moral centers..and allows for people to live many different styles of lives while keeping their lives between the ditches of life’s road..any other morally based issues are man made and oppressive..

seek God, all else will pass into obscurity, too bad folks feel the need to imprison others to make themselves feel justified..


43 posted on 04/18/2012 4:12:22 PM PDT by aces
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Meet the New Boss
One can make various arguments for or against the regulation of certain substances, but the particular argument that because passing a law has not eliminated the outlawed activity, therefore the law should be removed from the books is practically the definition of illogic.

No, that is the strawman argument that people like yourself put into the mouths of those who want to end the drug war. The real argument is that the prosecution of the "War on Drugs" has resulted in militarized local police forces, no-knock warrants, pre-trial asset seizures and forfeitures, an explosion in the prison population, and an extremely lucrative black market which funds and perpetuates mafias, gangs, drug cartels, not to mention corrupts entire governments into becoming narco-states.

In other words, the "War on Drugs" shreds our Constitution and is far, far worse than the problem of drug use. Get it now, or are you too busy watching "Reefer Madness"?

Also, all of you keyboard drug warriors should remember that you are not having this discussion with some zombied-out, body-pierced, lowlife named "Meatpipe" at an Occupy Berkley rally. You are discussing this with fellow conservatives on a conservative board (and the occasional troll). So your petty assumptions and snarky remarks about how druggies will say anything to get high don't apply here. Try making reasonable arguments that follow the rule of law.
44 posted on 04/18/2012 4:13:43 PM PDT by fr_freak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: MichaelCorleone

If you believe in the scientific method of research them we have gone through the theory phase and the experimental phase of the research with the 18th and 21st amendments to the Constitution and Richard Milhous Nixon’s war on drugs. Based on what happened during prohibition. Baby Face Nelson, Machine Gun Kelly, John Dillinger and others shooting up the nation to control illegal liquor and now every drug dealer in sight or out of sight shooting each other I think we have pretty good experimental evidence of the illegal side of drugs.

Now since most of you obviously don’t approve of the scientific method I think we should reintroduce prohibition.

The comparison of drugs to murder is poor logic IMHO. Make a better argument.


45 posted on 04/18/2012 4:14:06 PM PDT by A Strict Constructionist (We're an Oligrachy...Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God. Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Meet the New Boss
The War on Burglary has failed even worse in the UK. They might as well take that off the books too while they’re at it.

Your burglary affects me. You're stealing my property.

The drugs affect you. I don't give a damn.

If you steal my property to buy drugs, then the burglary laws are sufficient to punish you.

46 posted on 04/18/2012 4:23:02 PM PDT by BfloGuy (The final outcome of the credit expansion is general impoverishment.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: fr_freak
No, that is the strawman argument that people like yourself put into the mouths of those who want to end the drug war.

Um, it's from the headline, dude:

"The "War on Drugs" has failed - time to consider legalisation?"

Actually I didn't say whether I wanted to end the drug war or not (talk about putting words into mouths!).

The argument that because outlawing something doesn't eliminate the outlawed activity, therefore we should get rid of the law, is absurd as a matter of logic.

47 posted on 04/18/2012 4:23:33 PM PDT by Meet the New Boss
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

I know nanny staters.

That’s why I’m in favor of shipping them to Canada.


48 posted on 04/18/2012 4:34:51 PM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Meet the New Boss
Um, it's from the headline, dude:

The headline only says that is has failed. It doesn't say a thing about the manner in which it has failed, so pointing to the headline as some kind of response is a failure of logic in itself. I consider the War on Drugs in the US a failure precisely because it has resulted in a degradation of the rule of law, not necessarily because it has failed to stop drug use.

Also, though the article is about the UK, the discussion on this thread (as with all drug discussions) has gone into general terms to include the experience with the War on Drugs in the US, and that includes your post. So, if you make an expansive statement about the War on Drugs, expect expansive responses. But feel free to repeat your easily-disputed straw man argument over and over as many times as you need to.


49 posted on 04/18/2012 4:36:11 PM PDT by fr_freak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: fr_freak
The headline only says that is has failed. It doesn't say a thing about the manner in which it has failed

It's not just the headline, the point is made in the VERY FIRST sentences of the article:

A FORMER British MI6 chief has joined growing calls to end the “war on drugs” and consider legalising them. The battle has left tens of thousands dead in Latin America but failed to reduce drug-use around the world.

Again, the mere fact that outlawed activity does not go away is NOT in and of itself a logical argument for getting rid of the law.

50 posted on 04/18/2012 4:42:57 PM PDT by Meet the New Boss
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman

Look at places like Kalipornia, the left and leftarians are in full alliance.

“We’ll let you have your socialist welfare police state if we can have our drugs and immoral sex.”

....

Protecting children from perverts.... is that being a nanny stater too? Of course it is. Some liberaltarians even admit it. The Free West Alliance even lists the “victimless crimes” they want to legalize, like organ trafficking and incest.


51 posted on 04/18/2012 4:43:23 PM PDT by GeronL (The Right to Life came before the Right to Pursue Happiness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: A Strict Constructionist

I agree with your points, but I have to point out one thing.

Baby Face Nelson, Machine Gun Kelly, and John Dillinger were all bank robbers, who sprung up during the Depression, mainly in response to the bad economy and new cars, guns, and highways that gave them an edge over law enforcement. That would have happened even if alcohol had been legal still. Al Capone, Lucky Luciano, Deanie O’Banion, Dutch Schultz, those were the kind of guys who were warring over the bootlegging.


52 posted on 04/18/2012 4:43:23 PM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: fr_freak

I lost any idea that the WOD was about drugs on the first case I did where a cop let a drunk go instead of arresting him. This POS then traveled about 5 miles down the interstate and killed most of a nice young family.

The COP was waiting on the interstate to arrest a drug/money courier that supposedly was going to come through his community. He didn’t do his duty because of the ability to confiscate cash and vehicles and enrich his department.

As usual the COP was protected because you can’t sue them for doing or not doing their duty. So some kids are growing up poor and without a parent.

As always follow the money and power it ain’t about the drugs.


53 posted on 04/18/2012 4:55:14 PM PDT by A Strict Constructionist (We're an Oligrachy...Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God. Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman

Point noted and correction appreciated.


54 posted on 04/18/2012 4:57:44 PM PDT by A Strict Constructionist (We're an Oligrachy...Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God. Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Meet the New Boss
Again, the mere fact that outlawed activity does not go away is NOT in and of itself a logical argument for getting rid of the law.

LOL. That's the third time you've posted that. As I've said, you go ahead and post the same strawman argument as many times as you feel you need to.
55 posted on 04/18/2012 5:07:29 PM PDT by fr_freak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: fr_freak

It’s not my “strawman” argument, it was in the headline and intro to the article that was posted.


56 posted on 04/18/2012 5:19:27 PM PDT by Meet the New Boss
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

Another enemy of the Constitution reveals himself. Thanks.


57 posted on 04/18/2012 5:24:22 PM PDT by Lurker (The avalanche has begun. The pebbles no longer have a vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Lurker

enemy of the Constitution.... where does it say drugs have to be legal?

Hey, since it doesn’t ban Child Rape I guess thats okay too??

state or fed, I am still against child rape.


58 posted on 04/18/2012 5:28:04 PM PDT by GeronL (The Right to Life came before the Right to Pursue Happiness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: microgood

“Lucky for you guys there is no war on ignorance and illogic. At least not yet. “

Ditto.

Anyway who sees drug abuse as a victimless crime is tragically ignorant.

And to call a war against a certain crime “a failure” because all incidents of that crime have not ceased is illogical.


59 posted on 04/18/2012 5:38:54 PM PDT by Persevero (Homeschooling for Excellence since 1992)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Ken H

“Do you think states should decide issues like medical marijuana under authority of the Tenth Amendment, or do you think fedgov should have that authority under the Commerce Clause?”

If all of our ducks were in a row, the states should do it.

However, our chain of command is so screwed up right now I don’t see a quick answer to the dilemma. Theoretically, the states. But I’d need to see the proper alignment of all states/federal rights at the same time. No cherry picking.


60 posted on 04/18/2012 5:41:36 PM PDT by Persevero (Homeschooling for Excellence since 1992)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-90 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
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

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