Posted on 11/22/2006 7:35:17 AM PST by Dick Bachert
Atlanta police went to a home on Neal Street in Atlanta last evening to execute a search warrant. When they kicked the door in the only occupant of the home, a 92-year-old woman, started shooting. She hit all three police officers. One in the thigh, one in the arm and another in the shoulder. All police officers will be OK. The woman will not. She was shot and killed by the police.
I'm not blaming the cops here. Not at all. They had a valid search warrant, and they say they were at the right address. Shots were fired, three cops hit, and they returned fire. A 92-year-old woman who was so afraid of crime in her neighborhood that she had burglar bars on every door and window, is now dead.
The blame lies on this idiotic drug war we're waging. We have all the studies we need, all of the comprehensive data is in. We can do a much more effective job of reducing drug use in this country if we'll just take a portion of this money we spend for law enforcement and spend it on treatment programs. A Rand study showed that we can reduce illicit drug usage in this country a specified amount through treatment programs at about 10% of the cost of reducing drug usage by that same amount through criminalization and law enforcement.
There's just something in the American psyche that demands that drug users be punished instead of treated and rehabilitated. We think they're stupid and ignorant for getting mixed up with those drugs in the first place. And you know what? We're right? But look at the messages we send to our children every single day with cigarettes, alcohol, and an endless stream of drug ads on television and in magazines. Drug culture? You bet we have.
The repeal of alcohol prohibition eliminated 95% of the black market for alcohol and 95% of the crime violent crime that prohibition facilitated.
Yeah right. It wiped out the crime families, not. It may have eliminated %95 of the illegal whiskey making operations, but it didn't wipe %95 of the black market. It still thrives because of huge profit potential.
With legalization government would save trillions. Think of the money spent on enforcement, prosecution, and incarceration. The potheads are still smoking pot and the crack heads are still smoking crack. A simple excise tax on the dope could fund efforts to rehabilitate addicts, but honestly, if a man wants to spend his nights passed out on a sidewalk somewhere, I can step over him. If he wants to go home after a hard day's work and smoke a joint, I don't care.
One thing is certain from an understanding of basic economics - the rate of violent crime would plummet since there would be no drug gangs and addicts wouldn't have to turn to street crime to pay for their stuff.
It wiped out the crime families, not.
Did I say it wiped out the crime families? No!
It may have eliminated %95 of the illegal whiskey making operations, but it didn't wipe %95 of the black market.
I said it eliminate 95% of the alcohol black market. Did I say it eliminated 95% of the black market? No!
It still thrives because of huge profit potential.
Yep. The huge profit potential a result of drug prohibition laws. Thank you for strengthening the argument against the WOD.
My role models do not either use drugs or encourage the growth of government thuggery. That you want more government thugs speaks volumes about you. If you call yourself "conservative," I wonder what it is you are trying to conserve, as it is obviously NOT the Constitution for the United States. THAT document grants government some LIMITED authority, but a MOST careful reading does NOT show where government, at any level, is allowed to outlaw what someone may or may not wish to put into their own bodies. You may ask where the Constitution allows people to ingest certain things. That is the wrong question, as it is NOT FOR GOVERNMENT TO ALLOW US TO DO THINGS (or refrain from doing them). It is for US to allow government to do ANYTHING AT ALL. And, bottom line, we cannot give government the authority to do anything that we, as individuals, may not legitimately and properly do, period. And I KNOW that YOU do not have any legitimate authority to prohibit anyone not living under your personal roof from doing anything whatsoever that does not involve the INVOLUNTARY participation of someone else. So please get over yourself and get a life minding your own damned business.
See post # 364... it applies to you, too.
See post # 364, as it applies to you as well.
See post # 364. You're included.
"Who are the tyrants? Who is the Taliban?"
Why you and your ilk, of course. As there is NO AUTHORITY granted in the Constitution for the United States to government to do such vile and despicable things.
I don't despise badges; a Peace Officer did me a great service when I was a lost youngster, many years ago. However, the militarization of the cops (now called LEOs and become mindless revenue-enhancement drones) and the use of our Constitution as toilet paper by politicians AND LEOs are two things to which I strongly object. I swore an oath many times over to protect and defend the Constitution for the United States from ALL its enemies, foreign and DOMESTIC. So I actually took the time to read and understand that document and the writings of the Founders. Apparently you have not. My "rant" is based on what the Founding Dads had to say about the new nation they were creating; your Barbra Striesand is based on wishful thinking, socialism and authoritarian statism, simple, but hardly pure.
Also, I see your background is in gangs and DRUGS, so you are hardly an unbiased bystander. Your LIVING is threatened by an end to the War on Americans posing as a "war" on inanmiate objects.
thats not the program they want to pursue. no neat gadgets,
no subguns, no armored cars to ride around in, no neat
ninja suits or camo fatigues to wear.
we are fighting the war that the drug cops and swat ninjas want to fight, not the one that out to be fought.
they are at war with the citizens, which is why the militarization of police needs to be reversed now!
Also, I see your background is in gangs and DRUGS, so you are hardly an unbiased bystander. Your LIVING is threatened by an end to the War on Americans posing as a "war" on inanmiate objects.<<<<<<<<<<<
Oh, finally, the old "your living depends on drugs being illegal" BS. My particular living unfortunately wouldn't change much were drugs legalized, there is plenty of crime to go around. Suppression involving drugs is but one part of the overall operations by LE or the criminal justice system in the community.
There are major commitments of time and resources to prevention and intervention efforts that you appear to be unaware of. And again, most of the problems from drugs wouldn't be fixed by legalization. Perhaps you should seek out some gang members and ask them to explain to you why legalization wouldn't inconvenience them too much.
"Perhaps you should seek out some gang members and ask them to explain to you why legalization wouldn't inconvenience them too much."
Perhaps when we stop waging war on drug users and gun owners, the problem will resolve itself when peaceable citizens decide that we've had ENOUGH of the gangs and take back our own damned streets. You people surely aren't doing it. I also recall from history that our streets were, while not perfect, a LOT safer when both freelance and government thugs couldn't be sure if their intended victim were armed or not. And when government did NOT wage war on its own people, but its thugs were few, far between and quickly eradicated. Not like it is now. That was before we had a "professional" police department to eat out our substance, by the bye. Now we have militarized PDs who are little more than door kickers and revenue agents/car thieves. I once thought of being a cop when I was planning to leave the Marine Corps after my first tour. Glad am I that I had a talk with a neighbor near Camp Lejeune before that was set in concrete. That was back in the late 60's. True enough, there are a lot of good cops... but the jackbooted ones are prevalent enough to undo virtually ALL the good work the good ones do. Pity. It surely does keep a lot of us from wanting to help out the next cop in trouble we see.
I once thought of being a cop when I was planning to leave the Marine Corps after my first tour. Glad am I that I had a talk with a neighbor near Camp Lejeune before that was set in concrete.<<<<<<<<<<
Hmmm. A Marine. Well, if I had your mindset, I'd tar you with the same brush as every bad apple Marine that ever screwed up. Maybe every Marine who ever got injured by unfortunate civilians in a war zone trying to protect their homes from the intruders. Obviously, getting shot meant they were corrupt, stupid, lazy or incompetent, right?
>>>>>>Pity. It surely does keep a lot of us from wanting to help out the next cop in trouble we see.<<<<<<<<<
Believe me, they wouldn't expect your assistance, they would work around you as they've probably always had to do. You and you alone have the key to the universe, the answer to street crime. Perhaps some history lessons would be in order. And I'm glad you didn't get into the wrong profession (LE), as well.
"Believe me, they wouldn't expect your assistance..."
Nope, likely not, after so many of them work to keep the rest of us disarmed and "helpless." Not all of us appreciate those sorts of efforts. Nor do we appreciate the ones we see doing nothing but raising revenues for the city. NOT pulling over dangerous drivers like red light runners, mind you me, but those whose vehicles they can steal and hold for ransom or sell. But you just continue on with your war on the rest of us Americans. Maybe YOUR swat team will be the next one to run into a 92-yr old Annie Oakley. Who might just be a better shot or aim higher for her hits. Maybe the rest of us will be reading about you and how we usta know you. And how, if you'd only been just TEN PERCENT smarter you might not have died that way... but your drug war addiction just wouldn't let you go; that monkey would not get off your back.
I bet if this was 1926 instead of 2006 you'd be saying the same thing about alcohol -- just legalize it and the gangs will go away.
And you'd be just as wrong.
Yet heroin USE has remained flat at about .1% for the last 30 years.
So, what's more significant? Purity, cost or actual use?
"Investigators said they found drugs after she was was killed."
-- www.telegraph.co.uk
"Armed with a "no knock" search warrant, police approached her house in Atlanta, Georgia, after receiving a tip that a man had sold drugs to an undercover agent from her home that day."
-- www.telegraph.co.uk
Two for two.
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.