Posted on 07/28/2014 12:07:40 PM PDT by right-wing agnostic
You are a statist New Dealer corrupter of the Interstate Commerce Clause (Wickard v Filburn 1942) and supporter of the legal basis of all federal regulation, just to keep your WoD going. You are responsible for the Left-Religious Right coalition to destroy the Constitution in order to impose your religion on America with federal power. You are personally responsible for more violence than all the drug users put together.
Oooooh.
Boo ga.
Meyaw ha ha.
And he would only have to steal $100 ;-)
How China got rid of opium? It became communist.
Pass.
Of course legalization is presented as a panacea.
Where and by whom?
The WoD creates more evil, black markets, gangs, murders, mass incarceration for non-violent offenses, theft to support expensive habits, mass violation of civil liberties, discouragement to seek help for addiction for fear of arrest etc. that it conceivably does any good. It is mainly for some on the “right” a way to use federal power to enforce the commandment, “Thou shalt not take strong drink.” as a consolation for having failed at banning strong drink before. For the left, which is normally pro-drug, it is a temporary compromise of their principles to buy your vote to create and maintain federal power outside the Constitution to do everything else they want. But the left always was going to legalize drugs anyway, just as soon as they didn’t need your vote anymore. Thank you for helping the left take over America.
It is the lesser of two evils. See #68.
Absolutely the wrong strategy. Anyone who has experience with a black market is aware that you simply cannot stop it by choking off the supply. Attempts to do so, to the extent they are successful, only increase the profit margins and attract new entrants into the field.
The only way to stop a black market is to decrease or eliminate demand.
It is, BTW, wildly unfair for us to blame poor countries to our south for the social dislocations created by our own inability as a rich society to control ourselves.
I think the article mentioned “yout’s” sentenced to life for possessing a dozen ounces of pot. I don’t think we need sentencing guidelines to that extreme for possession, even in “dealer” quantities, unless there was a capital offense included. The last time I read about a bank robber, I seem to recall they were sentenced to 15 years. For robbing a bank.
I guess my objection is to mandatory minimum sentences for drug offenses that also result in “we” the taxpayers footing the bill for a life or decades long sentence.
So, I don’t think legalization is the way to go, but I absolutely think the laws and sentencing guidelines could stand to be reformed. And add the tax laws to the reform list too if we are trying to address legislation that is out of whack.
Just my opinion and opinions will vary.
How about we just don’t pay disability for addicts? How about we give stiffer sentences to addicts that commit serious crimes? Not for actually holding the drugs...
Did you read your own link? "Street committees," "re-education" and the like were central to the effort.
I disagree on a point. The arresting of small possession offenders clogs our judicial and penal systems. We waste millions if not billions on their legal issues and worthless rehab attempts.
I disagree on a point. The arresting of small possession offenders clogs our judicial and penal systems. We waste millions if not billions on their legal issues and worthless rehab attempts.
I'm not sure you're disagreeing. If the only way to stop a black market is to decrease or eliminate demand, but it's wildly impractical to decrease or eliminate demand as you say, there's a logical conclusion ...
A great many of those in prison for "possession" are there because they plea-bargained to this charge after being arrested for considerably more "serious" charges, quite often violent crimes.
The prosecutors love "possession" because it's pretty much a slam dunk. They either had it on them or they didn't. Proving other charges involved laborious and difficult issues with things like evidence, witnesses, trials, etc. Since possession penalties are pretty steep, why go to all the effort to prosecute for a more difficult to prove crime?
That said, this is not at all a good thing, IMO. That well over 90% of those prosecuted are convicted and over 90% of them on plea bargains is IMO a scandal and hissing.
Unless you believe cops and prosecutors never make mistakes or arrest and prosecute out of vindictiveness, that is. The real problem is the way our courts have been taken over by pleas, not that people are prosecuted for possession.
YMMV
Cut government spending. Execute the drug pushers.
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.