Posted on 02/29/2008 7:17:28 PM PST by neverdem
In the slide show I narrated about the late William F. Buckley, Jr., I didn’t have room to get into a couple of issues we’ve been debating here at the Lab: the Drug Enforcement Administration’s campaigns against medical marijuana and against doctors who treat chronic-pain patients.
Mr. Buckley was worried about the D.E.A. well before the OxyContin scare inspired the agency’s Operation Cotton Candy and led to doctors like William Hurwitz and Bernard Rottschaefer being sent to prison. In 1995, after criticizing presidents and members of Congress for pursuing a war on drugs he considered futile, Mr. Buckley wrote:
But perhaps the worst offender is the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration — not so much the agents who risk their lives trying to apprehend major drug traffickers as the ideologically driven bureaucrats who intimidate and persecute doctors for prescribing pain medication in medically appropriate (but legally suspicious) doses, who hobble methadone programs with their overregulation, who acknowledge that law enforcement alone cannot solve the drug problem but then proceed to undermine innovative public-health initiatives.I am often baffled by the resistance of conservatives to drug-policy reform, but encouraged by the willingness of many to reassess their views once they have heard the evidence. Conservatives who oppose the expansion of federal power cannot look approvingly on the growth of the federal drug-enforcement bureaucracy and federal efforts to coerce states into adopting federally formulated drug policies. Those who focus on the victimization of Americans by predatory criminals can hardly support our massive diversion of law-enforcement resources to apprehending and imprisoning nonviolent vice merchants and consumers. Those concerned with over-regulation can hardly countenance our current handling of methadone, our refusal to allow over-the-counter sale of sterile syringes, our prohibition of medical marijuana.
(Excerpt) Read more at tierneylab.blogs.nytimes.com ...
I totally agree with Buckley on this. I don’t see how any conservative who believes in limited government and individual rights could possibly approve of the failed “War On Drugs”.
I think there needs to be a clear line drawn between legalization and decriminalization.
If something is completely legal, that generally implies that one may do it regardless of whether it bothers other people.
If something is regarded as a serious crime, then it is appropriate for the government to track down the perpetrators even in the absence of specific complaints.
I would suggest that most drug offenses should occupy a middle ground. Police shouldn't try to track down people who are using drugs without bothering other people, but they should be allowed to act against those who do bother others.
I agree. It would be sufficient if it were regarded by the law in the same way as liquor.
Wait a second. Doesn’t this opinion label Buckley as an insane libertarian and an enemy of all that is good and decent in society?
At least that what some of the “deep thinkers” on the fr say. How does this square with his status as one of the greatest conservatives ever? Maybe some people are a lot dumber than they think.
As HL Mencken said, “The sort of man who wants his ideas to be forced on others is usually the sort of man whose ideas are idiotic.”
Diabetic mice 'cured' with drugs
The Moon’s Craggiest Stretch Comes Into Focus
FReepmail me if you want on or off my health and science ping list.
It's getting harder to justify all the time.
WFB was Libertarian or Conservative at times.
Well, in that case no drug laws are needed, because there are already laws against bothering other people. (And if you do criminally bother others, it shouldn’t matter under the law whether you are on drugs or not.)
On a sports forum, a poster claiming(I have my doubts)to be a SWAT team leader, wrote about how he likes busting in at 3 or 4AM
,forcing everyone to the ground and shoving the warrant under their face.
Thanks for the link, but the audio on youtube is too muted for me with three volume controls on max.
Ya can tap dance in a mine field only sooooo long before fate teaches ya a permanent lesson !
That so called SWAT weenie just hasn’t had his lunch handed too him........yet !
Stay safe Bert !
I would see nothing wrong with a law against e.g. shooting heroin in a public place. Even if people doing so were otherwise peaceful, if passersby were bothered that should justify police action. Absent such a law, I would see no basis for the police to take any action against someone peacefully shooting dope no matter how many people it offended.
Hey, if he at least brings the warrant with him that's better than some.
“Wait a second. Doesn’t this opinion label Buckley as an insane libertarian and an enemy of all that is good and decent in society?”
Well, to be fair, there are some insane libertarians out there; not the typical sort, but the extreme anarcho-capitalist variety.
How does this square with his status as one of the greatest conservatives ever?
You need to define "bothering other people". Property rights generally determine whether any particular behavior is sufficiently "bothersome" to warrant police action. You may "bother me" when you dress strangely, but that doesn't mean I should be able to have you arrested for dressing that way. The issue of what offensive behavior you can get away with in public will always be a problem as long as we have "public" (i.e government owned) property.
Thanks for the ping and post. I disagree with Buckley on this topic.
RIP Mr. Buckley.
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.