Posted on 01/19/2011 9:19:29 AM PST by smokingfrog
And since Prohibition was so successful.
In other words; Useless.
Every gun law ever passed is unconstitutional.
Period, paragraph, end of discussion.
If the libs treated the war on drugs and the war on poverty the same way they treat the war on terror, we would be hearing the following questions and comments by the MSN.
When are we going to start demanding an exit time table for the “War on Drugs” and the “War on Poverty”?
Our nation can’t be at war forever.
This is a quagmire with no end in sight.
Why haven’t we had congressional hearings designed to ridicule the people responsible for the prosecution of both of these wars?
These are two wars our nation cannot win, our best option is to get out of these wars as soon as possible.
To liberals (progressives), every constitution is against the law..
My take....
Any attempt at Strict gun control will be met with a
response like nothing ever seen in this country before.
War on drugs? Piffle.
War on terror? Not even close.
Given how well the War on drugs has been, maybe we should welcome a War on Firearms... or even better, a War on Education.
[/sarc][/cynic]
But seriously, the War on Drugs has yielded one thing: dissolution of virtually all of the Bill of rights it a practical/real sense.
Amd 10 — “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
There is no Constitutional authority authorizing the War on Drugs; remember that we had to pass an amendment BEFORE enacting nation-wide prohibition of a substance. That Amendment was never expanded to allow for the restrictions of other substances and was actually repealed.
Amd 9 — “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”
You don’t have, say, the *right* to travel; which is why they set up ‘sobriety’ check-points and force licensing for the exercise of such right. {I would mention the BP checkpoint-searches, but that falls nicely under the 4th amendment.}
Amd 8 — “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.”
What are the bails and fines for having, say, an ounce of marijuana? What about the possibly-multiple decade-long incarcerations?
Amd 7 — “In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury shall be otherwise reexamined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.”
I’m uncertain if the 7th has been directly weakened or violated from the War on Drugs: certain laws allow for the pursuance of violations of civil liberties in civil court, so that may be a way for some “bleed-over.”
Amd 6 — “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.”
Speedy trial. Amazing how often that phrase is glossed over when reading this amendment. But then, if it weren’t for the War on Drugs, they couldn’t belittle “minor” cases of Law Enforcement wrongdoings saying things like “We have to ease the burden on the judicial system, so that they can deal with murderers & drug-dealers.”
Amd 5 — “No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”
“nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law” — Part of the War on Drugs is the demonizing of some of the periphery, liks domestic violence... while I’m not advocating domestic violence it is a fact that the courts can construe “a heated argument” as being domestic violence; furthermore, if one happens to have a restraining order issued on them [which does NOT require a jury trial or any proof-of-guilt] for domestic violence they lose the right to keep and bear arms. An Awesome two-for-one by the War on Drugs.
Amd 4 — “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affi rmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
The War on Drugs has done MUCH violence to the Fourth Amendment. The searches at Border Patrol checkpoints, for one, do not have a warrant which “particularly describes” what is to be searched [and seized]. For another they can bring a dog out and claim that it is signaling its handler that there is something ‘suspicious’ about your vehicle; a BP agent I knew said “the cues can be as subtle as a change in breathing.” I’m sorry, but I can cause a “change in breathing” which has NOTHING to do with an illegal activity: give me the leash and five minutes at a nice run.
Amd 3 — “No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.”
Surprisingly this amendment is rather well-respected... though even that may change if the Authorities ever decide we need live-in “Minders.”
Amd 2 — “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
“But we shouldn’t let felons [and/or drug-users] carry guns!”... oh do shut up! Here’s one for you a “felony” from a State Statute which SHOULD be prohibited by both Amendment 2 and its State’s Constitution: http://www.conwaygreene.com/nmsu/lpext.dll?f=FifLink&t=document-frame.htm&l=query&iid=6c1804dd.55b72e94.0.0&q=%5BGroup%20%2730-7-2.1%27%5D (Carrying firearms onto school premises.)
Amd 1 — “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
Like Amendment 7, I can’t think of a way that the War on Drugs has directly eroded this amendment right now.
So that’s a 50-70% direct impact against the Bill of Rights? I admit some of them are a bit tangential, but remember that the key idea in the War on Drugs is that EVERYONE is a potential enemy of the state and cannot be trusted.
I was having a "second amendment" discussion with a co-worker today. The discussion dirfted to the AR-15 that was being fired in the next lane from me at the range last week. (Almost crapped my pants when it was first fired.)
He asked, "what do you need more than a pistol for? Home defense against intruders is all you should be worried about."
Now, this is a guy who keeps an unlocked and loaded pistol at his bedside. Putting the stupidity of that practice aside, I asked him, "And what form does this intruder take in your universe? Is it a drug crazed Guatemalan looking to score some quick assets? Or is it someone from the government looking to take you down as a registered firearms owner? Tonight it might be the Guatemalan. Tomorrow night...who will it be?"
He just didn't get it. He couldn't wrap his brain around the possibility that a tyrant could emerge from our own government and attempt to control the populace by first getting all the guns. Pathetic.
BFL
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.