Drug War Redux - The attorney general's misguided model for the War Against Terrorism

Reason ^ | 2001-09-27 | Sam MacDonald

[Storm Orphan]

Reason bump.

[Storm Orphan]

Okay... so the Drug War has been such a success that most people don't even know what marijuana
looks like, so we should apply this same winning, liberty-enhancing strategy to fighting terrorism.

go back into my bomb shelter now to hide. this is really scary.

[dvan]

The In Defense of Freedom Coalition, an ad hoc group of more than 150 organizations

Oh Boy a new group has been added! The liberals can spin them out faster than you can print business cards for them.

[Storm Orphan]

The liberals can spin them out faster than you can print business cards for them.

Cobbled together in the week following the terrible attacks on September 11, groups signing on include everyone from the liberal ACLU to Phyllis Schlafly’s arch-conservative Eagle Forum.

Eagle Forum is a liberal group?

[dvan]

Eagle Forum is a liberal group?

Just because this guy says they are signed on doesn't mean it is so. I'll believe it when he submits ALL the name od these groups. They sure got organized quickly. I imagine Greenpeace is among them.

[Storm Orphan]

Perhaps you should read before sounding off.

Follow the link above. The members include: the Rutherford Foundation, the Baptist Joint Committee on Public Affairs, the Competitive Enterprise Institute, the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention, Gun Owners of America, the Libertarian Party, the Patrick Henry Center for Individual Liberty, and the Second Amendment Foundation, among others.

[Storm Orphan]

*ping*

[Storm Orphan]

*ping*

[Storm Orphan]

*ping*

[Storm Orphan]

*ping*

[Storm Orphan]

*ping*

[js1138]

The war on drugs doesn't work because a significant minority of people want drugs and will do anything to get them. Last time I looked there were few voluntary consumers for exploding jet fuel.

[longshadow]

lurking placemarker bump

[Storm Orphan]

I imagine Greenpeace is among them.

If you follow the link to the list, you will find they are not.

[Romulus]

In the interest of the survival of Christendom (it's in your interest too; believe me), I am willing to push the envelope a little. But in this case asset freezing works just as well as asset forfeiture, and it's vastly less corrupting.

I happen to believe that the best historical analogy to what's happening now is the emergence of the Soviet Union -- when a prompt and firm response from the West would have vastly reduced the danger. Instead, through Western cowardice and treachery, we were exposed to 60+ years of mortal danger. Federal authorities already have plenty of power to track terrorists here. Maybe I'd modify the wiretap laws and enforce stronger cockpt security, but the other proposals seem mostly unnecessary and dangerous. The chief danger is still abroad, and that's where I think the enemy should be attacked -- early, often, and in an intelligently targeted way.

Thanks for the flag. I've been thinking about you. Stay in touch.

[Uriel1975]

In an attempt to show just how benign the War on Terror will be for law-abiding citizens, Ashcroft has chosen an odd model: the War on Drugs.

Eeek!

(sorry, that's all I have to say)

[Askel5]

Thanks for the flag, Storm Orphan.

Owe you a thank-you, Carbon.

[BenR2]

As an evangelical-fundy type, I must say that Ashcroft DEEPLY disappoints in this matter.

Apparently he has learned nothing in his long public service career about the lunacy of calling for FedGov trampling of our freedoms in order to defend them.