There is nothing conservative about thinking its okay for kids to be on crack either. Conservatives can oppose these para-military tactics without being pro-drugs.
Going to the other extreme is nonsensical.
Well stated. We are often presented with it as an “either or” choice. You are in favor of dope if you oppose light infantry attacks in American cities.
This baby’s blood is on the hands of all who support the war on some drugs.
How does opposition to the War on Drugs make anybody pro-drug? Hmmm?
Does one have to be “Pro Drugs” to believe in Free Choice and let Darwin sort it out. Sorry to ask but I have never ever read anywhere in History where Prohibition of Anything has ever worked, and Prohibition ALWAYS gives rise to a POLICE STATE.
Sig Heil
But they won't escape being accused of it.
So, you're against the para-military tactics (Look, Ma, I'm a pretend sojer!).
Where are you on the "War on Drugs"-associated "asset forfeiture" business, wherein blue, brown or black-painted publicteer* vessels ply the highways and neighborhoods of America with the government Jolly Roger raised high?
*"publicteer" is the government version of the old "privateer" ships that used to "relieve" their prey of their cargoes and ships, back in the day.
And now the ugly big picture.
Tell me, if the government is so concerned with drugs and the safety of the American people, why have they for 30+ years, aided and abetted Mexico and kept the lawless borders unsecured where thousands of tons of drugs enter annually, unabated?
Our government, the Mexican govenrment and the cartels are making hundreds of billions off this epic con-job annually.
So much so people/officials from top to bottom, who are supposed to be in charge of border security and law enforcement, are bribed and bought off to make damn sure those borders remain lawless, and wide open for business.
Opposing the War on Drugs is ‘pro-drugs’????
If you notice these raids, they tend to be outside the areas where drug sales are frequent and chronic. Why is that?
I'll tell you. Raiding a house in the "inner city" is dangerous. I don't care HOW many SWAT people you have, or how many full auto weapons they bring, raiding a crack house in Detroit or Chicago will have Bloods and Crips opening fire on your team from every window up and down the block. Your SWAT armor won't mean diddly as they toss Molotov cocktails on your head. If you return fire, you will ignite a riot which will have half the city in flames by nightfall, and everybody from Al Shapton to Obama will be after the heads of everyone involved.
It's much safer to exercise your SWAT gear in the suburbs, against a white family that nobody will riot over.
And as a bonus, if you do find some drugs, you can confiscate the house under Civil Asset Forfeiture laws.
Now tell me, which is more profitable to law enforcement, seizing a crack house in the badlands of Detroit, or the nice home pictured above?
And if anything goes wrong, it's just a bunch of white people. Nobody's going to riot and burn the city over this little kid:
Sleep well.
If you’re in favor of anti-drug laws, you’re in favor of this. There’s no two ways about it.
It amazes me how the little libertarians flock to any thread about drugs. It’s their life cause. It is for THIS reason alone I could never fall in line with them. Talk about a one issue party, jeez.
Keep up the great work Geron, your words shed much needed light, though the little libers won’t let it in.