Posted on 08/05/2011 3:16:16 PM PDT by He Rides A White Horse
I rarely post an article, even more rare that I post a vanity. I feel that this is a topic that involves everybody, both pro and against. I have a few thoughts of my own, but I would also like to hear from heads and tails. Law enforcement, if they wish, please add your viewpoints; I am certain that you have a unique perspective. I'm hoping that this doesn't turn into a flame war.
I will submit from the start that I do not use drugs. So if anybody wants to issue a blanket statement that states 'If you don't use them, why be afraid if you have nothing to hide.' I regard that statement as analogous to 'if you have nothing to hide, why not submit to your house being search at will." Both statements are totalitaian canards by nature. They are disingenuous at best. Horrific at the worst.
There is something I want to address, a peculiar, non-traditional method that our government imposes, a dictum that seems to be the only solution for any problem that may arise.
Take the Second Amendment for example. Gun control (I often call it 'citizen control'). It appears that our government always addresses the lowest denominator possible. What I mean by this is that we have a relatively small group of people responsible for gun violence. In this scenario, the government responds by abrogating the rights of the many, law abiding citizens who are not guilty of these acts. Another example is the policing of what we eat. Same methodology. Restrictions are imposed on restaurants because a small group of people do not meet the physical 'requirements' that our politicians believe to be ideal.
This creeping type of political ideology is becoming more bold with every passing day. It is an invasion on all levels ranging from repealing 'don't ask, don't tell', to the blatant edicts emanating from Homeland Security. Which brings me to the crux of the matter. What and when is enough?
I will plainly state that I have had enough. How can any person state that we are fighting a War on Drugs and War on Terror with a straight face? We can simply declare that we have no borders and that could be stated with a straight face.
If you cannot (rather will not) find wave upon wave of illegal immigrants, how can you possibly expect to win both wars?
The reason is that such policies are intended for political expediency, and nothing more. Both parties are falling all over themselves to court the potential voting block. So what are they doing?
They are fighting a War on Civilians. Creating more and more alphabet soup agencies that it is mind numbing. This done out of 'sensitivities' so as not to offend Islam, illegal aliens, and other pet liberal groups.
The only people on the losing side in The War on Drugs are the average citizens who favor our disappearing Constitutional Republic. Our rights are being systematically destroyed, the Constitution is being fed into the paper shredder and it will not stop. Again, the question "what and when does it stop?". I for one have had enough. How do you feel?
Which positions are you referring to?
Moron...
You'd rather give the government power than allow people to suffer the consequences of their actions.
Sorry, but that is not "conservative" by any stretch of the imagination.
Here's the Conservative way to do this, "We are going to pass an Amendment outlawing the production, sale, and use of a xxx types of drugs. This will give the FedGov the legal authority to run a 'war' on drugs."
Absent that, you are no better than a Democrat.
You figure it out...I suspect the war on guns is going to be fought and it’s not going to have anything to do with the US congress, but the executive branch.
And no... All of the current gun control proposals all mirror the drug statutes and even use drug case law to prop them up in courts.
Since the War on Poverty was not a war at all, maybe you need to come up with some other attack.
Been here as long as you have? lol Your logic again assumes a lot.
The CSA didn't come with a declaration of war that I recall. Or is this one of those "it's a war when I say it is" kind of deals?
I stated that I oppose the legalization of drugs, prostitution, and gay marriage. Which ones of these do you support?
The CSA? Which CSA would that be? Confederate State of America, Child Support Agency, Community Supported Agriculture? What, what, what?
I figured you knew the history and background of the issue well enough to associate "CSA" with the Controlled Substances Act in a "drug war" thread.
Do we need to explain Wickard v Filburn, too?
We’ve had controlled substances acts since 1914 you’re just a little bit LATE pulling your drawers up and objecting to it. What are you on? Crack or wacky weed? Which one do you want to make legal?
Is insults all you know, or can you put them aside long enough to try and comprehend the signicance of the New Deal Commerce Clause, and it’s consequences. Are you capable of doing that?
Sir, with all due respect, there’s not going to be any argument that you can make to me that’s going to make me believe that legalizing street drugs in the US is a wise choice.
NOW, if you want to believe that putting a little street drug market on the corner in every community, and taxing it, and checking ID’s is going to solve the drug hog problem that we have in the US you go right ahead.
The problem is DRUG ADDICTION, the problem is not outlawing drugs. Can you grab your drawers and understand that concept?
NOW, we’ve a serious problem with alcohol addiction on this planet for years. And in this country. We took steps to prohibit the sale of it and it failed, BECAUSE so many were already addicted to it. So, alcohol became legal again and we STILL have people dying from drunks grabbing guns and shooting people and drunks on the highways causing 37% of deaths in this country.
NOW, did making alcohol legal again solve any problem whatsoever with alcohol addiction? NO, it didn’t!
Neither will making street drugs legal solve one damned thing about the current horrific street drug addictions in this country...or anywhere else. Even the Netherlands has finally figured this out and making drugs illegal.
The "war on drugs" is screwed up because it's another example of the federal government assuming control of something it was never granted or intended to have control of.
OK, so I agree with you that getting rid of the DEA is a tremendously good idea. They’re useless bureaucrats. And we have plenty of local law enforcement that’s answerable to local citizens.
As for outlawing street drugs, I don’t care whether it’s the feds or local law that makes them illegal, either one will do. Just so our law enforcement can arrest these thugs trying to sell our children street drugs and get them addicted to it.
Your “logic” is completely missing...
I am a man of faith. My faith lies with my God and I do not trust men to rule on Earth in His stead. Period.
Go away child...my logic is just fine...and I know there’s no use beating a dead horse...scat!
Sums up your posts so far perfectly. Horsesh*t...
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.