Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Rand Paul calls for repeal of drug laws; reaches out to minority voters
Washington Examiner ^ | 10-7-2015 | Jason Russell

Posted on 04/11/2015 9:38:43 AM PDT by Citizen Zed

Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., formally launched his presidential campaign Tuesday with a speech in Louisville. Among the notable quotes from Paul's speech was a comment seemingly meant to raise minority support by calling for reform of federal drug laws that disproportionately lead to incarceration of black Americans.

"I see an America where criminal justice is applied equally and any law that disproportionately incarcerates people of color is repealed," Paul said.

Paul went on to address other topics without expanding much on what kinds of laws he meant. But given his past comments, it's not hard to guess he was talking about the war on drugs. "The war on drugs has become the most racially disparate outcome that you have in the entire country," Paul said in November 2014. "Our prisons are full of black and brown kids. Three-fourths of the people in prison are black or brown."

Lauren Galik, the Director of Criminal Justice Reform at Reason Foundation, said she was excited to hear a Republican presidential candidate campaigning on drug reform. "More than half of our federal prison population right now is there for drugs, many of which are African-American," Galik told the Washington Examiner. "African Americans are more likely to receive a sentence that carries a mandatory minimum term of imprisonment than white individuals."

Mandatory minimums disproportionately affect African American criminals compared to whites and Hispanics. "Although Black offenders in 2012 made up 26.3 percent of drug offenders convicted of an offense carrying a mandatory minimum penalty, they accounted for 35.2 percent of the drug offenders still subject to that mandatory minimum at sentencing," according to the United States Sentencing Commission, an independent federal agency.

(Excerpt) Read more at m.washingtonexaminer.com ...


TOPICS: Chit/Chat
KEYWORDS: antimilitary; drugs; paul; randpaul; wod
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140141-146 next last
To: AEMILIUS PAULUS

Your comments take me back to the days when that Nobel Prize winner Shockley (electronics) dared to propose that genetic differences among races is real and demonstrable. The kind and fair world of do-gooders excoriated this honest man of science as few men had/have been treated. Of course these do-gooders want every other person to live by their rules even if the world is different.


101 posted on 04/11/2015 12:31:41 PM PDT by noinfringers2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Patton@Bastogne

Opium wars.

The British made a lot of money shipping in opium from Afganistan to China in the 19th century. When the Chinese resisted, the Brits could count on their technological superiority to defeat a China divided by numerous warlords. The opium made the Chinese docile and an ideal host for parasitic colonialists.

Today, the game is similar in the US. The opium comes from the same place, Afganistan. But it’s the US government that protects the opium trade as demonstrated by the fact that Afganistan opium production has skyrocketed since US involvement since 2001. The US is intentionally not taking down the big Latin American drug cartels or the money laundering banks. Like the mob, Feds take their share of the profits, but keep the racket going. Meanwhile, the US has the highest per capita use of opiates. But that’s OK because it keeps the American peasants dumb or in jail.

The US government is basically acting as an imperialistic and foreign power against its own people. Time to take the power away from the f’ing Feds and repeal the Federal drug laws for that reason alone.


102 posted on 04/11/2015 12:36:26 PM PDT by grumpygresh (Democrats & GOPe delenda est. President zero gave us patient zero.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: ConservingFreedom
.


Exactly wrong - for most of those ten generations there were no laws against drugs.


I'm not backing down on "anything" I wrote. Period.

Sure, cannabis and opium were all around.

It's just that the people with the "most pivotal" ACCOMPLISHMENTS had the morals (read "horse sense") ...

to NOT be pot heads or opium addicts.

Thomas Jefferson, the Wright Brothers, Thomas Edison, etc, were "not" pot heads.

Did they drink alcohol ? Sure.

But alcohol doesn't "adle the brain" the way that long-term pot smoking does.



People supporting pot "legalization" are delusional.

Drugs like this DESTROY peoples' lives.

Period.

Eventually, when a "critical mass" of a nation's population is rendered incoherent (like voting for dupes like Obama) ...

the nation is FUBAR.

The worst part is that the "Dopers" have a false sense of "entitlement".

The nation is on it's death bed.

Does this sound like America in 2015 ?

Yes.

So don't hand me the "crap" about how legalizing pot is "good" for America, or any other nation that genuinely wishes a successful future.



.
103 posted on 04/11/2015 1:08:02 PM PDT by Patton@Bastogne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: NRx

Love it when a noob gets all puffed up and struts around the board


104 posted on 04/11/2015 1:17:24 PM PDT by Elyse (I refuse to feed the crocodile.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Patton@Bastogne

Do you agree with Ted Cruz that it should be up to the states to decide marijuana legalization, or do you side with fedgov?


105 posted on 04/11/2015 1:17:58 PM PDT by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: Patton@Bastogne

Your comments are 100% absolute truth.


106 posted on 04/11/2015 1:33:22 PM PDT by little jeremiah (Courage is not simply one of the virtues, but the form of every virtue at the testing point. CSLewis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: manc
one is for making drugs legal and the other does not

Cruz says it's the states' decision; whether President Cruz thinks a state made a good or bad choice will be of no practical importance.

107 posted on 04/11/2015 2:40:14 PM PDT by ConservingFreedom (A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: manc
Where is your facts backing up your assertion?

http://www.casacolumbia.org/download/file/fid/640, question 44:

Which is easiest for someone your age to buy: cigarettes, beer or marijuana?
31% CIGARETTES
14% BEER
34% MARIJUANA
5% THE SAME
15% DON'T KNOW/NO RESPONSE

108 posted on 04/11/2015 2:43:42 PM PDT by ConservingFreedom (A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: Patton@Bastogne
TEN generations of Americans worked their asses off ... saved money ... built a nation ... all pretty much in a "no legal drugs" world.

Exactly wrong - for most of those ten generations there were no laws against drugs.

I'm not backing down on "anything" I wrote. Period.

Sure, cannabis and opium were all around.

I think you just did back down from your claim that ten generations were 'in a "no legal drugs" world.'

It's just that the people with the "most pivotal" ACCOMPLISHMENTS had the morals (read "horse sense") ...
to NOT be pot heads or opium addicts.

There you go: drugs were legal, individuals were free to choose, and many made the better choice. That's what I advocate.

109 posted on 04/11/2015 2:48:26 PM PDT by ConservingFreedom (A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: Elyse; NRx
Love it when a noob gets all puffed up and struts around the board

He was right, though. Doesn't take long to figure out how the moral-statist phony "conservatives" operate.

110 posted on 04/11/2015 3:06:16 PM PDT by ConservingFreedom (A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: Ken H
.


Of course states have the right to legalize marijuana.


It's stupid, and will produce a generation of "Mental Invalid Bong Makers" ...

other than that, I sure as heck wouldn't live in a state like that.

It would ultimately be just like living in Jamaica, otherwise known as a third-world shit hole ...


. .
111 posted on 04/11/2015 3:34:06 PM PDT by Patton@Bastogne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: ConservingFreedom

Laws don’t get passed until problems arise, when drugs became a problem in the 1800s, drug laws started getting passed.

When polygamy became a problem we started seeing polygamy laws.


112 posted on 04/11/2015 3:53:46 PM PDT by ansel12 (Palin--Mr President, the only thing that stops a bad guy with a nuke is a good guy with a nuke.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: ConservingFreedom

Then this poll like so many is useless because I have teens and asked them plus asked their friends earlier today after your posts and my wife works with teens.

But hey if you want to believe a poll what suits your theory then go right ahead and I will go with first hand knowledge


113 posted on 04/11/2015 4:45:54 PM PDT by manc (Marriage =1 man + 1 woman,when they say marriage equality then they should support polygamy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah

Hey how are you, ling time no hear?


114 posted on 04/11/2015 4:48:29 PM PDT by manc (Marriage =1 man + 1 woman,when they say marriage equality then they should support polygamy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: manc
Then this poll like so many is useless because I have teens and asked them plus asked their friends earlier today after your posts and my wife works with teens.

So you think a few nonrandomly selected data points are more reliable than a large randomly sampled study? Bask in your ignorance - the intelligent FReepers to whom I'm really speaking know better.

115 posted on 04/11/2015 5:06:45 PM PDT by ConservingFreedom (A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: ansel12
Laws don’t get passed until problems arise

Laws get passed when power-hungry pols and bureaucrats sell the con that a problem has arisen - true conservatism is skeptical of government claims and jealous of individual liberty.

116 posted on 04/11/2015 5:10:12 PM PDT by ConservingFreedom (A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: ConservingFreedom

The drug laws started getting passed when they became a problem, for instance Opium in San Francisco.

Just as polygamy wasn’t a problem, until it became a problem, and the same reason that we are now having to look at laws banning full term abortions.


117 posted on 04/11/2015 5:13:53 PM PDT by ansel12 (Palin--Mr President, the only thing that stops a bad guy with a nuke is a good guy with a nuke.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: ansel12
The drug laws started getting passed when they became a problem, for instance Opium in San Francisco.

The only "problem" in San Francisco was that Chinese laborers were indulging in recreational substances different from the ones the Caucasian majority favored.

118 posted on 04/11/2015 5:26:40 PM PDT by ConservingFreedom (A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: ConservingFreedom

You left out polygamy and full term abortion.


119 posted on 04/11/2015 5:29:05 PM PDT by ansel12 (Palin--Mr President, the only thing that stops a bad guy with a nuke is a good guy with a nuke.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]

To: ansel12
That those are problems in no way supports your claim that drugs were a problem.
120 posted on 04/11/2015 5:48:15 PM PDT by ConservingFreedom (A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140141-146 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson