Skip to comments.Carroll: Tancredo's next crusade?
Posted on 04/05/2009 4:36:51 PM PDT by ChrisInAR
What do you talk about at lunch with Tom Tancredo? I thought I knew, but to my surprise (and relief), we spent much of the hour discussing the wisdom of legalizing drugs rather than rehashing our disagreements over illegal immigrants.
"The status quo isn't working," Tancredo says, meaning the war on drugs has failed spectacularly. And while that's hardly a novel insight, most people who reach it don't take the next step of questioning the drug war itself.
(Excerpt) Read more at denverpost.com ...
So what? In 1776 would you have asked Thomas Jefferson what other countries support his stance?
This is a liberty issue. You want to control what others put into their bodies, and that control has resulted in an all out war and the destruction off our 2nd and 4th amendment rights. But at least you get to sit at home knowing that if somebody is having a good time in a way you don't approve of that the government can break down his door and haul him off to jail.
How many people have been killed in traffic accidents or other tragedies by a pot smoker in your home town over the last year? How about in your home state, how about providing one single case? I bet you can’t....
and the torture for those who don’t get capital punishment will help encourage those who continue to take drugs to straighten up.
Are you a former member of the Taliban?
Nope, I just enjoy the idea that, when the mere thought that jail won’t curb a behavior, worrying about creative tortures that might be inflicted can be.
After all, these criminals unilaterally tortured the innocent person they maimed. I just want to see them get a huge dose of their own chosen fun.
If I desired the liberty to make bombs in my basement, would you say I should have that? I mean, that was allowed in Jefferson’s time. As was gay marriage and marriage to animals, right?
After all, it is a liberty issue.
Pot heads don’t torture people and they aren’t violent, you know this, I know this and anybody with a modicum of social intelligence knows this.
Torturing somebody because they smoked a joint is worse than barbaric and to even entertain the idea points to mental instability.
When somebody smoked pot they only harm themselves to a small degree. Smoking pot does not infringe upon anybody’s liberty or property. Smoking pot does not lead people to commit crimes. Drinking alcohol on the other hand....
The truth is that we have a government to be an arbiter of some sort in all of our lives, meting punishment to those who wronged us—even libertarians agree to this use of government.
The problem we are describing with government is that it has taken on the roll of pre-deciding many things as being “wrong” or “right” which were once left up to the individual or to the State. Often, once could argue such laws were for “a good cause,” to prevent things a simple majority of society thought were somehow grotesque or too risky. But our Constitution allows us to limit ourselves and others through law, so this is to be expected.
What is the point at which such regulation becomes too much? I would argue we are well past that place. However, the arguments for legalizing currently illegal substances or behavior cannot be made simply because it is a “liberty” we should have. The truth is that our laws can have a protective effect on our society from time to time. Encouraging people to take up currently illicit drugs will really only spread the problem of drug use (it will be at every drug store and supermarket) while having completely unpredictable results on “lessening the drug war.”
You see, there will always be a drug that seems “edgy” to people precisely because it isn't yet illegal, and therefore, it becomes desirable to many. So we can legalize literally all drugs in an attempt to curb the “edgy-ness” and to, from the arguments of many here on Free Republic, “defund the drug gangs.” There is absolutely no evidence that legalizing will do such a thing, but there is plenty of evidence that when you put mind-altering substances on a table at a party, that a huge number of people will try them. If they are legal, such items are freely available and, some argue, cheaper because they are mass produced (sure, they are taxed, but when the tax is too high, people again buy illegally - CrippleCreek has a link about that). Does having a cheap, readily-available supply of crank, cocaine, pot, etc. really sound like the cure for getting drug crime off the streets? Or does it remind us of Opium dens of yore?
We have enough problems with what is currently legal. Why complicate it by saying illegal drugs made legal will make using those substances easier for our society to handle, ESPECIALLY when no other society in the world has shown that works?
By the way, not even pot is truly legal to buy, sell, grow and use anywhere in the world. Why screw us up here in the US with millions more druggies causing crime and using our insurance/welfare resources?
I believe anyone who commits a crime on a drug meant only for recreational fun should be held liable as though the crime was premeditated. I also believe a torture penalty for such offenses is only fair, as the crime they committed against an innocent should be used as the means by which they are punished, three-fold over.
I will tell you skippy, here in San Diego with over 3 million people and Calif. with millions more, what do you think
also Sept 2008 the wreck of the Metrolink in LA
that collided head on with a Union Pacific freight train
killing 25 passengers - the engineer tested for marajuana.
:-) Yeah, a troll with something like 5000+ posts.
He tested for it but was he actually high at the time. Marijuanna components stay in the system for up to 90 days after use.
You’re just saying stupid things for the attention.
That is a troll and it doesn’t matter how long you been here or how many posts.
Saying stupid or controversial stuff just to provoke people to respond is trolling
Since you have way to much time on your hands, why don’t
you send for the report.
Although a torture penalty is not legal in the US, it once was, as were public hangings and such. I am for bringing that all back and making punishment for heinous crime palpable again to all who might commit a crime.
It doesn't seem too fair that a criminal can pick an innocent person out and hurt them in whatever way they would like, while those left behind know the bad person is watching Oprah in a nice temperature-controlled room, with food and exercise equipment on hand to further ease their time.
However, I'm not for allowing inmates to hurt one another. I believe any negative stuff that happens to a person behind bars should only be prescribed by a judge, not randomly allocated by a fellow inmate.
I hope that helps you understand. By the way, ever watch "24"? If you have ever found yourself rooting for him while he's torturing someone "for a cause," you are in a worse position than that which I advocate.
Nah I’ll just let you keep making things up, it’s funner.
“Marijuana and cocaine weren’t always illegal.”
Neither was slavery. Not a good argument.
And if you dont think booze creates problems today ... just look at the death stats on drunken driving for your answer.
“Should the federal government be regulating citizens’ vices?”
But certainly more offensive than punishing us for our vices is when Govt punishes us for our VIRTUE!
Which we do today. By that I mean taxation of the responsible to pay the bills of the irresponsible. Nobody has convinced me that legalizing drugs wont make that welfare-addled system worse. For those of us who are responsible non-drug-using citizens, it’s not a gain to our freedom to see legal drug use, just a burden to our wallet.
YUP. That's the nub of it.
Face it, my drug-desiring FRiends, the socialists have us in a corner. We are the SUCKERS for their entire social engineering scheme. For us taxpayer, turing 'potheads in jail' into 'potheads on welfare' is a distinction without a difference to our wallet. So ... If you want YOUR freedom ... LIBERATE US RESPONSIBLE TAXPAYERS FIRST!