Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The War on Drugs: A War Where Everybody is a Loser
CrowdH News ^ | 10/31/17 | Andreas Salmen

Posted on 11/02/2017 11:20:11 AM PDT by Bonston

The US government has created a business out of putting people in jail, a quite lucrative one at that. Privately run prisons thrive due to those minimum sentencing practices, while taxpayers pay for often disproportionately long prison times for people that are no immediate harm to anyone but themselves. And as a reaction those individuals are persecuted to the fullest extent, lives are being destroyed, and the nation’s workforce is diminished while the costs are paid by society.

Instead of a helping hand, the U.S. has introduced the tradition of handing out handcuffs to those related to drugs. And that is exactly what we have to talk about.

(Excerpt) Read more at crowdh.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Government
KEYWORDS: cannabis; justice; prisonsystem; warondrugs; wod
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-114 next last
To: Bonston
long prison times for people that are no immediate harm to anyone but themselves

The author apparently hasn't seen the dead victims of drugged drivers. The article is crap.

21 posted on 11/02/2017 12:58:21 PM PDT by aimhigh (1 John 3:23)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp
What contrary experience of the USA in the 1800s?

As I've pointed out to you: "the rate of opiate addiction in America increased throughout the nineteenth century, from not more than 0.72 addicts per thousand persons before 1842 to a maximum of 4.59 per thousand in the 1890s; thereafter the rate began a sustained decline."

22 posted on 11/02/2017 1:02:48 PM PDT by NobleFree ("law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the right of an individual")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp
The constitution imbues the Federal Government with the power to protect the United States from enemies, foreign and domestic. Drugs fall into that category.

That's certainly a broad, Hamiltonian view of the boundaries of the Constitution. Inanimate objects, wholly without life, even, can actually be considered "enemies" of a state?

23 posted on 11/02/2017 1:03:12 PM PDT by Hemingway's Ghost (Spirit of '75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: 2banana
Methamphetamine (meth or crystal meth) is considered one of the world’s most addictive drugs.

A weaker statement than your previous "100% addictive from the first time you use it."

24 posted on 11/02/2017 1:03:59 PM PDT by NobleFree ("law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the right of an individual")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: waverna
I don’t want drugs legalized if we all have to pay for...

Nor do I. However, just because the federal gov't hasn't banned something, the states are not prohibited from doing as they see best. It won't be "legalized" unless the states want to legalize it. My argument is that it cannot constitutionally be prohibited at the federal level. It is also not constitutional for the federal gov't to make us pay for treatments associated with it.
25 posted on 11/02/2017 1:08:03 PM PDT by Sopater (Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with mine own? - Matthew 20:15a)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: aimhigh
long prison times for people that are no immediate harm to anyone but themselves

The author apparently hasn't seen the dead victims of drugged drivers.

Did everyone who is in prison for possession kill while driving drugged? If not, here's a radical idea: imprison only those users of alcohol or other drugs who DO drive under the influence?

26 posted on 11/02/2017 1:08:20 PM PDT by NobleFree ("law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the right of an individual")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: waverna
It’s a nice libertarian argument but we are so far down the rabbit hole of post constitutionalism that starting with drug legalization isn’t the best idea.

Perhaps, but I don't want to spend a great deal of time trying to work on "post constitutionalism" solutions that just make us more comfortable in our oppression.
27 posted on 11/02/2017 1:13:38 PM PDT by Sopater (Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with mine own? - Matthew 20:15a)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Bonston

“Would you care to elucidate on your conservative credentials”

Apparently, you are unwilling to share more about your general perspective.

That leads us to believe you are a (probably libertarian) troll.

But my offer remains: Give us some bona fides, and we’ll consider your posting and opinions in light of them. Failing that, my point above stands.

We like to be welcoming. But over the years, we’ve seen dozens or hundreds of libertarian drug pushers arrive, get outed, and leave. Please demonstrate you’re not another, and you’ll be welcomed into the fold.


28 posted on 11/02/2017 1:22:33 PM PDT by Uncle Miltie (The "God Gene" is evolution's way of saying "Chaos Sucks!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: 2banana

Nothing is 100% and nothing is addictive from first use... Well maybe oxygen.


29 posted on 11/02/2017 1:23:52 PM PDT by discostu (Things are in their place, The heavens are secure, The whole thing explodes in my face)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: NobleFree

There should be at least one legal recreational drug formulation per brain receptor system.

For cocaine, this might be a form of (unsweetened) cola beverage.

For opiate users, maybe codeine solution (red - lethal to non-addicts, orange for moderate users, yellow - not likely to kill novices).


30 posted on 11/02/2017 1:26:27 PM PDT by Brian Griffin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Sopater

It’s not like the war on drugs has led to gross abuse of the Constitution! Only a couple dozen clauses and half as many Amendments have been sacrificed to this false god of safety. If it saves even one child, it’s worth every totalitarian usurpation.

You silly constructionists still believe words have inherent meaning when simply everyone knows words are only imbued with meaning by the divine penumbras emanating from the nether regions of the five sacred black robes.


31 posted on 11/02/2017 1:30:01 PM PDT by antidisestablishment ( We few, we happy few, we basket of deplorables)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: antidisestablishment
It’s not like the war on drugs has led to gross abuse of the Constitution! Only a couple dozen clauses and half as many Amendments have been sacrificed to this false god of safety. If it saves even one child, it’s worth every totalitarian usurpation.

Oh yeah.... I keep forgetting. I'll now submit.
32 posted on 11/02/2017 1:34:02 PM PDT by Sopater (Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with mine own? - Matthew 20:15a)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp

“China”

Until 1909 you could walk into a pharmacy and buy opiates and cocaine legally in the USA. And you could buy jars with Cocaine and Heroin labels to store the purchases.

Legally required prescriptions for ordinary drugs came about around 1948 because of Democratic pharmacist and Senator Hubert Humphrey.

And the famous soda Coca-Cola used the original formula for decades.


33 posted on 11/02/2017 1:34:53 PM PDT by Brian Griffin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: aimhigh
The author apparently hasn't seen the dead victims of drugged drivers. The article is crap.

Ending the lost federal war on drugs won't make it legal to kill people with cars while driving under the influence. Your response is crap.
34 posted on 11/02/2017 1:35:39 PM PDT by Sopater (Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with mine own? - Matthew 20:15a)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp

Dr. Bartalo in “Barber of Seville” (1818) hated Figaro because Figaro doped up the member’s of Dr. Bartalo’s household.


35 posted on 11/02/2017 1:37:21 PM PDT by Brian Griffin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: 2banana

“You really want that for sale at your local Wal-Mart?”

Let’s take the warning labels off everything and let nature takes its course. We’ve got just way too many stupid people breeding.

Do you really need to be told that meth is bad for you? Do you? Cigarettes have come with warning labels for 60 years. People still smoke. Let them. Go die. I could care less.


36 posted on 11/02/2017 1:38:30 PM PDT by CodeToad (CWII is coming. Arm Up! They Are!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Bonston

Are addictive drugs bad? Yes.

But addictive drugs of unknown potency are worse.

Addictive drugs of unknown nature and potency are worse still.

The police and prosecutors have tried hard, but their will be recreational drug dealers as long as recreational drugs fetch high prices or poverty exists in the USA.

Neither a war on poverty or on drug dealers can be won.

One needs to accept addiction and work to make the supply of recreational drugs of controlled quality as the utmost priority.

Drug overdoses are never accidental - they are the result of public policy.

If people want to taper off opiates, methadone treatment is possible. If they don’t, their fixes must be non-lethal.


37 posted on 11/02/2017 1:47:12 PM PDT by Brian Griffin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: antidisestablishment
What’s to stop them from declaring you that enemy?

The fact that I'm not trying to dope up my fellow citizens.

Nice conservative answer.

It is a nice conservative answer. People who attempt to make a profit by harming other Americans need to be regarded as enemies.

38 posted on 11/02/2017 1:58:58 PM PDT by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Sopater
The hell they do. You could say that about tobacco and anything else, too. It's absurd.

Tobacco doesn't induce people to rob and steal. Dope does.

39 posted on 11/02/2017 1:59:40 PM PDT by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: NobleFree
As I've pointed out to you: "the rate of opiate addiction in America increased throughout the nineteenth century, from not more than 0.72 addicts per thousand persons before 1842 to a maximum of 4.59 per thousand in the 1890s; thereafter the rate began a sustained decline."

And as I probably pointed out to you, anyone who claims to have such records is a liar. Nobody was keeping records of addicts in 1842. The East India trading company *WAS* keeping track of their opium imports to China, and that's why *those* records are valid.

You don't have any real data from that time period.

40 posted on 11/02/2017 2:03:45 PM PDT by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-114 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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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