There are many people that think that the country’s “War on Drugs” has spun so far out of control that it is little more than an excuse for police departments to terrorize citizens. Incidents like this one make their case.
When the shooting stopped, two dogs lay dead. A mayor sat in his
boxers, hands bound behind his back. His handcuffed mother-in-law was
sprawled on the kitchen floor, lying beside the body of one of the
family pets that police had killed before her eyes.
To understand the full extent of this tragedy, you need to read the entire account. Briefly, drug smugglers were sending packages to innocent people in a scheme to get drugs into the country. They would then pick up the packages before the innocent person ever knew what was in it. In this case, the police intercepted the package, delivered it via an undercover agent, then stormed the home, killed two pet Labradors, handcuffed the victims and left them that way for hours and now refuse to apologize for their errors. Really, read the entire account.
It is past time to end this “war on drugs” and time to put sensible drug policies in place. Too many innocent citizens are being brutalized by ever expanding paramilitary police forces.
(As a reminder, this and all other posts reflect the opinion of their author, not necessarily anyone else associated with LST..)
Filed Under Front Page · · · · 
Print This Post
··
Comments
69 Responses to “War On Drugs: War Of Terror?”Search
Our Sponsors
Poll
Loading ...
Now we can agree on something other than Lorrie Morgan. Well said.
Big Jolly, you can count me in. I’ve had it with these no-knock raids and SWAT team assaults on teenagers growing pot in their bedrooms.
And I want to state loudly and emphatically I have never advocated for the legalization of drugs…not once…not ever.
But the domestic war on drugs has pushed this conservative (with libertarian leanings) over the edge.
The “War on Drugs” has become a “War of Terror” as the drug lords use fear and intimidation on the police and anybody else who would try to control them. The innocent citizen is caught in the middle. And the law enforcers use matching techniques as they are outmanned and out gunned in their fight against the drug lords. Mexico, the hub of everything, has so much corruption that the war on drugs is a losing battle. Wow, here’s a new concept, maybe if we close the borders to illegal aliens it might have an overflow affect on the trafficing of drugs into this country.
texpat - I absolutely concur. I have not - and will not - advocate for drug legalization. But this kind of crap has to stop. At the extreme risk of sounding like Phil_M
if we can’t find cops with more sense than these showed then we need to do without.
These guys (the cops involved) need to be prosecuted and thrown in jail. The the county and individuals involved need to be sued.
#4 fat albert
I was researching this very subject last night and got so angry I decided I would back off before I published something I might regret. I’ve got a file going on it and will file a report. It’s ugly.
Here’s an interactive map from our friends at Cato showing botched no-knock raids.
Also, if you’re going to have a war on drugs or anything else, does it not make sense to do a better job of interdicting the supply in the first place?
Well, those of us that fondly remember the Bill of Rights have been vomiting a little in our mouths for a LONG time. I’ll never forget the first time I saw COPS, where the Storm Troopers crashed into an apartment, threw everyone to the ground at gunpoint, stood on their necks, and celebrated with high-fives when a couple of pills, an old shotgun, and a couple of butcher knifes were found.
And that was before the Patriot Act . . .
I’m sick and tired of getting attitude from a police officer anytime I ask him a question.
Count me in too, Jolly. And I also claim texpat’s disclaimer: don’t, never have, never will. I don’t even drink. But I’m sure it’s just a matter of time that I get hassled if not arrested for DWI.
Somebody once said that the definition of insanity is making the same mistake repeatedly but expecting different results. When has prohibition ever worked? The real reason our government refuses to legalize drugs is because drug enforcement and prisons are huge businesses, and the current government paradigm does not allow for shrinking itself.
Legalize all drugs, then educate people to the dangers and several things will happen:
1. The same amount of people will still have drug problems, but most people will still not abuse them
2. The prison population will go down by half to two-thirds
3. Gang/organized crime activity here and abroad will plummet, as will other drug-related crimes
4. We will save billions in DEA and prison expenditures that can be used for education and treatment
Before you jump in and tell me it will never work, ask yourself how well things are working now. Don’t confuse a perfect solution with the best one available.
A fair portion of the money spent on interdiction would be better spent on Drug Treatment. Get the folks to quit buying and using drugs or at least get the hard core users down to reasonable levels and the problems will take care of themselves.
Simple
How sad, to see a front-page LST-er fall into the intellectual traps laid by dope-smoking hippies and their illegal-alien drug-smuggling invader allies.
The solution is simple–
(a) Make intoxicating drugs illegal
(b) Spend mind-bending amounts of money attempting to interdict the flow of drugs from producers to consumers
(c) Spend more money keeping people who use drugs in cages
(d) Expand the authority of the State to unprecedented levels
(e) Discourage our children from using drugs, both through cutting-edge, hip advertising campaigns and highly persuasive, compelling, and non-hyperbolic presentations in schools
I am confident that were we, as a nation, to pursue this strategy for several decades, victory in the War on Drugs would be assured.
No doubt some child-molesting, hemorrhoidal crack-heads will now leave comments that disagree with my analysis, but you are all wrong and can go to Hell.
I hate to read about these kinds of events. I have little respect for DELETED BY LST as it is, and this just reinforces my distrust and disgust of the system. Huge penalties need to be handed out against these thugs. (How many of THEM are drug runners, or under control/payroll of the drug lords?) Hmmmmm?
Bah!
I’m just curious, how many people here like the idea of America in Roman Empire mode? I know that a lot of conservatives like the idea just fine, but I believe jack-booted thugs and the war on drugs are part and parcel of that phenomenon. I want to end the war on drugs, at least on soft drugs (which may only mean pot), but I also want to see the U.S. withdraw from its self-appointed role as world policeman. No more troops in Germany, Japan, or the Middle East; perhaps we are justified in staying in Korea a tad longer, but I say that reluctantly. Did you know we had military troops in China for 100 years, from 1845 to 1945? That’s just ridiculous. Let’s not keep making those mistakes, and the consuls won’t feel the need for their centurions. Maybe life as an elected official is such a fishbowl lifestyle that their own personal liberties are already gone, so they think nothing of taking ours as well. Could that be possible?
#11 deep
That was certainly a well-thought out statement.
/sarc
The commenter in #10 is just one more example of what can happen to your brain when you consume too much Burke and snort too many Hobbes.
Long Live Lysander Spooner !
The problem in this thread it that in agreeing with thoughtful, rational, intelligent people like Texpat and BJ, I find myself also aligned (at least superficially) with comments such as #11 and #12. So, as a disclaimer - I have never - not once - referred to a LEO as a “pig”.
The vast, vast majority of LEO’s, including all that I personally know, are decent, hardworking, servant minded people whose honest desire is to help society. They are underpaid for the work they do and perform a valuable service without which our society could not survive. There are unfortunately a few bad apples……
As far as
goes - you obviously need to take a couple of serious history courses, and try doing some reading.
#15 fat albert
I too find using sweeping epithets like pig towards our law enforcement personnel and making baseless generalizations about them to be abhorrent and certainly not constructive to any intelligent discussion.
Oh, the all-conquering panacea power of education-interdiction-treatment. Education only works on those that aren’t idiots.
A guy I respected was the father of a 10 year girlfriend. He was an alcoholic and as alcoholics like to reason, he’d buy booze on sale and the family wouldn’t be any worse off since he could spend X number of dollars increasing the dollar to alcohol benefit ratio and not deplete family funds for this hobby of his.
The Great Ah-Ha moment came when he realized he enjoyed his wife, his family, his kids, and the grand kids and had missed out on a large part of it due to drink, Stopped dead in its tracks. No educating, no interdicting, no treatment needed. A man of will.
So this triad is just a bunch of crappola majora. Butch up. Man up. I don’t care any more about your life than you do. Go through life in a fog if that’s your choice.
The tragic part is I miss the friendship solidified with him more than I miss his daughter.
Wow,
Quit using an obviously failed policy and try something completely new in order to deal with reality.
Sounds like a good idea.
Now,
DRILL HERE, DRILL NOW, SAVE MONEY!!!!!!!!!!!
#18 Vic
Drilling for drugs ? Now that is a truly novel idea !
Use of that term is inappropriate and has been deleted; let’s all get re-focused on the issues.
#20 benzion
I think you should have left something indicating the target of his disgust so others will be able to tell where he was going. Perhaps something like “[police officers] - LST Mod” would have been better?
My first experience with the drug war was in 1980 while I was attending college and working in radio. The local sheriff was up for re-election the following month, and not so coincidentally, the department had just wrapped up a 6 month “investigation.” A deputy dropped by one evening to hand deliver the press release containing details of the project and the names of over 60 individuals who were going to be arrested the next day. Fortunately, the tactic of using heavily armed swat teams to execute arrest and search warrants had not become popular, and no one was killed in the mass round-up.
From the press release I recall the department spent $250,000 dollars on the project, not including salaries or overtime expenses. Of the 60 some odd cases, only a few involved a over half an ounce of marijuana, and the largest was under 1/4 pound. Many of the charges involved distribution of less than an ounce, and in some cases people were charged with distribution for sharing a single joint with an undercover deputy. There were zero warrants for heroin, LSD or other very dangerous substances, and only a handful for cocaine. I found it very odd that after 6 months of hard work, they had failed to identify a single big time drug dealer.
The sheriff was re-elected, thanks in large part to his “tough on crime” propaganda.
You can not separate the benefits politicians derive from continuing to wage this insane War on People from its more reasonable (and failed) objectives.
In a comment from yesterday I included an email that I sent to the Olson campaign. A few minutes later, I did a find-all/change from Olsen to Lampson and emailed his campaign too.
I’m pleased (and in a few cases, a little surprised) to see the eruption of libertarian common sense on this topic, and urge you to write your representatives at all levels of government, and especially your congress critters because of HR 5842 and 5843.
fascists
pithy
I’d support easing the Gestapo tactics, in exchange for increasing sentences & convictions (and treatment) for being under the influence while committing a crime and while driving.
For every sob story about some teenager getting his door kicked down for growing weed in his room, there is another one about a family who suffered tragedy because of drugs.
#2, Texpat and BigJolly, you can count me in too as an LST contributor that agrees with you on this post.
Somehow I’ve managed to surround myself with writers who all favor some degree of capitulation in this vital, largely successful, and on the brink of final Victory! Drug War.
Coincidence™
25 - Don, if our goal is to eliminate sad stories about teenagers and suffering families, then we’re doomed to failure.
On the other hand, if our goal is to reduce or eliminate overreaching police tactics and stories of kicked down doors, I think we have a shot.
Think about it for a second. Given the parameters of the above story, If I don’t like you, all I have to do is mail you some dope and tell the cops it’s coming. Then they can kick down your door, shoot your dog, tie you up and terrorize you for a few hours, vandalize your home, and then, like some kind of surrealistic Roseanne Roseannadanna murmur “oh, never mind” on the way out without so much as an apology.
This crap has to stop!
As long as drugs are illegal there will exist an innovative and well funded black market for supplying them. The bad experiment in government having the power to keep people from making bad choices known as alcohol prohibition should have taught us that lesson, but apparently it didn’t.
Today’s drug prohibition protects the black market and guarantees the high retail prices that drive violent crime, as well as profit margins that fund counter-intelligence and other equipment used by the supply chain. If you want to put the bad guys out of business for good, hit them where it hurts — in the wallet.
I don’t know about you, but I trust these former drug warriors of LEAP a lot more than I do the tax payer funded propaganda pump known as the ONDCP.
I hope Mayor Calvo and his wife, Trinity, own Prince George’s County before this is all over.
#27 Benzion
A gram of Rothbard, a lid of Locke, a toke of Jefferson, a vial of Hayek and a pound of Friedman can put a man into a state of consciousness where he sees visions not available to the common man.
#30 texpat
Why would they want it?
#31 Texpat, don’t forget a bong-bowl full of William F. Buckley.
In my prior comment, I forgot to paste the URL for Law Enforcement Against Drug Prohibition. They’re good folks doing good work.
#22 - bob42 wrote -
To which I concur whole-heartedly!
The problem is not the “war on Drugs” it is our failure as a society as a whole to fight it. When segments of society say that their choice of drug is just recreational and should not be illegal it weakens the whole cause. When you have Stars like Willie Nelson, Gary Dourdan (CSI), Matthew McConaughey , Woody Harrelson, Macaulay Culkin, David Faustino, and Robert Downey Jr. all being arrest for drugs and yet we continue to hail them as “stars” and continue you reward them after their “bad behavior” what message does that send? Wink Wink nod nod that is the message that is sent! Start weakening the standard now when will it stop. It is like the concept of marriage being defined for centuries as between man and woman and then gay marriage now being acceptable what then polygamy, bestiality?
This situation in the article is not about the problems with the prohibition on drugs but with sloppy police work between 2 different jurisdictions and a cunning criminal who puts innocent people in the way.
The relevant facts that have been left out was this was not some insignificant drug bust. IT started out in Arizona in the interception of 400+ pounds of drugs that were divided up into smaller packages to be ship out. A package of 32 pounds of drugs was sent to this mayors house. That is where things get murky on details. The police should have done more home work on:
1: who lived there
2: what were there habits, schedule and such
3: coordinated with local Law Enforcement
4: communications
It is curious as one report goes that they knew that someone other than the occupants were going to intercept the package yet they sprung on him. More detail are needed but it does sound like the police messed up big time and should be punished appropriately and compensation made.
The interception of the supply is good but bringing down the distribution network is good as well. It just appears that the police botched this operation. The map on botched raids is interesting but it fails to point out the number of raids that go right which I suspect if far more than goes wrong.
One bad raid does not make the cause any less important, like one case of friendly fire in war makes the cause any less noble.
#32 Wagonburner
I would take Prince Georges County and rename it Michael Steele County after the black, conservative Lt. Governor who was treated so shabbily and horribly by his fellow Marylanders (particularly in majority black Prince Georges) in his race for the US Senate in 2006. That would drive them flat out nuts !
Tektite - you’re rationalizing why incompetent government thugs are unlawfully kicking down doors of innocent people (the symptom) while ignoring the fact that prohibition (the cause) inevitably leads to needless suffering, needless spending, and failure. Eliminate the cause and the symptom vanishes.
When has prohibition ever worked in any society? Has it ever worked for…
Liquor? Nope
Prostitution? Nope
Guns? Nope
Drugs? Nope
Let the people choose what they want, but make sure there are laws and enforcement in place to ensure they do it in a responsible manner. If they don’t, then take the right away from the individual who chooses not to comply, but don’t take it from everyone else.
#35 - Tektite - great post.
For everyone that thinks we should legalize drugs, who is going to pay for the aftermath of those addicted? It doesn’t just affect them. It affects my wallet when they need medical treatment, etc. Yeah I know we pay now, but maybe we shouldn’t. If you want to snort coke or be a meth addict, then I think we should tell these people that they are on their own. No taxpayer money for their self-inflicted problems. It’s really irritating when insurance companies will pay for rehabilitation for drug addicts but won’t pay for therapy for legitimate (and not self-inflicted conditions). My daughter has an eye problem that cannot be corrected surgically, but there has been success with therapy (much like speech therapy). Yet the insurance company that would pay to fix her if she were a crack whore, won’t pony up a cent to fix her eye that was no fault of her own.
Here’s the Uncle Miltie quote for the day.™
It is very unlikely that a situation created in the first place by excessive government intrusion will be improved by increasing the amount or scope of that intrusion.
According to Tekite’s logic, the problem with alcohol prohibition is that the government didn’t have enough power to enforce it.
Alcohol and cigarettes are responsible for far more deaths each and every year than drug abuse is. Yet, both are legal, there is no significant black market for them, and cigarette smoking has been on the decline for decades. BTW, numerous studies consistently show that it is easier for minors to obtain dangerous drugs than it is for them to obtain a six pack of Michelob or a pack of Marlboro’s, and the reason is simple. Drug dealers have no incentive to check IDs.
This particular “Keystone Cop” story is by no means an isolated incident. The Mayor is fortunate that he didn’t mistake the no-knock raiders for a home invaders and grab his gun to defend his property, which is his right. Had he done so, it’s very possible that he’d be as dead as his two dogs are today.
Maltboy, I am not rationalizing anything, I am analyzing what went wrong. in this case.
If the police would have acted perhaps in a different manner the outcome would have been different. The fact there is prohibition on illegal drugs does not lead to unlawful kicking down the doors of innocent people. People make mistakes include law enforcement. Police break down the doors of innocent people houses looking for a murders, pedophile, or some other criminal. So as a result we legalize murder pedophiles and a host of other crimes just so the police do not make a mistake as to the house of a criminal is? If that is the case we have anarchy.
Even with your suggestion you still will have laws to be enforce which will lead to mistakes. It is not the laws that are the problem it is the people who choose to not follow them. WE as a society have said that you can not possess or use illegal drugs just as we have said you can not steal nor rape or rob another! What you accuse me of doing you have committed yourself! You rationalize a way for something that society has said no to in order to justify the repeal of the Prohibitions laws!
Bob42; Alcohol prohibition did not work because we as a society were not serious about enforcing it. It is the same with gun laws. We have enough laws on the books to keep guns out of the hand of those who are precluded from having them but we do not enforce them. Just as with illegal immigration. We have enough laws to deal with it yet we are not serious about enforcing the existing laws.
As far as the black market for cigarettes, it exists big time. People are flying in from Asia with cheap cigarettes to sell them. Custom agents at airports are busting them all the time. Cigarettes from Canada are being smuggled in for the Black Market. To say there is no black market is like saying the sun and the moon do not exist. Children have just as much access to illegal drugs as they do with cigarettes if not more. They are not hurting for a supplier of those.
Lastly your chart is miss leading as I pointed out in a previous post. Compare those number of botched raids with raids that go well. You will find that those numbers are greater than the botched raids.
Huh?
I’m no fan of overly heavy-handed drug enforcement like happened recently with the Mayor and the 2 Labs, but I’ve never agreed that legalization will cause less abuse of drugs.
Besides, what’s the difference between having a drug problem and abusing drugs? I’m not getting it…
#41 With all due respect Tekite, I’ve done my research and invite you to do yours. I’d be very interested in learning how many “successful” paramilitary raids have occurred within 100 miles of the Texas/Mexico border, where the likelihood of of intercepting the largest pipes in the supply chain is most high.
According to the botched drug raid map (which is far from all inclusive) none were botched. Is that because law enforcement around the border made fewer mistakes in their interdiction efforts there? Or might it be due to the fact that law enforcement is federally funded according the quantity of busts rather than the quantity of seizures, or the quality of execution, and is therefore highly motivated to conduct raids in less dangerous areas.
As far as the black market for cigarettes goes, yes it does exist. But compared to the volumes obtained legally, it is insignificant. It is also largely the result of recent excessive taxation by state governments who are permitted to engage in precisely the kind of social engineering you seem to favor.
Increased public awareness of the dangers of tobacco have been far more effective in reducing the deaths and damage that result from that addiction, and this was accomplished without empowering the government to use violent and ineffective means to reduce consumption or supply.
As American Woman aptly states, “The Government does nothing well.” History strongly suggests that when empowered to perform social engineering, the efforts of the government fail miserably at the stated goals, typically cause more harm than good, but succeed in endangering and intruding on the rights of law abiding individuals.
Such is the case with our government’s failed attempts at social engineering via the prohibition of alcohol and drugs.
Finally, your comparison of law enforcement tactics used in The War on Drugs to more legitimate uses of that power is horribly flawed.
It is a legitimate function of government to enforce laws against murderers and rapists because those criminals intrude on the rights of others in a very violent fashion.
It is not a legitimate function of government to engineer society or prevent people from making bad decisions, and is not something that they do with any degree of effectiveness. Empowering government to attempt such folly is something that I more often hear from flaming left-wing liberals.
To our taxpayer funded drug warrior propagandists, there is no distinction between drug use and drug abuse. It is an axiom of their justification, and a proven lie.
Will a cocaine user “get down” to a reasonable level?
Bob, I too have done my research. I have lived within 100 miles of the border. I have seen the reports on the raids conducted for illegal drugs and their distribution. They have stop lots of illegal drugs from being distributed. Lot of the drugs intercepted is done at the border checkpoints and checkpoints further inland. Yet drugs still pass through the border via overland or tunnels. Criminals are resourceful and will do whatever it takes to ply their trade regardless of our laws as well. Also they will defend their products without regard to whom gets in the way. So it is no surprise that drugs make it beyond the border regions.
So far Bob all I have seen in your writings are conflicting arguments. You state
It is not a legitimate function of government to engineer society or prevent people from making bad decisions
Yet you then turn around as say
That is engineering by government to produce a desired environment. Then you state
If that is case how can the government be any more effective at enforcing laws against murders and rapist?
This type of thinking is nothing more than libertarian Fruitopia of live and let live.
Government is not some faceless entity. It is the people of this country. We have said that murdering is wrong. That child rape is wrong. That stealing from others is wrong. That marriage with more than one woman is wrong. That the possession and use of illicit drugs wrong. These are all conditions that society has set forth for living here.
If you want to call laws prohibiting drugs “engineering by the Government” so be it. I have seen the devastation these drugs cause not only to individuals who use them but to society itself. Legalization would do nothing but increase the problem. Legalization also would not reduce the criminal element of its trade but enhance it.
#40 Tektite
Now I understand. If pot was legal, those moron thugs would have shown up anyway. It was inevitable, and in no way precipitated by current law. Interesting logic.
You have it exactly backwards. The law IS the problem, just like it was the problem with alcohol prohibition. Americans will always choose to ignore unjust laws. It’s in our nature.
#42 jimb
But it won’t cause any more abuse either, Plus, if we get drugs off the streets, out of the schools, and into legitimate outlets, we can control access to kids. The money we will spend educating and treating addicts (we’re spending it now anyway, BTW), will be a drop in the bucket compared to what we’ll save in enforcement, prosecution, and imprisonment.
There is no difference between a drug problem and drug abuse. My point was that most new users will do so responsibly, because they re already showing responsibility by obeying current laws. Those abusing will continue to abuse regardless of legality.
Tektite
Yeah, Just like it did for alcohol. Do you have a clue how the black market, and all the criminal activity associated with it, is fueled solely because these substances are illegal? That’s why the prisons are FULL of rum runners and tobacco bootleggers… NOT! Sheesh.
If you’re talking about pot, I may be able to go with what you say. Maybe. Pot ain’t like alcohol, really, but OK.
If you’re talking about meth, coke, heroin, etc. No way. Recreational use of those drugs can never be honestly characterized as responsible.
That said, the “war on drugs” is overdone. Episodes like the one that resulted in an innocent family shackled and 2 family dogs killed are ample evidence of that.
I don’t agree that kids are going to be less likely to use drugs because they’re no longer illegal and now somehow magically “off the streets, out of the schools, and into legitimate outlets”.
Does that keep kids from drinking beer???
Can you imagine? “Honey, I’m going to pick up a 6-pack of beer and an 8-ball. You want anything?”
Legalize dope and tax it. There is no halfway measure.
Matboy, The fact that there are laws against drugs does not equate to unlawful kicking down the doors of innocent people. The point being made some here was Drug laws = unlawful kicking down the doors of innocent people. I said that it does not and that it could happen under other circumstances as well. In any action taken by Society to enforce the laws it has created those who are innocent are some times caught between the police and the criminals who break the laws. That is what appears to have happened in this case.
jimb - ask any high school kid, “which is easier to get at school, pot or liquor?”. I remember when I asked my daughter that. She rolled her eyes and said “Dad, they’re selling weed every day between classes at school”. There is no perfect solution available to solve the drug problem, but there is a better one. Rejecting a better solution only because it is not a perfect solution is lunacy.
Tektite – Inane marijuana laws have directly lead to overzealous enforcement, which in turn has lead to the unlawful kicking in of doors and killing of innocent people and pets. If marijuana was legal, that mayor’s dogs would be alive today. If you can’t comprehend that, then you never will, and we should just leave it at that.
As long as there has been law enforcement there has been overzealous enforcements. In last 8 years we have seen more enforcement since drug enforcement has been placed as higher priority under President Bush than his predecessor did. From 1979 to 1992 drug use dropped due to enforcement. Yet under the Clinton years it jumped among the young over 141 percent.
Lets clear the air a little bit. The kicking in of the door was lawful. There was a warrant. This phrase of unlawful kicking in the door and killing of innocents has been tossed out there as a red herring. The proponents of legalization want you to believe that this is occurring in great numbers and have made a map that chart these events. The chart is incomplete. It fails to give the true picture of the raids that were correct. In looking at the chart from the Caro Institute that has been touted with much fanfare here there have been no great number of innocents killed in these raids. In total 42 since the numbers have been tracked dating back to 1985 when compared to the thousands of raids that have occurred since then. OF the innocent doors kicked in have been 150 since 1985 compared to the thousands of raid that have gone to the right address over that time period.
The events with mayor is and event where law enforcement did not do its homework. This was not a raid on a suspected casual user but on someone who was suspected of dealing.. Look at the facts 400 pound intercepted with 32 pound direct to this mayors house. Whether or not they actually suspected the mayor or believed that someone had stolen someone’s identity is in dispute.. Either way they did not do their research and gather the proper Intel.
Just because tragic incidents that happened in Maryland occur is no reason to throw in the towel. That is what the drug dealers and growers want you to do! They will do anything to win at great expense to the public. Yet law enforcement takes great care to prevent the innocent from being harmed. But unfortunately it happens. The effects of drugs is devastating on many families and communities and legalization will do nothing to stop it but just make worse We may care but the drug dealers do not! Therefore we can not give in one inch. If you allow Marijuana today then tomorrow it will be Speed or Crack or what ever the drug de jour is . If you can not comprehend that then God help us all.
Yeah, I’ve said it before . . .
It’s all academic until it’s YOUR door with a HighTek boot-print on it, and it’s YOUR kids with a bright red dot on their faces. And I’m not addressing anybody from India, either.
It’s easy to say “Just turn up the enforcement”, especially when you are involved or profit from that enforcement. But when a hammer just isn’t the correct tool, a BIGGER hammer isn’t the correct tool, either. Unless you are working on a German car, but that’s another post entirely.
Weak people are going to find crutches, legal or otherwise. Some drink, some gamble (legal and otherwise), some smoke (ditto), some find themselves picking a rockier path.
I say make ‘em legal, tax the crap out of ‘em, and no more income taxes. The Government has too much money now.
Slash,
Try having those buying dope knocking at your door at 2 am when it turns out they have the wrong address. Not once but on multiple times. These are the type of guys that would buy it from others just to get around the tax if there was one. So they could careless about buying it legit. Taxing them will not end the illegal drug trade it will strengthen since you now have allow the supply to enter, the black market will grow.
If the War on
DrugsPeople who make poor choices was actually working with any real degree of effectivness, Tekite might have a point. But it doesn’t, and he doesn’t.When you equate society with government and surrender to them your authority to make decisions for yourself, you give up your freedom to make responsible decisions. (You also sound like LBJ and his “Great Society” and a nanny state fascist.)
Arguing that ending drug prohibition will increase drug abuse is a common sign of brainwashing by the ONCDP and DEA. The fact of the matter is that less than 1% of people responding to a Zogby poll said they would use hard drugs if they were legal.
Our 30 year effort resulted in needless deaths and property destruction and the increased use of paramilitary tactics for non-violent suspects. Any kind of drug a person wants is as readily available today as it was 30 years ago.
The War on Drugs is an expensive failure and it should cease. Prohibition of alcohol failed in exactly the same manner and for exactly the same reasons.
But then, you can find authoritarian nanny state fascists that want to bring back alcohol prohibition too.
No Bob I do not equate society with government. Society defines what is acceptable and what is not. Then society forms a Government to carry out its dictates. Therefore Society is never equal with government, instead it is superior to it.
The war on drugs is not about a war on people who make bad choices. It is about upholding the laws of society. People are free to make all the bad choices they want. They know where the line between just a bad choice and breaking the law is yet they proceed to do so. Then they should face the consequences.
Your arguments about legalization of drugs will cure all the ills is typical of the pot toking brain damaged Libertarian. We saw what drugs did in the late 1800’s and early 1900’s with the abuse of prescription drugs. Society pass laws to end it. We saw a reduction in drug use from 1979 to about 1992. Why? It was because laws were toughen and enforced. After 1992 to about 2000, drug use and importation increased greatly. Why? Because drug enforcement was not a priority.
Congress reported that there may be as many as 15 million people in the U.S. are drug users and many are addicts. That is a far cry from the 1% Zogby poll.
How many people have been stopped for speeding and were innocent? Just because they were does that mean we stop enforcing speed laws? What about arm robbery? Do we let them get away because some innocent may get killed?
If we did does that mean that they will be less of those crimes? No! Did they care when they broke the laws in the first place that an innocent may be caught or hurt? No.
If the war on Drugs is an expensive failure then the war on crime is as well. The only reason criminal violate the laws is that there are laws to violate! If there were no laws there would be no criminals!!!
IT is not about being a nanny state. It is about Society who has made the determination that the use of illegal drugs harms society as a whole. Don’t blame Government blame society for the laws.
If you want your drug legalization I am sure you can find some libertarian state willing to create your fruitopia!
Textite,
Your arguments are very persuasive. And interesting. You have easily won this particular thread. Thanks for your input.
“If you want your drug legalization I am sure you can find some libertarian state willing to create your fruitopia!”
Wrong again Tektite. The fact of the matter is, I can’t. California legalized medical marijuana, but heavily armed taxpayer funded jack booted thugs from the DEA still crash through the doors of carefully monitored dispensaries, terrorize the terminally ill, tear the places up, and seize products that are being legally sold and used according to the laws enacted by that state. As long as the federal government is allowed to behave so disrespectfully, it’s silly to believe that states that come to their senses on the Drug War will not be interfered with by the federal Police State.
The deaths of dogs, innocent people, hard working LEOs, and non-violent offenders during drug raids are only a few of the ills that have convinced reasonable people that The War on Drugs causes more harm than the drugs it seeks to prohibit, while failing miserably at reducing their availability.
There are many more reasons the insanity of the Drug War should be stopped, and you can bet your bong you’ll be hearing about them from me.
But why bother… If your such a firm believer in the appropriateness of Drug Prohibition I figure you’ll tolerate incidents such as those that happened in Tulia Texas just as well as you do breaking down doors and shooting dogs and killing people for smoking pot.
The War on Drugs is bovine processed hey and it’s about time our government stopped deceiving us about why they keep it up. It certainly can’t be because it works!
Content Advisory: strong language, common sense
Bob42:
California the last Time I checked was still part of the society as a whole that forms this country (Even though I wish it would just sink into the pacific ocean). Your derisions aside on the characterization of the seizures the fact remains that the Society through the Government still said that these drugs were illegal. Don’t like them then go form your own society.
When you enforce the laws of the land (i.e. society) there are unfortunate events. The dogs in this case is one example. The death of the LEO’s is another but it is a fact of law enforcement regardless of whether it is drugs or any other form of crime. The non-violent offender if involved in the crime of possession and distribution is still a “CRIMINAL”. Violent or not he still made a decision to break the law. The LEO’s seized millions of pounds of drugs as well the ill-gotten gains. We have had a war on street gangs and violence for as long as we have had on drugs and they are still around. What then? We give up on that too?
As far as the incident in Tulia goes, that proves nothing. IT is just an instance of a cop who is a criminal willing to violate the laws by committing perjury against innocent people. This is nothing new. IT has happened before in other types of cases. It just proves that Cops can violate the laws just as criminals do.
Just because you can not have your Dutchie or Doobie, does not mean that we have to give in to those who want to break the law as set forth by Society.
Tektite, now you’re sounding not only overly authoritarian, but also naive.
Not that this is likely, but if I decided that I would like to use any illegal drug, I can assure that I would have no trouble finding whatever I wanted.
Despite how fond you seem to be of the federal government stomping on states rights, the War on Drugs is an expensive failure in each and every regard.
If our congress critters have an ounce of integrity, they will bring HR 5842 and 5843 to the floor for rational discussion and debate. They have been shirking that responsibility for far too long, and while they dallied about, people have died.
…and they voted to allow medical use of marijuana. The dispensaries do nothing harmful except threaten the power and funding of a corrupt enforcement agency by exposing the farcical marijuana laws for what they are. But I guess the society of California does not have the right to exercise their reasonable and constitutionally granted State rights because the feds (not society) say so. I don’t know where you’ve been hiding for the last 40 years, but this stopped being a government by the people a long time ago. It is government designed to perpetuate its own existence by expanding its authority and furthering our subjugation (dependence) at the cost of our liberty and our standard of living. Its main objectives are to serve special interests and hand out the fat to the ever expanding list of dubious federal agencies. The DEA is one of them. It’s a brilliant strategy - create an artificial need and then fill it with federal dollars. Well at least it’s brilliant until it gets so out of hand that our infrastructure collapses under its own financial weight.
But back to my first point. Someone once said that the definition of insanity is making the same mistake over and over but expecting a different result. Prohibition has never worked. Never. Period.
And my second point – there is no perfect solution to the substance abuse problems society has. This includes legal substances like alcohol and nicotine, and all the illegal ones. The current solution – to make some substances illegal and spend billions making criminals out of people simply because they use one of the banned substances, has been a colossal failure from the word go. A better, not perfect, solution is to make the substances available legally instead of making criminals out of otherwise law abiding citizens.
Tektite, bob42, Maltboy, jimb, slash and others
Great debate. It makes the time we spend here worth it. This is what we work so hard to produce. Thanks.
Bob42, I am neither Authoritarian or naive about this subject. If you wish to find illegal drugs that is your choice but remember that you have decided to cross the line and violate the laws of society. If caught and find yourself in a raid or jail remember that it was your choice that put you there.
Using your standard then any law enforcement activity is a failure. Does that mean we stop enforcing laws or enacting them? I have time and time again posed this question to you and other but yet all I have heard deafening silence. Just the constant drumming of make drugs legal. Fine then go for it! Get society to agree with it and then translate that into laws. You got California on board get some more states then you will enough of society to change federal govt. law. Until then watch out for SWAT!!!
Tektite, I’ve responded to your repeated and absurd suggestion that my logic recognizes no difference in laws that protect property from those that attempt (but rarely succeed) in regulating individual behaviors. The difference is huge, unless you’re an authoritarian that gets his kicks from controlling what other people do, and wasting everyone’s money in the effort. Our government seems to be addicted to that.
Maybe BigJolly will do another front pager on the insane drug war, or perhaps government’s insane prohibition of online gambling.
This has been much fun and very entertaining, but I’m going to take Texpat’s hint and agree to disagree with you (for now.) Seriously dude, discussing this has been like trying to having a reasonable debate with Joe Arpaio. I sincerely hope that you misinterpret that to be a compliment.
You fail to understand what standard is being applied here. This is not a call for abandoning all law enforcement just because it is not perfect. There is no such thing as perfect solution to all of society’s ills. But there may be better solutions than simple prohibition, and in fact, society’s handling of alcohol and tobacco has proven this is true.
We have to continuously strive to maintain a sensible balance between authority and liberty or we will eventually become a police state. Some would argue we are already there. For the sake of our liberty, it is incumbent upon our leaders to continuously reexamine our laws and the motivation behind the laws themselves to make sure they are working as intended. Sometimes this will reveal that the law itself is the problem. It used to be illegal to drink a beer. It used to be illegal for a woman to cast a vote. Those laws were wrong and caused lots of problems, so we got rid of them. Our archaic drug laws have proven to be ineffective, disproportionately applied, and overly harsh. They have made tens-of-thousands of criminals out of otherwise law abiding citizens. This is wrong. It is time for a change.
I do not consider it a waste of money enforcing the laws of society. The money spent this past year to remove 1.7 million pounds of drugs the streets was well worth it. I have seen the effects that drugs have on communities and families. It has not just an effect on the individual but others as well. In other words it harms Society at-Large.
Its not about getting my kick controlling someone it is about being a part of Society and forming itself into something that allows for the majority to live and prosper and to create an environment for my children and others children to grow and live in. If you want to consider that authoritarian then fine I can live with that. If you want to compare me to Sheriff Joe, Fine so be it. I do take that as a compliment. He is one who does not fold when things get tough, he perseveres and does not give in one inch. That is why I do not give in one inch on illegal drugs. That is what the criminal want you to do. Give them one drug they will push for more.
Later guys, I am done on this topic, time to get my Jack Boots on and step on someone’s neck !!!! LOL
I think you’ll find that rather difficult with your head burried in the sand. Enjoy the bliss.
Update and more links here.
At last, the county police officially no longer suspect the mayor or his wife to be evil drug dealers, cartel kingpins, or hopelessly addicted hippie stoners that spend their lives semi-conscious on their couch whenever they’re not out selling gateway ganja weed to our kids
Duh.
The next logical step would be an apology, followed by an admission of responsibility. But don’t hold your breath — Keep in mind that the Nanny State/Police State always moves kinda slow, but especially when they go into cover my butt mode.