cannabisnews.com: Drug War Death Toll










††Drug War Death Toll

Posted by FoM on April 26, 2001 at 10:47:53 PT
By Llewellyn Rockwell Jr.†
Source: WorldNetDaily†

You will never stop the production and consumption of marijuana, cocaine, or any other substance that people want to grow and repackage for others who want to buy. The attempt to do so vastly increases the price and thereby benefits some producers at the expense of others, breeds crime and corruption in public agencies, and violates people's civil liberties. The drug war leads people to believe that the federal government, not the people who can actually do something about drug use, is taking care of the problem. 
It breeds parental dereliction of duty. Meanwhile, the government's constant message of "Say No to Drugs" has the opposite effect on young people always willing to bite the forbidden fruit that government doesn't want them to touch. For bureaucratic reasons, the drug warriors are unwilling to make distinctions about the severity of drugs, so that pot and heroin are considered equally bad. This is so absurd that it discredits the entire message. Meanwhile, other forms of drugs such as alcohol and tobacco enjoy legal approval, even as the government has programs to make drugs by prescription as cheap as possible. The hypocrisy is flagrant and outrageous, and the effects deeply corrupting of the culture and the political process. The drug warriors first federalized drug control, on grounds that state-level interdiction had too many leaks. Then the federal government, always glad for more power, made it a foreign-policy issue, browbeating governments all over the world to run roughshod over their citizens in an attempt to stamp out drugs. Today, Veronica Bowers and her 7-month-old adopted daughter Charity are dead. They were killed by military bullets raining in on a small civilian aircraft flying to bring the Gospel of Jesus Christ to the Indians of Peru. The CIA and the Peruvian military mistook a plane of missionaries for drug dealers. There were no warning shots. Drug lords, for all their malice, are careful to keep non-combatants out of the line of fire. Governments don't care. We are all in the line of fire so far as they are concerned, so the blood of civilian missionaries is the price we pay for keeping cocaine away from those who will find some way to get it anyway. It was a mistake, the U.S. says. Sorry. But where is the accountability? Who is going to fry for this murderous act? The sub-commander whose irresponsible behavior led to the death of Japanese high-school students was "punished" with an early retirement so he can continue to live off the taxpayers while doing nothing. Does anyone believe that those responsible for the death of the missionaries will receive any worse treatment? So far no one has been willing to accept responsibility. Who investigates the investigators? Who prosecutes the prosecutors? Isn't it time the Christian right begin to rethink the drug war, which has now taken two of its own? In a drug war, the government treats us all as suspects. Our bank accounts are investigated, we are harassed at the airport, and we are spied on at every turn. Recreational users, who pose no threat to anyone but themselves, are treated as worse than felons and given mandatory sentences that ruin their lives. Meanwhile, murderers can't be kept in prison because prisons are overcrowded with small-time tokers. After decades of experience, we know the drug war can't work. Anyone who says otherwise is a liar or a fool. We also know that the costs are huge, to our liberty and our tax dollars. The drug lords don't entirely mind; they will continue to earn monopoly profits so long as their competition is kept at bay. It is the rest of us who should protest. But can we really make drugs legal at the federal level? There is no constitutional basis for doing otherwise. Nothing in that founding document permits government bureaucrats to control what we smoke, inhale, or inject. By letting them attempt to do so, we invite every form of tyranny. And no amount of increased power by the feds will do the job. Consider that one of the worst drug problems exists in federal prisons. Prisons can't keep them out! A free society shouldn't even try. If we make illicit drugs legal, people warn, they will be available for anyone who wants them. But that is precisely the situation we are in now. Can it get worse? What happens if people take more drugs after legalization than before? So be it. People do lots of things that are bad for them. They eat too many cheeseburgers and they skydive. They watch tacky movies and listen to rap. They wear sloppy clothes and forget to floss their teeth. They get too fat and pick their noses. And they ingest, sniff, and smoke mind-altering drugs. A free society deals with these problems at the level of the family, the church, and community norms, not through the leviathan state. Ludwig von Mises, in 1949, said: The problems involved in direct government interference with consumption are not catallactic problems. They go far beyond the scope of catallactics and concern the fundamental issues of human life and social organization. If it is true that government derives its authority from God and is entrusted by Providence to act as the guardian of the ignorant and stupid populace, then it is certainly its task to regiment every aspect of the subject's conduct. The God-sent ruler knows better what is good for his wards than they do themselves. It is his duty to guard them against the harm they would inflict upon themselves if left alone. Self-styled "realistic" people fail to recognize the immense importance of the principles implied. They contend that they do not want to deal with the matter from what, they say, is a philosophic and academic point of view. Their approach is, they argue, exclusively guided by practical considerations. It is a fact, they say, that some people harm themselves and their innocent families by consuming narcotic drugs. Only doctrinaires could be so dogmatic as to object to the government's regulation of the drug traffic. Its beneficent effects cannot be contested. However, the case is not so simple as that. Opium and morphine are certainly dangerous, habit-forming drugs. But once the principle is admitted that it is the duty of government to protect the individual against his own foolishness, no serious objections can be advanced against further encroachments. A good case could be made out in favor of the prohibition of alcohol and nicotine. And why limit the government's benevolent providence to the protection of the individual's body only? Is not the harm a man can inflict on his mind and soul even more disastrous than any bodily evils? Why not prevent him from reading bad books and seeing bad plays, from looking at bad paintings and statues and from hearing bad music? The mischief done by bad ideologies, surely, is much more pernicious, both for the individual and for the whole society, than that done by narcotic drugs. These fears are not merely imaginary specters terrifying secluded doctrinaires. It is a fact that no paternal government, whether ancient or modern, ever shrank from regimenting its subjects' minds, beliefs, and opinions. If one abolishes man's freedom to determine his own consumption, one takes all freedoms away. The naive advocates of government interference with consumption delude themselves when they neglect what they disdainfully call the philosophical aspect of the problem. They unwittingly support the case of censorship, inquisition, religious intolerance, and the persecution of dissenters. Note: Give it up, drug warriors. Llewellyn H. Rockwell Jr. is president of the Ludwig von Mises Institute -- http://www.mises.org/ -- in Auburn, Alabama. He also edits a daily news site -- http://www.lewrockwell.com/Source: WorldNetDaily (US Web)Author: Llewellyn Rockwell Jr.Published: April 26, 2001Copyright: 2001 WorldNetDaily.com Inc.Contact: letters worldnetdaily.comWebsite: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/Related Articles:Learning By Accident http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread9503.shtmlSenate Committee Looking Into Drug Interdiction http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread9502.shtml

Home †† Comment †† Email †† Register †† Recent Comments †† Help






†


Comment #12 posted by dddd on April 27, 2001 at 05:36:21 PT

Two Years
Kap....I think your dead reckoning is sound navigation.I agree thatan 'event',will occur that will do heavy damage to the federal houseof cards.....I am quite certain that one of the elements that will bequite contraversial,,is when the supreme court finally has the ballsto release its' decision to burn Californian voters,and the rest ofthe country,on the OCBC/medical necessity issue.... That's gonna be one hot potato,,that's why it's taking so long forthem to decide,,they have to check with their handlers,and bossesfirst to make sure they can muffle the outcry.They will release theirdecision at a strategic point,when the country is in some sort of crisis......Perhaps this summer when gas hits 3 buck a gallon....I glad you found that d**n crystal ball of yours...........dddd
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #11 posted by lookinside on April 27, 2001 at 05:10:35 PT:

sanity!!!
he says it like it is...the politicians (at least the ambitious ones are clinging tothe drug war for dear (political) life...when we start fielding squeeky clean candidates with adefinite pro legalization stance, and they win, watch the"weathervane" types start to change their tune!the only thing a politician fears is defeat...i think someof them would murder their children if it would gauranteere-election...one way we might get this letter out is to copy it and sendit to every email address we have...if one in 10 recipientsforwarded it to all THEIR email addresses, after a coupleweeks, the coverage might be quite extensive...it's worth atry...
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #10 posted by kaptinemo on April 27, 2001 at 04:29:32 PT:

Let's see now; wheres that d**n crystal ball
Haven't had to use it for a while...oh, there it is!J4, I'll hazard a guess: 2 years, or 8 more States passing MMJ referenda.Or a whole planeload of politicians being shot out of the sky courtesy of another product of adrenaline-tripping foreign US-trained DrugWarrior fighter jocks.(I know, I know; not bloody likely...but I can dream, can't I?)Which brings up a favorite point of mine: the pols will change the laws when their upper-class masters are inconvenienced by them...or when enough angry members of the electorate start pushing for change.Seriously, the US Government is banking on what Winston Churchill once opined:""Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened."The ugly truth of the DrugWar - which has been readily apparent in the unwarranted official murdrers of Ismael Mena, Esequiel Hernandez, Donlad Scott, Patrick Dorismond, Alberto Sepulveda, etc. - has reached international awareness through the cold-blooded execution by the Peruvian Air Force of American innocents abroad. An execution financed almost entirely with US taxpayer dollars. A point which has not been missed by the foreign press. The US Government seeks to brazen it out by hoping the US populace will indeed 'pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing has happened.'Sadly, many will do just that. But with each 'incident' the number of people questioning this DrugWar grows. Questions unsatisfactorily answered causes further questions. And as we have seen, the DrugWarriors have no answers. Some, like Republican Senator Chuck Hagel, have even, just as predicted, made the political gaffe of claiming that we must accept the death of innocents as 'collateral damage' in this so-called 'war' - to protect the innocents.By their own words, they damn themselves.I only give this Drugwar about 2 more years. Either an even more blatant and undeniable example of the failure of the DrugWar becomes front page news as the Bower Incident has, or more States will chafe at the Feds proscription against MMJ and pass more referenda. Or some other incident may come out of the blue which could blindside everyone, Reformer and anti alike. In any case, there will come a direct challenge to Federal 'authority' vis-a-vis the DrugWar. A challenge which will cause the Federal government to be much more directly - and vociferously - at odds with the States. Up to now, the Feds have been able to use various legal sophistries, such as trying to trump State's Rights by hiding behind the robes of the Supreme Court. But there will come a day when the rift becomes so great and the discourse so acrimonious, that the Feds will have to choose whether they can risk alienating half of the country, or capitulate.On that day, the DrugWar dies...or martial law is declared. And if that happens, the Republic dies.In finishing, I have another quote from that Master Statesman Churchill:"The Americans will always do the right thing... after they've exhausted† all the alternatives."
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #9 posted by jjjj on April 26, 2001 at 23:29:55 PT

jjk
When does anyone realistically think that mary jane will be legal? This article makes me proud and gives me a sense that it can happenWhen does everyone realistically think our country will change???
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #8 posted by Shawn on April 26, 2001 at 21:49:23 PT:

WOW!!
I dont think it could have been said better. Dont give up.
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #7 posted by MDG on April 26, 2001 at 18:30:28 PT:

Imprint's question about mass-mailing...
I have believed that it was articles like this, and more so the obvious "instant access" of information on the internet that has caused "Anti-Spam Legislation" due to governmental fear of an informed citizenry (in many areas, obviously). This behavior is also indicated more starkly in the Methamphetamine Anti-Proliferation Act.After all, what would happen if this article were, in fact, mailed to every person in the country (via e-mail)? Well, even if only a small percentage of recipients actually read it, quite a few eyes might well be opened.Mike...
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #6 posted by observer on April 26, 2001 at 16:09:53 PT

Amen.
This was an especially lucid and forceful essay wasn't it? O that our lawmakers could articulate a defense of freedom like Llewellyn Rockwell Jr. does it.
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #5 posted by dro on April 26, 2001 at 13:31:40 PT:

government is jus lame
the more they try to keep these drugs and all this other stuff out of our country the more poeple will pay and the more these drug dealing gods will make and more people will want to break the law, its fun getting away with things, especially things that the most powerful country in the world cant do ne thing about
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #4 posted by Sudaca on April 26, 2001 at 13:20:25 PT

YES!!!
Oh my! This is right to the heart of the matter. I wish this article echoed all over the world, and up to the top.But still, the administration is preparing a zealot of Taleban proportions to renew the insanity of the war on drugs.
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #3 posted by Kevin Hebert on April 26, 2001 at 12:36:37 PT:

The truth
Amen, Mr. Rockewell, amen.
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #2 posted by re-pete on April 26, 2001 at 11:22:02 PT

repeating your link
http://www.lewrockwell.com/an interesting paper with good and unusual articles.
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #1 posted by Imprint on April 26, 2001 at 11:12:31 PT:

This says it all!
Wow, what an article. To the point, brief and so true. How can we mail this to every person in the country? If this message could get to just a few more people things would change. Seeing an article like this gives me hope; hope that oppression on us all will one-day end. Our country could once again focus on real crime and violence. Our country could clear itís collective mind and make some real progress for humanity. 
[ Post Comment ]





††Post Comment





Name: ††††††Optional Password: 
E-Mail: 
Subject: 
Comment: ††[Please refrain from using profanity in your message]

Link URL: 
Link Title: