There are natural consequences and artificial ones.
Saying that jail is a "natural" consequence of drug use is a lie. It is an artificial consequence made real by evil actions committed by sick people. The natural consequences of drug abuse (note: not use) can be horrific. But there is no justifiable reason to heap artificial consequences on top of the natural ones.
You don't "help" a person by caging them, stealing their money and other property, by making them lose their job, and by alienating them and their family. Only a truly sick individual would see that as "helping" them.
An honest drug warrior would acknowledge that it is all about punishment. But that is also evil. You can't be a decent human being while punishing people for harming themselves. And don't forget, almost ALL the negative consequences of drug use have nothing whatsoever to do with the drugs, but everything to do with prohibition. Drug users (and abusers) who manage to avoid detection by the authoriturds generally live productive lives due to the absence of the life-destroying artificial consequences. And even if they do destroy themselves, that is their right.
If someone's actions harm another person or their property, then it makes zero difference if they are "on drugs" or not. Stop pretending otherwise.
.
The Harrison Narcotics Act of 1914 was the first federal involvement in what is no mis-termed the war on drugs. Certain religious groups lobbied
ReplyDeleteCongress to ban drugs. Their rationale was that the use of these drugs was immoral therefore they should be illegal. Basically, certain Christian groups got their version of religion put into federal law, a 1st Amendment "establishment of religion" violation. I don't go to that church and I don't believe in that religious dogma.
Kent,
ReplyDeleteI don't know if I agree that this is all about punishment, although that is surely a major part of it. There is also what we used to refer to as the 'law enforcement growth industry' (LEGI) - which I think now is the LEGI on steroids, with prisons for profit, seizures of property and rewarding the seizers (all without even the allegation of crimes).
There is also the aspect of religious interference with government (doesn't anybody read teh constitution anymore - or when this started? - as per DM Mitchell's comment).
In this context (environment), it is all but impossible to have a rational conversation about law and rights with most people, I'm sorry to say, because most people are capable of reason, if they only knew it...
Rich
(always enjoy your blog)
Yeah, you are right about the "LEGI" factor. Too many (despicable) people depend on criminalization for their money and are all too happy to see more "customers" created by fiat.
ReplyDeleteAnd, thanks for the kind words.