cannabisnews.com: War On Drugs Repeats Mistakes of Prohibition War On Drugs Repeats Mistakes of Prohibition Posted by FoM on September 20, 2000 at 16:35:32 PT By Gary Presley Source: Springfield News-Leader Over the past few years, a good portion of our national treasury has gone up the noses of social malcontents and into the pockets of the South American drug lords. President Clinton apparently believes that’s not enough.Reporting in the New York Post on Clinton’s summer trip to Colombia, Sidney Zion writes, “Worse than drug addiction is the addiction of our politicians to the War on Drugs. Undeterred, Bill Clinton this week arrived in Colombia with a billion in hard cash and a promise to exhale the Cali cartel that ‘subverts Colombian democracy and poisons American children.’”Clinton is not alone in his quest to tilt at this particular windmill. Mel Carnahan and John Ashcroft busily blame one another for Missouri being the so-called “Meth Capital,” each eager to cast an “aye” vote when Congress next decides to pour more money down this particular rat hole.Do any of these people remember Prohibition, the experiment that turned half the nation into scofflaws and established organized crime as a major force in American society?Prohibition didn’t work, but we didn’t learn. We decided to name it the “war on drugs” and try again.Wait. Maybe we did learn something. We no longer punish alcohol possession, minors excepted. We punish alcohol-induced misbehavior and view chronic misuse as a disease.Why don’t we treat other chemical addictions and abuse in the same manner?People seek drugs to cope with spiritual, emotional or physical problems. That makes drug abuse a problem for a pastor, a counselor or a physician. If a drug abuser refuses to ask for help, we should care only about their behavior during their voyage to personal destruction.We have nothing to show for the war on drugs but more addiction than ever, a legal system clogged with drug-related cases, and graft and corruption that eat away at our moral foundation. We have politicians who take our tax dollars and send our legal system on a mad pursuit where private property can be confiscated without due process and courts intervene to forbid the medicinal use of marijuana.My idea is hardly original. Former Baltimore Mayor Kurt Schmoke first spoke out years ago. Since then, William F. Buckley Jr. and George Bushnell, former president of the American Bar Association, among others, have suggested some sort of decriminalization process.Drug abuse, alcohol or otherwise, is best left to physicians and other medical professionals. Prohibition taught us that. The War on Drugs repeats the lesson.Gary Presley, Aurora, is a free-lance writer. Published: September 20, 2000Source: The Springfield News-Leader (MO) Author: Gary PresleyAddress: 651 Boonville, Springfield, Missouri 65806 Copyright: 2000 The Springfield News-LeaderWebsite: http://www.springfieldnews-leader.com/ Contact: http://www.springfieldnews-leader.com/opinions/index.html Related Articles:The Pros and Cons of Prohibitionhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread7066.shtmlProhibition Liveshttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread6781.shtmlCannabisNews Articles - Prohibition:http://cannabisnews.com/thcgi/search.pl?K=prohibition Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help Comment #13 posted by freedom fighter on September 22, 2000 at 08:02:31 PT Just a thought, Ledher I noticed that some of the articles that are written in mainstream media comes from cannabisnews. Yeah, some of the writers are plagarizing our quotes..:)So, yes, we are making the difference here and also, we are pi**ing the Law because they do come here to study us. Peace be with you\/ [ Post Comment ] Comment #12 posted by FoM on September 21, 2000 at 16:08:44 PT My Suggestion Hi Lehder and Everyone,Thank you for the compliment about CannabisNews. Without all of you it wouldn't be what it is becoming. I have read in the past that The New York Times can be a good forum but I don't know if it is active now or not. You must accept cookies and register. Please feel free to use any article from CannabisNews as a reference point if you go to this board or another. I know my sister who is conservative goes to lucianne.com. I have seen a little about drug policy on that site but it was a long time ago. Here's the link. Maybe someone else knows about more boards.http://www.lucianne.com/Website: http://www.nytimes.com/ Forum: http://forums.nytimes.com/comment/ [ Post Comment ] Comment #11 posted by Lehder on September 21, 2000 at 15:29:15 PT thanks, jeb But are we doing any good here? Who comes to a board called "cannabisnews"? Are there some web sites of this style where we can confront and debate an enemy who outnumbers us? Let me know, pls.This terrific board compiles a history of the war on drugs that will be very useful and informative to scholars and historians - and required reading for drug warriors once we have convicted and imprisoned them for treason. But this is election time. [ Post Comment ] Comment #10 posted by jeb on September 21, 2000 at 12:01:49 PT Good show, Lehder ditto on all of that [ Post Comment ] Comment #9 posted by Lehder on September 21, 2000 at 10:22:52 PT wasted votes I will vote according to my true opinions.I could not possibly affirm the war policies of either Bush or Gore, but I can understand how some voters might be more disgusted or intimidated by one candidate than the other. I would be very afraid of a drug war candidate with charisma, a circumstance that could bring us true totalitarianism. But Bush lacks not only charisma, he has revealed himself to be an ordinary slob with deficiencies in education, culture and class as well. At the moment, Bush's every action and every word - except for slips - are carefully orchestrated and scripted by his political handlers. But as president, Bush would be unable from time to time to avoid speaking and acting spontaneoulsly, and he'll slip again. And again - badly. And President Dubya, along with oil man Big Bush and Haliburton CEO Cheney, would be primarily occupied with manipulating the international oil market to the advantage of themselves and their buddies. Their machinations are probably well underway already. Likely, a Bush presidency would soon be in political or legal trouble, the same as Clinton's, the same as Nixon's, and hopefully preoccupied and moribund. The cocaine question may even become an issue, and wouldn't that be fun. So it can be argued that Bush's election might be better for our cause than Gore's. It's a toss up, and the repercussions of electing either of these guys are unpredictable.Certainly - after the election when the drug issue can again be broached without debate - Bush would repeat all the ignorant war slogans that are designed to atomize the public. But whoever is elected will refry them until enough people have finally puked. With a growing dissent for war policies in Mainstream press - and two governors favoring mj legalization - we have every expectation of at least placing some restraints on the expanding war no matter who is elected.The drug war has been institutionalized in thousands of local, state and national laws, in the legislature, in ever growing police organizations, in the drug testing and prison industries, in a corrupted judiciary, and in a brainwashed public. This network of mendacity and corruption is what today comprises "mainstream". So if you want change but are waiting for your ideas to become more mainstream before voting for them - then your vote truly is wasted. I hope I will not be casting the only vote for Browne. I know I will not elect a president - but I will be counted. My vote may help some local candidates, I may help to get Browne or Nader or other candidates TV time next time, and Bush and Gore will know that one more guy opposes them. And my vote for Browne will denote opposition that is both fundamental and broad. Voting FOR your true opinions will make them more mainstream, voting against them will not.Our fight is with a vast system of propaganda and repression, not with any one person. Losing one elected office is no big deal. But disenfranchising yourself by sleeping with the enemy, voting out of spite and nodding to a vicious ideology will certainly be counterproductive. [ Post Comment ] Comment #8 posted by John Patterson on September 21, 2000 at 10:04:43 PT: Texans need to vote Nader Hey, If you live in a state that's going to be carried by Bush for sure, (like me in Texas), why not vote your concious. The green party needs to get 5% to get matching funds next time or something, right? [ Post Comment ] Comment #7 posted by FoM on September 21, 2000 at 08:59:04 PT Good Point Hi CongressmanSuet,I get a very sick feeling in my stomach when I allow myself to think of Bush being our next President. I understand what you mean.Peace, FoM! [ Post Comment ] Comment #6 posted by CongressmanSuet on September 21, 2000 at 06:35:51 PT: Onfortunately, as things stand now, vote your concience and you will get 4, no make that 8 years of Shrub Bush at the helm, butchering the English language, and highly escalating the comming ground war in Columbia. I hate to say it, but Im not so sure this is the time to make the "proverbial" stand. We need to wait and try to garnish real, authentic support for the Libs. and Greens. They need to become more mainstream parties, need to be seen as viable alternatives. I know, a vote for what you believe in is NOT a wasted vote, BUT...that vote might very well hand the election to Bush, and that my friends would be a real tradgedy. [ Post Comment ] Comment #5 posted by Kanabys on September 21, 2000 at 05:13:42 PT Votes count?? I classify myself as libertarian, that's the way I think. I should be able to do ANYTHING that I desire as long as it doesn't intrude on ANYONE elses turf. But Phyro, can you really say that if I voted my beliefs that ANYTHING but a stupid republicrat will get office???? Hell, I thing that the whole freakin' country could vote libertarian and still the idiotic electoral college would still cast republicrat votes. What we need is a MAJOR bloodless political revolution!!! [ Post Comment ] Comment #4 posted by Phyro on September 21, 2000 at 01:58:07 PT Your Vote Count's!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It's not life that sucks as some put it but the Goverment that Doesent think that Boose & Cigs do damage !! If we can get people to Vote We the People can change the Goverment to what Our founding Fathers wanted for Us in the First place!!!! [ Post Comment ] Comment #3 posted by EdC on September 21, 2000 at 01:51:54 PT Mistakes of Prohibition Vote Libertarian and put an end to the drug war. [ Post Comment ] Comment #2 posted by MikeEEEEE on September 20, 2000 at 17:53:10 PT Occassional Very Depressed Occassional, watch out for what you wish for. [ Post Comment ] Comment #1 posted by Occassional Pot User on September 20, 2000 at 17:28:54 PT: Greed + Power Human nature is the root of all of this.Until the human race dies out, we'll continue to have infinite problems.The whole human race is the problem. I wish a meteor would hurry up and destroy the planet. Life sucks. [ Post Comment ] Post Comment Name: Optional Password: E-Mail: Subject: Comment: [Please refrain from using profanity in your message] Link URL: Link Title: