Nancy Siebern
New member
I have no way of getting this from the paper to the computer except hard typing. Trust me, there is a tie-in to guns and you might be surprised at the last sentence.
The Denver Post
March 3, 2000, page 11B
By Paul Kelly
Boulder - The war on drugs is a complete failure because it's based on false premises. A drug free society is almost certainly not possible or even desirable. This leads to such incredible spectacles as Bill "Two Pack a Day" Bennett as drug Czar. (Enforcing ideological purity is easier if you're not too sensitive to hypocrisy).
Corporate America spends $70,000 for each positive drug test. Since only about 1 in 20 drug users actually have a problem likely to affect their job performance, it's costing $1,400,000 to identify each problem drug user. Of course, they're easy to spot without the test. They're the ones screwing up on the job.
Drug paranoia is a very expensive habit.
Our Constitution is based on the philosophy of inalienable individual rights, among which are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Our government exists to serve a sovereign people.
Since the war on drugs is predicated on the exact opposite philosophy, that the people exist to serve the government, which has absolute authority to dictate our lifestyles, whether we're happy or not, it's impossible to enforce drug laws without trashing the Constitution, particularly the Bill of Rights.
First Amendment: No priest has ever been arrested for consuming wine in any "dry" state or county or during Prohibition. Rastafarians and Native Americans should be so privileged.
Second Amendment: Given how testy some peasants get when their betters kick down the doors to their filthy hovels, slam their faces against the wall, and force them at gun point to "make the correct choices in life", it would be better all around if only noblemen were allowed to possess weapons. Not that the gentry don't do drugs, they do. They just don't inhale and nobody kicks their doors down.
Fourth Amendment: This doesn't exist anymore. If a cop wants to search you or your car he will. He can always swear later he saw you drop a suspicious packet of paper. If he wants to search your house he can just fill out a perjured affidavit and find a friendly judge to rubber stamp the warrant. There need not be any citizen complaint or witness. The whole thing is internally generated.
Fifth Amendment: Civil forfeiture now allows the government to steal without so much as a nod to due proces. It also makes law enforcement a profit-sharing partner in the drug trade.
Police now spend a much smaller percentage of their time responding to criminal complaints filed by victims. Setting up drug deals is more lucrative. Besides, if the police arrest the burglar right away, they have to return your property. If they don't take any action until he sells your property and buys drugs, they get to keep the cash. So what do you think they're doing? At least you know if your house is burglarized, whether it's a cop looking for drugs (or guns) or an addict looking for money to buy drugs, he works for the government, and the proceeds are ending up in the police department's budget one way or another. We now define a crooked cop as one who doesn't share what he steals with the entire department.
Like everyone else in the drug trade, your government's in it for the money.
Sixth Amendment: It's tough to hire a lawyer after the government confiscates all your assets.
Eighth amendment: If you don't think 10 years for smoking marijuana rather than drinking beer isn't "cruel and unusual," whatever you're taking is a lot worse for the brain than whatever you're condemning.
Fourteenth Amendment: Ah, equal protection under the law.
That's where six guys can be involved in a drug deal, five are cops and one goes to jail. Our new social philosophy forces us to argue that the Constitution doesn't really apply to the government. Of course, this ridiculous premise leaves us with the little problem of trying to figure out what in the world it does apply to.
Doesn't it?
Paul Kelly is a Boulder carpenter and former vice-chair of the Boulder County Democratic Party.
The Denver Post
March 3, 2000, page 11B
By Paul Kelly
Boulder - The war on drugs is a complete failure because it's based on false premises. A drug free society is almost certainly not possible or even desirable. This leads to such incredible spectacles as Bill "Two Pack a Day" Bennett as drug Czar. (Enforcing ideological purity is easier if you're not too sensitive to hypocrisy).
Corporate America spends $70,000 for each positive drug test. Since only about 1 in 20 drug users actually have a problem likely to affect their job performance, it's costing $1,400,000 to identify each problem drug user. Of course, they're easy to spot without the test. They're the ones screwing up on the job.
Drug paranoia is a very expensive habit.
Our Constitution is based on the philosophy of inalienable individual rights, among which are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Our government exists to serve a sovereign people.
Since the war on drugs is predicated on the exact opposite philosophy, that the people exist to serve the government, which has absolute authority to dictate our lifestyles, whether we're happy or not, it's impossible to enforce drug laws without trashing the Constitution, particularly the Bill of Rights.
First Amendment: No priest has ever been arrested for consuming wine in any "dry" state or county or during Prohibition. Rastafarians and Native Americans should be so privileged.
Second Amendment: Given how testy some peasants get when their betters kick down the doors to their filthy hovels, slam their faces against the wall, and force them at gun point to "make the correct choices in life", it would be better all around if only noblemen were allowed to possess weapons. Not that the gentry don't do drugs, they do. They just don't inhale and nobody kicks their doors down.
Fourth Amendment: This doesn't exist anymore. If a cop wants to search you or your car he will. He can always swear later he saw you drop a suspicious packet of paper. If he wants to search your house he can just fill out a perjured affidavit and find a friendly judge to rubber stamp the warrant. There need not be any citizen complaint or witness. The whole thing is internally generated.
Fifth Amendment: Civil forfeiture now allows the government to steal without so much as a nod to due proces. It also makes law enforcement a profit-sharing partner in the drug trade.
Police now spend a much smaller percentage of their time responding to criminal complaints filed by victims. Setting up drug deals is more lucrative. Besides, if the police arrest the burglar right away, they have to return your property. If they don't take any action until he sells your property and buys drugs, they get to keep the cash. So what do you think they're doing? At least you know if your house is burglarized, whether it's a cop looking for drugs (or guns) or an addict looking for money to buy drugs, he works for the government, and the proceeds are ending up in the police department's budget one way or another. We now define a crooked cop as one who doesn't share what he steals with the entire department.
Like everyone else in the drug trade, your government's in it for the money.
Sixth Amendment: It's tough to hire a lawyer after the government confiscates all your assets.
Eighth amendment: If you don't think 10 years for smoking marijuana rather than drinking beer isn't "cruel and unusual," whatever you're taking is a lot worse for the brain than whatever you're condemning.
Fourteenth Amendment: Ah, equal protection under the law.
That's where six guys can be involved in a drug deal, five are cops and one goes to jail. Our new social philosophy forces us to argue that the Constitution doesn't really apply to the government. Of course, this ridiculous premise leaves us with the little problem of trying to figure out what in the world it does apply to.
Doesn't it?
Paul Kelly is a Boulder carpenter and former vice-chair of the Boulder County Democratic Party.
Other markets will function less satisfactorally on this account."