Home

I’d recommend reading this article in its entirety.  The below is a short summary of it:

Jesse Webster was arrested 18 years ago for dealing cocaine.  He is serving a life without parole sentence in federal prison.

You would think that that kind of sentence would be served for murdering another person… maybe raping or assaulting them.  But drug dealing?  

I’m not surprised though, because its been a long time since we’ve lived in a truly free country.  We have thousands of Federal laws on the books.  How many offenses can  you think of that actually have a victim?  Let me put it this way, drug dealing is not such an offense.  I see no evidence from the article that he dealt to children.  He also committed “tax evasion”, which is no more properly a crime than it should be a crime to lie to an armed robber who asks you how much money you have.  Not to mention that even if these things were rightfully crimes, they could not constitutionally be crimes at the Federal Level.

As such, the officers who were involved in enforcing this “law” are nothing more than kidnappers with a badge.  The judge who knowingly sentenced him to an obscenely high sentence is also an accomplice to kidnapping, but its even worse because, according to the article, he actually knew that what he did was wrong, yet he still did it.

“The law is the law” is not an excuse.  Nowhere does the Bible condone evil actions just because they are “legal”, nor is there any place in the Bible where certain substances are criminalized.  While we should certainly have compassion on people who are deceived into thinking drug criminalization (Or drug use, for that matter) is a good idea, we should never compromise on the condemnation of aggression against those who have not used violence simply because it happens to be “legal.”  Aggression is always wrong.  Love the sinner, but hate the sin, whether it be the drug dealer, or the person who kidnaps the drug dealer, or aids and abets in said kidnapping. 

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “Any “War on Drugs” supporters… pay attention

  1. Drugs are dangerous and must remain illegal to “protect society” the Government has insisted, after one of England’s leading police officers called for Class A drugs to be decriminalised.
    Mike Barton, chief constable of Durham police, said that drugs could be made available to addicts through the NHS, in a controlled supply system that would cut off the income streams of criminal gangs.
    His intervention adds weight to growing calls for an overhaul of UK drug policy. Leading figures in health, including England’s chief medical officer Dame Sally Davies, have called for drug addiction to be viewed primarily as a medical, not a criminal, problem. The Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg and the influential Home Affairs Select Committee have both backed calls for a Royal Commission to look at options for reform.
    However, a Home Office spokesman emphasised the dangers of illicit drug use and said that the current approach had seen a decline in drug use.
    Writing in The Observer, Mr Barton, who is the Association of Chief Police Officers’ (ACPO) Intelligence lead, said that drug addicts “need to be treated, cared for and encouraged to break the cycle of addiction. They do not need to be criminalised.”
    “If an addict were able to access drugs via the NHS or some similar organisation, then they would not have to go out and buy illegal drugs,” he said. Those who encouraged others to take drugs by selling them should still be “tackled” as criminals, he said.
    ACPO have distanced themselves from Mr Barton’s comments. Andy Bliss, chief constable of Hertfordshire police and ACPO’s lead on drug-related crime said that questions over drug legislation were “matters for parliament to decide” and appeared to urge caution over the message any softening of drug policy would send.
    “Government policy on drugs enforcement is very clear and unambiguous and our job as police officers is to enforce the law…” he said. “We need in particular to be very thoughtful about setting clear boundaries, especially for young people, in relation to drugs, their misuse and criminal activity surrounding them.
    A Home Office spokesperson said: “Drugs are illegal because they are dangerous – they destroy lives and blight communities…The UK’s approach on drugs remains clear, we must help individuals who are dependent by treatment, while ensuring law enforcement protects society by stopping the supply and tackling the organised crime that is associated with the drugs trade.”
    However the drugs policy reform group Transform Drug Policy Foundation welcomed Mr Barton’s comments. “We are delighted to see a serving chief constable who is willing to stand up and tell the truth – prohibition doesn’t work,” said the group’s founder Danny Kushlick.

  2. Hi Eddie.

    I’m honestly not sure what position you’re arguing here. Are you arguing for or against prohibition, or neither? You are of course welcome to disagree with me, but I’m not sure what position you are taking since you include testimony from both sides.

    “Destroy lives” “blight communities” and “protecting society” are arguments intended to scare the reader into accepting prohibition as something other than the scam that it is. Are lives destroyed by alcohol addicts? Of course. Does that mean all users of alcohol, or dealers of alcohol, should be jailed? Of course not.

    To be clear, I am not saying that being under the influence of drugs or alcohol is in any way an excuse for committing an act of aggression against somebody else. Many prohibitionists use the fact that some drug users may abuse their children or drive recklessly under the influence as a “protecting society” type of argument for abusing drugs. These arguments are faulty, first off, because the same arguments would apply for alcohol, and secondly, we already have laws against reckless driving and child abuse, neither of which is excused by drug use. Having a separate law against drugs is redundant, but it helps prosecutors who can’t necessarily prove that a real crime (that is, and act of aggression) has occurred. That is not acceptable.

    To be clear, I am not advocating the use of drugs either. I believe the use of drugs is an unhealthy choice, and can lead to addiction. Much like drunkenness, I believe this is a vice. That doesn’t mean it should be a crime.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s