By Tom Snyder and Tracy Schreiber
Today the people of California get to decide whether to legalize marijuana. Let’s hope they decide against it.
Whatever happens, however, let’s put an end to the stupid arguments that libertarians, liberals and red diaper doper babies make in favor of legalizing drugs, including marijuana.
One of the arguments these airheads make is that the War on Drugs is “unwinnable.” When people say it’s an “unwinnable” war, what do they really mean? What does it mean to win the drug war? You can’t possibly mean winning the drug war means no one using drugs, because, by that same logic, the war against violent crime is unwinnable.
This argument is specious. When confronted with such an argument, ask the person, What level of drug use constitutes “winning” the War on Drugs? Just because there’s rampant crime of any sort, that shouldn’t make us just give up!
Another argument in favor of legalization has the pro-legalization person asking the anti-legalization person, “If you make drugs legal, would you do drugs?”
The person’s answer to that question probably will be no, but what if it isn’t?
Of course, if they legalized rape or prostitution tomorrow, we ourselves wouldn’t suddenly become a pimp or a prostitute, much less rape anyone. Just because the average person wouldn’t do these things does not mean that a lot of other people wouldn’t do them.
Robbing banks is a perfect example here. If they made robbing banks legal, or-de-criminalized it, the average person probably isn’t going to start robbing banks, but many other people will.
Often, the pro-legalization person cites America’s allegedly bad experience with the Prohibition of alcohol in the 1920s.
The fact is, however, during Prohibition, the consumption of alcohol did indeed decline. Thus, Prohibition did indeed inhibit drinking.
Of course, according to our reading of the Bible, it’s not bad or sinful to drink; it’s only sinful to get drunk and intoxicated. Drinking isn’t the problem, drunkenness and public intoxication are the problem.
In reality, contrary to what the legalization crowd says, we don’t have drug “prohibition” in the United States. What we actually have in the U.S. is drug control, just like we now have alcohol control. For example, you can’t make privately make hard alcohol. We also don’t allow 200 proof alcohol in sold alcohol. Beer can’t have 20 percent alcohol in it. We control all of these things, including the times that bars are open.
Thus, you can buy tons and tons of drugs in the drugstore with a doctor’s prescription, including a handful of “illegal” drugs. And, certain forms of alcohol are also illegal. So, we really don’t have Prohibition like in the 1920s.
If they made all drugs legal today, hardcore drug users would still commit crimes to do their drugs. Crack is one of the cheaper drugs, but people who use crack still commit crimes.
If you make these hard drugs legal, why don’t we make a host of things legal, including 200 proof alcohol?
Furthermore, whatever happened to multiculturalism? Why should all states be the same?
Go to Nevada if you want to gamble or buy a whore. Go there and live. But, Nevada clearly breeds a distasteful, godless community that harms the family and hurts children because of all its gambling and legal prostitution.
Conservatives believe in limited government. They don’t believe in no government at all.
For example, border control is designed for the feds and the state police to keep an eye on illegal immigrants, but local police should be able to alert the feds when they find an illegal immigrant, especially one committing a traffic violation or some other crime.
Some libertarians and leftists say using pot or hard drugs is a “victimless” crime. But, why should THAT be the standard? Why should that be the determining factor for legality?
They seem to be arguing in a circle and begging the question here. They’re assuming that THEIR definition of liberty, freedom and victim is correct, but they must prove that it is, not simply assert it willy nilly!
Ultimately, we’re glad for the War on Drugs. It keeps our neighborhoods, and our children, relatively safe and free from drug addicts and potheads. When, of course, the voters all decide that the authorities should enforce all the drug laws to the fullest extent of the law.
We can indeed “win” the War on Drugs, but only if we truly take it seriously.
And, we’re glad we have alcohol and drug control in a relatively limited way that’s not totalitarian. It makes for a better, safer, more civilized local and state community.
Thus, there’s no really good reason to turn around and make drugs like pot, cocaine, LSD, heroin, etc., legal, much less available to people under 18.
Finally, please consider the children when you decide how you think about the War on Drugs. Our children are already susceptible to the temptations of evil drug dealers. Legalization of hard drugs, including marijuana, will just make them more susceptible!