Comments on: The Wire

By: Wire Writers Speak : Defending People

Wire Writers Speak : Defending People — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 13:50:05 +0000

[...] post on the “war on drugs” and my response started with AHCL’s question on the overall message of The Wire with regard to that [...]

By: robert howard

robert howard — Thu, 13 Mar 2008 08:51:19 +0000

Viewpoints, Outlook : March 12, 2008, 8:44PM
At least give Spitzer credit for taking on the bad guys, PERIOD.
It was David and Golith; while, David stood for righetous and slew the GIANT. I think this quote will suffice for us all mortals. The man without sin; standing and throwing the first stone. Still the Law of Land Prevails, because he was the enforcer for poor ethics of all morals. Now, it is his time because he must receive what he practiced and pay for not following what history has put in writing for himself and the leaders that have not been identified in illegal ethical behaviors.

Professionally,

Robert Howard

By: S.C. Ruffey

S.C. Ruffey — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 12:14:00 +0000

War on Poverty, War on Drugs, War on Terror. Three political boondoggles that simply cannot be won while we maintain some semblance of a free society. But they look good to the voters come election time.

The voters want their politicians to "do something" about crime, drugs, sex offenders, terrorists, whatever. I suspect that our beloved leaders do know their history and are fully aware that the current "wars" are as completely failed as was prohibition. But they will never back down because their personal, vested interest is not in solving problems, but rather in getting re-elected.

If there is to be any change in the system, it is going to require voter action nearly on par with a revolution.

By: Mark Bennett

Mark Bennett — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 00:38:00 +0000

Interesting: he seems to have taken down the Las Vegas Sun piece (after receiving a call from the Sun, I suspect) as well as the DOJ press release about my client.

By: jigmeister

jigmeister — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 00:16:00 +0000

Mark,

I see David Finn (what kind of trial judge, I wonder) still hasn’t apologized. It also looks like he is still cutting and pasting.

By: Colin

Colin — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 23:11:00 +0000

as for an explanation for why we will continue to have this conversation, is there really a mystery?

for one, the vast majority of voters don't know anything about hard drugs. this ignorance breeds fear which causes the poorly thought out backlash that we've been dealing with for decades.

for two, drug prohibition is a very delicate and hot item in public discourse. it is not "safe" for many people to be seen advocating a legalization of drugs, no matter what their personal beliefs. it operates much like religion (especially the old style witch burning kind) and the SS. if you're afraid that your neighbor will john proctor your ass, you shut up and toe the line.

By: Michael

Michael — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 22:59:00 +0000

I was waiting for your response to AHCL’s comment that the War on Drugs was worth fighting for. Nice job. I wonder if $40 a gram is a bit steep for taxing cocaine; at that price, you’ll still create a black market for bootleg cocaine to avoid the tax (like the bootleg cigarettes in the northeast).

By: Mark's Dad

Mark's Dad — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 22:36:00 +0000

The "war on drugs" is not a legal war, but it is a metaphorical war as are the wars on poverty, cancer, und so weiter.

And as a parent who has long used the legal drug to adjust my reality, I have good cause to be surprised that, metaphorically, neither of my acorns has landed anywhere near the tree.

By: Mark Bennett

Mark Bennett — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 21:07:00 +0000

Jigmeister, I don't think that's what dad is saying, but if it is he's wrong. "War" is a legal term; for good reason, we give the government certain powers during times of actual bygod war than we do in times of peace. If we give the government the power to define war, we'll find ourselves in an Orwellian state of eternal war. (Oh, wait . . .)

Society can define the word "war" to include Burger King and McDonald's fighting over hamburgers; that's the way the language is made. But a price war or a trade war is not legally a war.

Why will it take -- why has it already taken so much longer for us to have this discussion than it took to do away with the prohibition of alcohol?

Ron, in my observation the pain of the criminal justice system very rarely induces people to quit. People quit when they're ready to quit, and for most people being jailed is not rock bottom. The DEA agent may be right: removing appendages would work better.

By: Ron in Houston

Ron in Houston — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 19:32:00 +0000

jigmeister

You're probably right. We will probably be having this discussion 20 years from now.

I've gotten a lot more cynical in my old age, but I haven't totally abandoned hope.