About Us

Name: T.P. Beh
Email: tpbeh@aol.com
Name: Cicero76
Location: Centennial, CO
Biography
Name: Rocky Mountain...
Email: townhall@rockymountainfoundation.net Biography
Name: John Dendahl
Email: j3dendahl@swcp.com
Name:
Email: fless@sbcglobal.net
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Don't Legalize Drugs

As a fan of Tom Tancredo, I find it very disappointing to hear him advocating for the legalization of drugs. One expects this kind of thing from liberals but when a conservative starts promoting government approval and regulation of dangerous substances, something is very wrong. In the words of former Senator Patrick Moynihan, by attempting to “define deviancy down” Tancredo may indeed be committing political suicide, and, while that would be regrettable, it wouldn’t compare to the negative consequences such a foolish policy would have on our society.

Certainly, the so-called war against drugs has not been overly successful. While hundreds of millions of dollars are spent on arresting and incarcerating drug dealers and users every year, the demand seems to continue to rise—along with the influence of criminal groups like the Mexican drug cartels. So, why not save that money and allow government to tax and make a profit from the drug trade by legalizing it, like alcohol?

In the first place, while government surely spends a lot of money on drug crimes, I’m not sure such efforts could truly be characterized as a concerted “war on drugs.” Rather than a war, the effort against drugs in the U.S. is more like a disjointed, uncoordinated, hit-or-miss endeavor run by the Keystone Cops. In fact, since Bill Bennett was drug czar under George H.W Bush, I can’t recall a serious attempt being made by the federal government in this arena. While every president since then has had a drug czar, does anyone believe a strong anti-drug policy was pursued by “I didn’t inhale” Bill Clinton? George Bush was obviously preoccupied by the war in Iraq, and does anyone think that fighting drugs is one of Obama’s priorities? In short, there hasn’t been a serious effort to fight drugs in this country for over 20 years, so despite the money being spent it’s a misnomer to call it a “war.” Instead of throwing in the towel on this non-war, perhaps Mr. Tancredo should advocate for a true national engagement on this issue.

The social cost of legalizing drugs on our society would also be immense—and likely end up costing us even more than it is now—and not just in dollars. Whatever the government legalizes receives de facto moral approval. It sends the message, as with abortion, that it is ethically okay, which only serves to encourage the practice. Before abortion was legalized in this country, abortions ranged in the thousands. Afterward, it averaged over a million a year. Legalizing drugs would have the same effect. Instead of millions, it’s likely that tens of millions would become users. Having smoked “weed” in my youth (a fact of which I am not proud), I know that it can have a very negative impact on an individual, distorting one’s thinking and creating a “dead-headed” outlook on life characterized by loopy passivity. Do we really want to have a nation full of lazy, empty-headed “stoners,” smoking grass and having no qualms about it? Another side effect of marijuana is a sense of paranoia that is heightened by the fact that it is illegal, which is a good thing. It’s an incentive to stop. Diminishing that sense of guilt and fear of being caught does nothing but encourage more drug use, which is another reason to oppose legalization.

Marijuana—as everyone who has used it knows—is a “gateway drug.” A seemingly innocuous (initially) way of getting high, it almost inevitably leads to greater drug use. Since all drugs have a diminishing return over time it takes more and more to get the same sense of euphoria, leading to smoking more and/ or seeking stronger weed. That quest usually doesn’t end with marijuana. It commonly leads to using things like hashish, peyote, ecstasy, crystal “meth” or cocaine, which in turn may lead to the use of hallucinogenics, like mescaline and LSD—and even heroin. The truth is, if we are going to legalize marijuana, we will ultimately have to do the same for all of these drugs. After all, the rationale will already be in place: just think of all the money the government can save/make! Along the way, we will continue to “define deviancy down” in our society, until virtually nothing is considered wrong anymore. Hey, if making drugs legal is good, what about prostitution?

Perhaps most disappointing about Tom Tancredo’s push (no pun intended) to legalize marijuana and other drugs is the immorality of the position, especially for a professing Christian. Unlike alcohol, which has food value and doesn’t necessarily cause drunkenness, drugs always impair one’s mind and distort one’s consciousness. That’s the only reason for using them. But they come at a high price, often impairing the user’s life, creating addicts who commit serious crimes to maintain their habit and destroying lives and families. While it doesn’t specifically mention drugs, the Bible condemns drunkenness and by extension all things that distort one’s ability to function with a clear mind and cause addiction. Such behavior is bad for the individual and unhealthy for society. Does Tom Tancredo really want to advocate for something so morally wrong and destructive to our nation? If so, his political future probably is over.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (7) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Judge Sotomayor: Tom Tancredo v David Shuster on "Hardball"

In another of MSNBC's regular foaming-at-the-mouth confrontations with anyone critical of the Obama adminstration, David Shuster takes on U.S. Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Colo.) in discussing Judge Sonia Sotomayor. Tancredo points out that Sotomayor has a lot of 'splainin' to do concerning past remarks and associations that imply sexism, racism or both.
 
Tancredo's former colleague in Congress, Rep. Susan Molinari (R-N.Y.), is also on the show and treated with kid gloves by Shuster because she pretty much refuses to say anything critical of Sotomayer. Both Tancredo and Molinari, however, strike at one of the most vulnerable spots in their opposition, the Senate Democrats' unconscionable (and arguably racist: they couldn't abide nomination by a Republican of this distinguished Latino) treament of Miguel Estrada, Pres. George W. Bush's nominee for a position on the D.C. Court of Appeals.
 
See Tancredo go at it with Shuster here.
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Cato Institute blog on Tancredo's Call for Drug Legalization

In an address given May 20, former U.S. Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Colo.) called for change in federal law to give the states – laboratories of democracy – latitude to consider drug legislation. Tancredo called the War on Drugs a failure and expressed concern about collateral damage, especially drug cartel violence plaguing Mexico and spreading northward, discussed elsewhere in this blog.
 
TV coverage on Denver's ABC affilitate can be seen here.
 
Cato Institute's senior fellow Doug Bandow complimented Tancredo, albeit left-handedly, in a post here.
 
Unfortunately, Bandow took a gratuitous slap at Tancredo's libertarian bona fides with the claim that Tancredo "made his name attacking immigration." As The New York Times might do, Bandow left out "illegal."
 
Few speak more eloquently than Tancredo about immigrants' wholesome contributions to our country's fabric. It will surprise some to know that one can't be libertarian while opposing illegal immigration, the position Tancredo has rather prominently championed.
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »