It's a big, weird world when a Republican congressman and a Hollywood actor square off over drug policy, and it's the politician who endorses legalization, while the actor favors prohibition. The debate makes more sense, however, when you realize that the live-and-let-live legislator is libertarian Rep. Ron Paul, and his authoritarian opponent is Stephen Baldwin, who is an idiot. Even more so than most actors, that is.
In his comments, Rep. Paul said:
Drugs are very dangerous, but there's a lot of things that are very dangerous. The question is who should regulate danger? Should we assume responsibility for ourselves, or should the government take care of us? And I don't believe in the nanny state.
If you do have regulations and laws, they should be at the state level, not at the federal level. We didn't even have a federal law up until 1937. And here we are, we have spent hundreds of billions of dollars in a very unsuccessful attempt to regulate drugs.
Later, he said that he was optimistic that the laws will change in exactly the way Prohibition came to an end.
So the sooner we come to this realization someday--actually I'm optimistic on this. I think this country is going to wake up like they did in the 30s and say prohibition didn't work.
Alcohol is a horror. It's made things worse. It has caused a lot of crime and violence. It's about time we just do this, get rid of the prohibition. Let the regulation go back to the state. Regulate it like alcohol.
And would the real regulation come from the individual and also from the family and the parents and the community. That's what prevents drug use, not some federal thug coming in with guns and arresting some kid, and throwing him for prison for life. That makes no sense whatsoever.
The March 13 face-off on CNN, with Joy Behar standing in for Larry King, is below.
If you don't have the patience to watch the video, a full transcript is here.
email J.D.: civilliberties (at) tuccille.com
You might also enjoy these:
- Forty percent of Americans want marijuana legalized
- Three Latin American presidents call drug prohibition a failure
- Police group celebrates anniversary of Prohibition repeal with call to legalize drugs
- Is getting high on drugs always a bad thing?
- Former police chief opposes war on drugs
- To legalize or decriminalize prostitution (and everything else)?
- Report calls for legal marijuana
- Nonviolent drug crimes dominate FBI arrest data
- Overregulating our way to police abuse
Civil Liberties Examiner is now on Facebook!
Or follow the latest civil liberties news on Twitter: Libertywriter
Contact J.D.: civilliberties (at) tuccille.com
Comments
Mr. Baldwin has played some seriously stoned characters. Perhaps he is confusing fantasy for reality. Or maybe he is trying to counter his stoner characters to gain "credibility". It's too bad; I used to really like him in "The Young Riders".
Hahahaha! Look at Baldwin's face before you start the video. Srsly, what's with the lips thing. I dun trust that guy.
Ppl should have listened to Dr. Paul in the first place!
-Dan
The war on drugs just makes it more exciting. I agree that local laws should govern drug use. Morally I believe it to be wrong, just like I do being drunk or addicted to cigarettes.
Then Alex Jones showed up with his giant megaphone and made this whole debate look even more ridiculous still.
I like how Baldwin tries to play the "gateway drug" card. Really...in this day and age, this nonsense needs to be called out directly for what it is- junk science at best and a simple baldfaced lie at worst.
Im not sure why the normal standards of "proof" and "scientific evidence" always seem to suddenly vanish from the dialogue when it comes to the Drug War, but there are a few things worth noting about the ludicrous "gateway drug" argument, since that seems to be the last thing prohibitionists are left still clinging to:
- You cannot prove causation in reverse, by saying "most meth and heroin addicts tried marijuana first, so marijuana leads to meth and heroin." This is akin to saying that "most motorcycle owners drove a car first, so driving a car will lead to owning a motorcycle." The claim is further complicated by the fact that the vast majority of hard drug addicts also tried cigarettes and/or alcohol before they tried marijuana as well; arbitrarily cherrypicking which prior experience led to the hard drug use is blatantly desperate.
- Even junk science is supposed to have some sort of statistics on its side; not so with the "gateway drug" theory. The fact is that while between some 70-100 million Americans have tried or still use marijuana, the vast majority of them never go on to crack, meth, heroin, etc. The "gateway drug" theory's own relevant statistics are clearly against it...which I guess explains why its proponents try to argue the supposed "causation" effect in reverse.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!