The New York University and the Chicago studies on drug addiction support the notion that drug addiction necessarily leads to predatory crime as a way of life. “For most narcotic addicts, predatory crime (larceny, shoplifting, sneak thievery, burglary, embezzlement, robbery, etc.), is a necessary way of life.”
It doesn’t have to be.
Here are latest victims of New Hampshire’s failure of a drug war:
Here’s your “War on Drugs” :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RbwSwvUaRqc
“But they did prevent Jonathan Whitworth from smoking the pot they found in his possession. So I guess this mission was a success.” – Radley Balko
(more…)
Rich Paul called Porc 411 yesterday to announce something different would be seen at the 420 – turns out it was what has been dubbed, Topless Tuesdays. Qik video from the scene:
It seems that the publicly funded propaganda tool known as the “Office of National Drug Control Policy” has issued its “strategy” to deal with the drug problem here in the United States. Of course there is nothing new or novel to what the Obama Administration thinks we should be doing about drugs here in the United States.
I quote: “We have many proven methods for reducing the demand for drugs. Keeping drugs illegal reduces their availability and lessens willingness to use them. That is why this Administration firmly opposes the legalization of marijuana or any other illicit drug. Legalizing drugs would increase accessibility and encourage promotion and acceptance of use. Diagnostic, laboratory, clinical, and epidemiological studies clearly indicate that marijuana use is associated with dependence, respiratory and mental illness, poor motor performance, and cognitive impairment, among other negative effects, and legalization would only exacerbate these problems.”
In other words: nothing is going to change.
Along the lines of what I posted last week about the New Hampshire court system teetering on the edge of disaster, the lawyer who runs the court system in New Hampshire is in the Nashua Telegraph today declaring what I believe could potentially be some excellent news:
“Cutting the number of court session days could lead to an unacceptably long delay for lower-profile criminal defendants who could be released because they weren’t given a speedy trial, Broderick said.” He also says that “You could have some lower-end people walking. I don’t say it as a threat, because it’s a very real possibility(.)” What an excellent possibility indeed.
And by the way, these people aren’t “lower end.” They are human beings no better than you or I.
I think by “lower-profile criminal defendants” he potentially means people who haven’t actually hurt anyone else. What a novel idea……. not throwing people into a human cage who haven’t actually hurt someone.
Drug addiction can strike anyone. Should these people be thrown in a cage?
“Despite being employed as an engineer, Eddie was forced to pawn things to help pay for his habit. He even pawned his grandmother’s diamond wedding ring for $250, a ring he was going to give to his daughter when she grew up.”
This is exactly what I argued yesterday in my post about the latest victims of drug prohibition here in New Hampshire. It is just plain true.
Some drug addicts even prostitute their children to pay for their habits: “Occasionally women are involved in supplying their own children to pedophiles, pornographers, or others in the sex industry. The mother’s own addiction is the usual cause.“
Those children would never be pimped out and victimized if there was not an insane “War on Drugs.” Their mothers, being far less likely to start drugs in the first place, would have a place to go to get treatment and help. I’m sorry to say it, but if you support continuing the “War on Drugs,” you are supporting the continued victimization of children and everyone else by these addicts.
Today’s excellent Foster’s Daily Democrat article is located here.
Recent Forum Posts
