Drug Control Begets Gun Control

Montana is a little ahead of the game.

It is time for the Nanny State to be dethroned. Statism and Collectivism have hidden under the banner of Liberalism for too long, and the War on *_____* (Drugs, Guns, Terror, etc.) excuse of the day has only served to erode our personal liberties. We need to get back to a national posture of personal responsibility and respect for the founding values which made this country great.

I am responsible for my own conduct, security, and education. Isn't it time for everyone else to be, too?

Pax,

Newbius

Amen John! Drugs and Kenny G CD's suck, but both should be legal to buy, use and sell.

Uh, no. Just because you can stick two things together doesn't mean they belong together.

Each member of the Mexican Army is issued an M16. Desertions from the Mexican Army have numbered in the tens of thousands over the past several years. Connect the dots. The Mexican Army is arming the drug lords through the mechanism of desertion.

It's hard for me to advocate for individual responsibility, self reliance and the other necessary attributes of liberty, then turn a blind eye while people poison themselves to the point of helplessness and dependency with dope. I get the argument put forth here, but I think think a society of free citizens has a right to ask some of those citizens not to render themselves useless and dependent on charity through reckless self indulgence.

It's hard for me to advocate for individual responsibility, self reliance and the other necessary attributes of liberty, then turn a blind eye while people poison themselves to the point of helplessness and dependency with dope. I get the argument put forth here, but I think think a society of free citizens has a right to ask some of those citizens not to render themselves useless and dependent on charity through reckless self indulgence.

One would think that this argument, coupled with the (I think overwhelmingly compelling) argument that drug prohibition helps fund terrorism, would be enough to get modern conservatives to rethink - at the very least, rethink - their irrational and dogmatic attachment to (federal!) drug laws.

Unfortunately, conservatives' faith in such laws makes reasoning with them on the issue almost impossible (see, for instance, Bill Bennett).

"...then turn a blind eye while people poison themselves to the point of helplessness and dependency with dope."

That is a false dichotomy. First, most people who use recreational drugs don't become wasted dope fiends, just like most drinkers aren't alcoholics. Second, ending the enforcement approach to managing the drug market doesn't necessarily mean turning a blind eye to its excesses.

Great point Greg. Conservatives do seem to lose their taste for states rights when the subject of prohibition comes up, don't they?

Not to mention that the guns in question are ALREADY ILLEGAL! Automatic weapons are already illegal and have been for 75 or so years.

Making Illegal guns more illegal isn't going to solve anything.

The guns being trafficked are automatic weapons. Automatic weapons are ALREDY ILLEGAL and have been for about 75 years.

Making illegal weapons "more illegal" isn't going to solve anything.

John,
People who transport valuable product over long distances will want to make sure that the product arrives at it's destination. Drug traffickers can't call the guys at Brinks to provide that protection and they can't call the police if they have a problem on the way. Options: don't protect millions of dollars of your product or protect it yourself.

Considering the history, I have to laugh at the notion that supporting the drug war is an exclusive conservative idea.

But, the left and its sycophants media are very good at labeling opponents and framing debates. They understand being first to label is all important in framing a debate.

Considering the history, I have to laugh at the notion that supporting the drug war is an exclusive conservative idea.

But, the left and its sycophants media are very good at labeling opponents and framing debates. They understand being first to label is all important in framing a debate.

Considering the history, I have to laugh at the notion that supporting the drug war is an exclusive conservative idea.

But, the left and its sycophants media are very good at labeling opponents and framing debates. They understand being first to label is all important in framing a debate.

Thanks as always for fighting for liberty, John. As a career Naval Officer, I have a special appreciation for your success in carrying the message that liberty means less govt intervention. As a citizen, I also appreciate your support of the 2nd Amendment. Paul

Full auto weapons are not illegal. Just need to pay a transfer fee and shell out for the gun.

Any time a government exceeds the mandate to define, prosecute, and punish transgressions against the person or property of another, it increases the quantity of transactions resulting not from free exchange (by traders each seeking his own best interest) but by coercion (under which some parties to the transaction are left poorer as a result of the transaction). As the victims of the initial government interference will seek redress, the combination of their actions in the private and public spheres will create another round of victims.

Lather, rinse, repeat.

What advocates of the War on Some Drugs fail to understand is that by declaring certain transactions illegal, they have precluded those who participate in those transactions, and feel they have been wronged by other parties, from seeking that redress via the civilized means of the legal system. These transactions therefore are conducted outside of civilized society, under the proverbial Law of the Jungle, which is supposedly what government is to curtail.

Or as Glenn Frey put it: "You always carry weapons, 'cause you always carry cash."