Where is the benefit to society when a person caught selling a $50 rock of freebase cocaine is sent to prison for 5+ years at, say, $25,000 per year. That’s $125,000+ wasted because another dealer fills the void immediately after every arrest.

And, of course, NOWHERE in the Constitution does it grant the government the authority to prohibit “morally incorrect” drugs. At least the prohibitionists of alcohol had enough respect for that document to amend it.

We need to keep reminding ourselves that the Controlled Substances Act and War On Drugs​ were the offsp​ring of Richard (”I”) M (”not a crook”​)​ Nixon​ & Company [​note:​ if he wasn'​t a crook​ then why did he need a blanket pardo​n from his succe​ssor Geral​d Ford and why did nearl​y ALL of his inner​ circl​e end up going​ to priso​n?​]​ So there​ you have it, a small​ group​ of REAL CRIMI​NALS who contr​olled​ the US Gov’​t makin​g criminals out of us “​littl​e peopl​e”​ who just want to live our lives​ in peace​ and seek respi​te from pain or relax​ from the drudg​ery of life with a NATUR​AL,​ eco-​frien​dly HERB.​

DRUG WAR = RICHARD NIXON​’​S LASTI​NG LEGAC​Y.​ “Tricky Dick” Nixon, the only US president to have ever been force​d to resig​n in DISGR​ACE yet his drug polic​y reign​s supreme and his party​ worsh​ips his Sacre​d Cow to this day as if it were the Gospe​l of Christ (​don’​t ever forge​t that all-to-many Republican​s are MAKE-​BELIE​VE Christians to boot!​ After all, what would Jesus think of locking people in cages because of a plant that His Father put on the Earth? A question the “Christian Right” refuses to answer)

As I understand it, the federal government gets its power to regulate drug laws from article 1 section 8 paragraph 3 of the U.S. constitution “to regulate commerce with foreign nations and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes”.

The Gonzales V. Raich supreme court case provides a good example of the legal position both by the states and the federal government. The ruling was in favor of the federal government.

“In a 6-3 opinion delivered by Justice John Paul Stevens, the Court held that the commerce clause gave Congress authority to prohibit the local cultivation and use of marijuana, despite state law to the contrary. Stevens argued that the Court’s precedent “firmly established” Congress’ commerce clause power to regulate purely local activities that are part of a “class of activities” with a substantial effect on interstate commerce. The majority argued that Congress could ban local marijuana use because it was part of such a “class of activities”: the national marijuana market. Local use affected supply and demand in the national marijuana market, making the regulation of intrastate use “essential” to regulating the drug’s national market. “

An over view of the case can be found here http://www.oyez.org/cases/2000-2009/2004/2004_03_1454/

I personally do not agree with the ruling as basically congress can now have complete control of how states regulate their intrastate commerce activities by simply stating that it affects the over all market, which is pretty frighting.

Our federal government has a responsibility to live up to its Constitutional obligations. The Constitution does not give the federal government the jurisdiction to mount a federal “War on Drugs”, and pass mandatory sentencing guidelines and enforcement down on the states in violation of the 10th Amendment.

A Constitutional perspective actually encourages state and local governments to work and advance shared local mores.

Blogs are great for debates, but from a legislative perspective I’m not interested in syllogistic debate, either. I’m simply interested in a federal government that lives up to its Constitutional obligations, and recognizes its jurisdiction.

Distinctions with “legal” drugs or “illegal” drugs become debating club topics for which most people simply don’t care. This is a syllogistic debate for which you have left out important real life premises. People don’t care to engage in symantic exactness and ideological purity.

We want our loved ones back from the dark places of humanity. The social stigma that comes from the illegal nature of drugs is a positive force on our own internal behavior regulation.

We have a problem in America with prescription drug abuse. We have a problem in America with alcohol abuse. We have a problem in America with illegal drugs.

People see, at a distance and in their own families, the human destruction caused by substance abuse. People know that we humans struggle with inner demons. Madision said that if men were angels we wouldn’t need government.

Come on BJ! What are you doing!?!

You are as bright a candidate as I have seen in a generation. You have more good ideas on how government ought to be structured than AEI and CATO can put on its websites in a month. But you are on the wrong side of this issue and you diminish your standing among reasonable, thinking people by getting into this debate.

Happy Independence Day!

Also, please know that I am a former drug and alcohol abuser.

I appreciate your other comments and comparisons and general level-headedness. Thank you.

What moral background has led you to believe that drug legalization is immoral? Myself, being a Christian, have had several discussions with other Christian friends about the Bible’s interpretation of drug use. The primary scripture used to justify moral outlaw of drugs is that “your body is God’s temple.” If this simple phrase is to be applied to all legislation, not just the politically popular (drug prohibition), shouldn’t the government outlaw Mcdonalds, Cheetos, and Pepsi, and mandate a minimum number of hours to exercise weekly? These laws would challenge the fundamental principals of American freedom, create incentive for black markets and crime rings to exist, and be impossible to enforce without bankrupting the American economy, just like the war on drugs. Governments have failed throughout history to legislate morality, the War on Drugs is no exception. We must rely on communities, families and churches to ensure our moral duties and we must restore the constitutional principals of liberty in the United States.

-Grey Monroe

Let me point out that the war on drugs fails on both a practical and a moral level. First, on the practical level, if your aim is to keep drugs out of childrens’ hands, consider for a moment that it’s easier today for kids to get pot than beer. Beer is a legal product, and sellers of alcohol want to remain on the right side of the law. Pot being illegal, the sellers have no reason to care if their customers are old enough to make informed decisions.

Now, on the moral level, do you have the right to forcibly prevent your neighbor from ingesting what he wants to ingest? If you don’t have the moral right to do it as an individual, then you can not delegate it to a collective and gain a moral right.

-jcr