Totally agree on this. But we had a nice 20 years of scare tactics that drug users were going to destroy America. It wasn't that long ago (the 80s) when crime was actually a front and center issue in presidential politics. The way we talk about the economy was the way politicians were talking about a crime epidemic that was supposedly going to ruin society. It takes a while to recover from that and we're still in an era where the only option is to be tougher on crime than the last guy. And that leads to idiotic things like mandatory sentencing guidelines for non-violent offenders. The rhetoric on drug crimes is finally starting to turn things around. And while Gary Johnson and Ron Paul won't get elected, their mere presence in politics and their outspoken criticism of the drug wars and American drug laws ARE having an impact. The way in which we discuss drugs is changing and I'm confident that we will get to the point where we'll be able to rationally talk about these things without resorting to outlandish scare tactics. So while I would never ever vote for Gary Johnson or Ron Paul, I absolutely appreciate what they're doing for this country by speaking out against the drug war. We need more politicians doing the same.
Most do, and the president hasn't backed off. Even more support gun control which massively multiplies any drug violation to the point of absurdity. Even in non violent crimes. Drug war is a problem because of cost and our people in prison. Lighter sentences for possession drastically reduces both.
I might vote for Jill Stein too. It doesn't matter since neither of them's going to win, but I'd like to see both of them get a large enough percentage of the popular vote to merit inclusion in the debates of the next election cycle. This two-party thing really isn't working when they all agree on so much.
Democrats tend to support the war on drugs in the the way that Republicans support Medicare. It's too politically costly to oppose it - but there's no question that the enforcement / tough-on-crime / mandatory sentence stuff are GOP ideas. It's rare the Democrats ramp up these things - they just don't ramp them down. The most recent example is the crack vs cocaine sentencing - Dems wanted to reduce the ratio much more, but had to negotiate with the GOP and could only do so much. That's certainly a part of it, but the war on drugs goes much farther than that - it's a war against dealers as well as suppliers in other countries as well.
Not that I know what was in the OP (I only saw the dumb thread title) as Hightop/MEOWGI is on my 8 person long ignore list -- and BBS life has never been calmer or better. I only ever enjoy the board anymore and nobody bums me out. I had to reply to this though because the title was so hilarious. GARY JOHNSON will NOT END the drug war, because Gary Johnson will get about 1% of the vote. Maybe less. Definitely not over 3%. Gary Johnson, a former governor, could only manage to get into one GOP primary debate because his numbers were so poor. And in that debate he looked like a terrified doe. He's about as likely to end the drug war as hightop is to fit 100 televisions in his vagina.
What about Clinton's Crime Bill in 94? If you smoke drugs, refuse a test, or have a gun after release from prison you go right back in. Then he built the prisons to hold them all. No one is complaining if the war on drugs did those things. People have a problem with their friends/family in prison for usage instead of getting treatment. The costs of holding them in prison is insane.
It was a very large bill that contained a lot of things to make people in both parties happy. As an example, the initial bill passed the Senate 95-4 and passed by a simple voice vote in the House. The final version was closer as it was politicized a few months before the midterm elections, but still passed with bipartisan support. But regardless, 18 years is a long time. I don't think most black voters are looking at what Clinton did in 1994 as their guide. All true. But that's not ending the war on drugs. That's ending the parts of the war on drugs that we don't like. That's not the claim Hightop made.
That bill was gigantic and was passed under the last old-school Democratic coalition with a huge chunk of the delegation being old Southern Democrats during a time when fear of crime was still a campaign issue. Not to mention I have no idea how the procedural events of that bill took place and who slipped that in. The Crime bill included the violence against women act, the assault weapons ban, new penalties for domestic terrorism in the wake of the OKC bombing, etc.. It's really difficult to comment on a very small part of a massive bill and the politics that went into it. But I will say those 2 years (92-94) were the years of the least united Democratic party since before the Civil War. There's a reason why the Clinton budget for example passed by only a handful of votes despite having a clear Democratic majority. Southern Democrats were on the verge of extinction (particularly in 1994 when it was becoming clear that a lot of people were going to lose their seats) Needless to say, that was an entirely different era for the Democratic Party. That transition period produced a lot of compromise within the party itself that resulted in dumb things like the provisions you mentioned.
Highcrop has about the same chance of being elected as Gary Johnson, so in essence, Highcrop will end the war on drugs. Yay, Highcrop!
So Hightop, when did the over-liberalization of America start ruining this country? I'm guessing back in the 1860s when Lincoln suspended habeas corpus, consolidated executive power, and then proceeded to issue a pesky executive order telling Southern business owners that they could no longer use "cheap" labor?
What would all those attorneys, bureaucrats, gun makers and corporate shareholders of prisons do if drugs were decriminalized? That'd be a massive bubble bursting. No way any politician is allowed to decriminalize drugs anytime soon.
Explain. Not sure I follow. I thought black folx had a boner against fractional reserve banking and thought the postal service was a grand conspiracy therefore they loved G-money Johnson.
Not sure where you get the dems supporting the war on drugs. I thought the reps were the ones who were tough on crime.
