Another Problem with the Drug War

Members of the local news media are upset over the announcement that a convicted murderer was released from the Iowa prison system on parole, and will finish his time living with family in the Kansas City area. The inmate had served seventeen years of a fifty year sentence for the second-degree murder of his girlfriend, back in 1992.

I’m not convinced that caging people is the best way to bring about justice or the most effective crime deterrent. However, it seems apparent that in the absence of the war on drugs and other Prohibitionist policies of the state, murderers might serve their full-time in prison. In 2005 more than one-fourth of all Iowa inmates were serving time for drug or alcohol related offenses.

Anyone concerned with violent criminals being released should consider this data, and ask whether it’s worth jailing non-violent drug offenders in their place.

More of This, Please

I mentioned this a few weeks ago, but a trend I’ve seen over the last few months is an increase in Google Alerts for “nullification.” In my latest column at the Tenth Amendment Center I describe some of what has come through my inbox lately, and encourage folks to help keep this growing.

From the article:

While the opponents of a Jeffersonian remedy certainly have the upper hand in terms of media exposure, it’s quite clear they’re in way over their heads, historically and intellectually. Of course I’m not so naïve as to believe that most of these critics have any real interest in presenting an objective view, or that all they really need is a good rebuttal to set them straight. I know that instead they would prefer to bar the gates (despite the walls crumbling around them, as Gary North so eloquently put it) and try to hold back the rising tide of dissent against Washington’s illegitimacy. That’s what all this demagoguery from mainstream news sources is; it’s as clear an indication as any that their really scared and it’s why Tenthers ought to press the issue even harder.

Just last week the editorial board of Jackson, Mississippi’s McComb Enterprise-Journal breathed a sigh of relief when representative Scott Delano pulled a bill that would have assisted the state in nullifying unconstitutional federal legislation. The bill’s proponents are no doubt feeling defeated, but the board couldn’t be happier. They’ve suggested that the republican legislator “should be commended for his prudence” in the matter.

Ah yes, prudence, that virtue whereby one party grants another the unchecked leeway to determine the limits of its own power. What could possibly go wrong?

Read the rest here.

Glenn Beck and Libertarianism (Not a Love Story)

There now seems to be a small rift growing between Glenn Beck, who claims to be evolving into a libertarian, and a number of the libertarians he hopes to attract with his new media project. Of course many are skeptical of a guy who, for many years supported the Bush administration, seems always to have supported the U.S. government’s wars overseas, and backed this guy for president in 2012.

That he recently accused the founder of Students for Liberty, Alexander McCobin, of being a jerk and a Nazi makes this all the more comical. McCobin was addressing the annual conference of Students for Liberty (SFL) when he suggested Beck’s libertarian cred may not be up to muster. Beck it seems was upset that he’s not being taken seriously and used his radio show to air his grievance.

In response, McCobin challenged Beck to “engage [young libertarians] in a meaningful conversation, embrace the positions where libertarianism is substantially different from conservatism, and work with [them] for a truly freer future.” He also offered that while he may call himself a libertarian, there’s no reason anyone has to accept Beck’s transition. As Andrew Kirell sarcastically put it: “We are glad for your newfound support for legal marijuana, gay marriage, and your backing down from Bush-era hawkishness. But many of us libertarians prefer to say ‘thanks but no thanks.’”

One peculiar point raised by McCobin in his letter to Beck was “that libertarianism is difficult to define, and there is significant room for debate.” Actually no, it’s rather simple to define, and there shouldn’t be any room for debate.

Libertarianism is simply the political system wherein the initiation of force is not acceptable. The use of force may only be used in defense against aggression and where force is being unjustly applied to persons or property. Beyond that all interaction is to be under voluntary terms and any system which deviates from this may not be accurately described as libertarian.

Another Tragic Legacy of TR

In this episode of The Lew Rockwell Show from November 28, 2008, economist Mark Thornton explains the roots of the drug war, which began in 1906, with Theodore Roosevelt. It’s an interesting look into the program’s history, as well as the economics of prohibition, which happens to be the title of one of Thornton’s books.

A few interesting points from the interview:

• Before the drug war began heroin was safe enough to administer to babies.
• Consumption of what today are illicit drugs was commonplace. However, addiction and overdosing weren’t a social problem.
• The notorious medicine man — that shady guy who rode into town trying to hock some quack cure-all — came about as a result of intervention in the pharmaceutical industry.

The black market all but destroys the incentives to produce safe products, and encourages producers to provide increasingly potent drugs, which can lead to addiction and overdose.

Getting Rid of Synthetic Drugs

Synthetic drugs, sometimes referred to as K2 or bath salts, are the latest target in the ever-expanding war on property (drugs). This is because they are supposed to be more dangerous than plant-based drugs, such as weed and cocaine. No doubt they are, but banning these drugs will be just as futile as the decades-long war on natural narcotics.

Had governments not pursued marijuana and cocaine so aggressively, the rise of synthetic drugs likely wouldn’t have occurred, at least not to the extent it has now. Instead of adding more products to the already long list of prohibited substances, state and local governments should decriminalize all drugs. This will allow consumers greater access to the less-dangerous products and, rather than caging addicts, the market can begin treating them.