Monday, September 10, 2012

Again Gary Johnson has it Right, If Only America Would Listen...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty
-vs- Tyranny



Gary Johnson is a vocal proponent of legalization of marijuana, making a compelling and rational argument for it. America's decades long war on drugs has produced little if any positive results. It has cost the American taxpayer billions, helped to create an expanding and violent illicit industry, and increased the number of incarcerated to record levels. It is time the nation rethink it's drug policies. Gary Johnson is on the forefront while President Barack Obama and Mitt Romney are less than interested in addressing an issue that should be of growing concern for all Americans.

OPPOSING VIEWS - Gary Johnson, this year’s Libertarian Party candidate for president, spoke at a rally on Tuesday outside the Democratic National Convention. He criticized both President Obama and Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney for avoiding one of the nation’s most important political issues. Obama has laughed off or ignored persistent questions about marijuana legalization, while Romney is equally dismissive, calling the issue insignificant.

During his two terms as governor of New Mexico, Johnson established himself as the highest-ranking public official to call for a dramatic shift in the nation’s drug laws. He explains that during his two terms, he applied a cost-benefit analysis to every issue. Regarding costs of the war on drugs, he has cited the United States’ world-record incarceration rate and the fact that approximately half of current criminal justice expenditures deal with drug cases.

On his campaign website, the former governor also refers to the harms of alcohol prohibition and the parallel harms of current drug prohibitions, including the enrichment of organized crime and the associated violence. The site clearly states his support for legalizing marijuana, specifying that the federal government should “end its prohibition mandate” and allow the states to determine their own policies. This is one area where he agrees with former Republican presidential contender and libertarian icon Ron Paul, to whom he has compared himself and whose supporters he may be courting. {Read More}

Clearly Gary Johnson is once again acting like the only adult in the field.



18 comments:

  1. ...and legalizing weed will stop the cocaine submarines how?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. One must think outside the box and see the larger picture.

      Delete
  2. Ending the drug war is a generally good idea, and neither the Dems nor the Reps would end it. It's a locally tax-paid scheme that employs literally millions of Americans. Yes, we have to keep the drunks off the roads, but no, we shouldn't be hunting down teenagers for pot and pills. It's stupidly unproductive.

    It's a great idea to end the drug war, at least as we know it, and the Dems are a little better on the issue than the Reps.

    Here you give me another reason to vote for Obama and the Dems this time around.

    JMJ

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Or, as principle would have it Gary Johnson and liberty.

      Delete
  3. Thersites has raised a valid issue. Please don't dismiss it so glibly.

    Marijuana is less than half the drug "problem."

    Even if marijuana were legalized, you would still have violent criminal gangs fighting over distribution, and what about cocaine and meth?

    I don't have a problem with decriminalizing marijuana, but it is no panacea. We would still have to prohibit its use by certain people, like airline pilots, train engineers, mass transit drivers, etc. Unlike alcohol, thc stays in the body much longer, affect the brain and all kinds of physiology like cognitive skills and reaction time.

    Also, I don't believe a nation should implement libertarian ideas if it cannot be libertarian about the consequences. Are we ready to watch families disintegrate due to daddy's drug use? Of course not.

    So, another person's drug use harms me, because I have to pay for it with money I have earned.

    It's not so cut and dried.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Is the present system working? Do we have a drug problem? A gang problem? High incarceration rates(highest in the west I believe)?

      What is the definition of insanity?... Doing the same thing over and over again while expecting a different result.

      Frankly JMJ is correct on this one, and he is partially correct on the reasons why neither party will do anything that makes sense.

      You suggest I'm being dismissive of Thersites comment, perhaps I was. But I have given years of thought to this and my position is that it is those who continue to do the same thing over and over again while the problem worsens in the misguided belief that things somehow, someday, will get magically better who are the dismissive ones Silver. They simply dismiss reason for hope in a misguided counter productive scare tactic mentality. It simply hasn't workd and it never will. Sorry.

      Drugs, with the exception of the most dangerous and addictive should be legalized, regulated, and taxed (@ a healthy rate say 10% to 15%), with the tax revenue going to drug education and rehabilitation. Make the process of obtaining drugs legally available to people with a price lower than the street cost, take the criminal element out of it, and so will go the violent aspect.

      The idea that somehow drug use among people who understand the risks of consistent prolonged drug use will increase (which is one obvious fear)if legalized does not stand up logically.

      So, Gary Johnson is right. But like in so many areas being right doe not get things done. Money and fear does. One only need look at the election process to know this.

      Again Silver (and Thersites), sorry for the perceived dismissing of Thersites comment. I hope the above explanation clarifies my position beyond the original post.

      Delete
  4. Some "problems" can't be "solved".

    Giving up isn't a solutIon.

    Do you know how to tell if you've won or lost a batlle? The guy who can walk out on it, and erect a monument to his fallen comrades, THAT is the one. He who PERSISTS. Not he who "gives up and goes home."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. After how many deaths? After how many trillions? After how much government sanctioned corruption? After how many more LAWS added to the books? After many more prisons overflow with incarcerations?

      Really, build your monuments to celebrate insanity. Sorry, I missed that us long ago.

      Delete
  5. It's called having principle's. I think that they're "worth" having. If they weren't costly, there wouldn't be much "value" to having them. And the alternative would be...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ah, principles indeed. As you indicate, standing by ones rational principles takes courage, especially so in the face of those who would ridicule you.

      Delete
  6. Liberty. Freedom within "limits".

    Plato, "Republic"

    The last extreme of popular liberty is when the slave bought with money, whether male or female, is just as free as his or her purchaser; nor must I forget to tell of the liberty and equality of the two sexes in relation to each other.

    Why not, as Aeschylus says, utter the word which rises to our lips?

    That is what I am doing, I replied; and I must add that no one who does not know would believe, how much greater is the liberty which the animals who are under the dominion of man have in a democracy than in any other State: for truly, the she-dogs, as the proverb says, are as good as their she-mistresses, and the horses and asses have a way of marching along with all the rights and dignities of freemen; and they will run at any body who comes in their way if he does not leave the road clear for them: and all things are just ready to burst with liberty.

    When I take a country walk, he said, I often experience what you describe. You and I have dreamed the same thing.

    And above all, I said, and as the result of all, see how sensitive the citizens become; they chafe impatiently at the least touch of authority, and at length, as you know, they cease to care even for the laws, written or unwritten; they will have no one over them.

    Yes, he said, I know it too well.

    Such, my friend, I said, is the fair and glorious beginning out of which springs tyranny.

    Glorious indeed, he said. But what is the next step?

    The ruin of oligarchy is the ruin of democracy; the same disease magnified and intensified by liberty overmasters democracy—the truth being that the excessive increase of anything often causes a reaction in the opposite direction; and this is the case not only in the seasons and in vegetable and animal life, but above all in forms of government.

    True.

    The excess of liberty, whether in States or individuals, seems only to pass into excess of slavery.

    Yes, the natural order.

    And so tyranny naturally arises out of democracy, and the most aggravated form of tyranny and slavery out of the most extreme form of liberty?

    As we might expect.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I am not a fan of Plato, I prefer Aristotle and Rand.

      Plato's Republic does a superb job of justifying statism I must say however.

      Indeed, principles...

      Delete
  7. lol! Is THAT what you think "Republic" does, justify "statism"?

    Plato, "Republic"

    Let us then consider, first of all, what will be their way of life, now that we have thus established them. Will they not produce corn, and wine, and clothes, and shoes, and build houses for themselves? And when they are housed, they will work, in summer, commonly, stripped and barefoot, but in winter substantially clothed and shod. They will feed on barley-meal and flour of wheat, baking and kneading them, making noble cakes and loaves; these they will serve up on a mat of reeds or on clean leaves, themselves reclining the while upon beds strewn with yew or myrtle. And they and their children will feast, drinking of the wine which they have made, wearing garlands on their heads, and hymning the praises of the gods, in happy converse with one another. And they will take care that their families do not exceed their means; having an eye to poverty or war.

    But, said Glaucon, interposing, you have not given them a relish to their meal.

    True, I replied, I had forgotten; of course they must have a relish—salt, and olives, and cheese, and they will boil roots and herbs such as country people prepare; for a dessert we shall give them figs, and peas, and beans; and they will roast myrtle-berries and acorns at the fire, drinking in moderation. And with such a diet they may be expected to live in peace and health to a good old age, and bequeath a similar life to their children after them.

    Yes, Socrates, he said, and if you were providing for a city of pigs, how else would you feed the beasts?

    But what would you have, Glaucon? I replied.

    Why, he said, you should give them the ordinary conveniences of life. People who are to be comfortable are accustomed to lie on sofas, and dine off tables, and they should have sauces and sweets in the modern style.

    Yes, I said, now I understand: the question which you would have me consider is, not only how a State, but how a luxurious State is created; and possibly there is no harm in this, for in such a State we shall be more likely to see how justice and injustice originate. In my opinion the true and healthy constitution of the State is the one which I have described. But if you wish also to see a State at fever-heat, I have no objection. For I suspect that many will not be satisfied with the simpler way of life. They will be for adding sofas, and tables, and other furniture; also dainties, and perfumes, and incense, and courtesans, and cakes, all these not of one sort only, but in every variety; we must go beyond the necessaries of which I was at first speaking, such as houses, and clothes, and shoes: the arts of the painter and the embroiderer will have to be set in motion, and gold and ivory and all sorts of materials must be procured.

    True, he said.

    Then we must enlarge our borders; for the original healthy State is no longer sufficient. Now will the city have to fill and swell with a multitude of callings which are not required by any natural want; such as the whole tribe of hunters and actors, of whom one large class have to do with forms and colours; another will be the votaries of music—poets and their attendant train of rhapsodists, players, dancers, contractors; also makers of divers kinds of articles, including women's dresses. And we shall want more servants. Will not tutors be also in request, and nurses wet and dry, tirewomen and barbers, as well as confectioners and cooks; and swineherds, too, who were not needed and therefore had no place in the former edition of our State, but are needed now? They must not be forgotten: and there will be animals of many other kinds, if people eat them.

    Certainly.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Indeed, and precisely...

      Thanks for the lesson.

      Delete
  8. Did you miss Gary Johnson on Reddit? http://ow.ly/dDO1P

    ReplyDelete

As this site encourages free speech and expression any and all honest political commentary is acceptable. Comments with cursing or vulgar language will not be posted.

Effective 8/12/13 Anonymous commenting has been disabled. This unfortunate action was made necessary due to the volume of Anonymous comments that are either off topic or serve only to disrupt honest discourse..

I apologizes for any inconvenience this necessary action may cause the honest Anonymous who would comment here, respect proper decorum and leave comments of value. However, The multitude of trollish attack comments from both the left and right has necessitated this action.

Thank you for your understanding... The management.