Drug Abuse - True Problem or Media Hype? (Worse Still)
SEVENER
> >
> > I suggest people do all in their power, write letters to the editor,
> > write their Congresspeople, and whatever possible to stop this new
> > facism before it gets started.
>
> It is getting worse!! There is a bill before congress
> that attempts to limit the exclusionary rule, give the military
> police powers, and institute the death penalty in certain drug
> dealing cases! Note that the states, who formerly had the
> power to legislate drug use (pot is decriminalized in Alaska)
> will have that power weakened, the death penalty, likewise,
> is a state issue. It strikes me that the centralization of
> police athority is an extremely bad idea. Who will police
> the police? Especially if the police are tautological with
> the most powerful military organization in the world?
>
> I am writing my congressperson and I am using the arguments
> sketched in the article referenced on the top and my other
> article "The War On Drugs is Mind Control and Colonialism."
> I wonder if that article made it everywhere because I have been
> getting much response to the article refered to in the title,
> but none on the other.
>
> Don Steiny @ Don Steiny Software
Using the military as a *police* force is particularly scary when
you see its results in both past history and other countries.
Are people so stupid as to forget that it was precisely engaging
the military in these sorts of police activities in Latin American
countries which led to death squads in El Salvador, Brazil, Argentina,
Guatemala, and other Latin American countries??
(Oh, I forgot. Somehow the Death Squads in all these countries
were never front-page news like true-blue enemy "terrorists".
Death Squads, we all know, are not "terrorists", just maintaining
order via the firm hand of random execution!)
Moreover, giving this sort of power to the military can be
a grave threat to civilian control and our democracy.
By being restricted to the primary function of simply defending
us against outside invasion, the military has not acquired domestic
power of its own. To break down that barrier is *VERY DANGEROUS*.
tim sevener whuxn!orb
Don Steiny
> In article <12...@whuxl.UUCP> o...@whuxl.UUCP (SEVENER) writes:
> >> > "The Drug Crackdown is the McCarthyism of the 80's"!!
>
>
> Don Steiny writes:
> >> It is getting worse!! There is a bill before congress
>
>
> This is net.med and its purpose is to support a discussion about medical
> issues. It's pretty clear that neither of you has anything creative to say
> about a medical field. Please, redirect your postings to elsewhere.
I have talk.poltics.misc in the header line. For political
and religious reasons we have given the medical profession
outragous powers. That is an other issue. Execpt for
alcohol and tobacco the only people that can legally push drugs
are doctors (they made a killing during prohibition perscribing
whiskey). It is a medical issue because we live in a society
where it seems reasonable that the medical profession should have
control over behavior. As ludicrous as this is, it generates
considerable overlap between medicine, politics, and religion.
>
> Both of you seem to be missing an elementary fact, necessary to understand
> the difference between a drug use and a tobacco use. Regardless of the
> unquestionable harm implied by both substances, this society has decided
> (for whatever reasons) to accept only one of them, namely tobacco.
> It's probably because of the reasonably safe end deterministic behaviour
> of the addicts (and if they want to die, fine).
In the United States, we have the freedom to question laws.
Remember that at one time alcohol was illegal, but we decided that
it was a mistake to make it illegal. The reasons why various
drugs are illegal are well documented parts of US history.
What are you? A communist? You sould like a communist to me.
Obey the law and don't question the state! Wake up buddy! This
is America.
> BUT and this is a big but, if you want to use drugs you MUST do something
> ILLEGAL in order to obtain them. And there are fortunately still some
> people around that do believe in a law.
This is circular. They are illegal because there are laws
against them.
>
> So if you want to disscuss whether or not the drugs are harmful
> and you find somebody here willing to waste his time, go right ahead.
Gee, thanks!
> Meanwhile, stop writing the letters to your congressmen and think
> a little bit about what you are saying.
Hmm, I know what year every drug was made illegal. I know
which congresspeople were instrumental in generating the legislation,
I know the social conditions that prevailed at the time. I know
the chemical composition of most drugs or I can look it up in a
moment. I know the receptor sites in the brain that the drugs
bind to (for those that do such things), and much more. You just
said that you do know even know why some drugs are illegal and
others not! YOU are telling ME that I should think? It looks
to me like your knee is jerking.
> And don't forget that there
> are some of us, who not only don't want to live surrounded by drug
> addicts but
> . . .also don't sit quiet and make sure proposals like yours
> don't get very far. I, for one always will.
> zdenek
I proposed that we do not loose our heads over a problem
that is media and political hype and recind the constitution in the
process. Are you saying that you are going to try to recind the
constitution? That's what we're afraid of!
--
scc!steiny
Don Steiny @ Don Steiny Software
109 Torrey Pine Terrace
Santa Cruz, Calif. 95060
(408) 425-0382