Knowledge Hub: 'History of Prohibition- Why It Failed?'

Source:Knowledge Hub- Big Government, is coming for you.

Source:The New Democrat

"People like booze. Now. But there was a time alcohol was a matter of debate and was made illegal. Here is why it failed.

Music by No Sustain

Written and Edited by Tyler Franklin"

Source:Google Sites- Yes, end the War on Drugs. 

From Knowledge Hub

As someone who is a nondrinker ( when it comes to alcohol ) I believe I have a lot of credibility when it comes to alcohol and other prohibitions, simply because I'm not looking to keep products like alcohol, tobacco, sugar, salt, caffeine, and any other current drugs that Americans consumer that are currently legal simply so I can continue to consume them, but because I don't believe they should be illegal. I don't want to legalize marijuana and decriminalize harder narcotics because I want to consume them, but because I don't believe people should be put in prison or even jail simply for consuming or possessing these products.

I simply as a Liberal don't believe that people should be arrested and put in jail simply for doing or consuming things that are dangerous and come with negative side-effects. You need a better argument than, "this is bad for you and dangerous and if you do this or take this, you're going to be locked, because these products are bad for you." Or you need a better argument than these products violate some people's religious and moral values in order to outlaw something. You need a fact-based argument that lays out that the negative consequences of using let's say risky products or so great that if they're allowed to be consumed in society that not only will the people who consume them be negatively affected. but the people around then and the greater society will be harmed to the point that society couldn't afford those negative affects. An argument that has never been made to outlaw alcohol or any other product that comes with real risk in America.

So why bas prohibition failed?

I'll give you a hypothetical: think about a father who doesn't want his daughter ( let's say ) seeing her boyfriend anymore simply because the father doesn't like him and doesn't want him around his daughter and he tells his daughter that and perhaps even tells her boyfriend that he doesn't' want him seeing his daughter anymore and if does, there will be real consequences for that: you think the daughter is going to stop seeing her boyfriend simply because her father no longer wants her to see him, especially if her father can't explain why he doesn't' like him, or why he's bad for her? Well, if you're familiar with teenage girls in America and perhaps outside of this country, you know that they won't stop seeing people simply because their parent or parents tell them not to.

The so-called War on Drugs whether it was alcohol prohibition in the 1920s or the war on harder narcotics today like marijuana ( and there's still a question of whether marijuana is actually a harder narcotic than marijuana ) has failed for the same reasons. Just because you tell someone they can't do something especially if the person is an addict or they know what they're doing is not so dangerous than they can die from, especially if they don't abuse alcohol or marijuana, doesn't mean they'll stop doing it or taking whatever they're into. It just means that what they're currently doing is illegal and that they may end up in jail or prison if they're caught in possession or consuming what they're into.

What you get with the so-called War on Drugs is an overcrowded, unaffordable, and unsustainable criminal justice and prison incarceration system where maybe 1-10 American prison inmates don't represent any actual threat to society. If they represent any threat whatsoever to anyone, it's to themselves, but because they're addicts. If your'e a true fiscal Conservative, you hate the so-called War on Drugs and criminal justice system in America, because it's so expensive, because we lock up people for what they do to themselves. You're cool with locking up predators who hurt innocent people especially if the punishment is just, but locking up people for what they do to themselves is a waste of tax dollars and you hate that as a fiscal Conservative.

So the War on Alcohol and the broader so-called War on Drugs has failed for several reasons: One, almost 50 years later after President Richard Nixon launched this so-called war we're still fighting it. That should be a pretty good clue there. But now thanks to this so-called war we have an overcrowded, unaffordable, unsustainable criminal justice system in a time when we're running trillion-dollar deficits and have a national debt of over 20 trillion-dollars.

Just because you outlaw something doesn't mean it goes away, it just means that it's now illegal and will go underground. And the people who get caught will end up in prison simply because they were caught in possession or caught using a product that Big Government says is dangerous and should be illegal.

Just like the father who tells his daughter to stop seeing her boyfriend for no apparent reason: they'll continue to see each other, but behind her parents backs and no longer be upfront and honest about their relationship.

The Washington Monthly: Martin Longman- 'White House Heroin Initiative is a Start'

Source:Washington Monthly- Everyone should say no to heroin. But they shouldn't be in prison for saying yes to heroin.

Source:The New Democrat

"I’m glad the White House is finally moving on the heroin/opioid epidemic in this country, and I think what they’re going to announce tomorrow morning is a good start, for the most part. What I think is needed, however, is much more public input, particularly from folks who are on the ground trying not just to interdict the trade in opioids, but from the ones who are taking responsibility for trying to help people kick and keep addicts alive."

From Washington Monthly

"EDGARTOWN, Mass. (AP) -- The White House is launching a new  million initiative to combat heroin use and trafficking of the drug, particularly in states along the East Coast. About half of the money will fund a program to link public health and law enforcement agencies, with the goal of prioritizing treatment for drug users over punishments. Monday's announcement comes amid a spike in heroin use and deaths in the United States. The rise in heroin use has become a frequent topic in the 2016 presidential campaign. Democratic frontrunner Hillary Rodham Clinton recently held a forum in New Hampshire on drug addiction, an issue she said voters have been frequently raising as she's campaigned in the early voting state."

Source:Local 12- Chief Bill Kramer, of the Norwood Police.

From Local 12

This is really something that we should’ve been doing since the so-called War on Drugs started in 1971. But then had we of done that, then maybe the War on Drugs is never started. Wait, that would’ve actually been a great thing. Just think of the hundreds of thousands of people we wouldn’t have in prison today. And instead of collecting tax dollars, instead they’re getting cleaned and paying into the system instead. What I’m getting at is not a question of whether this would be a good idea or not. That is treating non-drug selling drug offenders as addicts and putting them in rehab instead of jail. But the question is like any government initiative especially when budgets are tight, is how you pay for it.

Generally speaking, I’m a big fan of the 2010 Affordable Care Act, which I believe I’ve made clear on this blog. But it does have at least three major shortfalls. Not creating a public option for Medicare. So non-seniors, could pay into Medicare along with their employers and use that as their health insurance. And it would have been their option, not mandate. Dealing with mental health care and not fulling paying for our mental health care system in this country. Had we done that, I believe we would have fewer shootings today. Because those shooters would have been in a mental hospital getting the help that they need. And the other has to do with drug rehab and the War on Drugs.

You put drug addicts into rehab and people who are caught in possession of heroin, cocaine, or meth, in halfway houses, if they’re not addicts instead of jail, or prison and same thing with small time drug dealers, we would have a mentally and physically healthier country. We would also have a hell of a lot fewer people in the criminal justice system. Instead they would be in the health care system as it as to do with drug abuse. And abusing alcohol, tobacco and legal medications, is also abusing drugs. Only you don’t go to jail for abusing those drugs if that’s all you’re doing. But you do make a mess of your life that others may have to pay for.

I think the way we finance drug rehab in America, is the same way we could finance mental health. Which is though the health insurance system both private and public. Require all public and private health insurers, including Medicare and Medicaid, to cover mental health and drug rehab. I would even be happy raise the payroll tax and cut the corporate tax to pay for this. So people don’t lose other benefits as a result. And tell illegal drug users, that they’re going to rehab instead of jail. And they successfully complete the program. They won’t get a criminal record as a result. Instead of treating essentially mental patients, which addicts are in a way, like felons.

Brave New Foundation: 'Former Prosecutor John Amabile- Drug Policy Kills More People Than The Drugs Themselves'

Source:Brave New Foundation- former Boston, MA prosecutor John Amabile.

"John Amabile was a prosecutor in Boston and saw the effects of the War on Drugs first-hand. What he saw confirmed that current policies aren't working. 

This is part of the SafeKeepers video series produced by the Beyond Bars campaign and Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (LEAP). ABOUT BRAVE NEW FILMS 

Robert Greenwald and Brave New Films (BNF) are at the forefront of the fight to create a just America. Greenwald and BNF create free documentary films that inform the public, challenge corporate media, and motivate people to take action on social issues nationwide. Brave New Films’ investigative films have shined a light on the Trump administration, voter suppression, U.S. drone strikes, the prosecution of whistleblowers, and Wal Mart’s corporate practices. BNF's mission is to champion social justice issues by using a model of media, education, and grassroots volunteer involvement that inspires, empowers, motivates and teaches civic participation and makes a difference." 

From Brave New Foundation 

If you add up all of the people we lose in the War on Drugs, from people who get shot in the streets over it or even get shot by law enforcement officer prosecuting this so-called War or the people we lose to prison each year who never come out the same as when they went in and generally come out worse or better criminals then when they went in, it wouldn't surprise me that we lose every year more people to the so-phony War on Drugs, then we lose people to illegal narcotics in America. 

The War on Drugs is really more a war on people who use or sell illegal narcotics. We arrest and put people away and in a lot of case for long sentences for simply possessing or using illegal narcotics. We arrest and lockup people for what they do to themselves and we arrest and lockup people for selling illegal narcotics, selling a product that we clearly have a large market for in America or we wouldn't be fighting this so called war for now over forty years and working with other countries to keep these illegal narcotics out of the country in the first place.

How America deals with narcotics should be done with two principles in mind: freedom of choice meaning that adults are smart enough to make these decisions for themselves instead of Uncle Sam making these decisions for them and that regulation and taxation would be a better way to control. narcotics, then locking up people for what they do to themselves which is wrong on many levels. 

Rehabilitation for the users of narcotics who are addicted, not incarceration, unless they commit another felony while under the influence. I'm not say I'm for full legalization of narcotics in America, but taxation, regulation and decriminalization would be a much more effective approach.

Reason: Ted Balaker- Interviewing Neill Franklin: 'Five Ways the Drug War Hurts Kids'

Source:Reason Magazine- LEAP's Neill Franklin, being interviewed by Reason Magazine's Ted Balaker.

"Commentators like Bill O'Reilly claim that ending the drug war would lead to more children being abused by drug-addicted parents. But 33-year law enforcement veteran Neill Franklin sees it differently.

"These drugs in an illegal environment are more accessible to our kids," says Franklin, who serves as Executive Director Law Enforcement Against Prohibition, "because we leave complete control, regulation, and standards up to the criminals."

Reason.tv's Ted Balaker sat down with Franklin to discuss how battling drug dealers in Baltimore turned him against the war on drugs and why ending prohibition would improve safety for children, as well as the rest of us."

From Reason Magazine

If there is one war in that America needs to end it's the "War on Drugs". The War on Drugs is almost completely fought from the law enforcement side.  Dealers and users are  both basically seen as criminals who deserve to be locked up.  Narcotics dealers and importers are clearly criminals who deserve to be locked up in maximum security prisons serving long sentences because they make their money selling dope to addicts who use it and, in a lot cases, destroy they're lives or die as a result.  But, a lot of times, their "customers" are not criminals and shouldn't be treated as such.  Narcotics customers are addicts and should be treated as patients.

While I'm for putting narcotics dealers away in prison, I am for sending narcotics users to drug treatment centers.  They could be released when their doctors and judges determine that they're rehabilitated and don't need or want narcotics anymore. They would get treatment, counseling and work while they're at these centers.  They wouldn't be free people who could leave at anytime.  Narcotics addicts sentenced to the treatment centers could be required to pay for their time there.  There could be vouchers or some other arrangement for those who could not afford the treatment.

Now, under the War on Drugs, when drug users are caught and convicted of possession of drugs with intent to use, they are sent to prison.  They serve their sentences and get out still addicted to narcotics.  They may even have used narcotics in prison and picked up a few  more criminal skills.  They go back to the street as narcotics users.  If, instead, we collapsed the narcotics market by getting the customers off of them, dealers would have fewer customers and make less money. After release from the drug treatment center rehabilitated users could be required to provide up to a year of community service. They could be spokesmen for the rehab program telling their community about the dangers of narcotics use and their experiences with it.

This makes financial sense.  One reason the U.S. prison system is over crowded is because a lot of its Inmates  are users who are there for narcotics related crimes.   This program could save a lot of valuable prison space for violent felons who deserve to be there. 

You can also see this post on WordPress. 

You can also see this post at The New Democrat, on WordPress.