Prompted by “Mexico: Cartels Declare Open Season on Candidates”: http://www.hightimes.com/read/mexico-cartels-declare-open-season-candidates
“Mexico’s drug cartels appear to have declared open season on any candidate for public office who will not toe their line in the run-up to June’s midterm elections. On May 14, mayoral candidate Enrique Hernández Salcedo was shot to death by gunmen who fired from a passing truck as he was making a speech in the town of Yurécuaro, Michoacán. Three spectators were injured. Hernández was a leader of the town’s ‘self-defense force,’ which took up arms to break the grip of the Knights Templar drug cartel in the region.”
Ending Alcohol Prohibition ended the black market violence associated with alcohol distribution. There is simply no reason to believe ending Certain Drug Prohibition would avoid that same positive outcome.
The war on some drugs (the retarded sequel to Alcohol Prohibition) exacerbates that violence, because the profit margin is much larger and there are more illicit drugs. Criminal organizations of all sizes have an otherwise unachievable huge revenue stream from illegal drug sales, so they have vastly increased their power (even small gangs can leverage fully automatic weapons against public — ironically tragically including law enforcement — safety).
In the case of larger criminal enterprises, their serious profit from illicit drugs gives them the power to deeply adversely affect good governance (and brutally combat rival criminal organizations) with all of the “collateral damage” exploding from such constant violence against healthy relationships, so even remains heavily threatening against national stability.
One local mainstream news outlet here aired a piece yesterday effectively praising the FBI sting against a major drug cartel group operating around our neck of the woods. There is no doubt the story conveys a major success in the war on some drugs, and equally absent in doubt is the sadly familiar journalistically unethical avoidance of the publicly important fact (based on ample historical precedence) that major bust does virtually nothing but waste taxpayer money, because any gap in illicit drug supply is promptly filled. Speaking of wasting taxpayer money, nobody wants to prominently publicly talk about the over $1,000,000,000 spent towards the Merida Initiative roughly over a decade ago to combat Mexican drug cartels (instead reportedly leading to tens of thousands of deaths and apparently no sign of drug trade decay there).
Nobody wants anyone abusing any drug (including the laughably — if not so tragically — arbitrarily legal drug called alcohol) or anything else, but the blatantly liberty-infringing notion that prohibition against use to prevent abuse is still the right path for society is proven outright wrong.
Failure to promptly replace the obviously failed war on some drugs with the obviously needed ‘war’ on unhealthy stress to minimize all forms of abusive behavior is a sign of human weakness.
“Researchers have long recognized a strong correlation between stress and substance abuse…” — the prohibitionist United States National Institute on Drug Abuse (back in 1995) [emphasis mine]
Not only do beneficiaries from black market forces have the violent (and bribing) means against good governance, beneficiaries from upholding the prohibition have leveraged their powerful self-interest means against good governance (the latter beneficiaries forming the real “success” story in sustaining this massively disastrous prohibition against the public they often demonstrably deceptively claim to serve and protect).
The result is literally a horrible loss for public safety (including a powerfully serious blow against honorable law enforcement) — a serious alarm that continued public avoidance will only serve to prompt reality’s likely harsh corrective response at least on behalf of the millions (if not billions) of people victimized by such blatant retardation to “serve” thugs on both sides of the war on some drugs against good governance. Reality always ‘churns’ to sustain its balance (all science points to reality’s need for balance), so the real “open season” is exercised naturally by the supremely powerful being (scientifically speaking) that is existence itself against those demonstrably evil beneficiaries.
Logically speaking, literally all of humanity’s military capability throughout posterity would have no impact against that inevitable correction. Good governance in the form of the Rule of Reality (i.e. reality’s need towards balance) will undeniably emerge victorious. You have a role in that victory, but will that role be pitifully directly/indirectly in support of a demonstrably outrageously sustained horror against sanity (deceptively publicly displayed as necessary societal goodness), or an honorable one against a horrible case of law abuse (the worst form of abuse due to its mainly broad scope of destruction)?
My recently launched Respect Cannabis campaign serves to build “omnipartisan” public support (by negating liberty-infringing political agendas for elitist power), but a sufficiently powerful mass is needed for leverage in the true highest court of the land — the court of public opinion. Despite propaganda informing the contrary, no government can withstand continuously broad public pressures (the only enemy of corruption is sufficient public exposure).
The Commerce Clause (i.e. “To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes”) is the sole “constitutional” basis for the war on some drugs, nationally speaking (apparently still with serious international consequences). While the Commerce Clause may facetiously be a suggestible sleep remedy (who can get righteously excited about the Commerce Clause?), obvious and illegal redefining of that clause (as contained in “smoking gun” form in the public record as supplied by our Supreme Court) effectively undermines the claim that law enforcement is upholding the law (a critical and prompt blow against Certain Drug Prohibition).
“Respondents Diane Monson and Angel Raich use marijuana that has never been bought or sold, that has never crossed state lines, and that has had no demonstrable effect on the national market for marijuana. If Congress can regulate this under the Commerce Clause, then it can regulate virtually anything–and the Federal Government is no longer one of limited and enumerated powers.” — Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas (his dissent in the case of Gonzales v. Raich) [emphasis mine]
Your voice is critical here, so feel free to now join us on behalf of good governance and drug abuse avoidance.
I will not rest until sanity is finally restored to serve and protect the many more (perhaps millions, if not billions, of) victims lined up as targets from a prohibition merely undeniably for the sake of foolish thugs — victims perhaps including you or someone meeting your care.