Wednesday, October 24, 2012

This prohibition is different

Many times I have pointed out that the old alcohol prohibition (which never really ended, but was just changed to profit a nastier gang) and the current prohibition on politically-incorrect drugs have a lot in common.  Such as creating gang violence and inflating prices and selecting for criminals in the supply of the prohibited substances.  Without making the demand for the substances go away even a little.

There is one big difference between the old alcohol prohibition and the current everything else prohibition, though: the most dangerous gangs this prohibition has spawned are the ones with the badges.

Now, I admit, the old prohibition is not something I have first-hand knowledge of.  And history books often lie.  Still, I'm willing to believe them when they claim the worst prohibition-related violence back then was committed by the "criminals".

That simply isn't the case with the current prohibition.

This time, more innocent people are hurt and killed by the prohibition enforcers.  They are worse, by at least an order of magnitude, than the prohibition violators.

And, even the prohibition violators who cause real harm are outnumbered greatly by those who violate prohibition non-violently.  The same can't be said about the enforcers.  Even the "best" of the prohibition enforcers is destroying lives every time he kidnaps or robs someone who did no actual wrong, but only ignored a counterfeit "law".  And the enforcers who cause real harm also outnumber the prohibition violators who cause real harm.  It's time to put an end to this stupidity.



  1. Another aspect of the old prohibition that is missing today and an aspect that put the final nails in the coffin of jury nullification, is that many juries during the old prohibition would not find a local person, someone they knew, guilty of breaking the anti-alcohol laws. There were many, many local wine and moonshine producers, know to the community who wanted them to make the alcohol for them. Today, "the people" have been brainwashed to believe that anything that is legal is justice. The law does not equal justice.

  2. Which is why "people like me" are not allowed on juries.

  3. Having an opinion seems to universally exclude one socially. It follows that having an opinion is sufficient cause to some to mistrust the 'opinionated' ones.

    I don't know how many jury trials are conducted in this area (of several hundred thousand people) but in 30 year, I know only a handful of people who were ever asked to serve.

    It's too bad that most of the accused persons fear injustice for even asking for a real trial.

    ... They might get the idea to have one of their own trials - with people popularly elected - on the spot.

    Wouldn't that be a shocker? yeah, but who has the gonads for that?

  4. Sadly, the only jury I've been selected for was a murder trial, where there was no opportunity to oppose the law itself.

    However, I was quite pleased to acquit the defendant due to the gross stupidity of the prosecution.

  5. I would have a hard time convicting anyone of anything in a government court.

    I know cops lie. I know crime labs lie to get the result the prosecutors want. I know judges lie to the jury. All in all, I'd prefer to say "not guilty" no matter how guilty the guy looked.