Professor Mark J. Perry's Blog for Economics and Finance
Via Andrew Sullivan, Megan McArdle and Don Boudreaux, graphic scenes of a drug raid where a police SWAT team shot two family dogs, killing one and injuring the other, with a seven-year old child present. After searching the house, the police found a "small amount of marijuana."
Bottom Line: It's not really a war on "drugs," it's a war on Americans and sometimes even their family pets.
Dr. Mark J. Perry is a professor of economics and finance in the School of Management at the Flint campus of the University of Michigan. Perry holds two graduate degrees in economics (M.A. and Ph.D.) from George Mason University near Washington, D.C. In addition, he holds an MBA degree in finance from the Curtis L. Carlson School of Management at the University of Minnesota. In addition to a faculty appointment at the University of Michigan-Flint, Perry is also a visiting scholar at The American Enterprise Institute in Washington, D.C.
28 Comments:
Really? Shooting the family dogs just like that? Shameful.
That ought to teach that dog to do drugs...
Haha, they are just too hot in speak of action.
Just a misinterpreted situation..
Ah, the land of the free. Next time I get really pissed at someone, I need to remember to send the cops their way. Too bad we haven't started yet to shoot up suspected drug dealers and their associates from helicopter gunships.
You forgot MY favorite part - they proceeded to charge the family with child endangerment (for having a small amount of marijuana on hand).
Madness.
Meanwhile, 20 million Mexicans are invading the U.S. across the southern border and the federal government doesn't give a damn.
Was this video shot in the U.S., or some Third World creep state? When did civilian U.S. police start dressing like Nazis?
Well, on second thought, we need these SWAT teams: After all, U.S. troops are propping up a narco-state in Afghanistan, now the world's biggest exporter of opium. U.S. Marines now protect the opium fields of nacro-lords who are loyal to Karzai, who's brother is one of the largest opium lords in Afghanistan.
We are only in for nine years and a trillion dollars in Afghanistan, so I think this is working out.
I see Iraq is going well too, with neocons saying we just have to hang in for a few more years, and send more money and troops until it settles down too.
This video is absolutely disgusting.
Wow, what are our priorities folks? Let's bust into someone house, shoot the family dogs, scar the child for life and cuff the dad. Damn war on drugs.
Sieg Heil (hail victory)!
Fallacious reasoning.
Doesn't mean you're wrong, but this post doesn't prove your point.
U.S. special forces shot two family dogs, with a seven-year old child present. After searching the house, the squad found a "scrawny terrorist recruit."
Bottom Line: It's not really a war on "terrorism," it's a war on Iraqis.
Haven't these people ever heard of motion sensor lights.
Come on to my property and you're going to get hit with a flood of lights. A few more steps and the sprinkler manifolds come on. Try for the door and get greeted by 200 psi water jets.
And don't even think about trying to pull the electrical meter.
I'm not opposed to legalization of drugs. But only if they accompany that with federal laws allowing concealed carry, allow people to opt out of substance abuse coverage, repeal Obamacare, and start pushing more of the costs of paramedics, police, and ERs onto heavy users of those services.
Yes the war on drugs is expensive, but so are the costs built into the health system, judicial system, and emergency services. Legalizing drugs will only cut the enforcement efforts, while raising the others. Make sure those costs get shifted onto users and count me in.
If you decriminalize drugs and focus on treatment, the price comes down, low level crime drops, the need for jails, courts and cops drops.
Reagan push Thatcher to criminalize drugs in Britain and from the information I've seen, Britain had a sharp increase in users after criminalization since they moved away from treatment. So I do see heath care costs increasing.
The big problem with decriminalize is that the politicians want to levy such high taxes on drugs that the criminal aspects of drug use will remain the same as it is today.
The social conservatives need to grow up and realize there never has been a drug free society. Offer treatment to those that want it and get them productive and let the rest get by.
Portugal decriminalized drugs around 10 years ago and have some of the lowest drug abuse rates in Europe.
California decriminalized drugs, and drug abuse is rampant. The U.S. should follow the Texas or Japanese models if it really wants to reduce drug abuse.
From article: "Drug Legalization: Myths vs. Reality"
"Drugs have not always been part of American society. Most Americans today can remember a time when drugs were not in the workplace or discussed casually on television, and when schools were free of drugs. The explosion of drug use during the 1960s and 1970s was the result of a misguided acceptance of drugs and the defacto legalization policies of the time.
Drug use is not victimless. Not only do individuals commit crimes under drug influence, but drug users are involved in 10 percent to 15 percent of highway fatalities, are two to three times more likely to be involved in workplace accidents (injuring others as well as themselves), and give birth to 100,000 cocaine addicted infants each year.
It is possible to make America drug-free. Drug use already has fallen by more than a third since 1985. Drug use among 18- to 25-year-olds is down 53 percent for marijuana and 52 percent for cocaine since 1977. This is hardly the time to run up the white flag."
PeakTrader,
Why not follow Singapore's model. The government can take hair from anyone at anytime and test it for drugs. If positive, the person "disappears" until clean and dealers are hung in public.
California is a joke that promotes drug use.
If you decriminalize, not legalize drug use and demilitarize the police and focus on treatment and not starting, were going to be much better off as a free people and a free country.
You bring up Texas. It's a state the finances it's government on taking private property without any due process.
I'd rather risk some tokers and keep due process.
Michael, maybe you'll like the Japanese model better:
The Japanese in 1954...inaugurated a system of forced hospitalization for chronic drug users. Under this policy, drug users were rounded up in droves, forced to go through cold-turkey withdrawal and placed in work camps for periods ranging from a few months to several years...This approach to drug users, still in force today, is seen by the Japanese as a humane policy focussed primarily on rehabilitation. By American standards, however, these rehabilitation programs would be seen as very tough.
The Japanese from the very beginning have opted for a cold-turkey drug withdrawal. Thus, every heroin addict identified in Japan is required to enter a hospital or treatment facility, where they go immediately through withdrawal. Conviction through the criminal justice system is not necessary for commitment. Any addict identified, either through examination by physicians or through urine testing, is committed through an administrative process. As a result courts are not burdened with heavy caseloads of drug users, drug users are not saddled with criminal records.
The government also launched a substantial public education campaign, including distributing anti-drug messages through government-controlled television movies, radio, newspapers, magazines and books, and posters in airports, railroad stations, bus terminals, and public buildings. Cabinet ministers, governors, mayors and other public officials regularly conducted public forums on the perils of drug use.
These policies dramatically and rapidly cut drug use. Within four years of the 1954 amendments, the number of people arrested for violating the Stimulant Control Law dropped from 55,654 to only 271in 1958.
Japan began experiencing serious problems with heroin. By 1961 it is estimated that there were over 40,000 heroin addicts in Japan...tougher penalties against importation and selling, and by imposing a mandatory rehabilitation regime for addicts.
The results of Japan's tough heroin program mirrored those of its successful fight against stimulants. The number of arrests for heroin sale and possession fell from a high in 1962 of 2,139 to only 33 in 1966 and have never risen above 100 since.
I agree that if a society is going to make drugs illegal, a Japanese style approach is a better.
One change I'd like to see is if you are found to posses drugs, law enforcement simply takes the drugs and send you on your way providing you're not impaired.
There are some states that park cops close to casinos and pull people over to take their winnings under the pretext that the cash is drug money.
There is a case pending where a guy got a cash payment for a car accident. He was stopped and the police took the money. His attorney provided to the court all the records showing that the money was from a settlement but the prosecutor in the forfeiture case has taken the position that the government is entitled to keep the money because the possibility exists that at some point in the future the money could be used to buy drugs.
I'd doubt such changes will be made since jurisdictions from local to federal use forfeiture laws as a cash cow since they don't require any judicial process.
I'd also like to see the US accept that marijuana has medical uses. 40 some years of research in Israel discovered the cannabinoid system and a variety of treatments have been developed to extend the life of people.
But overall, Americas approach is a failure. Whether drugs become legal or remain illegal, decriminalization and treating the issue as a social health issue will better deal with the issue while restoring some rights Americans once enjoyed.
Marijuana is the "red herring" in the drug war. The drug lords get half their revenue from it, and it accounts for most of the volume (by weight) of traffic. I thought we learned during alcohol prohibition in the 1920's that the approach didn't work.
It is time to legalize, regulate, and the tax (the h*ll out of) this recreational drug. We can use that revenue to focus on the war on hard drugs. A "win" for society in just about every way!
The tax the hell out of it creates its own problems. Schwarzenegger's legalize and tax proposal would have made the legal price higher than the illegal price. Legalization isn't going to work if you don't price the criminals out of the market.
The cops basically handled the situation OK because they had control of the situation.
They broke the door down too quickly without trying to gain peaceful entry for a long enough period.
They did not read out the warrant or show the warrant to the detained person even after they apprehended him.
The cops got the job of enforcing the warrant the question is should it have been issued in the first place.
A small amount of drugs was found but did they suspect the detainee was a significant dealer.
The video shows that somebody is serious about drugs. But who?
It wasn't shown why the dogs were shot.
We need a constitutional amendment that starts invalidating laws once the population in jail exceeds 1% of the civilian population.
I'm a respectable high income tax paying S.O.B. and the police have already alienated me so much that I'll probably get myself in trouble if I get stopped again in my life.
That's a great plan. Legalize it to get more of it and then tax it to get less of it.
The dumbest people making some of the biggest decisions murders one's confidence in democracy.
Post a Comment
<< Home