New Gun Rights Group Claims that War on Drugs Degrades Constitution

[CaliFFL]

I know legalization is a hot topic here, but I find this very interesting.


Former National Rifle Association spokesman and American Shooting Sports Council Executive Director Richard Feldman has formed a new gun rights group -- the Independent Firearms Owners Association -- that will not only push for pro-Second Amendment policies, but lobby for marijuana legalization.


http://www.outdoorlife.com/blogs/gun...s-constitution

[tennmike]

He actually makes a good point. The war on poverty started with the administration of LBJ. We lost that one and the unintended consequences of it plague us more and more with each passing year. The war on drugs started with the administration of Nixon, and we have lost that one, too. And the unintended consequences of that one grow, and fill the prison system with nonviolent offenders. The war on poverty and the war on drugs both produce money and power for those that game the system. Way past time the foolishness stopped.

[DoctorWho]

Prohibition did not work, it was an exercise in futility, it created a vacuum, organized crime ramped up activities to supply a new demand, this in turn spawned corruption of diverse LE agencies and politicians, then a swollen Federal agency spent resources to fight a needless battle.

Drugs are a self correcting problem, the heroin addict will eventually OD and Darwin himself out of the picture.

[Big Battery]

It was the War on Drugs that caused Police Officers to start referring to us as civilians...

[tennmike]

Prohibition did not work, it was an exercise in futility, it created a vacuum, organized crime ramped up activities to supply a new demand, this in turn spawned corruption of diverse LE agencies and politicians, then a swollen Federal agency spent resources to fight a needless battle.

Drugs are a self correcting problem, the heroin addict will eventually OD and Darwin himself out of the picture.

True. The hard core drug users will eventually Darwin out by some means.
Methamphetamine use skyrocketed around the same time that marijuana was being interdicted well. So the drug runners started running meth across the border. A few kilos of meth were much more valuable than a truckload of weed. FWIW, I'd rather have a neighbor growing a little weed for his own use than to have that same neighbor cooking meth and making the neighborhood a hazmat superfund site. Actually did have a neighbor cooking large amounts of meth in his old barn. The darned 'lab' caught on fire and burned down the old barn and his house, and nearly spread to his neighbor's house up the hill when it set the leaves and 8 foot pine tree privacy border on fire. Never seen a barn go up that quick or burn that hot; lots of small explosions, too. The volunteer fire department spent their resources protecting the neighbor's house.

If you want to make something wildly popular, prohibit it. Human nature will take over. That which we cannot have is what we desire the most.

[jbp-ohio]

I know legalization is a hot topic here, but I find this very interesting.


Former National Rifle Association spokesman and American Shooting Sports Council Executive Director Richard Feldman has formed a new gun rights group -- the Independent Firearms Owners Association -- that will not only push for pro-Second Amendment policies, but lobby for marijuana legalization.


http://www.outdoorlife.com/blogs/gun...s-constitution

As long as businesses can still test and fire users without user getting unemployment.... OK, I'm on board

Also start a random testing policy for ANY person getting a check from the government (state and federal)

I don't like the idea of legalization, but I don't like the idea of breaking down doors on the word of a crackhead looking for a plea deal even less.....

[CaliFFL]

[QUOTE=jbp-ohio;107401]As long as businesses can still test and fire users without user getting unemployment.... OK, I'm on boardQUOTE]

If the user isn't high on the job, why should it matter? Same as booze...

[alphasigmookie]

[QUOTE=CaliFFL;107404]

As long as businesses can still test and fire users without user getting unemployment.... OK, I'm on boardQUOTE]

If the user isn't high on the job, why should it matter? Same as booze...

That...why are we so hesitant to give power to government but then freely give even greater power to "private" corporations? The growing control that we've been giving to employers over the private lives of their employees to me is just as scary if not scarier than the growth of government control.

Also, before people claim that employment is voluntary, it's really not. With more and more of the available jobs being provided by fewer and fewer, larger and larger companies that all seem to follow the same "group think" anti-employee HR policies, the options for most people are extremely limited.

[jbp-ohio]

[QUOTE=alphasigmookie;107409]

That...why are we so hesitant to give power to government but then freely give even greater power to "private" corporations? The growing control that we've been giving to employers over the private lives of their employees to me is just as scary if not scarier than the growth of government control.

Also, before people claim that employment is voluntary, it's really not. With more and more of the available jobs being provided by fewer and fewer, larger and larger companies that all seem to follow the same "group think" anti-employee HR policies, the options for most people are extremely limited.

Because it really is about safety.

Having the guy sitting at the desk beside you stoned, isn't the same as having the guy driving a forklift in a confined space with 100 people while hauling 10,000# coils of metal being high........

When I am made King, I will make it a law to have a breathilizer hooked up to the time clock. You will have to blow before you can clock in. A drunk nearly got me burned when I worked at the chemical plant.

[DoctorWho]

You know, that comment made Me think, or perhaps put My mind in the gutter..........

"When I am made King,.........."

"You will have to blow ( __ ) before you can clock in. A drunk nearly got (me) burned when I worked at the chemical plant.

After all, it is not who you know that keeps you employed, its who you...........

[Teach]

It's pretty evident who works for a living, and who shuffles paper. I totally agree that anyone who comes to a real job impaired needs to be canned on the spot- - - -no mercy, no appeals, no second chances. It's like the Air Force ground pounders who used to gripe about aircrews getting extra pay for being on flying status. I've never seen two desks in the orderly room crash into each other at 500 MPH!
Jerry

[tennmike]

I worked in nuclear power. Random drug tests. Zero tolerance on drug use. If you were taking any prescription drugs, you had to check in with medical before reporting to work.
In the Navy, it was zero tolerance, too. Didn't want a missile tech working on missiles stoned, or a gunners mate stoned working on weapons in the armory. Or the engine room crew trippin' on watch.
Marijuana effects wear off pretty fast. If you show up at work stoned, you need to be shown the door, and don't let it bang you in the butt on the way out. No excuse for showing up for work in an altered state, ever.

[Bigslug]

Makes perfect sense to me. Liberals claim to protect us from guns, while conservatives claim to protect us from drugs. Both end up holding big chunks of your freedom. Apply Ben Franklin's adage of liberty and security here.

As Eli said so well on the old forum: You can walk down main street while freebasing on coke with an AT-4 strapped to your back for all I care; until you point that AT-4 at someone who isn't deserving of a rocket-enema, we don't have a problem.

[DoctorWho]

To amplify, give all the freaks as much Meth and Coke and Heroin as they want, so they OD fast.......

Let the sober folks can defend themselves from the drug crazed freaks as need be...... very simple, it is a self correcting problem, and you will save BILLIONS of DOLLARS in Court costs and associated expenses, LE budgets etc.....

[alphasigmookie]

It's pretty evident who works for a living, and who shuffles paper. I totally agree that anyone who comes to a real job impaired needs to be canned on the spot- - - -no mercy, no appeals, no second chances. It's like the Air Force ground pounders who used to gripe about aircrews getting extra pay for being on flying status. I've never seen two desks in the orderly room crash into each other at 500 MPH!
Jerry

I didn't see anyone say anything about employers having a right to control what you do or what state you're in once you punch the time clock and you're on their time. The issue I have is when they start trying to control the activities you partake in after you clock out. There has been enough overstepping in this domain with trying to ban smoking and firearms in private vehicles in recent years to illustrate the slippery slope.

While like most folks I may be a "wage slave", I'm not willing to become a complete slave to my employer.

[rbsivley]

I didn't see anyone say anything about employers having a right to control what you do or what state you're in once you punch the time clock and you're on their time. The issue I have is when they start trying to control the activities you partake in after you clock out. There has been enough overstepping in this domain with trying to ban smoking and firearms in private vehicles in recent years to illustrate the slippery slope.

While like most folks I may be a "wage slave", I'm not willing to become a complete slave to my employer.

That's how I feel. Why do they care what I do after 1530 and why can I drink till I pass out every night as long as I sign in on time but don't dare get a little buzz for fear of a piss test.__

[DoctorWho]

I didn't see anyone say anything about employers having a right to control what you do or what state you're in once you punch the time clock and you're on their time. The issue I have is when they start trying to control the activities you partake in after you clock out. There has been enough overstepping in this domain with trying to ban smoking and firearms in private vehicles in recent years to illustrate the slippery slope.

While like most folks I may be a "wage slave", I'm not willing to become a complete slave to my employer.

I worked for a private industry company / secure facility, when they changed policy, and stated that as part of the agreement to use the company parking lot, they could check My car at any time, there were some really large thefts of super valuable items, some of them very small and easy to conceal on ones person with very little trouble, I met with the bosses, and told them two things, made it quite clear, I had ZERO interest in stealing anything regardless of its value, 1-3 Million dollars worth, and I turned in My coded pass for the parking lot gates, if they now wanted to search My vehicle ( utility Truck)
They now needed a search warrant, but when nothing was found, I would sue them and win.

I usually had a couple of AR-15s ammo and other gun stuff securely locked up in the truck, the real reason I did not want them searching My truck and asking why or what I had locked up.....

[robert38-55]

He actually makes a good point. The war on poverty started with the administration of LBJ. We lost that one and the unintended consequences of it plague us more and more with each passing year. The war on drugs started with the administration of Nixon, and we have lost that one, too. And the unintended consequences of that one grow, and fill the prison system with nonviolent offenders. The war on poverty and the war on drugs both produce money and power for those that game the system. Way past time the foolishness stopped.

Yea I remember all that tennmike LBJ's Great society, War on poverty, War on Drugs, etc. Remember Tricky Dick's Nixon WIN Whip Inflation now?

[Make_My_Day]

Yea I remember all that tennmike LBJ's Great society, War on poverty, War on Drugs, etc. Remember Tricky Dick's Nixon WIN Whip Inflation now?

What a totally moronic slogan to have when it is the government (FED) that is responsible for inflating the dollar.

To stay with the theme of the thread, I say they should legalize marijuana and stop prosecuting petty possession cases of hard drugs for the users and concentrate on dealers. For the job related cases of intoxication, regardless of the substance, random tests are an invasion of privacy in my opinion. Have people trained in the visual detection of substance abuse and give suspected users the tests. Have substance sniffing dogs on site if necessary.

[Bigslug]

I think if various drugs are legalized - in short, put on the same level as alcohol - you're going to have to treat employment issues by judging level of impairment and overall workplace performance rather than by the fact the drug can be found in someone's system. You can't fire someone for drinking or smoking off the clock, but you can fire them for showing up wasted or for lighting up in the bathroom. Much the same would become true of other substances if they were legalized.

And then there's the problematic question of what constitutes impairment. Some form of drug specific equivalent to B.A.C. would be a start, but it's no exact science. Some people are tipsy after a single beer, and then there's Doc Holliday who was an effective gunfighter even with blood that was probably flammable.

Not saying I have an answer, but what impositions are you willing to live under to be made "safe"? Making intoxicated driving illegal hasn't kept people from doing it, so do we have punishment for supposedly endangering, but not actually harming anyone, or do we save the consequences for when someone actually DOES get hurt? Much like with gun control - do you heap restrictions on people who's guns remain harmless merely because other people misuse them? As a blanket statement, I tend to prefer freedom with a few risks involved.