Friday, June 25, 2010

Sarah Palin's fuzzy on pot ~ By Joseph Farah

I have to give this round to Joseph Farah. In fact, he took Sarah Palin to the woodshed on this one. Joseph is most definitely right: laws should either be enforced or scrapped. Joseph wrote, "Selective enforcement is not fair and equitable. Some people get punished for a crime, others do not. It makes no sense. Either the laws on the books are important, or they are not. If they are not, they should be scrapped."

That seems to be plain old common sense, don't you think? Isn't this like the Federal laws against illegal immigration that aren't being enforced? And isn't that why Arizona passed SB 1070 because the Federal government isn't enforcing the existing immigration laws, which was endangering the citizens of Arizona? When laws are being violated, it sends a bad message when the government seems to look the other way. Just sayin'...
The worst possible idea is to keep marijuana illegal and treat it like it is legal.

It makes no sense, it reduces respect for the law and it promotes tolerance for law-breaking.

There is simply no room for mushy, muddle-headed, lukewarm solutions like Sarah Palin has offered. It sounds good. But it's not. We should be hot or cold on this issue – either enforce laws aggressively or scrap them altogether.
By Joseph Farah

Posted: June 25, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2010

Sarah Palin says she doesn't think marijuana should be legalized, but she also doesn't think cops should aggressively enforce laws against it.

"If somebody's gonna smoke a joint in their house and not do anybody any harm, then perhaps there are other things our cops should be looking at to engage in and try to clean up some of the other problems we have in society," she said, characterizing pot-smoking as "a, relatively speaking, minimal problem we have in the country."

On the surface, what Sarah Palin says is likely to resonate with most Americans. Unfortunately, she is exactly wrong in her prescription for more tolerance of marijuana.

There are several problems with what she proposes, which is essentially the status quo policy in most states right now.

First, we should not have laws on the books if we do not intend to enforce them uniformly and aggressively. Selective enforcement is not fair and equitable. Some people get punished for a crime, others do not. It makes no sense. Either the laws on the books are important, or they are not. If they are not, they should be scrapped.

Second, police are not routinely beating down the doors of law-abiding homeowners because they are quietly smoking pot in their living rooms. That's not how police encounter pot smokers. Generally speaking, police find pot when they are do traffic stops. Smoking pot while driving is hazardous not only to those smoking it, but everyone else on the road. Just as drunk driving is considered a very serious crime throughout America, so should be the smoking of pot while driving – or even the possession of it. If someone is driving and has pot on them, isn't this the equivalent of alcohol open-container violations?

Third, marijuana is also often found on those arrested for other crimes – especially drug crimes. These people should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Marijuana is a major product of some of the largest and most dangerous organized crime syndicates in America and around the world. These mobsters kill people, rape people, torture people, enslave people. There's nothing petty about that kind of criminal activity, and marijuana keeps these mobsters in business.

I believe we should either legalize marijuana as a controlled substance or enforce laws against its use and possession with vigor. I'll tell you why.

I'm not a big fan of Rudy Giuliani as a national political figure, but he was probably the best mayor of New York since Fiorella LaGuardia. Why? Because he did such a good job making New York safe. Do you know how he did it? He aggressively enforced even the most "minor" infractions of the law – making New York a city that did not tolerate criminal activity. For instance, he attacked graffiti in two ways – tough enforcement against the vandals and quick removal.

The theory behind this policy was that entire neighborhoods previously marred by graffiti would no longer look like bastions and sanctuaries for criminal activity. Entire neighborhoods were reclaimed by the law-abiding.

What followed was remarkable:
  • murders down
  • armed robberies down
  • break-ins down
  • prostitution down
  • muggings down
Across the board, crime plummeted in New York under Giuliani's attack on the most "minor" criminal infractions.


Bookmark and Share

Be sure to check out
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear!

No comments:

Post a Comment