The Land of the Unfree

elder999

El Oso de Dios!
Lifetime Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 5, 2005
Messages
9,929
Reaction score
1,451
Location
Where the hills have eyes.,and it's HOT!
It’s official! The numbers are in once again! For I-don’t-know-how-many-years-running, the United States, this so-called "land of the free," is imprisoning more people, in both absolute numbers and percentage of its population, than any other country in the world. Russia? China? Cuba? Zimbabwe? Vietnam? We put more people in the calaboose than any of them. And it’s not vast numbers of illegal aliens pouring over our borders we’re incarcerating. It’s not terrorists. It’s us. We’re locking each other up in record numbers. This shouldn’t come as any surprise because all the figures that support what I’m saying come straight from our own justice department. Yet it is a surprise to most people I talk with.

What’s amazing is that some 80 percent of those in prison are there because of what they do to themselves. They’re not murderers, rapists, child molesters, or robbers. They’re not purveyors of death, mayhem, plunder, and destruction. They’re simply people who are doing what they want with their own bodies. During Prohibition, it was a bottle of whiskey that could put you in the clink. Today, it’s "Light up a joint and go to the Big House." In fact, take out the murderers, child molesters, rapists, and robbers, and leave nothing but the consensual criminals, and we’d still have more people in prison than any other country.

It’s insane how we Americans are bent on regulating each others’ behavior. Witness seat belt laws (yes, you should drive with your seat belt on, but having cops pulling you over to enforce it?), drug laws, licensing laws, zoning laws, eminent domain abuses, blue laws, "free speech zones;" the list goes on ad nauseum. We think of ourselves as free, but we are simply the most regulated society in history. And we have more new rules, laws, and regulations pouring out of our legislatures and bureaucracies every year than any other country ever. We just can’t get over this uniquely American obsession of outlawing each other’s behavior—and fining or jailing those who don’t comply or conform.
And get this: We also have record numbers of people whose livelihoods now depend on ensuring others are deprived of their liberty. Get rid of victimless crimes and you’d have to lay off tens of thousands of cops and start shutting down prisons, and most lawyers would have to find a productive line of work. Even drug kingpins would have to start flipping burgers when the prices of their drugs crash because they’re not "regulated" by government prohibition.

So, we’re not only bent on jailing those whose behavior we disapprove of, there are millions of Americans with economic reasons for keeping other Americans unfree, disenfranchised, and locked up. Because paying off mortgages, funding IRAs, and making car payments depend on the system as it stands, there is zero possibility that the problems all these regulations are supposed to be solving will ever go away. Worse, if they did go away, do you really think the regulators will clean out their desks and go home? They won’t. They’ll create new laws, new reasons to throw you, your family, your friends, and your neighbors in prison. Little Johnny needs braces, so off you go to the dungeon. Imprisoning each other is now as American as apple pie.

(And, by the way, if the price of "illegal" drugs drops to that of a six pack of beer, drug users will no longer have to burgle, rob, or assault to get money to feed their habits. They'll be able to afford to buy them while they’re flipping burgers alongside the erstwhile drug kingpins. So, even the rate of violent crime will drop. That is, there’ll be even fewer people in prison for violent crimes than there are now. )

Despite the fact that this country was founded on the concept of natural or God-given rights, in other words, rights no man could take away, we have come to the belief that with a simple majority vote we can and should be able to deprive anyone of his or her rights.

Decades ago I read a statement by a historian who said that long after the fall of the Roman Empire, people still pridefully regarded themselves as Romans. He wrote they just didn’t know or care to admit that Rome had become a victim of its own excesses and decadence and that the Empire was gone—and so was Rome.

I’ll bet that the last time most people read any part of the Constitution was as a kid, for a school assignment, and not as an adult when it would now mean something to them. And, having read it way back then, they’re not going to read it again. Not now. And because of that, they have no idea what the limits are that are supposed to be placed on our government; they have no idea what their freedoms are.

So, next year, I expect even more Americans to be imprisoned by their fellow countrymen. I expect more laws on the books at federal, state, and local levels. I expect more of our behaviors to be regulated. I expect more cops, lawyers, prison guards, and prisons. I expect more idiots will still be calling this "The Land of the Free." Like the Romans of old, we’re not smart enough to see that those days are long gone.
 
OP
elder999

elder999

El Oso de Dios!
Lifetime Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 5, 2005
Messages
9,929
Reaction score
1,451
Location
Where the hills have eyes.,and it's HOT!
Well, to the fellow who posted the anonymous "anarchy peddler" neg. rep. I don't really care about negative rep., but I am curious as to what in the world could possibly lead you to believe that because I support our rights, our Consitutional government, and minimizing its intrusion upon our freedoms, I am an "anarchy peddler?"

After all, the purpose of my posting something like this is to open a discussion, and hear the opinions, both positive and negative, of those who read it, not necessarily to open myself to the childish, churlish unsupported sniping of someone of probable lesser intellect and reading comprehension...

..and what's a DU server?
 

Cryozombie

Grandmaster
MTS Alumni
Joined
Feb 11, 2003
Messages
9,998
Reaction score
206
OOH, Elder, Id take neg rep if someone would acknowlage my Anarchist leanings... Too bad most of the "organized" (haha) anarchy movements in the US I'm familiar with are just neo-hippie liberals hiding behind the term Anarchist while they break drug laws, and protest wars, support the democratic party and do almost nothing else.

Your post made sense man, so of course you'll get attacked for it.
 

5-0 Kenpo

Master of Arts
Joined
Jun 9, 2005
Messages
1,540
Reaction score
60
I agree. Where in the constitution does it say that the government has a right to protect me from myself.
 

Ceicei

Grandmaster
MT Mentor
Joined
Apr 23, 2003
Messages
6,775
Reaction score
85
Location
Utah
Did the DU server go down today, or what?

Maybe the DU he is referring to is DemocraticUnderground.com? This website actually exists. Considering the political implication, it wouldn't surprise me. However, CoryKS can explain better his reference.
 

CoryKS

Senior Master
Joined
Aug 30, 2006
Messages
4,403
Reaction score
183
Location
Olathe, KS
Maybe the DU he is referring to is DemocraticUnderground.com? This website actually exists. Considering the political implication, it wouldn't surprise me. However, CoryKS can explain better his reference.

Bingo. There were several threads running yesterday that made me wonder if something was offline elsewhere. But for the record, I am not the drive-by neg repper. I don't give negative rep.
 

Tez3

Sr. Grandmaster
Supporting Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2006
Messages
27,608
Reaction score
4,901
Location
England
Elder999, you have me confused! On this thread you are bemoaning the fact you have a great many laws and fear being imprisoned yet on another thread you are advocating that the rest of the world is converted to the American way of life as this is the way to world peace!
 

CoryKS

Senior Master
Joined
Aug 30, 2006
Messages
4,403
Reaction score
183
Location
Olathe, KS
elder999:

Your complaint seems to be that drug use only hurts the user and that the government has no right to regulate it. Do me a favor: find a child welfare worker in your area and set up an interview. My wife and I are in the process of getting licensed to adopt, and the number of kids in the system who came in because of neglect or abuse due to drug use by their parent(s) is unbe-frickin-lievable. Please, don't take my word for it - talk to someone who works with the kids.
 

Tez3

Sr. Grandmaster
Supporting Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2006
Messages
27,608
Reaction score
4,901
Location
England
elder999:

Your complaint seems to be that drug use only hurts the user and that the government has no right to regulate it. Do me a favor: find a child welfare worker in your area and set up an interview. My wife and I are in the process of getting licensed to adopt, and the number of kids in the system who came in because of neglect or abuse due to drug use by their parent(s) is unbe-frickin-lievable. Please, don't take my word for it - talk to someone who works with the kids.

Good post! It's very naive to believe drug taking only harms the user. It's always going to be a balancing act between laws that protect as many as possible while maintaining free will.
Can you explain funding IRAs please as it means something else to me being British to what you may mean.
CoryKS good luck with your adoption, it takes special people to take on children who need a great deal of love and give them a better life.
 

CoryKS

Senior Master
Joined
Aug 30, 2006
Messages
4,403
Reaction score
183
Location
Olathe, KS
Good post! It's very naive to believe drug taking only harms the user. It's always going to be a balancing act between laws that protect as many as possible while maintaining free will.
Can you explain funding IRAs please as it means something else to me being British to what you may mean.
CoryKS good luck with your adoption, it takes special people to take on children who need a great deal of love and give them a better life.

An IRA is an Individual Retirement Account, definitely not what you're thinking. Thanks for the support!
 

Tez3

Sr. Grandmaster
Supporting Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2006
Messages
27,608
Reaction score
4,901
Location
England
An IRA is an Individual Retirement Account, definitely not what you're thinking. Thanks for the support!

Cheers! I did rather think it could have been the other! social services over here are very odd when it comes to adopting ( unless you're Madonna) I'm deemed far too old to adopt but for every bit of hard work it entails you I think you will have twice as many blessings!
 

zDom

Senior Master
Joined
Aug 21, 2006
Messages
3,081
Reaction score
110
Well, to throw a comment in as a devil's advocate (I'm not advocating the use of illegal drugs),

most of the harms caused to others/society by illegal drug use are actually the combination of drug use + something.

For example, the child victims? = drug use + having children.

So wouldn't more appropriate legislation be making drug use while a caretaker of children illegal?

(And what about alcohol + having children? Just as bad, just as many victims...)

Most of these social ills are not related to the USE of illegal drugs/legal alcohol, but the ABUSE of these substances.

There are plenty of potheads out there, for example, smoking in their closet who are excellent, loving parents; productive members of society. Doctors, lawyers, POLICE OFFICERS...etc...

And as for social ills, look at how the abuse of FOOD, for example, is causing our health care system billions and billions.

Or the abuse of leisure time (lack of exercise).

Or the combination of the above two factors.

A lot of child victims related to THOSE as well: I read a lot of obits where people die in their 30s or 40s leaving behind children they probably never played catch with.

Unfortunately, legislation is not based on what is best for society, but what is best for the special interests groups who fund election funds and who are well-represented by lobbyists.

It's not really about legislating morality; it's about legislating for the purpose of remaining one of the country's Elite Ruling Class by securing re-election.

There are plenty of legislators and other elected officials who personally would support, for example, the decriminalization of legalization of marijuana but it would be political suicide:

a) We are at WAR with drugs! You would lose a LOT of voters by supporting an end to this war. And a lot of local funding for prosecutors and law enforcement is related to efforts to eradicate drug use/abuse.

b) Pharmaceutical companies couldn't market products like Xanax if you could grow a comprable product in your backyard!

In the meantime, "conform or be cast out" -- Neil Peart, "Subdivisions"

Out and into the pokey!

FWIW, I'm a big fan of John Locke (as were, apparently, the founding fathers of the U.S.), especially his concept of a sphere of freedom.

/end soapbox; fetch beer. :)
 

CoryKS

Senior Master
Joined
Aug 30, 2006
Messages
4,403
Reaction score
183
Location
Olathe, KS
Well, to throw a comment in as a devil's advocate (I'm not advocating the use of illegal drugs),

most of the harms caused to others/society by illegal drug use are actually the combination of drug use + something.

For example, the child victims? = drug use + having children.

So wouldn't more appropriate legislation be making drug use while a caretaker of children illegal?

(And what about alcohol + having children? Just as bad, just as many victims...)

Most of these social ills are not related to the USE of illegal drugs/legal alcohol, but the ABUSE of these substances.

There are plenty of potheads out there, for example, smoking in their closet who are excellent, loving parents; productive members of society. Doctors, lawyers, POLICE OFFICERS...etc...

And as for social ills, look at how the abuse of FOOD, for example, is causing our health care system billions and billions.

Or the abuse of leisure time (lack of exercise).

Or the combination of the above two factors.

A lot of child victims related to THOSE as well: I read a lot of obits where people die in their 30s or 40s leaving behind children they probably never played catch with.

Unfortunately, legislation is not based on what is best for society, but what is best for the special interests groups who fund election funds and who are well-represented by lobbyists.

It's not really about legislating morality; it's about legislating for the purpose of remaining one of the country's Elite Ruling Class by securing re-election.

There are plenty of legislators and other elected officials who personally would support, for example, the decriminalization of legalization of marijuana but it would be political suicide:

a) We are at WAR with drugs! You would lose a LOT of voters by supporting an end to this war. And a lot of local funding for prosecutors and law enforcement is related to efforts to eradicate drug use/abuse.

b) Pharmaceutical companies couldn't market products like Xanax if you could grow a comprable product in your backyard!

In the meantime, "conform or be cast out" -- Neil Peart, "Subdivisions"

Out and into the pokey!

FWIW, I'm a big fan of John Locke (as were, apparently, the founding fathers of the U.S.), especially his concept of a sphere of freedom.

/end soapbox; fetch beer. :)

Well, I agree with a lot of what you say - in theory. It seems to make more sense to criminalize the precise behavior that is causing the problem, rather than making broad ranges of activity illegal. For example, open container laws - it isn't the fact of an uncapped bottle in the vehicle that is killing people, but whether or not the driver is 'faced. Nor, following this line of reasoning, should possession or even distribution be an offense since it is the actual ingestion of the drugs that is causing the problem.

In reality, though, allowing these activities would greatly hinder the prevention of the greater crimes. Should a police officer allow a driver with an open container and a legal BAC go about his business? Is it likely that someone will procure a bag o' dope for the sake of simply owning it? Yeah, the laws are broad-based, but even as broadly defined as they are we still have large numbers of people hurt by these actions. Do you think that number will be reduced as a result of rewriting the laws to more specifically target certain groups?

Like you, I am pretty much a Lockean. The food abuse/poor health argument doesn't hold for me because I don't agree with socialist health care in the first place. Live your life and reap the reward, I say. But as long as other citizens insist on being "charitable" with my money, I'm going to agree with laws that keep that charity to a minimum.
 

5-0 Kenpo

Master of Arts
Joined
Jun 9, 2005
Messages
1,540
Reaction score
60
elder999:

Your complaint seems to be that drug use only hurts the user and that the government has no right to regulate it. Do me a favor: find a child welfare worker in your area and set up an interview. My wife and I are in the process of getting licensed to adopt, and the number of kids in the system who came in because of neglect or abuse due to drug use by their parent(s) is unbe-frickin-lievable. Please, don't take my word for it - talk to someone who works with the kids.


So at what point do we stop legislation that primarily affects the individual commiting the act?

Almost everything a person does affects another person. There is no way around that. And as a police officer in a primarily inner-city municipality, I see the affect that drug use has not only on children, but the person doing the drug also. It is wasteful, and morally inexcusable.

But where do we stop?

It's easy to say that there is a fine balance that must be met, but we contradict ourselves all the time.
 
OP
elder999

elder999

El Oso de Dios!
Lifetime Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 5, 2005
Messages
9,929
Reaction score
1,451
Location
Where the hills have eyes.,and it's HOT!
Elder999, you have me confused! On this thread you are bemoaning the fact you have a great many laws and fear being imprisoned yet on another thread you are advocating that the rest of the world is converted to the American way of life as this is the way to world peace!


Your confusion might be congenital. :) However, on this thread I am bemoaning what is wrong with America today, and a departure from its values, and on the other I was extolling the virtues of capitalism, not necessarily "the American way of life," as well as pointing out the folly of war.....you can, however,believe what you like.
 

Tez3

Sr. Grandmaster
Supporting Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2006
Messages
27,608
Reaction score
4,901
Location
England
Elder you must bear in mind that while you post during the day it's the middle of the night to me lol! Plus my stress levels are high, we are running an MMA show this Saturday and a couple of fighters have dropped oput, aaaargh.... which is why I'm up in the middle of the night Pming and emailing every fighter I can think of for a replacement. Sorry can't afford Americans fighters!

There's problems with all cultures and all economic systems the difference comes when people care and are willing to do something about injustices and governments.
My mother who died in her late eighties a couple of years ago would get very angry when people used to bemoan modern life and say how much better things were in the 'old days'. she said they most certainly weren't better, there was probably more crime, more social injustice and more laws earlier this century than there is now. The difference I think is modern media, nothing happens now without it being flashed onto our TV screens, computers and satellites enable reporters to tell their stories instantly. the streets of London certainly are safer now than they have ever been despite all appearances to the contrary.
Drug use is not a new problem, in Victorian times it was rife and well before that gin was a horrendous problem leading eventually to the licensing laws over here which have only been relaxed in the past couple of years here.
What we see on our screen and read in our papers is always the worst of everything, I'm sure in reality values haven't gone down that much, just at the moment people need to realise they have to stand up and be counted.
 

Last Fearner

2nd Black Belt
Joined
Jan 21, 2006
Messages
712
Reaction score
17
So, next year, I expect even more Americans to be imprisoned by their fellow countrymen....
I expect more of our behaviors to be regulated....
I expect more idiots will still be calling this "The Land of the Free." Like the Romans of old, we’re not smart enough to see that those days are long gone.

America - "Land of the Free!" Free to violate the law. Free to go jail for unlawful behavior. Free to believe what you want, speak openly about your beliefs, protest about your government, and free to vote for who is elected to public service.

Yes! This is the Land of the Free - as free as laws of nature and time for development will allow

"Freedom!" It is an interesting topic, and the American system of government is certainly not without flaws, but for the sake of a stimulating discussion, let's take a look at the very concept of "Freedom."

People are creatures of thought, expression, and action. We can think, we can speak and express ourselves in many ways, and we can move our bodies into action. Yet, are we "free" to do each of these things without restrictions or consequences? Should we be?

In my opinion, the only real, true and total freedom exists if you were the only person alive in the whole universe. You could leave the planet and return, visit any part of the Earth anytime, and claim exclusive ownership to any land, body of water, or airspace that you wanted. You could think, say, and do whatever you wanted, and any damage that you caused would only affect you and your universe. You have the freedom to do whatever you want!

Beyond that scenario, all other concepts of freedom are a compromise in order to balance the same rights and freedoms among all individuals sharing the same universe, planet, continent, etc. For example, you have the right and freedom to stand on a particular spot on a public sidewalk, but then, so do I. We can not both stand on the same spot at the same time, so if I am there first, your "freedom" to stand there is restricted. You have the freedom to walk from point "A" to point "B," but if I am standing in your path, someone's freedom to do as they want is going to be compromised.

Thus, notwithstanding laws that restrict harmful or dangerous behavior which cause a damage to others, we have limits on our freedoms due to laws of nature, and natural contradictions. If you are denied the "freedom" to own land and build a private home to live in, then you are not entirely free. However, if you are granted such a freedom, then every other person is thereafter denied the freedom to own the same land, or build a home there, or perhaps even to enter upon or travel across that land. The exercise of one person's rights and freedoms automatically inhibits another person's freedoms.

Therefore, societies must enact and enforce laws which regulate behavior so that each person has an equal opportunity to enjoy the same rights and freedoms in principle, on balance with the other people in society. Are humans going to be able to manage a system such as a free democracy without flaws? Probably not, but America is about as close to a completely free society as one can get without contradicting laws of nature. If total anarchy ruled, then only those who were able to enforce their will on others would be free, while the rest of the population would be forced to sacrifice their freedoms to accommodate the dominate force (much like a dictatorship).

As to the concern that we are "over-legislating" each other, and putting more people in prison than we need to, I agree. I also believe that there have been more ridiculous laws on the books in past centuries, in America as well as other countries, than there are today. Our Federal Constitution guarantees certain rights to protect our freedoms, and we have the power as a body of people to control our government. It is true that many Americans are ignorant of their power and authority beyond the simple ballot box, because the old concepts from other nations have crept back into the mind-set of the masses of immigrants, and their descendants.

Many Americans might believe that the highest authority in this land is the President, but that would be false. "We the people of the United States of America" are, in fact, the highest authority. The new system of government created in 1776 was designed to turn the idea of a monarchy, and an autocratic concept of government over the people upside-down. This new government of the United States was to become the "public servants" of the people who were all kings and queens of equal status (lacking the radical change of the role of women and minorities in the beginning - the concept was still there for everyone).

Still, we don't have freedom to do whatever we please, because virtually everything we do has an affect on the rights, freedoms, health & safety, and general enjoyment and quality of life for each of our fellow citizens. Even the most secluded, or private act often has consequences which affect the environment, long term health of others, and the delicate fabric of society. What could be deemed as harmless between two or more individuals is often determined in the long run to have a systemic affect on the moral climate, social interactions, economic stability, and potential undermining of future generations which can wreak havoc that can spread like a virus.

I agree that changes need to be made, and the current implementation of democracy is flawed to the point of restricting some freedoms excessively, but I would not conclude that America has become anything less than what could reasonably be expected from a 230 year old trail blazing, thrust into the future of trial and error on a path to the most Free nation on Earth (yeaaay! flag waving >>> fireworks >>> salute to Old Glory >>> tear runs down the cheek as the Star-Spangled Banner is played on CD.)

Yeah, I love this country, and the ideals and concepts for which it stands. I take the good, and try to do something about the not-so-good. I can appreciate elder's complaints and objections because there is some validity to it, but I do not condemn America, nor the modern application of the Judicial system entirely, and the very fact that these objections can be raised without death or imprisonment is what makes this country great!
Let's be positive, and continue to iron out the wrinkles, and mold this country into the grand vision of democracy and freedom that the founding fathers (and mothers) intended.

Just my humble opinion. :ultracool
Last Fearner
 

Latest Discussions

Top