Home arrow Commentary arrow OPINIONS arrow Politic arrow The Drug War Leads to Gun Control
Oct 21 2009
The Drug War Leads to Gun Control | Print |  E-mail
Political Views
By MWC News   

Translation
Bookmark and Share

ImageThe Drug War Leads to Gun Control
by Jacob G. Hornberger

A fundamental principle of interventionism holds that one government intervention inevitably leads to more interventions, in order to “fix” the problems of the previous interventions. At the end of this road lies omnipotent government and the loss of freedom.

A good example of this phenomenon is being provided by a group called the Binational Task Force , whose co-chairman , Robert Bonner, is former head of the DEA. The group, which also includes two former U.S. ambassadors to Mexico, wants to reinstate the assault-weapon ban that was enacted during the Clinton era.

Guess what the group cites as its justification for such gun control: the drug war. Yes, that war that everyone admits has failed to achieve its objectives despite 45 years of vicious warfare. The task force is saying that reenacting the assault-weapons ban will reduce the drug-war violence that now pervades Mexico.

If I were a believer in extra-terrestrial life, my question would be: What planet are these people from? Do they honestly believe that gun-control intervention is going to alleviate the horrific consequences of their drug-war intervention? Can anyone really be that stupid?

Not likely. My hunch is that these people are simply looking for new excuses for gun control and are latching onto the war on drugs to advance that agenda.

Let’s restate some important principles that are involved here.

The drug-war itself is the root cause of the drug-war violence in Mexico, the United States, and elsewhere. If there were no drug laws — that is, if drugs were legalized — there would be no drug gangs, drug cartels, and drug-war murders, assassinations, robberies, bribery, and the like. All the violence associated with the drug war would disappear for the obvious reason — there no longer would be a drug war.

The black market inevitably attracts an unsavory producer, one who has no reservations about employing violence and political corruption to expand his market share.

Making drugs illegal doesn’t cause consumers to stop desiring drugs. Making them illegal simply makes it more difficult and more expensive for the consumer to acquire them. Thus, oftentimes poor drug users resort to robberies, muggings, and thefts to acquire the money to pay the exorbitant black-market prices for the drugs they seek.

Rarely does this happen in a free and open market. Competitors compete against each other on the basis of such things as quality and price. Generally, prices are within reach of most everyone.

After all, when was the last time you saw Al Capone type of gangs distributing beer? When was the last time you saw a wino mugging someone to get the money to pay for a bottle of wine?

Prohibition-related violence disappeared with the repeal of Prohibition. That’s precisely what would happen if drug prohibition were repealed.

The statist notion — the notion being advanced by the Binational Task Force — is that by reenacting the assault-weapons ban, drug gangs in Mexico would no longer be able to acquire the weaponry to initiate drug-war violence.

That’s ludicrous. For one thing, the drug gangs can acquire weaponry from all over the world. For another, the assault-weapons ban didn’t really ban assault weapons — it simply required modifications of them, such as shorter clips or no bayonet. People could still acquire AR15s, AK47s, SKSs and other assault rifles.

What the statists fail to recognize — or perhaps not — is that a fierce war on guns — that is, one waged like the war on drugs — would do nothing more than produce the same type of violence, if not more, than that produced by the war on drugs.

The solution to the failure of interventionism is not more interventionism. The solution is the repeal of interventionism. Americans would be wise to reject the statist recommendations of the Binational Task Force. Contrary to what these people say, it’s not possible to fix their failed war on drugs with a war on guns or with anything else. The only way to end the drug-war violence is by ending the drug war.  

Jacob Hornberger is founder and president of The Future of Freedom Foundation.


This_Category
Category:: Political Views

Recommend this article...




Did you enjoy this article? Please bookmark it onto:
Digg!Reddit!Del.icio.us!Newsvine!Blogmarks!Yahoo!

Quote this article on your site | Views: 1860

Comments (4)
RSS comments
1. 21-10-2009 09:38
Superbly stated
Excellent article, Mr. Hornberger. As a gun rights advocate, I am often characterized as a "conservative," and therefore a proponent of the War on (Some) Drugs. In reality, I believe people have the right to do with their own bodies what they wish to. In addition, I can find no provision in the Constitution that empowers the federal government to regulate drugs.
Guest
45superman@gmail.comNOSPAM! ">Kurt Hofmann, St. Louis Gun Ri
2. 21-10-2009 13:44
Superbly stated
Great artical Jacob! Anybody who still thinks drug prohibition is a good idea is either profiting from it or is simply mentally deficient. 
 
If you support prohibition then youve helped trigger the worst crime wave in this nations history.  
 
If you support prohibition youve helped create a black market with massive incentives to hook both adults and children alike.  
 
If you support prohibition youve helped to make these dangerous substances available in schools and prisons.  
 
If you support prohibition youve helped raise gang warfare to a level not seen in this country since the days of alcohol bootlegging.  
 
If you support prohibition youve helped remove many important civil liberties from those citizens you falsely claim to represent.  
 
If you support prohibition youve helped put previously unknown and contaminated drugs on the streets.  
 
If you support prohibition youve helped to escalate Theft, Muggings and Burglaries.  
 
If you support prohibition youve helped to divert scarce law-enforcement resources away from protecting your fellow citizens from the ever escalating violence against their person or property.  
 
If you support prohibition then you have abandoned American children to the morals and ethics of gangsters and terrorists. 
 
If you support prohibition youve helped overcrowd the courts and prisons, thus making it increasingly impossible to curtail the people who are hurting and terrorizing others. 
 
If you support prohibition, then you also support the black market economy that funds most of the terrorist groups in the world today. Including the Taliban and alQaida. 
 
A regulated and licensed distribution network would put responsible adult supervision in between children and premature access to drug distribution outlets. Regulated and licensed distribution would reflect and respect society's values, thus preventing children obtaining easy access to theses dangerous substances. What we need is legalized regulation. What we have is a non-regulated black market to which everybody has access and where all the profits go to organized crime and terrorists.. 
 
Well its one, two, three 
What are we fighting for? 
don't ask me I don't give a damn, 
Next stop's Afghanistan. 
And its five, six, seven 
Open up the pearly gates. 
Ain't no time to wonder why, 
Whoopee  
We're all gonna die.undefined
Guest
malcolm.kyle@gmail.comNOSPAM! ">malcolm kyle
3. 22-10-2009 13:54
Superbly stated
I understand that prohibition is a bad thing. The one hole that is relevant in your theory is this, suppose drugs are made legal, even the more dangerous ones? Policy is made to regulate them. So what, their effects are still what they are. Put warnings on their packages the same as Tylenol? Suppose some addict gets his/her hands an some of the good stuff, gets behind the wheel and causes a massive pile up. Who is to be blamed? Suppose they get some bad stuff, freak out and go on a killing spree? I know these are all somewhat hypothetical scenerios, but they are not at all that far fetched. Now, I strongly agree that if some junky overdoses, that\'s just one more piece of trash that gets disposed of. Also, I myself am NOT going to have my hard earned tax dollars going towards government sponsered addiction programs just because the people of this country won\'t grow a pair, stand up and say \"This is it. I refuse to have this crap cause a rift in this country anymore. Do what needs to be done or it will be done by us, the American citizens of these United States.\" By this I mean that whenever, wherever, and however a problem arises, it will be delt with, with the most extreme prejudice. Make examples out of the criminals that are caught. No more slaps on the wrist. To those that think Capital punishment is inhumane, too bad, it\'s what needs to be done. This country has become WAY too soft and is high time it changes! Tired of drugs coming into America? Authorities know who the suppliers are but won\'t do a thing about it because there is too much money and politics involved. Here\'s a suggestion, the next time you see someone dealing drugs on the street, walk up to them and slit their throat. Too personal? Shut your eyes and run them over with your vehicle. Make the point that enough is enough. If this has all seemed too violent for whoever reads it, don\'t bother to read it again.
Guest
cjlee91@yahoo.comNOSPAM! ">nuffsEnuff
4. 23-10-2009 07:06
mr.
I am beginning to see the light. Makes sense to me now. i was born in the days of prohibition. People drank more alchohol per capita then than they have since. Cheaper too because we weren't making the Kennedys rich. Look at countries where guns are banned. Everyone who wants one has one. They make their own. I was raised in the era after prohibition. street gangs in New York made their own guns from a piece of pipe and a rubber band. They were called by the media ZIP GUNS. If something becomes rare the price goes up and the black market IE mafia types will furnish it. Bann it and everyone will have it that wants it. That simple and that true bad as I hate to admit it. Even God has the rules down right. The Ten Commandments and the Golden rule. The only laws necessary and all carry the same penalty.
Guest
slim@outdrs.netNOSPAM! ">CLARENCE LEE CLINE

Write Comment
  • Please keep the topic of messages relevant to the subject of the article.
  • Personal verbal attacks will be deleted.
  • Please don't use comments to plug your web site. Such material will be removed.
  • Just ensure to *Refresh* your browser for a new security code to be displayed prior to clicking on the 'Send' button.
  • Keep in mind that the above process only applies if you simply entered the wrong security code.
Name:
E-mail
Homepage
Title:
BBCode:Web AddressEmail AddressBold TextItalic TextUnderlined TextQuoteCodeOpen ListList ItemClose List
Comment:

Code:* Code
I wish to be contacted by email regarding additional comments

Powered by AkoComment Tweaked Special Edition v.1.4.4


Tags:  Jacob G. Hornberger Drug War Gun Control
 
< Prev Content   Next Content >
 

Translate

Enter Amount: