Welcome to the Prison Talk Online Community! Take a Minute and Sign Up Today!






Go Back   Prison Talk > RESOURCE CENTER > The War on Drugs - and the results of it
Register Entertainment FAQ Calendar Mark Forums Read

The War on Drugs - and the results of it A war against drugs, or against families?

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 05-27-2005, 11:22 PM
witchlinblue witchlinblue is offline
Closed
 

Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: North of North
Posts: 5,158
Thanks: 0
Thanked 40 Times in 30 Posts
Default History: Why were the laws against drugs passed in the first place

Some of the language used in this article is racial as well as the content but the drug laws were originally passed in The United States for racial reasons. I have changed some offensive words and they will be in a different colour so its clear what Ive changed.

Why the Laws against Drugs Passed In The First Place?
from: The Consumers Union Report On Licit and Illicit Drugs, by Edward M. Brecher and the Editors of Consumer Reports Magazine, 1972.

The first American anti-drug law was an 1875 San Francisco ordinance which outlawed the smoking of opium in opium dens. It was passed because of the fear that Chinese men were luring white women to their "ruin" in opium dens. "Ruin" was defined as associating with Chinese men. It was followed by other similar laws, including Federal laws in which trafficking in opium was forbidden to anyone of Chinese origin, and restrictions on the importation of smoking opium. The laws did not have anything really to do with the importation of opium as a drug, because the importation and use of opium in other forms -- such as in the common medication laudunum -- were not affected. The laws were directed at smoking opium because it was perceived that the smoking of opium was a peculiarly Chinese custom. In short, it was a way of legally targeting the Chinese.

Cocaine was outlawed because of fears that superhuman "Negro Cocaine Fiends" or "Cocainized N***ers" (actual terms used by newspapers in the early 1900's) take large amounts of cocaine which would make them go on a violent sexual rampage and rape white women. There is little evidence that any black men actually did this, if only because it would have been certain death. The United States set a record in 1905 with 105 recorded lynchings of black men. At the same time, police nationwide switched from .32 caliber pistols to .38 caliber pistols because it was believed that the superhuman "Negro Cocaine Fiend" could not be killed with the smaller gun.

Dr. Hamilton Wright is sometimes referred to as the "Father of American Drug Laws". Dr. Wright was the Opium Commissioner at the time and had previously become famous because he had "scientifically proved" that beri-beri was a communicable disease. Beri-beri is a vitamin deficiency.

The Harrison Act which "outlawed" these drugs was, on its face, a simple licensing law which simply required sellers to get a license if they were going to handle the opiates and cocaine. As the Consumers Union Report on Licit and Illicit Drugs has said, it is doubtful that very many members of Congress would have thought that they were passing what would later be regarded as a general drug prohibition. The law even contained a provision that nothing in the law would prohibit doctors from prescribing these drugs in the legitimate practice of medicine.

In fact, even the people who wrote the Harrison Act and the Marijuana Tax Act in 1937 agreed that a general prohibition on what people could put into their own bodies was plainly an unconstitutional infringement on personal liberties. For comparison, see the history of the constitutional amendment which was required to prohibit alcohol. There is no fundamental reason why a constitutional amendment should be required to prohibit one chemical and not another.

The trick was that the bureaucrats who were authorized to issue licenses never did so, and there was a heavy penalty for not having the license. This heavy penalty required that the enforcing bureaucrats needed more staff and, therefore, more power, which, in turn required tougher laws. Over the years, through a series of court rulings, they gradually got the courts to change what had been well-established constitutional law. Specifically, they got the courts to accept the notion that it really was a tax violation when people got arrested for drugs, and that the fact that the government would not issue any licenses was not a defense. They also got the courts to bypass the old issue of whether the Federal Government had the right to control what an individual puts into their own bodies by creating the fiction that whatever the person puts into their bodies must have come as a result of some form of interstate commerce, which is regulated by the Federal Government in the form of taxes and licenses and, therefore, since the Federal Government is allowed to levy a tax it is -- by rather indirect logic -- allowed to regulate what anyone may put into their own bodies.

Marijuana was outlawed in 1937 as a repressive measure against Mexican workers who crossed the border seeking jobs during the Depression. The specific reason given for the outlawing of the hemp plant was its supposed violent "effect on the degenerate races." (Testimony of Bureau of Narcotics Commissioner Harry J. Anslinger, in testimony before Congress in hearings on the Marijuana Tax Act of 1937). The American Medical Association specifically testified that they were opposed to the law. When the supporters of the law were asked about the AMA's view on the law on the floor of Congress, they lied and said that the AMA was in favor of the law because they knew the law would never pass without the AMA's endorsement. The law passed, and the AMA later protested, but the law was never repealed.

In both cases, newspapers across the country carried lurid stories of the awful things that these drugs did to racial minorities, and of the horrors that people of racial minorities inflicted on innocent white people while they were under the influence of these drugs. Later research has shown that not a single one of the stories used to promote these laws could be substantiated.

There never was any scholarly evidence that the laws were necessary, or even beneficial, to public health and safety and none was presented when the laws were passed.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #2  
Old 06-10-2005, 09:02 PM
rltjmjt rltjmjt is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: May 2005
Location: West Virginia USA
Posts: 11
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default

This country, will one day soon, be held responsable, for these Abominations done in the name of justice, for they are repugnent to the very fiber of the Constitution, and they have brought about great hardship on all of society, however the persicution of the drug society and the use of a decleration of war on Americans who choose to use moves it to the next level for which their is no immunity for war crimes extended to the United States government.
__________________
rltjmjt
Juggalo 4 life
Convict 4 ever
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 08-24-2005, 09:11 AM
groland's Avatar
groland groland is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Trinity TX, Santa Monica CA
Posts: 106
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default

The reason that Hemp is illegal in America today is because the main families in America (Masons), the Harrimans and Rockefellers (Standard Oil), the Whitneys (Eli Whitney-Cotton Gin), Dupont (Chemicals in wood pulp processing and cotton pesticides), and Hearst (Newspapers, Media) find it more profitable to sell us unnecessary chemicals, unneeded dug-up petroleum oil, immune system destroying pharmaceuticals, and axed up trees cut into real thin slices, all at over-inflated prices and at the expense of our health and living environment. For these companies, the real problem is that one cannot patent a natural plant. Almost everything produced in America by large corporations is exported for sale on the world markets. The total value of oil, petrochemicals, and pharmaceutical sales totals hundreds of billions of dollars. However, with the availability of over 50,000 new products and the necessity to manufacture them, America would be a much richer nation if the farmers and the average citizen were allowed to grow this valuable crop.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 05-12-2006, 09:20 AM
Lemmons's Avatar
Lemmons Lemmons is offline
What Needs Must Be
 

Join Date: May 2006
Location: MI USA
Posts: 663
Thanks: 181
Thanked 250 Times in 140 Posts
Default

For these companies, the real problem is that one cannot patent a natural plant.

I've heard they [the companies] are currently having the same problem with stevia, a naturally sweet leaved herb which is used by many people in the US to replace sugar. I use it and the stuff is great, better than sugar in taste and for health. In Japan, where laws have been passed to prevent the use of synthetic sugars like aspartame and sacharrine, which have been sufficiently proven overseas to have severely negative health effects, Coca Cola company has been forced to use the natural herb stevia for their diet products. Yet here they keep feeding us poison.

It's always about the bucks. It makes me ill.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 05-12-2006, 01:46 PM
JoyceRooni JoyceRooni is offline
too much time on my hands
 

Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: beautiful downtown
Posts: 537
Thanks: 0
Thanked 8 Times in 2 Posts
Default

you might as well make something like dental floss illegal. then everyone will want it, try to smuggle it, kill for it, its price will go up, you can only buy it by risking your life, and you end up paying $100 for 2 cents worth of the stuff. it's just such stupidity.

let's outlaw flour! or cinnamon! or tar paper! sheesh!
__________________
Joyce
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 05-13-2006, 10:49 AM
HeSoHandsome HeSoHandsome is offline
Banned
 

Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: NY
Posts: 5,244
Thanks: 0
Thanked 62 Times in 36 Posts
Thumbs up Just a little clarification on the cocaine

Quote:
Originally Posted by witchlinblue
. . . Cocaine was outlawed because of fears that superhuman "Negro Cocaine Fiends" or "Cocainized N***ers" (actual terms used by newspapers in the early 1900's) take large amounts of cocaine which would make them go on a violent sexual rampage and rape white women. There is little evidence that any black men actually did this, if only because it would have been certain death.
Actually, there was no evidence on this because at that point, blacks had not yet been using cocaine. What was going on was whites were getting strung out on cocaine. At that time, they could only get it from a doctor, so doctors were very busy them days, and there was a lot of back 'n forth going on amongst the patients. It made them crazy, they lost their minds, and they could not stay out of the doctor's office to get more.

At that time white men intimidated by black men felt at any opportunity and if no opportunity, then by force, it was always on the mind of black men to take and rape a white woman. Whites felt that if blacks got their hands on cocaine, that in the midst of the black men losing their minds the way the whites were doing, that the blacks would be raping white women.

Further, if blacks got addicted to the cocaine, because they would not be able to go to the doctor and get it the way the whites were doing, that a black market would develop paving way for the blacks to be able to get their hands on it to feed their addictions too.

For these reasons I've got in purple, cocaine was made illegal.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 12-16-2006, 10:15 PM
Demi Demi is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 684
Thanks: 74
Thanked 75 Times in 59 Posts
Default

He's so Handsome,

Is that where the term "black market" comes from? Just curious.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 12-17-2006, 10:25 AM
HeSoHandsome HeSoHandsome is offline
Banned
 

Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: NY
Posts: 5,244
Thanks: 0
Thanked 62 Times in 36 Posts
Red face

Can't help you with that one Demi, but if you google the term or do some research on it, you may find your answer for I haves no idea.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 12-17-2006, 10:57 AM
Demi Demi is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 684
Thanks: 74
Thanked 75 Times in 59 Posts
Default

Thanks, I thought you might know.

I just did a search. If anyone is interested the answer is "NO." The term, Black Market, has nothing to do with the black race. It seems to have come from early England and has more to do with having a "black heart"(rogues) or doing things (illegal, shady) "in the dark."

Last edited by Demi; 12-17-2006 at 10:59 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 12-17-2006, 04:07 PM
HeSoHandsome HeSoHandsome is offline
Banned
 

Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: NY
Posts: 5,244
Thanks: 0
Thanked 62 Times in 36 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Demi
Thanks, I thought you might know.

I just did a search. If anyone is interested the answer is "NO." The term, Black Market, has nothing to do with the black race. "
And you're right -- had you asked me straight out "does black market have anything to do with the black race?" I'd of answered "huh?? -- NO", and I see that the answer you found is the same -- "NO".

Girl if you read my posts I am clear, concise and plain. So when you direct a question at HeSoHandsome, you gotta come clear, concise and plain. To word your question the way you did, all I could come up with was "huh?? ", which is why I just responded "I can't help you with that one"; because I had no idea what you were asking, that's why I suggested google -- on there you can find almost anything. And, if you don't read my posts, then now you know should you have any questions to ask me in the future, to just spit it out girl, just spit it out, plain and clear cause I ain't fancy!!

Last edited by HeSoHandsome; 12-17-2006 at 04:14 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 03-08-2012, 11:55 AM
jean2Lr jean2Lr is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: MS
Posts: 26
Thanks: 0
Thanked 7 Times in 7 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Demi View Post
He's so Handsome,

Is that where the term "black market" comes from? Just curious.
What on earth does that have to do with prison, jail or the law. There are more correct forums for this question. If you are bored go to ask.com they can answer any question you have and leave prison talk for the intended purpose. Please
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:41 AM.
Copyright © 2001- 2017 Prison Talk Online
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Website Design & Custom vBulletin Skins by: Relivo Media
Message Board Statistics