PDA

View Full Version : Avoiding repeating history. NFA 1934


nicki
11-03-2009, 1:02 PM
The 1920's had a boom economy and it also had Alcohol Prohibition.

I am not making a post debating the merits of the drug prohibition one way or the other, what I am doing is taking a quick look at history and then looking at current trends.

Many people in 1935 still supported alcohol prohibition even after it was repealed and lost public support and I am sure many of you on this board feel the same way about drugs.

I read an recent article in High Times magazine about alcohol prohibition and marijuana prohibition, all I am doing is adding what happened with guns.

The 1930's came along, the economy crashed, support the Prohibition rapidly flipped in the 1930's and prohibition was repealed in 1933 with another constitutional amendment.

However what followed shortly was the NFA 1934. Organized crime was violent, and the public feared "Tommy Gun" toting criminals shooting each other up and getting caught in the cross fire.

Of course there were also the bank robbers like John Dillinger, Bonnie and Clyde, etc. etc.

Alcohol prohibitionist at least honored the constitution, they amended it with the 18th amendment. T

Those who created the NFA 1934 subverted the constitution with a end run around the 2nd amendment by creative abuse of the taxing authority of the Constitution.

They did it again in 1937 with the marijuana tax act.

Today our economy is close to another depression if we are not already there, we have another probibition, the Drug War.

Public opinion is shifting against the Drug War, Marijuana will be legalized by the California and I believe other states will shortly follow in the next few years.

What this has to do with guns.

A significant portion of gun violence in the United States is directly and indirectly related to the violence of the drug trade.

If drugs are legalized, what will be the new mission of the former DEA and Vice Police officers all across the country.

Some believe the NFA 1934 was passed to "create jobs" for the treasury agents like "Eliot Ness".

If the drug war ends, the crime rate related to the drug trade will significantly drop.

With legalization of marijuana, Industrial Hemp potentially could become a 500 to 1 trillion dollar annual industry which would jump start our economy.

The net effect could result in US crime rates dropping at least 50 percent, overall I think crime could drop so low that our country would be safer than all the countries in the world with civilian disarmament.

What this means is that if Marijuana is legalized, the anti's will have to move very fast, because it could be their last stand and not just on guns, but on everything.

Bigger Constitutional issues will be hitting the courts because of gun and marijuania issues.

Potentially the abuse of the tax system could become an issue in that legitimate use of the tax system is to run the government, not to make end runs around constitutional rights.

The "commerce clause" will become another issue again because reinterpretation of the "Commerce Clause" is how we got so much fed regulation in our lives since FDR.

Then there is the 9th and 10th amendments as well.

Welcome to the Revolution.

Nicki

putput
11-03-2009, 1:26 PM
Yup, this is found on my .gov to-do list as #2 right behind campaign finance reform and just ahead of health care reform. The cost in tax revenue - missed or misspent, violence, instability abroad, etc is ruining this country. Think of all the crimes that could be investigated if we weren't chasing around a few buds or flakes. Jails full of people who become second class citizens (loss of right to vote) just for possession. Sad really.

OlderThanDirt
11-03-2009, 1:56 PM
Almost all of the wanted "criminals" that get their pictures posted in the local paper are druggies, many whose only crime is drug use. This is a monumental waste of taxpayer resources. There has to be a better way. However, regardless of whether or not drugs are legalized, and whether crime rates will decline, the government will continue to abuse the tax laws, and eventually target firearms. I think Hillary Clinton said it best:

"[w]e tax everything that moves and doesn't move..."

Untamed1972
11-03-2009, 2:03 PM
What is the crime rate like in those European countries like Netherlands or Holland or where ever it is that drugs are legal? Just curious.

But the things you state are exactly why you'll never get support for such laws from the LE community. It's turf/job protection. If you do something that cuts crime in half overnight they suddenly lose the need for a lot of jobs with great pay and benefits and all those lucrative tax dollars.

Never forget that politics is run by agendas not logic.

DarkHorse
11-03-2009, 2:32 PM
FYI - The Netherlands and Holland are the same country. The capitol is "The Hague." Seriously.

Drug use isn't as legal as some folks would have us believe, but some drug laws are simply not enforced. Or something like that, according to a friend who spent a summer in Holland with his exchange student.

B Strong
11-03-2009, 4:51 PM
Nicki - most of the "Machine Gun" crime that prompted the NFA was commited in the 1920's and it did indeed involve alcohol trafficing gangs.

The source for the MG's used by the famous "Auto-Bandits" like Dillinger et al stole theirs from National Guard armories, they didn't buy them.

The whole course of the legislation was based on hysteria, not reality, just like what we deal with today.

Although I'm inclined to favor drug legalization, there is simply too much money involved in the enforcement end for it to ever stop - we may see loosening of enforcement wrt marijuana in certain local areas, but there is too much at stake in law enforcement and corrections funding at stake for them to ever give up - never mind that they've lost 100 times over, as long as there's funding at risk, they'll never admit it.

Shotgun Man
11-03-2009, 5:49 PM
So if drugs get legalized the antis are gonna go ape**** on us?

Dr Rockso
11-03-2009, 7:26 PM
FYI - The Netherlands and Holland are the same country. The capitol is "The Hague." Seriously.
Even weirder, The Hague is the seat of government but not the capitol (which is Amsterdam).

jamesob
11-03-2009, 8:24 PM
lol, high times.

Mulay El Raisuli
11-04-2009, 4:17 AM
I came across a reference that said Portugal has legalized (not decriminalized) everything a few years back. Including heroin & cocaine.

I haven't been able to confirm this or even find out the results. But if it worked.......

The Raisuli

B Strong
11-04-2009, 5:04 AM
I came across a reference that said Portugal has legalized (not decriminalized) everything a few years back. Including heroin & cocaine.

I haven't been able to confirm this or even find out the results. But if it worked.......

The Raisuli

It has worked, with no increase in the rate of drug addiction, or an increase in trafficing to other countries.

Chatterbox
11-04-2009, 8:35 AM
I came across a reference that said Portugal has legalized (not decriminalized) everything a few years back. Including heroin & cocaine.

I haven't been able to confirm this or even find out the results. But if it worked.......

The Raisuli

I listened to a story on NPR about Portugal a few month back. It is in fact decriminalized, in that there are no penalties for drug posessions.


Under Portugal's new regime, people found guilty of possessing small amounts of drugs are sent to a panel consisting of a psychologist, social worker and legal adviser for appropriate treatment (which may be refused without criminal punishment), instead of jail.

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1893946,00.html#ixzz0VugUJATL

joelberg
11-04-2009, 11:08 AM
I listened to a story on NPR about Portugal a few month back. It is in fact decriminalized, in that there are no penalties for drug posessions.

Under Portugal's new regime, people found guilty of possessing small amounts of drugs are sent to a panel consisting of a psychologist, social worker and legal adviser for appropriate treatment (which may be refused without criminal punishment), instead of jail.

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/health/arti...#ixzz0VugUJATL

That sounds like a punishment to me...

Mike d'Ocla
11-04-2009, 7:17 PM
That sounds like a punishment to me...

If you'd served some time in prison, it wouldn't.

That said, I think Nicki's original post is very thoughtful and important. It points to the fact that we've got this Calvinist or Puritan tendency in this country to see everything in black and white or good and evil terms. Drugs and alcohol are bad so they have to be totally eliminated and harsh punishments instituted. Socialism is bad so we have to hate anyone who thinks or says anything we think may be socialist (whatever that means). Guns are bad so we have to pass ever more laws to try to limit their availability and use. Democrats are bad so we have to vote only for Republicans. Islamic extremists are bad so we have to kill them all at enormous economic cost and cost in lives.

It's clear to me that this kind of thinking creates many more problems than it solves. The principle of harm reduction is what drives some rational legal efforts to deal with drugs, as in Holland. As in California cities which tolerate "medical" marijuana.

This black-and-white, Calvinist, Puritanical thinking is bad. It must be stopped. :D

Mulay El Raisuli
11-05-2009, 4:04 AM
My thanks to Chatterbox & BStrong.

So, if legalization doesn't increase the number of addicts, & if horns don't grow on the heads of those who voted for this, then why aren't we bright enough to implement it?

The Raisuli

B Strong
11-05-2009, 5:04 AM
My thanks to Chatterbox & BStrong.

So, if legalization doesn't increase the number of addicts, & if horns don't grow on the heads of those who voted for this, then why aren't we bright enough to implement it?

The Raisuli

Because there is so much money and power to be lost if we declare the drug "war" to be "over."

joelberg
11-05-2009, 6:07 AM
If you'd served some time in prison, it wouldn't.

That said, I think Nicki's original post is very thoughtful and important. It points to the fact that we've got this Calvinist or Puritan tendency in this country to see everything in black and white or good and evil terms. Drugs and alcohol are bad so they have to be totally eliminated and harsh punishments instituted. Socialism is bad so we have to hate anyone who thinks or says anything we think may be socialist (whatever that means). Guns are bad so we have to pass ever more laws to try to limit their availability and use. Democrats are bad so we have to vote only for Republicans. Islamic extremists are bad so we have to kill them all at enormous economic cost and cost in lives.

It's clear to me that this kind of thinking creates many more problems than it solves. The principle of harm reduction is what drives some rational legal efforts to deal with drugs, as in Holland. As in California cities which tolerate "medical" marijuana.

This black-and-white, Calvinist, Puritanical thinking is bad. It must be stopped. :D
I see what you did there :D

I guess I'm just another L who is sick and tired of the R's and D's trying to control everyones' lives.

joelberg
11-05-2009, 6:09 AM
Because there is so much money and power to be lost if we declare the drug "war" to be "over."

Pretty much this. I'm no fan of drugs. I've never done any that weren't over the counter or prescribed by my doctor, but I can see how government has used the drug war to rob us of our rights.

cadurand
11-05-2009, 7:02 AM
Legalizing drugs.. it seems so obvious to me. Usually it seems obvious to almost everyone I talk to as well.. but they just won't make that last leap to agreeing that all these laws should be repealed and a lot of law enforcement could be done away with.

KQED here in San Francisco had the "drug cszar" on this week. A few callers brought up legalizing either weed or everything.. and he flat out refuses to discuss it. He said "These drugs are illegal in every country in the world."

I guess that's his rationalization. If everyone else says it's bad, then we should too. Of course many of those countries were probably pushed into creating drug laws in order to receive welfare or "aid" from the good old USA.

The closest he would come was these "radical" programs some states have created to treat users instead of throwing straight into prison.

But I guess I shouldn't expect a guy to agree with a theory that would mean his job is pointless and doing no good. He wouldn't even admit they catch less than 10% of the drugs coming into this country.. he didn't deny it either though.

putput
11-05-2009, 7:09 AM
From CNN this morning..

Link (http://www.cnn.com/2009/OPINION/11/05/marijuana.racial.arrests/index.html)

In 2008 there were 847,864 arrests for pot nationally and around 89% of those for posession...

Mike d'Ocla
11-05-2009, 9:12 AM
From CNN this morning..
Link (http://www.cnn.com/2009/OPINION/11/05/marijuana.racial.arrests/index.html)

In 2008 there were 847,864 arrests for pot nationally and around 89% of those for posession...


It's a lot less stressful for cops to earn their bread spending their time busting potheads who are essentially harmless even if unemployed, unhappy and depressed than it is to go after armed, angry, pathological gangbangers or even any of those SUV drivers who focus on their cellphone conversations or text messages rather than controlling their 5000 lb. gridlock-makers.

And if "we" are enforcing laws so that we can reduce the number of citizens needlessly killed and injured, why not simply enforce traffic laws more rather than drug or gun laws?

sfwdiy
11-05-2009, 11:40 AM
Interesting post. I'm actually quite interested to see what happens when marijuana is completely decriminalized in California. I think this probably will happen in the near future.

--B

PS: IBTL and Pvt. Cowboy

xrMike
11-05-2009, 1:31 PM
What this has to do with guns.

A significant portion of gun violence in the United States is directly and indirectly related to the violence of the drug trade.

If drugs are legalized, what will be the new mission of the former DEA and Vice Police officers all across the country.

Some believe the NFA 1934 was passed to "create jobs" for the treasury agents like "Eliot Ness".

If the drug war ends, the crime rate related to the drug trade will significantly drop.I just finished reading John Ross' "Unintended Consequences" and he posits much the same -- that NFA was mostly a creative method for keeping a bunch of govt. workers gainfully employed after the repeal of Prohibition...

Great post, lots to chew on here.

stag1500
11-05-2009, 4:59 PM
My thanks to Chatterbox & BStrong.

So, if legalization doesn't increase the number of addicts, & if horns don't grow on the heads of those who voted for this, then why aren't we bright enough to implement it?

The Raisuli

A large part of the population has this irrational fear that if you legalize drugs, we're going to turn into a nation of drug addicts. The same argument was used when alcohol prohibition ended. It's kinda like when the Fed AWB ended in 2004 and the anti were shouting that there's going to be blood in the streets. Obviously, this is completely B.S. Neither of these catastrophies (rampant alcoholism or gun violence) came to pass. But, hey! You can't argue with stupid.

Mulay El Raisuli
11-06-2009, 5:01 AM
A large part of the population has this irrational fear that if you legalize drugs, we're going to turn into a nation of drug addicts. The same argument was used when alcohol prohibition ended. It's kinda like when the Fed AWB ended in 2004 and the anti were shouting that there's going to be blood in the streets. Obviously, this is completely B.S. Neither of these catastrophies (rampant alcoholism or gun violence) came to pass. But, hey! You can't argue with stupid.


Still, if what I hear is correct, we're going to try. In that I think there's going to be an Initiative for legalizing weed put on the ballot in 2010. I like the idea so much that, if true, I might even go out & & gather signatures.

The Raisuli

B Strong
11-06-2009, 5:21 AM
Pretty much this. I'm no fan of drugs. I've never done any that weren't over the counter or prescribed by my doctor, but I can see how government has used the drug war to rob us of our rights.


And even when they're not inclined to go against "us," there are empires that have been built on the WOSD.

The whole issue of forfiture has made certain agencies in Fla. damn near obsessed with glomming onto any bit of cash they can assert is involved in drugs.

My favorite story was the guy who was a Fla. state lottery winner that - surprise! - had a wad of cash on him, as well as the newspaper article detailing his lottery win.

The cops involved "arrested" the cash he had in possession...never a charge against the guy, and no indication from anywhere or anything (prior arrest record was clear) that the guy was involved in drugs in any way.

The guy who was robbed filed suit, and was able to reclaim his dough.

Lot's of folks didn't have the financial ability to put forth an action against the agency.