MENU

Reason.com

Free Minds & Free Markets

Trump Doubles Down on Death for Drug Offenses

Despite potential legal obstacles

MATTHEW HEALEY/UPI/NewscomMATTHEW HEALEY/UPI/NewscomIn New Hampshire today, President Donald Trump promised once again to tackle the opioid crisis with the full force of the federal government, reiterating his support for executing drug traffickers.

"We have to get tough on those people. We can have all the blue ribbon committees we want, but if we don't get tough on the drug dealers, we're wasting our time. And that toughness includes the death penalty," he said.

Trump's preference for executing drug offenders was first reported last month.

Some drug dealers "will kill thousands of people in their lifetimes," Trump claimed at his New Hampshire event. "They'll be jailed for 30 days, or a year, or they'll be fined. And yet if you kill one person, you get the death penalty or you go to jail for life. If we're not going to get tough on drug dealers who kill thousands of people and destroy so many people's lives, we are just doing the wrong thing."

"This is about winning a very, very tough problem," he added. "Toughness is the thing they most fear."

"Drug trafficking is not an offense for which someone can receive the death penalty," the ACLU's Jesselyn McCurdy said in a statement released shortly after Trump's speech. "The Supreme Court has repeatedly and consistently rejected the use of the death penalty in cases where there has been no murder by the convicted individual."

"Like unnecessarily long prison sentences, there is no evidence that the death penalty actually prevents crime. It's an ineffective way to address this problem," said Ames Grawert, senior counsel in the Justice Program at the NYU School of Law's Brennan Center.

Senators Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said Friday that he is working with Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) on a bill to create new mandatory minimums for fentanyl, and possibly to write a new capital offense into federal drug law.

"I'll also be working with Senator Cotton and others to explore the possibility of even stronger penalties—that could include the death penalty if the fentanyl results in someone's death—for those who choose to push this deadly drug into our communities," Graham said in a press release.

Trump said he would call for more federal funding for developing nonaddictive painkillers, an idea in which FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb has also expressed interest. Trump also alluded to changes in the reimbursement practices of Medicaid and Medicare to make sure "opioid addiction is not subsidized by the American taxpayer."

Congressional Republicans claimed in January that Medicaid expansion fueled the epidemic; Stanford's Keith Humphreys has argued otherwise.

"The best way to beat the drug crisis is to keep people from getting hooked on drugs to begin with," Trump said. To that, he supports "spending a lot of money on great commercials showing how bad it is, so that kid's seeing those commercials during the right shows on television of wherever--the internet--when they see these commercials, they say, 'I don't want any part of it.'"

In 2006, the Government Accountability Office published a study on federally funded anti-drug advertising that suggested "exposure to the advertisements generally did not lead youth to disapprove of using drugs and may have promoted perceptions among exposed youth that others' drug use was normal."

"Failure is not an option, addiction is not our future," Trump said. "We will liberate our country from this crisis. We will raise a drug-free generation of children."

"We will be spending the most money ever on the opioid crisis."

Trump touted a new high watermark for National Prescription Drug Take-Back Day, an annual pseudo-holiday in which the Drug Enforcement Administration asks Americans to empty their medicine cabinets of unused and expired drugs. The most recent event, Trump said, saw the agency collect 900,000 pounds of pharmaceutical products, "more than the weight of three Boeing 757s."

The administration often illustrates the impact of the opioid crisis using aeronautical metaphors. "Every three weeks, we are losing as many American lives to drug overdoses as we lost in the 9/11 attacks," Attorney General Jeff Sessions said in 2017.

Trump revealed that "our Customs and Border Protection[sic]" seized three times the amount of illicit fentanyl in 2017 than they did in 2016. "I told China, 'Don't send it,'" Trump declared. "And I told Mexico, 'Don't send it.'"

The Chinese government has denied responsibility for illicit fentanyl use in the U.S., but has nevertheless taken steps to crack down on grey and black market chemical manufacturers. In December, residents of Guangdong province gathered in a sports stadium to watch as seven drug dealers were sentenced to execution.

Photo Credit: MATTHEW HEALEY/UPI/Newscom

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • ||

    "Toughness is the thing they most fear."

    No. You're not going to be tougher than their black-market competition. You're just not.

    What they fear most is legalization.

  • ||

    No. You're not going to be tougher than their black-market competition. You're just not.

    Chicago went through this a similar set of mental gymnastics recently. Gang members were being killed for losing guns. So, a shootout with the police seemed preferable to losing guns and getting killed. The police chief, no shit, said that they have to make gun possession commensurately onerous to prevent these gang members from having guns in the first place. A couple local niche reporters pointed out that he was essentially calling for executing people for owning hand guns. If you could legally pick up and carry a gun on any street corner in Chicago for $30 gangs wouldn't kill people for losing them and there wouldn't be any shootouts with police (why risk your life over $30?). Pure idiocy.

  • ||

    It never ceases to amaze me how locked into a certain pattern of thinking people can get where they seem to totally lose the ability to back up and look at the big "what-are-we-trying-to-achieve-here" picture.

  • Hank Phillips||

    Not in Portugal. EVERYTHING is decriminalized there. So what do "shovers" offer tourists? Acid, Mescaline, MDMA and hashish. It's really difficult--and quite pointless--to eat enough of those to achieve even an upset stomach. And Europeans are rushing to pay higher bank fees so they can keep their cash in Portuguese banks... safe from asset-forfeiture looters in their own socialist slums.

  • Rich||

    "there is no evidence that the death penalty actually prevents crime."

    Other than crime by the penalty receiver.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    Sounds like you haven't gone to a haunted mansion and seen first hand how bad things are now.

  • Diane Merriam||

    No - they aren't interested in anyone's welfare. They're not trying to protect anyone. They just want to feel all holier than thou on this stupid drug war. Nobody cares about the casualties. Nobody wants to look at the truth.

    It's the "drug war" itself that is killing so many. Not only with drugs that no one knows what's actually in them ... including a lot of the people that are selling them ... but the gang turf wars, the drive by shootings, the lives ruined.

    Now we get to add all the people with severe chronic pain. Hey, just take a couple of asprin, right? WRONG!! Asprin doesn't begin to touch the pain. But we need to cut back on prescribed opioids, even for people with stable use for years or even decades. And the group that gets hit the hardest is vets and they're right in the crosshairs of Trump and Sessions and the CDC.

    Or maybe they're just trying to save money. If people hurt enough without the drugs then maybe more of them will just kill themselves. It's already happening. That gets them off the VA cost roll. Or if they're broke civilians (and chronic pain usually puts them there, sooner or later), it gets them off of Medicaid. For older people, it gets them off Medicare. Windfall benefit.

    Damn them all.

  • Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland||

    One point at which libertarians, liberals, and moderates converge is recognition that drug warriors are comprehensively lousy people.

    The faux libertarians -- the ones who claim to be libertarian but are drug warriors, anti-abortion crusaders, 'build a wall' xenophobes, longtime gay-bashers, and the like -- are the worst.

    Thank goodness they hitched their political wagon to Donald J. Trump.

  • Libertymike||

    The fly in your progressive ointment is that liberals and moderated have, by and large, consistently refused to end the war on drugs. Moreover, they have, by and large, voted for mandatory minimums and for funding the DEA instead of terminating it.

  • Sevo||

    "The fly in your progressive ointment is that liberals and moderated have, by and large, consistently refused to end the war on drugs. Moreover, they have, by and large, voted for mandatory minimums and for funding the DEA instead of terminating it."

    That 'constitutional scholar' we had lying to us for eight years claimed he couldn't do anything about it; it was up to Congress.
    Scumbag...

  • UnrepentantCurmudgeon||

    He "couldn't do anything" because he knew nothing about being a President working with Congress. His "Peter Principle" high water mark was at his inauguration.

    Not that we've done much better since ....

  • ||

    Are the biggest suppliers of opoids big pharma?

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    Interesting question. I imagine the vast majority of the usage is legally prescribed.

  • ||

    When my daughter was in the hospital recently we had to put our foot down a couple of times to get them to try Tylenol first before jumping straight to the Oxy.

  • Diane Merriam||

    The vast majority of the people who are taking opioids at any specific time, for any reason, probably did get them legally and properly. The vast majority of the people dying are *not*. Nor are they taking only opioids. There are almost always multiple drugs in their system. Even the people they say got addicted via legal prescriptions mostly had other addiction problems as well, sometimes even other drug addictions.

    So while yes, there are (or have been) pill mill doctor's offices, most doctors don't just write, and keep writing, prescriptions for opioids for patients that there should no longer be a need for them. If you break your leg, you're not still going to be able to convince doctors that you should still be getting prescriptions for pain medication six weeks later.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    My statement was not meant to imply that those dying are getting their drugs through legal means. I only meant to imply that I thought the vast majority of opium usage is from legal sources. Personally, I think an obvious way to aid this crisis is just flood the street with well made, cheap pharmaceuticals. Take the guess work out of getting high.

  • Hank Phillips||

    You saw it in the article... Communist China, the new benchmark for dictatorship the Herbert Hoover's Republicans have chosen to emulate.

  • JuanQPublic||

    Some drug dealers "will kill thousands of people in their lifetimes," Trump claimed at his New Hampshire event. "They'll be jailed for 30 days, or a year, or they'll be fined. And yet if you kill one person, you get the death penalty or you go to jail for life. If we're not going to get tough on drug dealers who kill thousands of people and destroy so many people's lives, we are just doing the wrong thing."

    He's now resorting to just throwing things at the wall to see what sticks.

    Non-understanding of what capital murder

  • JuanQPublic||

    ...is. Rolling us back decades to tried and failed policy.

  • ||

    *holds up egg*

    "This is your policy."

    *smashes egg into frying pan*

    "This is your policy on drugs. Any questions?"

  • Rich||

    "If we're not going to get tough on drug dealers who kill thousands of people and destroy so many people's lives, we are just doing the wrong thing."

    "And don't even get me started on international arms dealers!"

  • ||

    "And drone bom- . . . wait."

  • Jerryskids||

    Can we resurrect the old tried-and-true headline of the accidental truth - "More Mush From The Wimp"?

  • sarcasmic||

    he supports "spending a lot of money on great commercials showing how bad it is, so that kid's seeing those commercials during the right shows on television of wherever--the internet--when they see these commercials, they say, 'I don't want any part of it.'"

    Problem is that the commercials are always full of lies. Once the kids figure out that the commercials are bullshit, they will not heed honest warning because they figure it's all a bunch of bullshit. So the commercials end up having the opposite of their intended effect.

  • sarcasmic||

    "exposure to the advertisements generally did not lead youth to disapprove of using drugs and may have promoted perceptions among exposed youth that others' drug use was normal."

    Exposure to obvious bullshit leads youth to distrust all warnings, even the accurate ones.

  • ||

  • sarcasmic||

    OK...

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    They kept showing pictures of her with eyes, so I kept expecting to see a picture with he eyes clawed out.

  • ||

    Yeah - I was sort of gripping myself for it as I scrolled down the page.

    Her account led me to believe that she may have had issues prior to beginning her career of drug use, and if I had to point to a substance that might have colluded in the "tearing my eyes out right now is the thing that will save the world" notion it would be the ecstasy she was taking for several weeks solid along with the meth and the heavy drinking.

  • Michael Ejercito||

    Yeah, that shit is wack.

  • Tony||

    Yup. I know I resented the Nancy Reagan bullshit we were served about drugs. The best you can say for the effectiveness of that propaganda is that it scared straight-laced kids like myself off drugs for a few years until we grew the ability to discern things, like the difference between weed and heroin.

  • sarcasmic||

    ...it scared straight-laced kids squares like myself...

    ftfy

  • Tony||

    Holding off on booze and drugs got me a free college education. Also enough credits to spend college drinking and drugging.

  • sarcasmic||

    I did my "college experience" working restaurants in a college town and crashing parties. Then when I was a little older and more responsible I went to college and made it worth it.

  • Trigger Warning||

    Fun fact: I did not know the names or effects of any drugs until my very helpful DARE class in 5th grade. After that, I knew what to look for!

  • ||

    I spent high school wondering why these predatory pushers never offered me any free drugs.

  • Trigger Warning||

    In college, you suddenly realized the true power of tits, and wept.

  • Mithrandir||

    Duterte approves of this.

  • Jujucat||

    Umhm...

  • Zeb||

    Executing drug warriors might help.

  • ||

    Send them to China for arena-style, gladiatorial combat. Penning shit into law hardly makes one a warrior and successfully navigating the arena lends gravitas to any legislation you would propose.

  • Sometimes a Great Notion||

    More gladiator jobs going overseas? We need those jobs here. 1st need to tax the populous in order to build Collisiums (current stadiums won't due). Then some licensing laws for gladiator health and safety. MAGA!

  • Idiocracy||

    Human Rights Watch, January 2018:

    http://bfy.tw/HCVC

    Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte's murderous "drug war" entered its second year in 2017, resulting in the killing of more than 12,000 drug suspects, Human Rights Watch said today in its World Report 2018. Duterte has responded to increased criticism of his anti-drug campaign by impugning, harassing, and threatening critics of the government and human rights defenders.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    Why link to let me google that for you instead of just linking to an article. Or even just linking to the google search?

  • ||

    resulting in the killing of more than 12,000 drug suspects

    So - a resounding success, then?

  • Hank Phillips||

    Any day now the Gee Oh Pee will fire Beauregard Magoo and hire Duterte the Smug Czar as Exterminator of Thought-criminals.

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    In December, residents of Guangdong province gathered in a sports stadium to watch as seven drug dealers were sentenced to execution.

    By the way, the death penalty for drug dealers in China is nothing new. I remember watching a doc in the 90s that was a bit shocking how drug dealers were executed.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    Seems common in Asia.

  • Brandybuck||

    Death penalty for physicians. Wonderful, just wonderful.

  • JuanQPublic||

    Just like the good old days of 1980s Nancy Reagan DARE tv spots while Reagan voters on Wall Street were tooting copious amounts of blow, awake from the closing bell to the next opening one.

  • Brandybuck||

    I don't recall Nancy Reagan saying "just say no or we'll fry your ass".

  • Libertymike||

    She would have liked to fry Barbara Bush's ass. Fo sure, brah.

  • JuanQPublic||

    Indeed. That's Trump's signature portion of it. He seems to believe that if you can't kill your way out of it, there's no other way.

  • Trigger Warning||

    THANKS, OBAMA.

  • Trigger Warning||

    In all seriousness, this is revolting, rotten, populist garbage, and it has no place in a civilized nation.

  • JuanQPublic||

    I agree wholeheartedly. It's a primitive way to deal with social problems, and guided by emotion, not reason.

  • Michael Ejercito||

    Like David Hogg does?

  • S p a c e d o u t||

    Trump gets his murder fix, Dems get their money high, Jerome gets a bullet in the head...

  • Robespierre Josef Stalin Pot||

    Googleplex-D chess?

  • Robespierre Josef Stalin Pot||

    Thanks libertarians for all the fucking excuse making for Trump that has catapulted this country right back to drug policy circa 1985. You guys are some real winners.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    You're welcome.

  • Unlabelable MJGreen||

    He couldn't have done it without us.

  • Sevo||

    Shitbag had to do some stretching to come up with that lame attempt at hanging it on l'tarians.
    Typical of his mendacity.

  • Robespierre Josef Stalin Pot||

    Sevo, is this an example of the President not being as bad as we thought?

  • Sevo||

    "Sevo, is this an example of the President not being as bad as we thought?"

    Shitbag, he's gotten stick from me for several things, notably the tariffs and this.
    Yes, he is not as bad as we thought.

  • Iheartskeet||

    Have to agree.

    This and the tarriffs are bad bad bad, but in the end, I have to reference Thomas Sowell and ask "Compared to what ?"

    Elections are pretty much about deciding what size of a shit sandwich you are going to eat. With Trump, I am pretty sure I picked the smaller of the shit sandwiches, though not as sure as I was a few months ago.

    Plus, its early yet. Hopefully, like a lot of other over-the-top Trump rhetoric, this will prove to be hot air.

  • Nardz||

    My only question:
    Why undermine your point by using a misleading headline?
    "Drug offenses" is a very large circle. "High quantity drug traffickers" is much smaller. Ostensibly, you feel that moving thousands of pounds of banned substances is inappropriate. Fair enough, I don't feel especially strongly either way, provided the cutoff is reasonably high, as people/organizations that deal with those quantities are never only drug dealers - they're certainly well-armed, command strict discipline, assault and defend against others for market share, often engage in human trafficking, and myriad other violent criminal enterprises. Still, there is that slippery slope to worry about.
    My main point of contention is the apparent insecurity of the author in his position. Mr. Riggs feels strongly enough to write an article in opposition to possible proposed policy, but not enough to speak of it in realistic terms? It seems there's plenty of room to debate/contest the wisdom and constitutionality of executing those busted for selling millions of dollars worth of cocaine or heroin without trying to cast them in the same light as the guy who sells half an ounce of weed to cover the cost of the other half for personal use.

  • Robespierre Josef Stalin Pot||

    Guys, really, I'm the one that is supposed to be in favor of giving the government the power to kill you for doing things the government doesn't sanction. Someone is moving in on my turf.

  • Robespierre Josef Stalin Pot||

    Fair enough, I don't feel especially strongly either way, provided the cutoff is reasonably high, as people/organizations that deal with those quantities are never only drug dealers - they're certainly well-armed, command strict discipline, assault and defend against others for market share, often engage in human trafficking, and myriad other violent criminal enterprises. Still, there is that slippery slope to worry about.

    {Clears throat} I've had enough experience with people making extremely decent money moving drugs in San Francisco and none of what is said above has been true about any of the people I have dealt with. Squirrelly certainly. Violent? No.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    May I ask in which link you are getting the "high quantity drug traffickers" phrase from?

    Ostensibly, you feel that moving thousands of pounds of banned substances is inappropriate.

    I believe you are making a false assumption on a libertarian website.

    It seems there's plenty of room to debate/contest the wisdom and constitutionality of executing those busted for selling millions of dollars worth of cocaine or heroin without trying to cast them in the same light as the guy who sells half an ounce of weed to cover the cost of the other half for personal use.

    Once again, beyond the fact that this is not a particularly meaningful distinction, I am interested where you're pulling this distinction from? Because the discussion about drug dealers in the article doesn't seem to make it.

  • Sevo||

    "It seems there's plenty of room to debate/contest the wisdom and constitutionality of executing those busted for selling millions of dollars worth of cocaine or heroin without trying to cast them in the same light as the guy who sells half an ounce of weed to cover the cost of the other half for personal use."

    There is no reason to toss anyone in jail for taking or selling drugs, so your argument is DOA.

  • Nardz||

    Can't say that I disagree with you there - but so long as it is a black market, high-level suppliers will be involved in a great deal of other activities that are worth jailing or execution.
    See Pablo Escobar, MS13, Aryan Brotherhood, John Gotti, etc

  • Nardz||

    Anyhow, my bone to pick isn't whether semi-Duterte style is good or bad, it's that the article is dishonest.

  • Sevo||

    Nardz|3.19.18 @ 11:47PM|#
    "Anyhow, my bone to pick isn't whether semi-Duterte style is good or bad, it's that the article is dishonest."
    That wasn't clear from your post.

  • Nardz||

    Some of us listen to sources directly.
    Since my main contention is not the policy at hand, but the misrepresentation in the article, it wouldn't make sense if I were able to find a citation in the article.
    Reading comprehension doesn't appear to be your strong suit.

  • Hank Phillips||

    This is sounding like a 1942 proposal to only send the "highly Jewish" non-Germans to Auschwitz, Treblinka, Belzek, and let the small fry off with a friendly warning castration and forearm tattoo. The superstitious awe in which blinkered mystics regard plants as avatars of Satan impels them to cultivate at gunpoint a nation of cigarette smokers, gin guzzlers and gasoline sniffers to whom crude narcotics are, by comparison, attractive--as in 1924.

  • Nardz||

    Really?
    Well, always good to know whose comments to skip over.

  • marshaul||

    Well, always good to know whose comments to skip over.

    Yours?

  • Hank Phillips||

    Gosh, all God's Own Prohibitionists need now is some loudmouthed braying about shooting those dirty mohammedans for tearing up "our" flag. It'll be another George Holy War Bush single term, complete with another faith-based economic collapse and Depression à la Bush Waffen Junior.

  • Robespierre Josef Stalin Pot||

    Obama was much worse. I'll so glad we're so kool that we didn't like the looks of that HRC hussy and her fancy pantsuits and sent her packing so she can hang out with Trump's lib friends in NYC.

  • Sevo||

    "Obama was much worse."

    Yes he was.
    As an example of his encyclopedic knowledge of constitutional law:
    "Barack Obama says it's up to Congress to change how feds classify marijuana"
    [...]
    ""Well, first of all," Obama contended, "what is and isn't a Schedule I narcotic is a job for Congress."
    "I think it's the (Drug Enforcement Administration) that decides," Tapper offered.
    "It's not something by ourselves that we start changing," Obama replied. "No, there are laws undergirding those determinations."
    http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/
    statements/2014/feb/04/barack-obama
    /barack-obama-says-its-congress-
    change-how-feds-cla/

    That lying piece of shit could have changed it with a pen; he didn't even need the phone.

  • Sevo||

    Oh, and the royal "WE" shows his great humility also...

  • Robespierre Josef Stalin Pot||

    So you're ok with gassing coke dealers then? I never heard Obama even come close to that. But he probably did, right?

  • Sevo||

    "So you're ok with gassing coke dealers then?"
    You fucking piece of shit, don't put words in my mouth.
    Fuck off, scumbag

  • Robespierre Josef Stalin Pot||

    I'm trying to find out exactly where libertarians are better off policy wise under Trump than they were under Obama. So far... hmmm... I don't see much.

  • Sevo||

    "I'm trying to find out exactly where libertarians are better off policy wise under Trump than they were under Obama. So far... hmmm... I don't see much."

    You fucking, lying slime bag, you're doing nothing of the sort.

  • Robespierre Josef Stalin Pot||

    That lying piece of shit could have changed it with a pen; he didn't even need the phone.

    So Trump is doing that, right?

  • Sevo||

    Shitbag, did you see me claim so?
    Shitbag, do you ever post without lying?
    Fuck off.

  • Sevo||

    Robespierre Josef Stalin Pot|3.19.18 @ 9:42PM|#
    "That lying piece of shit could have changed it with a pen; he didn't even need the phone.
    So Trump is doing that, right?"

    I think this needs comment:
    You, as a pathetic, slimy, lying piece of lefty shit never bother to read what I post even 5-comments up-thread. You don't care; you are totally bereft of principle, so you attempt to libel my character with blatant lies; total and complete bullshit.
    Now I'm not threatening anything like legal action for your mendacity; as a fucking lefty slimebag who can't pay his mortgage, I doubt the value of your entire wealth is worth an hour of my time, let alone my legal help.
    Nor are your lies worth more than insulting responses:
    Fuck off, asshole.

  • Robespierre Josef Stalin Pot||

    So you think this...There is no reason to toss anyone in jail for taking or selling drugs, so your argument is DOA. in response to a politician advocating the state murder of someone selling a couple kilograms of cocaine is equivalent in tone to this, That lying piece of shit could have changed it with a pen; he didn't even need the phone. To a politician that didn't reschedule marijuana.

    Sure, whatever, right-wing windbag.

  • Sevo||

    Robespierre Josef Stalin Pot|3.20.18 @ 12:26AM|#
    "So you think thisstuf stuff stuf stufst ufstu fstufs tufs ufstuf stu fst ufwing windbag."
    You slimy peice of shit, I no longer care what you didn't bother to read.
    Fuck off, scumbag

  • R. K. Phillips||

    Hey, almost all of the 57 state governments agreed with Obama.

  • Echospinner||

    The shame of it is that this is a big issue and there are things government can do to help. All of that gets overshadowed because Trump has to make some off the rails comment as usual to show what a "badass" he is.

    He did talk in general terms about treatment but I suspect it will go nowhere.

  • Sevo||

    "He did talk in general terms about treatment but I suspect it will go nowhere."

    Nor should it.
    The government has no interest in what people chose to smoke, eat, sniff, inject or whatever.
    It is NONE of the GOVERNMENT'S BUSINESS.

  • Robespierre Josef Stalin Pot||

    I'm trying to figure out where we as libertarians are better off policy wise with Trump than we were under Obama. Someone had a fucking meltdown when I posed this question before. Anyone else want to give it a try?

  • Sevo||

    Robespierre Josef Stalin Pot|3.20.18 @ 12:28AM|#
    "I'm trying to figure out where we as libertarians..."

    YOU are nothing anywhere close to a libertarian, you slimy piece of lefty shit.
    Fuck off.

  • Inigo Montoya||

    News flash, dumbass:
    What drug dealers fear most isn't tough law enforcement. They've been thriving under that for decades! An end to prohibition, on the other hand, would be their worst nightmare.

    How many bootleggers and rum runners do you think exist today?

    Is being a moron some kind of prerequisite for politics? I'm really starting to wonder.

  • sarcasmic||

    You're applying logic to a moral issue.

    Moralists don't give a shit about logic or reason.

    Drugs are bad. Drug dealers are murderers. Murderers deserve the death penalty. The end.

  • NoVaNick||

    I have heard probably 99% of Trump's policy proposals before - from mandatory death penalty to protective tariffs - in or about 1991, and it was mostly democrats then who called for these things. The people who still call for these things and love Trump also have yet to give up their mullets and acid washed jeans.

  • Carter Mitchell||

    At one point I had a tiny shred of support for Trump If this is really his position, that shred has evaporated and it's time for active opposition. I have zero respect for the orange orangutan, he's apparently revealing himself as pure evil. Like 99% of the other politicians.

    I suspect that he'll be a one-and-done, but how much damage will he cause before we're rid of him?

  • AngelaM||

    The biggest drug pushers of opiods are not some corner operators but the major drug companies. The President's bluster will do little to stop the epidemic. Opiods are cheap with a prescription and over prescribed. Elderly patients seeking pain relief and taking multiple medications can easily overdose through confusion.

    People don't start taking opiods by buying them on the street; they usually start by taking a doctor's presciption; this is how they become hooked. Once they can no longer access the drugs legally or in the ever stronger dosages they need to get relief, they turn to street sellers. Telling China and Mexico, not to provide drugs for the American market is like telling a toddler not to touch the big red lollipop in front of him. The money is too good, to resist- something our money obsessed president should understand. The death penalty threat won't deter dealers; death is just a risk of doing business for them because competing dealers don't engage in price wars but settle competition for territory with bullets. If the government really wanted to end the reliance on opiods it would legalize marijuana- which is non-addictive, effective, has fewer side effects and works just as well to reduce pain. Doing so would, of course, cut into the drug industry's profits which is apparently something this administration is loathe to do.

  • Nominalis||

    If execution was an effective method of social control then we'd still be speaking ancient Latin and sacrificing animals for the health of the Emperor.

  • TommyInIdaho||

    It will never happen, Trump knows it will never happen but the posturing allows him to be the toughest prez ever on drugs without anything happening.

  • Grizzly||

    Good. Execute every last one of them. These dirtbags and their customers spread crime and disease. Many of their "products" cause psychosis and drive people into homelessness.

    Marijuana is harmless and should be legalized, but other substances--cocaine and crack, crystal meth, opiates, synthetic cannabinoids, synthetic cathinones, and so on--should be either strictly illegal or heavily regulated. These types of drugs are severely damaging to society.

  • mmmjv||

    I thought Trump was all for eye for an eye. This would be in total violation of that.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online