The "war on drugs" vs. the right to privacy

There is a false trade-off between privacy and law enforcement.

It's a false dichotomy, and a false excuse. The government has no cause to violate the privacy of its citizens in their persons, houses, papers, and effects like that.

When people do drugs, their activities are almost always not only apparent to neighbors and others, but highly disruptive to the functioning of a peaceful society -- and there is no lack of genuine probable cause to execute a warrant in those cases.

The same with child pornography and other bugaboos of anti-privacy advocates. People aren't surfing that kind of smut anywhere in real life without the neighbor's children being aware of something very unseemly going on if they are not victimized themselves.

How can the U.S. government be so aggressive at spying on its own citizens, and yet at the same time so enabling of drug abuse, sex trafficking, and other openly criminal activity, which it takes no action whatsoever to stop?

Why is the U.S. government so extremely aggressive in prosecuting as a crime the mere possession of firearms or ammunition, which is almost always deemed "unlawful" on some technicality or another, in total ignorance and defiance of the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution?

 

So let's drive a car with no seat belts, drunk, talking on our phone while naked.

My right to privacy.

 

There is no right to privacy anymore. That was destroyed beginning with Reagan and continuing with Trump...

 

They also corrupted and abuse the 4th amendment on asset forfeiture..

 

Don't bother asking the other party to pay for your injuries.

Now you are responsible for the other party's injuries.

Let's just disable that video chat feature.

 

You’re confusing a number of different issues, in addition to being wrong on others.

Although inalienable, our rights are not ‘absolute,’ nor are they ‘unlimited’ – whether it’s the right to privacy or the right to possess a firearm, our rights are subject to restrictions and regulation by government.

The ‘war’ on drugs is a failure because it’s bad legislative and law-enforcement policy.

But the arrest and prosecution of those in violation of drug laws are afforded the right to due process, consistent with the 4th, 5th, and 6th Amendments to the Constitution.

Private citizens using drugs in the privacy of their own homes – seeking to neither manufacture nor distribute drugs illegally – is an issue to be solved via the political process, not judicial. Citizens need to compel lawmakers to decriminalize the private use of drugs, not the courts.

As for child pornography, the Supreme Court has consistently held that the possession of such material is in no manner entitled to First Amendment protections.

With regard to the US government ‘spying’ on its citizens, that is also an issue that must be resolved through the political – not judicial – process; the right to privacy where the people are secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects manifest only when the government uses personal, private information pursuant to criminal prosecution, where one’s life or liberty are in jeopardy.

That citizens ‘think’ or ‘believe’ that the government ‘might’ use personal information against them is not a violation of privacy rights.

Last, the government only prosecutes individuals who have violated state or Federal firearms laws; no one is being prosecuted for only possessing a firearm, unless he is a prohibited person.

Again, as with the right to privacy, the Second Amendment right is neither ‘absolute’ nor ‘unlimited’ – it is not a right to possess any weapon, at any time, and anywhere; laws regulating the sale and possession of firearms are perfectly consistent with current Second Amendment jurisprudence.

The right to privacy is not a right to be comprehensively immune to government action or regulation and, if Constitutionally warranted, criminal prosecution.

 

That simply is not happening. The odor of marijuana, "spice," heroin, or crack cocaine, or the noxious fumes of manufacturing methamphetamine tend to stink up the whole neighborhood, and then there is the problem of customers and dealers driving automobiles into the neighborhood and shooting firearms while high on drugs. Yet lawmakers and law enforcement officers continue to insist on punishing sober and law-abiding bystanders for the activity of drug addicts, whom they leave unmolested, enabling them to remain in their drug abuse.

Shouldn't be looking for it so hard or planting it and arresting men "oh, by the way" on it when they are brought up on other unrelated charges. I do not believe that child pornography per se is the issue the pimps and prosecutors are making it out to be. There is simply too much of an "adult" business going on here, and "child" pornography is sort of a subtle gentlemanly code for accusing someone of obstructing or ratting out adult sex traffic. When those books are audited, and even one of those false charges is thrown out, the blood of hundreds and thousands of "criminal justice participants" will be spilled on the streets.

Oh, well. I guess I'm on your (s)hit list. Welcome to mine, because I am definitely a "prohibited person" by your filthy disgusting juris-prudery. There is a time for peaceful discussion, and there is a time for war. This is war, and any aid or comfort to this sort of jurisprudential filth is punishable (and will be punished) by death as high treason without the benefit of a grand jury.

The children have parents, schoolteachers, and plenty of adult protectors. We have no need to fear for their sakes.

 

It depends on who is incharge at that office. This is part of the Shadow Gov and how it works. You saw how Holder did the illegal guns across the boarder.

 

Certain things are deemed by society to be crimes. It doesn't matter if those crimes are done privately or publicly.

 

You saw how FDR screwed the USA Japanese with his friend Hurst out of Billions and dollars in land and property. No one pitched a bitch about it.