|
The following feature article was published
in the Spring 2000 Supplement of the Loompanics
Books Catalog.
|
-
- The Dark at the End of the
Bong
- by Bob Newland
-
- Organized Crime is directly paying a third or more of
the 535 people sitting in the Congress of the United
States. There is no other rational explanation for the
kilotons of vice-producing laws we've had dumped on us
since about the day my four-year-old granddaughter,
Bridget, was conceived.
-
- There used to be just three federal laws --
prohibiting money counterfeiting, treason, and piracy. On
the day George Will pointed that out, when Bridget was
about two weeks old, that number had grown to over 3000.
Today, as Bridget's mother began teaching her phonics,
there are over 10,000 federal laws. Every one of these
7000 newest laws was proposed by a Republican or a
Democrat, and was passed with the collusion of both
parties.
-
- Claire Wolfe, whose essays have graced these pages,
and whose Loompanics books will soon be banned and
burned, said in the foreword to 101 Things to do
'til the Revolution, "America is at that awkward
stage. It's too late to work within the system, but too
early to shoot the bastards."
-
- That there are 7000 new federal laws in four years is
reason enough to shoot the bastards. After you have
prohibited stealing, beating people up arbitrarily,
killing people, defrauding people, creating imminent
danger through personal negligence or malice, kidnaping,
rape, and littering, what's left? A few dozen to
differentiate between various degrees of crime and to
propose appropriate punishment? Maybe.
-
- The crimes I just listed create victims. But what --
that doesn't fall into one of the above-listed categories
-- can properly be called a crime? The creation of more
"crimes" through legislation is the result of
special-interest lobbying, and imposes economic
regulation under the guise of moral indignation. Someone
-- often many someones -- gets paid off every time a law
is passed today. I'd say that's true of every single law
passed during the entire 20th Century.
-
- The first wholesale disaster caused by this
congressional whoring was alcohol Prohibition. In 1918,
the rate of alcohol consumption had been steadily
declining since the Civil War. Crime was low. During the
next 14 years of federal alcohol prohibition, alcohol
consumption rose to the current level, where it's hung
for 68 years. Murders rose from three per 100,000
population per year to ten per 100,000. The drive-by
shooting was born. Millions of our parents and
grandparents were criminals. Many suffered horribly
because the whimsical gavel of justice landed on them
instead of their neighbors.
-
- When Prohibition ended in 1932, the murder rate
dropped like a rock to the pre-Prohibition level. All
crime dropped to near pre-Prohibition levels. The nation
enjoyed this state of relative safety and security for
the next 35 years, despite the little-publicized antics
of ex-Prohibition Agent Harry Anslinger, who had, along
with the Hearst paper empire and DuPont Plastics (nylon),
managed to vilify hemp, "marijuana", as the Next Big
Threat to Virginity and the American Family.
-
- In 1937, Congress passed the Marijuana Tax Act, which
imposed a tax so steep on the production of cannabis hemp
that hemp was de-facto banned. This served the three main
players well. Hearst's forests became the principal
source of paper. DuPont's nylon enjoyed market
super-significance in textiles, plastics, cordage and
many other products formerly made from hemp. And the
jobless Anslinger became head of the newly-formed Bureau
of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs. Anslinger's wife's
uncle, Andrew Mellon, also happened to be Secretary of
the Treasury, wherein resided the BNDD. Anslinger (by
self-admission in his autobiography) also supplied
illegal morphine to Senator Joseph McCarthy for several
years -- to prevent the Reds from finding out about
McCarthy's addiction and blackmailing him. It's cozy up
there in Washington.
-
- The Vietnam War's daily imposition into everyone's
living room by 1968 changed everything. Domestic groups
were bombing banks and draft boards. War veterans --
vets, fer Crissakes! -- were protesting the Vietnam War.
College students denied draft deferments by the adoption
of the lottery system were being drafted, and were
protesting. What could be causing this?
-
- President Nixon asserted that the protests could not
be rational. Therefore something was destroying rational
thought. Marijuana! Yeah, that's it. Marijuana. National
news magazines ran frequent stories about the upsurge in
marijuana use. Anti-war protests centered around
smoke-ins. Obviously, Anslinger had been right. Reefer
was destroying our future, our very ability to send kids
to places they never heard of to kill people they didn't
know.
-
- Thus was born the "War on Drugs". Anslinger had died,
so Nixon chose G. Gordon Liddy to head a task force whose
job it was to highlight the destruction caused by
marijuana, LSD, mescaline, mushroom, and banana peel and
nutmeg ingestion.
-
- The Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs soon
became the Drug Enforcement Agency. Congress began
passing a still-never-ending series of federal laws, many
to prohibit a yard-long list of psychotropic
(mood-altering) drugs, most of which had proven medical
value. Other laws prohibited knowing anyone who used any
of these drugs, or knowing of a place where such drugs
were used or traded, or having a relative who had been
accused of doing or knowing, or having property which had
been accused of doing or knowing.
-
- By 1985, the Fourth Amendment had been erased. There
simply was no longer any such thing as "unreasonable"
search or seizure. Cops were claiming -- credibly,
according to the courts -- that a bulge in the suspect's
pocket, which the cop had spotted a block away, looked
like marijuana, and, upon a search, sure 'nuff turned out
to be marijuana. Mention was rarely made of the hundreds,
thousands, of people who were searched for bulges caused
by Kleenex® or gloves.
-
- Some states put people in jail for life for having a
hempseed in their car trunks. The feds began
incarcerating folks for 30, 60, 100 years for possession
or sale -- or "conspiracy" thereto -- of certain
substances. Rampant property seizures confiscated the
life-savings and equity of hundreds of thousands of
innocent people after simple allegations of "drug"
violations. Louisiana and Florida cops began confiscating
what they said was "large" amounts of cash on drivers
they stopped -- saying that, even though no drugs were
found, a given driver "had no other reason to carry 'that
much' cash". The quantity of cash in question might be no
more than a couple hundred dollars. Often, officers
seized thousands of dollars and kept it, on no evidence
of any wrongdoing.
-
- When folks in the South began complaining of such
tactics, the cops began offering drivers the option of
keeping some of their own money if they would refrain
from complaining. Some police agencies used the seized
money to send officers on ski vacations.
-
- All this under the auspices of a queer doctrine which
says that, while property can commit a crime, property is
afforded no civil rights or due process.
-
- In 1968, the "War on Drugs" was declared. Using
politics which had worked so well in Vietnam, no goal was
stated and no agenda was outlined. Battle generals in the
DEA were patted on the back after telling politicians
they could see the light at the end of the bong. In 'Nam,
Americans tried to make people stop being communists by
dropping stuff -- bombs, bomblets, propaganda leaflets,
Agent Orange -- on them from the air. In America,
Americans tried to make people stop trying to feel better
-- by taking all their possessions, putting their
families on welfare, and incarcerating them. Predictably,
the results were similar to those in Vietnam -- and to
those of alcohol Prohibition.
-
- Murder rose from 3 per 100,000 population, per year,
in 1965, to over 10 per 100,000 now. Theft, muggings, and
aggravated assault also rose dramatically during the
1968-2000 era. As the viciousness of the drug laws and
their enforcement agents grew, so did drug use and crime
centered around obtaining drugs. The risk factor being
the most significant cost of drug dealing, the price
charged for taking the risk grew exponentially, and so
did the profits to some of the most vicious people on
earth. The "War on Drugs" has been most effective at
being a government price-support device for drug
dealers.
-
- Strangely, surveys show that drug use (licit and
illicit) grew steadily during the last 30 years. Surveys
show that the age of first-drug-use decreased steadily.
Police corruption grew dramatically, centered more and
more around drugs. Latin American governments fell like
dominoes as America imposed her zero-tolerance policies,
along with Agent Orange, on them. Over 60,000 innocent
people have died in Columbia alone since 1975, caught in
the crossfire between the cop cartels and drug
cartels.
-
- Congress, never at a loss for a rational explanation
after promulgating a disastrous failure, began asserting
that it was the fact that people could converse with each
other which was causing such destruction. "If we could
just stop folks from passing on knowledge, we could win
their hearts and minds."
-
- In that noble spirit, U.S. Senators Orrin Hatch and
Diane Feinstein are currently attempting to codify a
prohibition on the passing on of common knowledge.
Having, since the infamous days on which they were
elected to Congress, consistently created danger for
common folks by escalating the "war on drugs", and having
consistently and systematically disarmed common folks to
prevent them from defending themselves, Hatch and
Feinstein marched in bravely with the Final
Solution.
-
- Called the Methamphetamine Anti-Proliferation Act
of 1999, it is the single most onerous piece of
legislation we have ever seen. An interviewer once asked
Ayn Rand when we would know we have to resist physically,
that it's time to "take to the streets". She answered
that we'd know when the free presses are shut down.
-
- That's just what the Methamphetamine
Anti-Proliferation Act will do. Within a 50-page bill,
replete with egregious micro-management proposals and
enhanced punishments concerning illicit substances,
resides the following language:
-
- (a) PROHIBITION ON DISTRIBUTION OF INFORMATION
RELATING TO MANUFACTURE OF CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES-
-
- (1) CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE DEFINED- In this
subsection, the term `controlled substance' has the
meaning given that term in section 102(6) of the
Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802(6)).
-
- (2) PROHIBITION- It shall be unlawful for any
person--
- (A) to teach or demonstrate the manufacture of a
controlled substance, or to distribute by any means
information pertaining to, in whole or in part, the
manufacture of a controlled substance, with the intent
that the teaching, demonstration, or information be
used for, or in furtherance of, an activity that
constitutes a Federal crime; or
-
- (B) to teach or demonstrate to any person the
manufacture of a controlled substance, or to
distribute to any person, by any means, information
pertaining to, in whole or in part, the manufacture of
a controlled substance, knowing that such person
intends to use the teaching, demonstration, or
information for, or in furtherance of, an activity
that constitutes a Federal crime.
-
- (b) PENALTY- Any person who violates subsection
(a) shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not
more than 10 years, or both.
-
- As S. 486, this language was approved by the U.S.
Senate on November 19, 1999. It will be heard by the
House soon, as H.R. 2987. Perhaps, by the time you read
this, it will be law.
-
- Don't be misled by the "intent" or "knowing that such
person intends to use" disclaimers. Federal prosecutors
will state that anyone distributing such information had
to "know" that the information would be used to violate
federal law. They'll also say, in reply to First
Amendment arguments, that distributing such information
is analogous to yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater. And
the courts will usually agree. And it really makes no
difference if the courts agree. As with all crimes, the
punishment begins with the accusation, not with the
conviction.
-
- So, Hatch and Feinstein and their disgusting allies
have crafted a bill which will put you in prison for
writing and distributing the words: "Put the seed in the
ground. Water it." Susan Calloway, a registered nurse and
member of the Liberty Round Table, pointed out several
months ago that under current federal and California
state regulations, normal saline solution is a
"controlled substance". Therefore, the penalties would
even apply to talking about salt water.
-
- The ACLU and other groups have vowed to immediately
mount a Supreme Court challenge upon passage of the law.
While I have almost no faith in the Supremes to do the
right thing, this law has a chance of being struck down.
Will Hatch and Feinstein then say, "Sorry, I made a
mistake."?
-
- No, they will immediately begin drafting another
time-wasting, money-wasting, life-destroying bill, to
solidly maintain their stupid, evil, counter-productive
anti-drug credentials. These cretinous sub-human
creatures have no shame, no conscience, and no principles
beyond getting re-elected.
-
- Loompanics -- along with hundreds of publishers,
wholesalers, and retailers -- will have to withdraw a
substantial portion of its titles if the Methamphetamine
Anti-Proliferation Act survives the Supreme Court. Until
it's challenged (and beaten) every publisher with finite
finances will have to contort beyond the point of
absurdity to avoid the chance of prosecution. "High
Times" magazine will be finished. Movies and television
will be able to depict neither someone rolling or even
smoking a joint, nor refer to any part of the process of
cooking crank.
-
- News programs concerned with drug policy will have to
entirely skirt the drug production process, including
footage of growing hemp plants. Internet service
providers, along with their clients, will face endless
RICO "conspiracy" charges -- often for entirely innocent
communications. The entire face of the Internet, along
with all communication, will change dramatically. And
that won't prevent prosecutions. Federal prosecutors will
routinely bring charges -- and financial ruin -- to bear
on arbitrarily-chosen victims simply to maintain the
proper level of terror. Look to the IRS for lessons in
maintaining control through terror.
-
- How does this serve Organized Crime? As the level of
misery in the United States explodes, more and more
people will turn to sedatives and stimulants. Illegal
drug supply will become THE growth industry of the early
21st century, along with, of course, incarceration.
-
- My granddaughter Bridget will grow up in a nation
more like Stalin's Russia than the Land of the Free.
Exactly like Stalin's Russia, as a matter of fact.
Bridget's phonics lessons will serve her well in reading
what will be -- de facto -- ONLY government-approved
communication. I won't be much help. I'll be dead or in
prison.
-
- It's as simple as this. If the Methamphetamine
Anti-Proliferation Act is allowed to stand, then the
First Amendment will have been erased. The free press
will have been shut down. And we'll know. It's time.
-
-
-
-
- Here are some Internet sources to reference on the
Methamphetamine Anti-Proliferation Act of 1999 (S 486 --
passed 11/19/99; and H.R. 2987 -- up for House vote
sometime soon):
-
- 1. Thomas® U.S. Congress Site for bill-tracking:
<http://thomas.loc.gov/>
-
- 2. Media Awareness Project (MAP): <http://www.mapinc.org/>
-
- 3. A specific MAP reprint of an essay on the
Methamphetamine Anti-Proliferation Act: <http://home.pacifier.com/~jinxette/free_speech_danger.htm>
-
- 4. Part of the machinery which will be used to
enforce the Methamphetamine Anti-Proliferation Act:
<http://www.aclu.org/echelonwatch/index.html>
-
- Here is contact information for Bob Newland:
- <http://www.nakedgov.com/>
- mailto:newland@rapidcity.com
-
- And be sure to visit Loompanics Books:
- <http://www.loompanics.com/>
-
- Author's Note: A Loompanics Books customer
emailed me, asking,
- "You stated that the number of federal laws has
increased from 3000 to 10,000 in the last four years.
I'd like to verify these numbers. Where did you get
your figures from?"
-
- Here's my answer:
- "I have heard various figures on the number of
federal laws. One attorney, who practices in the
federal system, told me 'There's really no way to
know. First, do you mean statute laws only? Or statute
law and case law? Or do you want to add in various
agency regulations which have the weight of law? Right
now, all I can tell you is, there are thousands and
thousands and thousands of written edicts the
violation of which can get you arrested and charged
with a federal crime.'
-
- "The same guy told me that there's no doubt
that the number of these laws and quasi-laws has
easily tripled since 1996. So, in both cases (3000 and
10000) I may have understated the case."
|