The Truth About Liberals, Drugs, and Guns

Posted: Feb 11, 2014 3:16 PM
The Truth About Liberals, Drugs, and Guns

In the midst of the media glorifying the Obama administration’s quest to release more “non-violent, low-level” crack dealers back in to the streets, Hollywood actor Philip Seymour Hoffman turned up dead last Sunday. The actor’s fatal enslavement to a heroin addiction provided the latest high-profile reality check concerning the wickedness drugs and their pushers inflict on society.

For now, Hoffman’s unexpected death has wiped the Obama-adoring grin off the liberal media’s face. The ugly demon of drug addiction never leaves anyone euphoric when forced to face its revolting consequences. So romanticizing a vision of fairness for crack dealing criminals will have to wait.

In fact, in the wake of Hoffman’s death, CNN’s Ashleigh Banfield lashed out angrily on air that the pusher who sold Hoffman his final dose of heroin should receive a life sentence, and the Huffington Post published an article exposing what only anti-gun liberals would not recognize as common knowledge -- drugs destroy far more lives than guns do.

Of course, the president and the Democrat Party’s nefarious fantasy of imposing drug leniency and restricting guns has never had anything to do with facts or reality -- come to think of it, most of what liberals support is based on their undaunted ability to simply ignore life’s dark truths.

According to the CDC, drug overdoses accounted for 30,006 unintentional deaths in 2010 while an additional 2,963 overdose deaths could not be determined as either unintentional or deliberate suicide. How many of all these deaths are tied to “non-violent, low-level” dealers who have the president’s empathy is also undetermined.

On the other hand, all the unintentional deaths caused by guns in 2010 added up to 606. Yea, you read that correctly -- 29,400 less dead victims than unintentionally killed by drugs. Furthermore, gun-related murders in 2010 totaled 8,775, which also falls far short of the staggering number of unsuspecting victims who died at the hands of drugs handed to them by dealers -- a.k.a. some “non-violent, low-level” victims to the Obama administration.

Granted, the ability to point out that drugs and guns are not the same makes some liberals feel intellectually gifted. But even intellectually gifted liberals should recognize that 20,635 more deaths caused by drugs clearly presents a lot more danger to society than all the murders related to guns and unintentional gun deaths combined. And don’t forget -- the 20,635 death advantage that drugs enjoy does not include the 2,963 additional drug-related deaths that were simply undetermined between unintentional or deliberate suicide.

By the same token, pointing out another obvious certainty that drugs are already illegal also makes some liberals feel rather smug. But liberals are not alone in pontificating that much of the drug-associated violence stems from drug prohibition. Most libertarians and many socially moderate conservatives feel the same way. And granted, legalizing drugs could certainly reduce the related violence -- but at what cost to a productive society, not to mention to healthcare?

Around the world, drug leniency has never paid off and has only created new problems for the countries that have tried it.

Nevertheless, as far as drugs and violence go, liberals move on with their lives conveniently ignoring other glaring drug and gun realities. For example, drug-related deaths have steadily increased for more than a decade. On the other hand, gun-related deaths have steadily decreased since 2005 while gun sales have simultaneously exploded. Whether witnessing the chaos and violence following Hurricane Katrina and President Obama’s mendacious promises not to outlaw guns has motivated many more Americans to arm themselves is mere speculation. But if facts matter to liberals, these irrefutable death trends should be quite humbling.

Meanwhile, as the wicked reality of drugs continues to rack up far more dead victims than the already illegal use and negligent handling of guns, the president has been possessed with a strange fixation on releasing crack cocaine dealers back in to the neighborhoods they oppressed and decimated with their “low-level and non-violent” involvement.

Drug addictions shackle junkies for life as those who survive their addictions and receive treatment face a 40-60 percent chance of relapsing. Hoffman’s death after this relapse is a classic example of this bondage.

But America’s president and attorney general are dead set on rescuing black crack dealers from what the administration has branded America’s discriminatory judicial system. While I am no fan of mandatory sentencing for any crime, I will never see drug dealers as victims. However, President Obama and Attorney General Holder probably identify with black drug dealers far better than I do.

In spite of their unique insight, however, the National Bureau of Economic Research published a study in 2005 on crack cocaine’s impact on black Americans. It reported that the homicide rate among black males aged 14-24 basically doubled between 1984 and 1994, crack’s most notorious heydays. Furthermore, according to the report, “the fraction of black children in foster care more than doubled, fetal death rates and weapons arrests of blacks rose more than 25 percent, and black low birth weight babies increased five percent. Among whites, there is little evidence of parallel adverse shocks.”

Because I am rather obtuse, I am failing to see how freeing convicted crack dealers is helping black Americans. My work with black youths has allowed me to see firsthand the devastation drugs have wreaked on some of their families. In fact, I have not noticed that the parents who have been to prison have come back committed to living more productive or responsible lives. At best, only about half of the criminals released from prison do not return to prison.

Then again, too many liberals are just flat-out ignoring the most obvious reality. Drugs ruin lives and lead to dependency. The Democrat Party thrives on dependence.

Guns, on the other hand, offer independence and self-reliance. The choice between dependence and self-reliance is ultimately the decision plaguing America.

Unfortunately, it seems painfully obvious what liberals like the president have chosen while many other liberals simply refuse to concede that their well-intentioned feelings have been trumped by life’s wicked realities.