Is This the Most Clueless Politician In the Country?

Just when I think things cannot get any more bizarre, debauched and moronic, I keep finding myself being surprised – big time. You think the amount of moonbattery has reached the outer limits, and then something comes along and makes you realise that the level of idiocy must be infinite.

And when this mental and moral meltdown comes from our politicians, then you really got to be worried. I refer to one of the most ridiculous and stupid things I have heard of in a long time from a politician – in this case recently elected David Leyonhjelm of the Liberal Democrats.

drugs 6He wants complete open slather on drugs – all of them. And let’s even sell marijuana in our supermarkets. Yes, he actually said that folks. Here is how a news item run with this story:

Cannabis should be sold in supermarkets and hard drugs be available from the Government for heroin, cocaine and ice addicts under a federal MP’s radical drug reform plan. Liberal Democrat senator David Leyonhjelm wants to kill the power of organised crime in Australia by decriminalising drugs, opening up the market and bringing down prices.
Senator Leyonhjelm said while it might not be smart to use marijuana, it was a harmless, non-addictive drug and should be openly available. His party’s philosophy is that if a person is not hurting anyone else, the Government should stay out of their business.
Like in the fruit-and-vegetable industry, farmers should grow cannabis for sale in supermarkets and other shops, he said. And anyone should be able to grow it in their garden. Senator Leyonhjelm believes the same open slather availability could be possible for party drugs, such as ecstasy, as long as it can be proven the only real risk is to the person taking it.
“I’m not saying they’re safe, I don’t recommend them, advise them, endorse them, no,” he said. “All I’m really saying is it’s an individual, adult choice.” For hardcore, addictive drugs, the NSW politician suggests the Government stop wasting millions on chasing crime gangs peddling drugs and peddle them itself. Under a “harm minimisation” model, registered addicts would get replacement drugs, such as methadone or “other options”, erasing the need to pay up big to criminals.
In the days of legal opium smoking, people lived their whole lives addicted to heroin, he said. “Because supply was never restricted, they lived a normal life and they functioned quite well.” He said while being an addict was “not ideal”, it wasn’t destructive until you added in the desperate behaviour of scoring a fix.

Wow, where do I begin with this utter buffoonery? Marijuana is harmless? Just what planet is this guy living on? And he wants to lead this country? Be gone! The truth is, there are well over 10,000 scientific studies about marijuana and its effects.

The findings of this research reveal a host of alarming facts. This is a dangerous drug, with acute effects of cannabis use including: anxiety, panic, paranoia, cognitive impairment, psychomotor impairment, and increased risk of low birth rate babies. Chronic effects include: respiratory diseases, attention and memory loss or impairment, and cannabis dependence.

As an article in Pediatrics stated: “Marijuana is an addictive, mind-altering drug capable of inducing dependency. . . . Marijuana should not be considered an innocuous drug. . . . There is little doubt that marijuana intoxication contributes substantially to accidental deaths and injuries among adolescents”.

Yet he says it is harmless and non-addictive. He might as well say the moon is made of cheese and there is no such thing as gravity. How can any politician get away with making such utterly absurd and blatantly false claims. There should be a law against politicians telling porkies to the public.

And he uses the stale yet standard mantra of the moonbats on all this: choice. An adult can do what he wants. No he cannot. There are all sorts of things an adult cannot and should not do. These are not activities which have no impact on others.

For example, as just stated, the number of people steadily being harmed or killed because of other drivers using drugs continues to rise. This is not a victimless crime. Try telling the families who have lost loved ones due to a drug user that it is just all about choice, and none of their business.

Then this guy who has obviously been smoking way too much of this stuff tells us another incredible porkie: making things like opium legal will make everyone happy with no problems. Um no, not even close bub. We know perfectly well that keeping an activity illegal deters people from partaking in that activity.

Remove the penalties or sanctions, and many more people will take up the activity. We can learn from history here. After Europe imposed the opium trade on China in the mid-19th century, by 1900 there were an estimated 90 million opium addicts in the nation. When British physicians could write prescriptions for heroin in the 60s, the nation’s junkies increased thirty to forty-fold.

And then, incredibly, he claims that addictions were not “destructive until you added in the desperate behaviour of scoring a fix.” Is this guy for real? Addiction to dangerous mind-altering drugs is always dangerous and deadly. And since this guy is obviously clueless about the most basic of facts here, let me inform him of a few home truths.

Crime is a function of drug use. When people are on mind-altering drugs, they engage in more crime at greater rates. For example, most US prisoners serving time for drug-related crimes were in for aggravated drug crimes, that is, crimes committed while on drugs (murder, armed robbery, theft, assault, child abuse, etc.).

In fact, the US Department of Justice has found that criminals commit six times as many homicides, four times as many assaults and almost one-and-a-half times as many robberies under the influence of drugs as they commit in order to get money to buy drugs.

And if full legalisation is achieved, it will simply increase the pool of drug users. There is no way to enact the legalisation of drugs without greatly increasing the number of users. By removing the penalties for usage, and by (in theory) reducing the costs, demand will increase. This is a simple function of supply and demand: make something easier and cheaper to obtain, and you increase the number of people who will try it.

Yet this politician thinks all this is just a peachy idea. Just who elected this guy anyway? The “harm minimisation” model is a failed model, and countries which once had huge problems with drugs and crime, such as Sweden, have remarkably turned this around by implementing a just-say-no approach.

If he wants to spend his life lying around getting stoned, endangering his life and that of others, let him do it elsewhere. We don’t need his vacuous and failed counsel here.

[1155 words]

21 Replies to “Is This the Most Clueless Politician In the Country?”

  1. I feel that many who voted ‘Liberal Democrats’ were misled by the very name chosen by the party.

  2. I didn’t know that. Thank you for your alert. On the ball as usual. This man should be removed from Parliament at the next election. Our young people already have problems of self-harm with booze and tobacco and he wants to add to the burden with binges of ecstasy and modern, potent strains of marijuana. We are supposed to nurture our young, not put them in harm’s way.

  3. If you want people entirely dependant on the government, this strategy makes a lot of sense.

    Addicted to substances only the government can provide – I think there is a teen dystopian novel waiting to be written there.

  4. And new research continues to speak to the great harms of even marijuana use:

    “Teen cannabis use is far from harmless, according to a landmark study that found even those who smoked it only occasionally were at higher risk of school dropout, suicidal behaviour and other drug use. In one of the biggest studies of its kind into Australia’s most widely used illicit drug, researchers, including Curtin University’s National Drug Research Institute, looked at cannabis use in 3765 teens aged under 17 and tracked them to the age of 25.”

  5. This is also why I am against “medical marijuana” unless the harmful effects can be removed (I don’t know if that’s possible). The last thing we need is a mass of psychotic potheads trying to drive cars, mingling with our kids etc.

  6. Sorry Bill but I agree with the Senator, Why? Show me where keeping them illegal has in any way benefited society?

    In the first instance, show me where alcohol is of any benefit or any different to drugs? Secondly, do you recall the prohibition years in the US and what came from that? All those in the know will readily admit that the war on drugs is a lost war and it only benefits those who are making a quite fortune from having drugs kept illegal.

    In my view, it is immoral in democracy to make illegal that which the individual must take personal responsibility and children are the responsibility of their parents or legal parents.
    Thus far, by keeping drugs outlawed we have achieved only the negative such as:
    1. Made many unscrupulous very wealthy;

  7. Thanks John, but I take it you have not even bothered to read this article, where I outline in a brief way the many clear dangers and harms associated with drug use. The truth is, alcohol can be used moderately and safely, but this is not the case with illicit, mind-altering drugs which are highly dangerous, highly addictive, and serve no useful purpose at all.

    And I am in the know, thanks, having written 30 articles on the drug issue; being involved with various anti-drug organisations; and having once been a very heavy drug user myself. So please, try becoming a bit more informed here. I discuss in detail elsewhere the unhelpful myths you raise, eg:

    Sorry, but anyone who claims to be a Christian yet does not give a rip about people being greatly harmed, even killed, by horrible lifestyle choices is certainly not showing the love and compassion of Jesus Christ. It is Satan who comes to kill and destroy, not Jesus Christ. He comes to give life. The biblical Christian cares greatly about others and the public good, and does not put selfishness and self ahead of every other consideration.

    I have zero tolerance for drugs, and I will say it right now, I have little tolerance for “Christian” libertarians who are in fact causing great damage by pushing a gospel of selfishness. But I speak to that elsewhere as well, eg:

  8. Unbelievable! I can believe that the Greens would push this kind of garbage….now I can put this guy, and the party of goons who support him, in the same category. To be avoided at all cost! Thanks for the info, Bill, everyone needs to be alerted to those who represent a danger to our society.

  9. John Abbott you said:

    “In my view, it is immoral in democracy to make illegal that which the individual must take personal responsibility”

    However that is not a Biblical view. The role of government is to commend and uphold what is (morally) right/good and condemn and punish what is (morally) wrong/bad.

    Every individual has a personal moral responsibility to make choices, and an upright government operating within its Biblical mandate will support and encourage right decisions, and condemn wrong ones, using its power of the sword to punish and restrain evil.

  10. John Abbott – I worked for some years as a Psychiatric Nurse in both of our big Psychiatric hospitals in SA. In that time, I treated many drug users who were brought in by the Police as they were not only endangering their own lives, but also the lives of other people. Often, when they came out from the influence of these drugs, they were horrified at the harm they had caused (which made it far easier to help them kick the habit). Having seen this countless times, I would NEVER advocate the use of any mind altering drug to be freely available.
    The Liberal Democrats are even more loonie than the Greens!!!
    How any person who calls himself a Christian can advocate the free availability of these (illegal) drugs is totally beyond me.

  11. ‘Tis said “There are no dangerous drugs only dangerous people”. Certainly some people become very dangerous after ingesting certain drugs. Perhaps the Senator has a point IF (and only IF) the presence of such drugs in body fluids becomes an aggravating factor rather than, as. at present, an attenuating factor in anti-social behaviour.

  12. I dont agree with providing drugs, but facts speak!- Over half a century of prohibition has created a world wide network of mafia and criminal organisations that run whole countrys; Started numerous full scale wars and uprisings and has increased the use of banned substances 100 fold.
    Prohibition is killing our children and funding criminals and terrorists.
    No we do not want to encourage drug use or make it easy. But over half a century of failure. Wake up something different has to be tried. The one thing that we know without a doubt- is prohibition does the opposite of what intended and much worse on top.
    What the Answer? I dont know. But lets not deny all the facts and research right in front of our face and think for a second that prohibition is any solution at all.
    If you think Prohibition is a workable solution. Please also cure drug addiction with leaches and bleeding? (thats a joke:)

  13. Thanks Rusty. You are right about two things at least:
    Yes, we need facts and evidence on this issue, and not just emotive knee-jerk reactions. I of course happen to provide copious amounts of facts and evidence in my 30 articles on this topic, while you provide not one iota of this. Sadly all you do is rehash the failed and false leftist mantras about prohibition not working, etc. If your plea for actual evidence was not just rhetorical, then have a read of my articles where I show that the harm elimination strategy has indeed worked quite effectively, all things considered in a fallen world where nothing will be perfect or foolproof. Sweden is just one crystal clear example of this.

    And you are also right that you have no idea how to deal with this. That much is obvious. But for those who are indeed interested in actual facts, not just rhetoric, the articles I have already penned on this offer plenty of practical programs and workable solutions, all involving evidence-based strategies. See here:

    When you have carefully read those pieces, then you are welcome to come back and engage in some constructive discussion.

  14. Bill, there’s only one thing that im upset with you about regarding putting up an article such as this, and that is not allowing us access to emoticons!! haha, where is the crack up smily?

    And oh dear, you even had a couple of people comment in defence of this, wow!

    My thoughts, this politician should put down his crack pipe.
    I agree wholeheartedly with you Bill. As a former drug addict and dealer and one who has and continues to work with those who come to Christ drug addicted, the facts are, access to these drugs will do the following:

    1) It will increase drug users as it then shows people as well as our most impressionable, being young children that its ‘not so bad’. Have these nutters forgotten just what message the simple cigarette being smoked gave kids? Oh its legal, and it looks cool, and heaps of people do it, so I will also do it.
    Take a look at the war which goes on now to increase prices of cigarettes and anti smoking ads, campaigns, education et cetera to try and stop it due to the health risks which are facts. What have we learnt? We have learnt that we must now work towards making the humble cigarette illegal for the sake of the health of addicts… these folk want us to go back?

    2) Drugs don’t affect just the drug taker. They affect their children, their spouse, their friends, and more. Drugs are selfish, I work with people who are on them and they aren’t coherent in many ways. Many people are affected, foolish comments from these folk, very foolish and uneducated.

    3) When your a regular user of drugs you do everything on them, whether its work, or whatever. Drugs affect your abilities and responses and this is dangerous to not only the user but others. Can you imagine workplaces and Occupational Health and Safety? What thoughtless and harmful comments these people make.

    4) If we want to talk about criminal gangs making their money from drugs, we also need to talk about pornography and an array of other things. haha, you silly people, you think that criminal gangs just make their money from drugs and that this will shut them down? Your wrong.

    If this reasoning were to come in then it also must extend to pornography, it must also extend to the illegal arms trade and it must also extend to theft such as by violence, bank robberies, hold ups, protection payments and more.

    People really need to think before they speak sometimes.

  15. I’ve got the right answer for resolving much of the problem with these criminal organisations and reducing them to a minor problem. Its…..tougher deterrents from being a criminal!

    Make the penalty larger for the crime and punish it. That way, many will get a real job after seeing a few of their mates go away for a long time for what they normally get away very lightly with. Problem resolved, now vote for me lol

  16. Leyonhjelm’s comments are definitely concerning, but his party also has some good attitudes regarding smaller government which likely led many people to vote for them. And I therefore find it ironic that he thinks the government should get into the drug trade!

    John Abbott, alcohol is no “different to drugs”? It is a drug, and a dangerous one at that (see here for example). So although I agree with you (and not with Bill) that this is a valid comparison to make the lesson is that alcohol should be treated the way marijuana is, not marijuana the way alcohol is.

    And keeping all them illegal has benefited society. Yes, I know what came from prohibition in the U.S. Closed prisons from lack of prisoners, increase in the sales of children’s shoes because their dads weren’t blowing their wages on booze, a decrease in wife-beatings, hotel revenues up because they were more pleasant and family-friendly places to stay without the booze, and so on. And this is despite the enforcement of it being sabotaged by the legislators, with the tax department being the enforcing authority! (Al Capone’s main conviction was tax evasion.)

    But the mainstream media waged a campaign against prohibition and highlighted the few negatives such as the black market in booze and ignored the positives such as those I mentioned above, and that propaganda is still doing its work.

    Rusty BodenSorry, I don’t even get the joke, let alone think it’s funny. Prohibition is a workable solution, whether that’s prohibition of rape, robbery, hard drugs, or alcohol. In no case do they succeed 100%, but that doesn’t mean that they provide no benefit.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

%d bloggers like this: