Monthly Archives: October 2007

Breaking: Justice For Genarlow Wilson

This morning the Supreme Court of Georgia ruled that Genarlow Wilson’s ten year prison sentence for having consenual oral sex with his 15 year old girlfriend when he was 17 constitutes “cruel and unusual punishment,” and ordered Wilson released immediately:

Georgia’s State Supreme Court has ruled that Genarlow Wilson’s 10-year sentence for having consensual oral sex when he was a teenager is “cruel and unusual punishment” and ordered him freed.

The state court announced the ruling Friday morning.

Wilson is being held in prison for having consensual oral sex when he was a teenager, despite a judge’s ruling that he should be freed.

Wilson was convicted of aggravated child molestation for having oral sex with a 15-year-old girl when he was 17.

He has served more than two years of a mandatory 10-year sentence.

The text of the Court’s opinion, in PDF format, can be found here.

Update: Further details from the Washington Post:

The 1995 law Wilson violated was changed in 2006 to make oral sex between teens close in age a misdemeanor, similar to the law regarding teen sexual intercourse. But the state Supreme Court later upheld a lower court’s ruling which said that the 2006 law could not be applied retroactively.

Chief Justice Leah Ward Sears wrote in the majority opinion that the changes in the law “represent a seismic shift in the legislature’s view of the gravity of oral sex between two willing teenage participants.”

Sears wrote that the severe punishment makes “no measurable contribution to acceptable goals of punishment” and that Wilson’s crime did not rise to the “level of adults who prey on children.”

Exactly the way this should have turned out to begin with.

Now This Is What $ 5 Million In The Bank Can Do For You

Ron Paul is about to begin a major media blitz in New Hampshire:

WASHINGTON, Oct. 25 — If media muscle is any measure of a candidate, Representative Ron Paul of Texas is getting ready to flex his.

In the last two weeks, Mr. Paul — a Republican presidential candidate — has spent nearly a half-million dollars on radio advertisements in four early primary states, the first major media investment of his campaign. On Tuesday night, he will take a seat opposite Jay Leno.

And on Monday, a campaign spokesman said, he will roll out his first major television advertising campaign, spending $1.1 million on five new commercials to be shown in the New Hampshire market for the next six weeks. (In contrast, Rudolph W. Giuliani, the former mayor of New York and a rival for the Republican nomination, has yet to commit to any spending for television advertisements.)

Mr. Paul’s commercials are intended to introduce him to voters in New Hampshire, where independents can vote in either primary and where a libertarian streak could give Mr. Paul a chance to translate his quirky popularity into votes.

This is where the rubber hits the road. Right now, Paul is somewhere between 5% and 7% in the polls in the one state where he’s most likely to garner more support than the conventional wisdom is expected, but with the primary now less than two months away, it’s time to make a move. Check back in about two weeks and we should see if this media campaign has had an impact on the voters.

More On Stormfront And The Ron Paul Campaign

Two weeks ago I wrote about the endorsement that Ron Paul’s campaign had received from the neo-nazi’s over at Stormfront.

Now,  its seems that the founder of the site has donated money to the campaign:

A LoneStarTimes.com investigation has conclusively established that a leading figure in the American neo-Nazi / White-Supremacist movement has provided financial support to Ron Paul’s 2008 Presidential campaign.

The individual in question is Don Black, the founder, owner and operator of Stormfront, a “white power” website that both professional journalists and watch-dog groups have identified as the premier English-language racist/hate-site on the Internet.

The amount in question — $ 500 — is small, but that doesn’t mean the campaign shouldn’t address it. This is, quite honestly, an issue that almost every politician faces at some point — you get a contribution from an unsavory character, or even one that is technically illegal under Federal Election Law. Even if it’s not illegal, there really is only one good PR move in a situation like this, you return the money and ask the person(s) in question not to send anymore.

You don’t building a winning coalition by letting the hatemongers in.

Exposing A Myth About Drug Legalization

One of the most common retorts from opponents of drug legalization is that making drugs available legally would lead to increased use.

Well, if Britain’s experience with the decriminalization is any indication, they’ve got it completely wrong:

Gordon Brown’s plans to tighten the law on cannabis by increasing the penalties for possession suffered a fresh blow yesterday as the latest official figures showed the decision to downgrade the drug had been followed by a significant fall in its use.

British Crime Survey statistics showed that the proportion of 16- to 24-year-olds using cannabis slumped from 28% a decade ago to 21% now, with its declining popularity accelerating after the decision to downgrade the drug to class C was announced in January 2004.

(…)

Since cannabis was downgraded the proportion of young people using it has fallen each year from 25.3% in 2003-4 to 20.9% now. Among those aged 16 to 59, the proportion over the same period has fallen from 10.8% to 8.2%.

Why might something like this happen ? Well, once illegal drugs loose their taboo status, their allure for some people, especially young people, suddenly goes away. Allowing legal cannabis businesses to flourish has not only been proven in many countries to bring more money into the economy, but can even reduce its appeal to many people. Even so, legal marijuana companies that make use of advisors such as mj consulting are thriving and profiting all over countries that have legalized. Therefore, legalization can allow people to know the risks associated with cannabis before they decide to use the substance. Legalization in Canada has allowed people to easily purchase marijuana through an online dispensary canada, and has not had a negative impact on the country. Some people have even said that cannabis is generally easier on your body than alcohol, so this might be an even bigger benefit to some people and help them stay a bit more healthier if they are allowed to. Those with the correct license to do so can find autoflowering seeds online in order to grow their own plants for personal use.

So the next time some drug warrior tells you that legalization will result in a nation of drug addicts, you can tell him that it ain’t necessarily so.

Confessions Of A Former “Big-L” Libertarian

Vodkapundit’s Stephen Green explains why he divorced himself from the party that once captivated him so much:

[W]e all woke up one morning to learn that airliners had crashed into the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and into the wooded hills of Pennsylvania. “Well, here’s a war even a good Libertarian like me can support.” We’d been attacked, directly, and we knew who the culprits were and where their protectors and sponsors were. We would go after them with such righteous fury that no one would dare strike New York City ever again.

Boy, was I wrong.

The angry folks at Liberty were mad at most everybody but Islamic terrorists. One even went so far as to denounce the Afghan War as “racist.” It was all imperialism this, and blowback that, and without a care in the world for protecting American lives, commerce, or, well, liberty. Then Postrel turned over Reason to Nick Gillespie, who seemed more interested in presenting libertarianism as something hip, arch, fun — and ultimately unserious. Such should have been no surprise, coming from the former editor of a magazine called Suck.

I felt abandoned, betrayed, by my comrades. By my former comrades.

If Libertarians couldn’t agree about the clear-cut case for war in Afghanistan, you can imagine how Iraq must have divided us. I had to stop reading Liberty months before my subscription finally, mercifully, ran out. Blogger friends of mine stopped emailing me. Ron Paul, whose name once graced the back of my first car, started sounding to me, less like a principled defender of American liberty, and more like a suited-up reject from the Summer of Love.

I stopped voting Libertarian for local candidates, leaving lots of blanks on my ballot. Next year, I’m not sure which party I’ll support for President, much less which candidate. From here, it looks as if the Republicans have become wrong and corrupt, the Democrats are stupid and corrupt, and the Libertarians have gone plain crazy.

Unlike Stephen, I was never a card-carrying member of the Libertarian Party and pretty much gave up on them as anything other than a protest vote after the 1992 elections. Locally, the candidates they were fielding here in Virginia were often rank amateurs who could not be taken seriously to fill the positions they were running for.

And, well, then there were just the crazy ones.

They existed before 9/11, of course, they were the one who talked about the Bilderbergers, the Council on Foreign Relations, and seemed to be able to spin an elaborate conspiracy theory to explain everything from the Kennedy Assassination to the eye above the pyramid on the back of a $ 1 Dollar Bill. There seemed to be a lot of them in the Libertarian Party circles that I did float around in early `90’s and, frankly, I wanted nothing to do with them even then.

Much like Stephen September 11th was a turning point for me as well. Leaving aside for the moment the issue of the Iraq War which I opposed from the beginning, it seemed axiomatic to me from the start that the War in Afghanistan was completely justified given the fact that it was directed against a foreign government that was harboring a terrorist group that had killed 3,000 Americans in one day and had made clear it’s intention to kill more of us.

But that’s not how many hard-core libertarians saw it. In their eyes, the war was unjust from the start, and some of them found it easier to believe that the United States Government had conspired in mass murder than that a ruthless terrorist who believed he had the blessing of Allah to murder infidels had in fact done just that, especially considering the fact that the evidence clearly supported the idea that it was the terrorists who were responsible for 9/11, not George Bush.

So the question is where does someone who believes in individual liberty, but also believes that the War on Terror is a war not only worth fighting, but a war that has to be fought go ? The Democrats aren’t an option because they’re mired in socialist economic nostrums. The Republicans, despite some individuals who still believe in individual liberty, have been nothing but a disappointment. And, well, the LP is just not worth thinking about anymore.

If anyone has the answer, let me know.

1 5 6 7 8 9 28