Martini: shaken not stirred

 can crime be decriminalized?  

It amazes me that people actually believe society can reduce criminal behavior by legitimizing it. In Vancouver Canada, liberal bleeding hearts have recently been trying to push through the establishment of a group of safe shoot-em-up drug cafes. The rhetoric has been fascinating. Descriptions of a coffee-shop atmosphere with classy interior design and nurses on hand to distribute the drugs make them sound like real cozy places indeed.

Perhaps people today are so gullible they actually believe such places can exist. The socialist spin doctors responsible for selling this to the public prey on the ignorance of our largely middle-class society--a population which has never seen the ugliness and despair of drug addicted Skid Row. At first glance such a concept might seem almost reasonable. I suppose many people picture those addicts as middle-class types like themselves. Polite society can't imagine the kind of people who would frequent these places. Society can't picture the seedy drug lords who would welcome this as an opportunity to make new customers, and who are quite willing to kill to rule such territory. People just can't conceive of the sheer volume of crime and death such places would attract.

Imagine if you will the prospect of trying to reduce bank robberies by legitimizing them. You would set up a corridor in your major cities where criminals could rob banks without penalty in hopes they would then do so without weapons. Sound absurd? Then why do people think it makes sense to legitimize the use of addictive drugs?

What I find interesting is that these proposals have already been tested. In Vancouver a site funded by the government was left alone by police. It was originally set up as a rehab center but quickly became a hotbed of heroin abuse. Drug dealers hounded the place and coerced passing teens to take the leap to hard drugs. In short order, the level of crime became so severe that police were forced to close it down. Yet our left-leaning social scientists believe that if just one aspect of the program were different--the interior decorating or location--then everything will turn out peachy keen and we can all live in peace and harmony.

What these socialists continually fail to grasp is a simple human fact. They believe, as did Karl Marx, that people are basically good inside and given the right circumstances all that good will shine through and evil will be dispelled from the face of humanity forever. This philosophy will always put them at odds with those who use common sense.

You don't have to be a Republican or fundamentalist Christian to know that people have a nature inside that doesn't lean towards good, but towards evil. Just watch a group of kids at play and you can see it at work. Do you see a "Joy Joy" society or something less than ideal? Hey, just talk to any teenager. This is a basic part of human nature. Christians call it the "sinful nature," but it doesn't matter what you name it. It's that inner desire to rebel, to put your own interests ahead of the good of others. That's what leaders discipline themselves to reject within themselves, so that they can set a standard of acceptable behavior for others to adapt. Orderly society can only exist when a group of people agree to common standards of behavior. Rebellion doesn't have a place in orderly society. How could it?

That nature inside of us is a terminal disease. A man named Jesus of Nazareth died to provide the only available antidote. Only by accepting his message of love and forgiveness through his sacrifice on a rough wooden cross some 2,000 years ago can we be permanently forgiven for our rebellious attitude towards moral guidelines. And only then -- when our hearts are changed from the inside -- can we truly have any hope of a peaceful world. Not because the rebellious nature inside us disappears. But because then we know that it exists.


Martini archives