The War on Drugs/Guns

http://www.lewrockwell.com/gregory/gregory76.html

How related are the two? More than you might think, I'd bet.  Advocates of civil liberties need to get together and support ALL civil liberties - not just a select few, and they need to do so consistently.  The ACLU should stop denying that the 2nd amendment is an individual right.  The NRA should stop denying that the 10th amendment protects an individual's right to use drugs.

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people."  Amendment 10, the Bill of Rights.
(http://www.billofrightsinstitute.org/Instructional/Resources/FoundingDocuments/Docs/TheBillofRights.htm)

Thus, since the drug war is not expressly authorized in the constitution, it is unconstitutional, right? ...

Advocates of the Bill of Rights and the civil liberties contained within should be more consistent.  It is not consistent to advocate the liberty of one group of people while ignoring the liberty of another group of people. 

This is one of the big reasons I was so turned off from both the NRA and the ACLU.  The NRA seems to be a recruiting ground for the neo-cons, claiming to support the bill of rights, while ignoring many of the liberties enshrined within it, such as the 4th and 10th amendments. 

The ACLU, likewise, seems to be a recruitment arm of the democratic party. It claims to be a supporter of the bill of rights & the constitution, while ignoring the 2nd amendment & the rights of american gun owners.  Both are inconsistent. 

The NRA should have joined the ACLU in opposing the Patriot Act and the more egregious violations of the bill of rights associated with the drug war.  The ACLU should join the NRA in being an advocate for the 2nd amendment rights of americans.

This is not to say I dissaprove of these organizations.  I am happy they are there.  Just imagine how much worse off our civil liberties in general would be without them.  However, civil liberties would fare better overall if the two of these organizations would hold to their objectives - defending the constitution and bill of rights for all americans.. and to stop kissing the asses of neo-conservatives and democrats regardless of what violations of civil liberty they support.

I have encouraged others since, if they would, to join GOA instead of the NRA due to these reasons (http://www.gunowners.org/), since GOA seems to be a more consistent advocate of the Bill of Rights in many cases where the NRA backed down (again, this is not to say I'm not happy the NRA is there).

Of course, advocates of civil liberties could also join one of the most uncompromising and consistent advocates of liberty today, the libertarian party (http://www.lp.org/).

Here is what the ACLU has to say about your 2nd amendment rights: 

"The individual's right to bear arms applies only to the preservation or efficiency of a 'well regulated militia." Except for lawful police and military purposes, the possession of weapons by individuals is not constitutionally protected." - ACLU, Policy statement #47, 1996.

So in other words, they are saying the 2nd amendment doesn't give you as an individual a right to keep and bear arms, and that this is a collective right for the military/police/national guard.

If you believe the term "militia" means the National Guard then you must believe that the freedom of speech is reserved for the Government Printing Office.