\Petition says Colombia citizen Alejandro Carranza Medina was illegally killed in US airstrike on 15 September
A family in Colombia filed a petition on Tuesday with the Washington DC-based Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, alleging that the Colombian citizen Alejandro Carranza Medina was illegally killed in a US airstrike on 15 September.
The petition marks the first formal complaint over the airstrikes by the Trump administration against suspected drug boats, attacks that the White House says are justified under a novel interpretation of law.
The IACHR, part of the Organization of American States, is designed to “promote and protect human rights in the Western Hemisphere”. The US is a member, and in March the Trump administration’s state department wrote: “The United States is pleased to be a strong supporter of the IACHR and is committed to continuing support for the Commission’s work and its independence. Preserving the IACHR’s autonomy is a pillar of our human rights policy in the region.”
“Enriched plutonium” is not a drug. (wtf)
Again. There is no coherent moral framework that anyone has ever concocted to justify criminalizing your use of drugs, medical or otherwise. No arguments exist in defense of this strange practice (which appears culturally rooted in Puritanism or maybe well-meaning paternalism). The same goes for abortion bans.
If you have such an argument, please publish it in one of the philosophy journals. There’s no Nobel prize for philosophy, but a bunch of fusty academics will be very impressed with you.
EDIT: I imagine if you had a magical “drug” whose ingestion could somehow make you explode and injure others, then its access could be reasonably restricted.
I mean you could make a for the good of society arguments like we do for helmet and seat belt laws. But then you would have to grapple with alcohol which is way more destructive to society than practically all the other drugs combined.