View Full Version : When do we stop f**king around, and declare thsis to be a war?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/americas/mexican-cartels-now-using-tanks/2011/06/06/AGacrALH_story.html
These bastards now have tanks, RPGs, grenades, mortars, and antiaircraft weapons. Doesn't that make them an invading foreign army?
bobbyfairbanks
06-11-2011, 12:36
We already lost the war on drugs. The only way to counter them is to legalize the drugs they are trying to sell. Then they will no longer have there black market to trade in.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/americas/mexican-cartels-now-using-tanks/2011/06/06/AGacrALH_story.html
These bastards now have tanks, RPGs, grenades, mortars, and antiaircraft weapons. Doesn't that make them an invading foreign army?
They have helos as well. To answer your question- when we get a president with a pair, who's concerned with protecting our country- there's something in the Constitution about that....- rather than protecting big business.
Delfuego
06-11-2011, 12:51
Yup that sure looks like a Mexican tank to me.... (Mexi-Tank)[ROFL1]
CMP_5.56
06-11-2011, 13:54
I bet that tank has the same horn as the roach coach! [ROFL1]
...when people stop complaining about us being "at war"
jplove71
06-11-2011, 15:56
More like when Janet Incompentano shuts her pie hole and starts listening to what is really going on at our border with Mexico.
Pancho Villa
06-11-2011, 17:21
Hey look guys, I have a fool-proof plan that will kneecap the cartels.
Legalize drugs.
Wow, look, 98% of their funding just went away and Wal-Mart is declared the winner of the War on Drugs.
Sure was hard work, coming up with that solution. I'll take my payment in ammo. [M2]
100 years from now people will look back on this period like we look back on prohibition today. "Really? They tried to make what illegal? Were they retarded or something?"
I wish they would just legalize it too. Unfortunately all the nanny idiots who think we need to be guided through life won't ever let that happen. They're trying to outlaw happy meals for chrissakes, how could we ever expect them to legalize drugs. Too bad, too, because I'm sick of this "gray area" with the whole pot thing. Seems like every other week I'm arguing with some stoner because he brings his pot into my ED, but thinks he can keep it because "I know my card's around here somewhere, man." Like whatever horrible pain you're experiencing at 23 years old warrants your need of an illegal substance. Just legalize the crap and be done with it.
/rant
bobbyfairbanks
06-12-2011, 00:17
Ya Meth, Heroine and other very addictive drugs can cause serious problems. My thing about them is people are going to do them any ways. whether they are legal or illegal. Why not just say fuck it, you do drugs and destroy your body it is on you. Having laws against it is not going to stop any buddy. Shit killing people is illegal but how many people get murdered every year. Driving drunk is illegal and how many get pulled over every night. No amount of money will be able to stop the illegal drug trade. The only way to win this war is to legalize the cartels product.
There are plenty of laws already, and there could be more, raising consequences if you hurt someone else while under the influence. Legal or not, people are still going to do meth and heroine, a TON of people do coke. Making it legal isn't going to make people run out and do it.
flan7211
06-12-2011, 00:55
Jails don't work so... I think they should just give the incarcerated their own city, like Detroit or New York, and let them govern themselves. Then like when Air Force One crashes and the CIC gets stranded there they can send in Snake Pliskin to save him. They should make a movie about that.
That's some good shit right there[ROFL1].
Legalization sounds great, but do you want drugs so non-nonchalantly bought and sold around your neighborhood? Now I know it happens anyways but legalization of even pot could only sustain itself for a short period of time. Social conservatives would drive it back and have a list of horror stories to go with it. No instead of thinking we can use the free market to work on these scum we need to hit them where it hurts. Get tough on illegal immigrants, harder on transporters, and kick gangs in the teeth. I would even support easing up on users but with a lot more pressure going on cross border drug transport.
Just guessing here but I imagine the border is a lot like the Ho Chi Minh Trail. A lot of there equipment and stockpiles are probably very close to the border. Even just one quick raid down there maybe 20 miles in with 3 or 4 Brigade Combat teams would do some serious damage to these pukes.
bobbyfairbanks
06-12-2011, 01:13
That's some good shit right there[ROFL1].
Legalization sounds great, but do you want drugs so non-nonchalantly bought and sold around your neighborhood? Now I know it happens anyways but legalization of even pot could only sustain itself for a short period of time. Social conservatives would drive it back and have a list of horror stories to go with it. No instead of thinking we can use the free market to work on these scum we need to hit them where it hurts. Get tough on illegal immigrants, harder on transporters, and kick gangs in the teeth. I would even support easing up on users but with a lot more pressure going on cross border drug transport.
Just guessing here but I imagine the border is a lot like the Ho Chi Minh Trail. A lot of there equipment and stockpiles are probably very close to the border. Even just one quick raid down there maybe 20 miles in with 3 or 4 Brigade Combat teams would do some serious damage to these pukes.
Do you realize that our country is 15 T in debt and inflation has made the dollar only have 10% of its buying power as it did in 1913. Where are we going to get the money to support going down that Rabbit hole?
There are plenty of laws already, and there could be more, raising consequences if you hurt someone else while under the influence. Legal or not, people are still going to do meth and heroine, a TON of people do coke. Making it legal isn't going to make people run out and do it.
I am giong to have to slightly disagree with you a lil stuving. Making some drugs legal is one thing like weed, fine, but others should stay where they are as illegal. You make certain things like, lets say, meth legal, and you will have a huge problem. The fact that it is illegal has kept it from being used by lots of people just because, well, it is illegal. You make it legal and I think it will be like alchohol, only when you try it the one time with your friends, you get addicted. Who here has tried alcohol? Who drank before legal age? Who smoked weed illegaly? See what I'm getting at? We also have to face a certain fact that the youth is getting dumber every damn day so counting on them to be smart enough not to try something like Meth is out of the question. That one time use and you're screwed thing is the ringer that should keep it and other drugs like it illegal. I don't think anyone who argues for all drugs to be legal has put any thought into just how dumb humans really are. You want to make a serious attempt at getting rid of a serious problem, you get serious about the punishment. You make or deal drugs, bullet to the head. You get caught using "hard" drugs, one of your hands comes off. No questions asked. See what the use rate goes down to after putting those laws into affect.
Marijuana is the only drug I've ever done. Not once, did I decide to not try some other drug because of its legal status. We won't have to put a bullet into the heads of people who do meth.
Do you realize that our country is 15 T in debt and inflation has made the dollar only have 10% of its buying power as it did in 1913. Where are we going to get the money to support going down that Rabbit hole?
You're kidding right? You think our gov. needs money to do whatever it wants? [ROFL1][LOL]
Marijuana is the only drug I've ever done. Not once, did I decide to not try some other drug because of its legal status. We won't have to put a bullet into the heads of people who do meth.
The users just lose "ends" not their life. The scum that make and deal, they can go....... Stuving I was talking about the public in general, not you. The questions of use I guess were directed at everyone though.
bobbyfairbanks
06-12-2011, 01:34
I am giong to have to slightly disagree with you a lil stuving. Making some drugs legal is one thing like weed, fine, but others should stay where they are as illegal. You make certain things like, lets say, meth legal, and you will have a huge problem. The fact that it is illegal has kept it from being used by lots of people just because, well, it is illegal. You make it legal and I think it will be like alchohol, only when you try it the one time with your friends, you get addicted. Who here has tried alcohol? Who drank before legal age? Who smoked weed illegaly? See what I'm getting at? We also have to face a certain fact that the youth is getting dumber every damn day so counting on them to be smart enough not to try something like Meth is out of the question. That one time use and you're screwed thing is the ringer that should keep it and other drugs like it illegal. I don't think anyone who argues for all drugs to be legal has put any thought into just how dumb humans really are. You want to make a serious attempt at getting rid of a serious problem, you get serious about the punishment. You make or deal drugs, bullet to the head. You get caught using "hard" drugs, one of your hands comes off. No questions asked. See what the use rate goes down to after putting those laws into affect.
Ya so I would guess that you are ok with the large federal government violating the constitution when ever they would like to. Ever hear of propaganda? Not everyone that tries Meth is addicted to it and are going to have there fall out. Shit it would help our country out if we let the idiots kill them selves with drugs. The key in legalizing it is that you cannot give out any state or federal aid to those people.
mcantar18c
06-12-2011, 02:09
Do you realize that our country is 15 T in debt and inflation has made the dollar only have 10% of its buying power as it did in 1913. Where are we going to get the money to support going down that Rabbit hole?
LOL.... I suppose we could find some spare change between the illegal Libyan conflict and the billions of $$ we send out to other countries for absolutely no legit reason.
Our current gov't doesn't give a damn about money.
I am giong to have to slightly disagree with you a lil stuving. Making some drugs legal is one thing like weed, fine, but others should stay where they are as illegal. You make certain things like, lets say, meth legal, and you will have a huge problem. The fact that it is illegal has kept it from being used by lots of people just because, well, it is illegal. You make it legal and I think it will be like alchohol, only when you try it the one time with your friends, you get addicted. Who here has tried alcohol? Who drank before legal age? Who smoked weed illegaly? See what I'm getting at? We also have to face a certain fact that the youth is getting dumber every damn day so counting on them to be smart enough not to try something like Meth is out of the question. That one time use and you're screwed thing is the ringer that should keep it and other drugs like it illegal. I don't think anyone who argues for all drugs to be legal has put any thought into just how dumb humans really are. You want to make a serious attempt at getting rid of a serious problem, you get serious about the punishment. You make or deal drugs, bullet to the head. You get caught using "hard" drugs, one of your hands comes off. No questions asked. See what the use rate goes down to after putting those laws into affect.
Agreed. Its a shame we did away with corporal punishment.
Ya so I would guess that you are ok with the large federal government violating the constitution when ever they would like to. Ever hear of propaganda? Not everyone that tries Meth is addicted to it and are going to have there fall out. Shit it would help our country out if we let the idiots kill them selves with drugs. The key in legalizing it is that you cannot give out any state or federal aid to those people.
When did violating the Constitution come into play here?
Maybe not EVERYONE that tries meth, coke, heroin, etc. gets addicted, but most do. I won't say too much here cause I have no firsthand experience on the matter, but the fact is that the stuff IS extremely addictive. I do think that we should just remove the warning labels on everything and let the problem solve itself, but legalizing drugs like these is a no-no. It may kill off the less intelligent among us, but in doing so it'll turn the country into a meth-infested shithole.... in other words it'll turn any significantly populated area into Detroit.
And you don't need to legalize drugs to avoid giving aid to those people. Just put a "Do they use drugs?" box on the requirement list.
The thing I don't get is why people think that legalizing drugs will kill off the cartels. Doing away with the prohibition didn't kill off the mafias, just eliminated bootlegging from their list of means of income. Sure, it'll put a good sized dent in their wallets, but they'll just step up their efforts in other areas to compensate for it.
The mafia did turn to other ways to make money, but they weren't able to deal in something that 90% of the population was interested in.
I have so many more thoughts about this, but it's so late and I am so tired. Basically, drugs have been around since we've been around, and it hasn't been a crippling problem in the past. Not for long anyway. Things aren't the same as they were then though. You can't off a meth head for stealing your stuff like you could in the 1600's.
BREATHER
06-12-2011, 06:42
"The War" on drugs will never be won until someone grows a pair and start taking graft, corruption and bribes as treason and punish it as such. Look up definition of treason. "They" are saying it is a declared war, at least that is how "they" make it sound.
There is corruption on both sides of the border. It's just not the criminals ,that are getting wealthy. We, the working lower middle class, are the chumps.
streetglideok
06-12-2011, 06:49
Right now lets face it, there isn't any real consequences to using drugs. So you want to become a meth head, or a heroine addict? No problem, its out on the streets. Oxycoton(sp)?Sure thing, thats legal even. You may get caught, and sent to jail, big deal. 3 hots and a cot, they are good to go. When out, theres different social programs to support the non-working deadbeat, why bother to work? Problem starts to grow when the drug users who want to make it a lifestyle cant afford their drugs, and start to steal from us working folks, or try to rob us to pay for it. Then it affects everyone. Solution is several steps, beginning with elimination of entitlement programs. If they cant get a job, there is plenty of trash or sidewalks to sweep. If they dont do that, let them starve, Darwin's law. If convicted of a crime in a violent nature, and they were on drugs, capital punishment, get rid of the scum. Otherwise revoke citizenship and deport them. Even if they were born here. No one else wants them? Thats no longer our problem, let them swim. It stops being fun doing drugs when mommy and daddy are no longer feeding them, or handing out money, and they starve to death.
As to people trying meth because they are dumb-
I agree, people are dumb, as evidence, I was a dumb DUMB kid. The one thing I can say for sure, I tried a couple drugs, (nothing too hard, not that dumb) for the most part, because drugs were a hell of a lot easier for a kid to get than booze. We could round up whatever drug we wanted, in under an hour. Booze, that one would require stealing from your mom and dad. If you have a teenage kid, I am sure they will confirm this assessment, excluding nerds and straight edge kids, no one talks to them.
If things are in a store, and you don't get to buy as much as you want, and then you get crack downs on growers and producers, I bet we see more controls on use, even with it legal. You can make meth in a 2L soda bottle in your house in a couple of hours. Shrooms, you have jars? Seriously, it is too easy to produce to stop with prohibition, ignore the border, they just make it cheaper and want in on the money. If they weren't packing it in, we would be producing it. It makes back country stills look like rocket science.
I think we would be better served if it was legal, monitored, and taxed. Use the revenue to keep people out of jails and create some more effective treatment options. I am sure it would be much cheaper than the system we have now. And if Coca-Cola or Philp-Moris had a cut in the profits, you could be sure the cartels in Mexico don't have a chance. They may play dirty, but you can't beat American business when the rules are relaxed.
No need to shoot meth addicts either, that's a self solving situation, they have it covered.
Pancho Villa
06-12-2011, 08:37
At some point, you have to accept that humans are responsible for their own actions.
Are hard drugs destructive to you if you abuse them? Are some drugs just plain bad for you? Sure.
Not my business, and I am kinda pissed off that I get taxed every quarter to pay for policing other peoples' business.
I mean, the argument that some people will abuse drugs and then produce "horror stories" that the paleocons will use to get them outlawed could be used for alcohol as well. I think its not controversial to say that alcohol is at least as destructive on a per-numbers basis (drunk driving, alcoholics, etc) as any other "hard" drug. Hey, let's bring back alcohol prohibition! It worked so well the first time!
At some point the paleocons have to accept that prohibition was a failure because telling people what they can and cannot put in their bodies isn't the state's business and trying to do so isn't just impractical, but immoral.
I don't really wonder why conservatives have failed for years to do significant rollbacks on the welfare state; they don't have any fundamental disagreement with it, they just want to tweak it. After all, if its the state's responsibility to make sure you don't ingest bad things for you, why isn't it the state's responsibility to support you with welfare, give you free healthcare and ensure all the foods you are allowed to eat are healthy?
Big brother is there to protect you from yourself, and if the people can't be trusted to not shoot themselves up with meth then how on earth can they be trusted to eat right, save money for unemployment or choose a good healthcare plan?
Pancho, all very good points. In fact, that's the truth right there about everything. Why is it the gov's business to protect us from ourselves? Wanna ride your motorcycle without a helmet? Ok, but if you crash it's your own fault. That's one of those laws that Colorado hasn't enacted... yet.. but it goes along the same lines. I wouldn't approve of a blanket legalization of all drugs, but some of the lesser harmful ones would probably become acceptable (from research and watching NatGeo: Marijuana, MDMA, LSD and mushrooms are near the bottom of the danger list- if done with reason and moderation). But like anything, cigarettes, alcohol, even scrip drugs, you abuse, you can die.
Now, to slide back on track a bit, I saw a documentary about the situation at the border, and they showed the civilian populous who sits down there and watches the border. They spot several armed men crossing into the US and right there I think it's an armed invasion of sovereign US territory by armed aggressors, how are we not at war? I say give the patriots down there permission to engage hostiles, no just sit back and call Border Patrol who will take who knows how long...
Fentonite
06-12-2011, 22:16
Read this book:
http://www.amazon.com/Drug-Addiction-Sheriff-Bill-Masters/dp/1888118091
Seriously. Available for less than 3 bucks. Pretty interesting insight.
Pancho Villa
06-13-2011, 11:58
Pancho, all very good points. In fact, that's the truth right there about everything. Why is it the gov's business to protect us from ourselves? Wanna ride your motorcycle without a helmet? Ok, but if you crash it's your own fault. That's one of those laws that Colorado hasn't enacted... yet.. but it goes along the same lines. I wouldn't approve of a blanket legalization of all drugs, but some of the lesser harmful ones would probably become acceptable (from research and watching NatGeo: Marijuana, MDMA, LSD and mushrooms are near the bottom of the danger list- if done with reason and moderation). But like anything, cigarettes, alcohol, even scrip drugs, you abuse, you can die.
Now, to slide back on track a bit, I saw a documentary about the situation at the border, and they showed the civilian populous who sits down there and watches the border. They spot several armed men crossing into the US and right there I think it's an armed invasion of sovereign US territory by armed aggressors, how are we not at war? I say give the patriots down there permission to engage hostiles, no just sit back and call Border Patrol who will take who knows how long...
OK.
If I cross into mexico with a pistol or rifle that means the US is invading Mexico? Sweet. brb starting an international incident.
OK.
If I cross into mexico with a pistol or rifle that means the US is invading Mexico? Sweet. brb starting an international incident.
Sorry guess I should have clarified- they stated that in 4 instances in one month US Border Patrol agents apprehended 3-17 armed Mexican Army soldiers illegally crossing the border either escorting drug mules or immigrants. While I was stationed in Northern NY they told us that the Canadian Gov't prohibited US Military personnel from crossing the border with: Arms, weapons of any kind, US Military uniforms and US Military issue equipment. When armed soldiers from a foreign military illegally cross into another country it is considered a hostile action on behalf of that military- under orders or not. Since they are paid soldiers from the Mexican army the US Department of State should notify the Mexican Gov't and there should be some public outcry. How would Canada feel if our troops started crossing into their country armed without permission?
Pancho Villa
06-13-2011, 12:44
Sorry guess I should have clarified- they stated that in 4 instances in one month US Border Patrol agents apprehended 3-17 armed Mexican Army soldiers illegally crossing the border either escorting drug mules or immigrants. While I was stationed in Northern NY they told us that the Canadian Gov't prohibited US Military personnel from crossing the border with: Arms, weapons of any kind, US Military uniforms and US Military issue equipment. When armed soldiers from a foreign military illegally cross into another country it is considered a hostile action on behalf of that military- under orders or not. Since they are paid soldiers from the Mexican army the US Department of State should notify the Mexican Gov't and there should be some public outcry. How would Canada feel if our troops started crossing into their country armed without permission?
Oh, to that: 100% agree. Its technically an act of war - tho I am fairly sure it would never get to that when push came to shove.
The problem from the Mexican side of things is that they have about as much control over the border as the Pakis have over their's, ie, none really. Legalizing drugs would be a good first strike against the orgs that do the most damage in that sense. Yes, hard drugs too. They are nasty things but prohibiting them only puts money into the pockets of extremely evil men.
Prohibition doesn't work and its a violation of the rights of Americans to boot. Yes, if you want to go shooting up speed every night, you're an idiot and you have a problem. However, making it illegal doesn't solve the actual cause, ie, the idiot sitting there willing to shoot up speed every night, and involves channeling money from legitimate businesses whose motivation is to make a buck and whose methods are free market competition into the hands of cartel bosses whose motivation is power over defenseless peoples and whose methods are murder.
There's really no upside to it.
Oh, to that: 100% agree. Its technically an act of war - tho I am fairly sure it would never get to that when push came to shove.
The problem from the Mexican side of things is that they have about as much control over the border as the Pakis have over their's, ie, none really. Legalizing drugs would be a good first strike against the orgs that do the most damage in that sense. Yes, hard drugs too. They are nasty things but prohibiting them only puts money into the pockets of extremely evil men.
Prohibition doesn't work and its a violation of the rights of Americans to boot. Yes, if you want to go shooting up speed every night, you're an idiot and you have a problem. However, making it illegal doesn't solve the actual cause, ie, the idiot sitting there willing to shoot up speed every night, and involves channeling money from legitimate businesses whose motivation is to make a buck and whose methods are free market competition into the hands of cartel bosses whose motivation is power over defenseless peoples and whose methods are murder.
There's really no upside to it.
Cost so far this year on war on drugs: $24.25B (that's BILLION with a B)
Now think of this, the Escobar Cartel in the 1980's spent $30,000 on rubber bands per year just to hold their cash together, and Escobar himself pocketed in excess of $20B from personal profit- that's after paying his men, and other expenses, and you have to figure that's 80's figures, so $20B then is a lot more now. Oh did I mention, that's just ONE cartel, estimates today believe there are over 10 just in NW Mexico alone- within 75mi of the US border.
n8tive97
06-13-2011, 13:36
Oh, to that: 100% agree. Its technically an act of war - tho I am fairly sure it would never get to that when push came to shove.
The problem from the Mexican side of things is that they have about as much control over the border as the Pakis have over their's, ie, none really. Legalizing drugs would be a good first strike against the orgs that do the most damage in that sense. Yes, hard drugs too. They are nasty things but prohibiting them only puts money into the pockets of extremely evil men.
Prohibition doesn't work and its a violation of the rights of Americans to boot. Yes, if you want to go shooting up speed every night, you're an idiot and you have a problem. However, making it illegal doesn't solve the actual cause, ie, the idiot sitting there willing to shoot up speed every night, and involves channeling money from legitimate businesses whose motivation is to make a buck and whose methods are free market competition into the hands of cartel bosses whose motivation is power over defenseless peoples and whose methods are murder.
There's really no upside to it.
So if I understand you correctly, your approach is to legalize it, tax the sh*t out of it and get out of debt? Thats your solution? Really?
So what all of you are saying is it is worth endangering more lives by legalizing drugs than to make punishments worse to get it to stop? Seriously? That is just kind of idiotic thinking to me.... Let the bad guys off the hook, and put unlimited access and easy to get hard drugs out the streets... Ya, well thought through plan, and while this genius plan rids us of all of the stupid people who abuse the drugs, and the innoscents who get taken out through crime or by accident by the spiked number of crack & meth heads ect, you guys are going to be hoping with the rest of us that we don't have to put a bullet through one of these newly found addicts heads to protect ourselves and families and hope they don't do anything else to endanger our lives? Have you guys ever been around someone who was actually jacked up on that shit? I really have to question it because while on those drugs, it really does alter the persons ability to think correctly. Most of the newly found legal drugs would be "tested" by most of the same people who try pot and drinking too. I'm glad you guys think that the majority of americans are smart enough not to do this, but you're wrong. It's proven that americans (most, not all) are some of the dumbest fucking people there are and if you defend the other side of the statement, you are either blind to statistics, or just going to argue for the sake of arguing. You are not thinking realistically at all. You would have the women that want to get skinny quick, oh look meth! The college, hell, high school parties with drinking and weed (which I do think they should legalize, weed that is) and then you throw in what was recently unaccessible hard drugs into the mix and get even more people addicted that are going to act like retards and endanger the people around them..... The many new ways all of these hard drugs are going to affect the population once made legal by either peer pressure, experimentation, or bordom I guess has just passed you guys by.
Everybody is saying that the drug prohibition has failed and I will agree. That however doesn't mean to give up and give in. That is the equivalent of giving up on punishing your child for repetedly doing the same bad thing and just telling them it is ok to do whatever bad thing they were doing so you don't have to come up with a worse punishment. So you start off slapping your childs hand when they are bad, and instead of making the punishment worse for their actions, you give in and say it's ok? Eventually you have to get worse with the punishment or the child doesn't care and will do whatever in the hell they want knowing what the max punishment already is and not caring abou it. So, are you just going to let your kids ack like little shits or do you step up the punishment? You're own little government is ran inside your own house, how do you deal with it? Do you still treat your child like it's two no matter what its age is? I'm guessing your punishments get worse so your kids don't look at you like your a retard when you slap their hands as they get older. So, how about taking the punishment a step further right now for drug producers, distributors, and users? Remember the pusification of america? Well how we punish our criminals falls right under that whole attitude and you guys are just helping it along I see. No one who does drugs and wants, needs them gives a fuck about our punishments because they are so pathetic, which is why they keep using them.
You guys say that people won't get stupid with the hard drugs because the general american public knows their limits? That is just a stupid arguement for many reasons one being because they are serious mind altering drugs that don't let you think correctly and do change the way you act, think, and percieve things while on the drug and over time on a permanent basis. We have all ran into people that were past hard core drug users that for lack of being able to describe how they act and talk, we describe them as crack heads. The hard drugs are not like alcohol which someone argued earlier about how horrible it was because it can kill you along with oxycotton ect., yet they still made it legal bla bla bla. Just because it can kill you doesn't make it all that horrible, hell drinking too much water can kill you (hyponatremia). What makes the other drugs dangerous, is the, let me say this again, "mind altering" abilities of it. You can come off being a hard core alcoholic with the only long lasting difference being a new state of awareness to the affects of alcohol. In pretty much all aspects the "hard" drugs are not comparable to alcohol so don't fucking try to give some stupid shit arguement about how they are. When was the last time you heard of someone giving head or sleeping with someone for a shot of alcohol? When was the last time a drunk guy jumped off a building thinking he could fly, drown thinking they were a fish, fought someone thinking they were a demon, bled out because they were clawing at their own flesh thinking there were bugs in or on it? Anyway the list can go on and on about how much worse the affects of hard drugs are in comparison, so don't compare them. You can compare MJ to alcohol all day long and alcohol is the worse one, but alcohol to the hard drugs is not a good comparison in the least bit.
I know a lot of you dislike the government for how it has its fingers in everything and I do to, but there are some things that they do for our own good. Yes, I know, you know not to use them, but I'm not talking about you personally, I'm talking about most of the general public which are a bunch of stupid ass morons. Like I said, instead of letting a bad problem get incredibly worse by turning it's nose at it, the government should for lack of better words "man up" and do something about the problem. The pusification of our government and the american people has reached an all time pathetic low and is just getting worse. Saying "it's ok" to do something doesn't get rid of the problem, it just makes it so it isn't "wrong", and when you say it is ok for people to do something they like, they do more of it. If you think they will know to limit their consumption of it, just remember, "mind fucking altering" and how much more addictive the hard drugs are than anything we have out there.
n8tive97
06-13-2011, 15:12
Spyder... RIGHT ON!!!!!!!!!!!
That should put an end to this thread if anyone with any amount of common sense reads. I was banging my head on my desk in disbelief of what I was reading. [Bang]
Spyder is a man of logic and massive amounts of common sense.
No one said anything about "taxing the shit" out of drugs. Only losers suggest that.
I just read Spyder's post. You guys are clinging to a fairy tale fantasy. The people who are prone to doing drugs, already do them. No law in the world will stop them. The people who already don't do drugs, won't start doing them just because the laws change. Everyone knows someone who doesn't drink at all, 10x more people who do drink, but don't abuse, and roughly the same amount of people whom are alcoholics as those who don't drink at all. How do the laws play into those numbers?
The fact is, you CANNOT legislate behavior.
I'm not even going to bother with comparing a government body trying to enforce laws to raising a child. This is silliness. It'd be nice if passing a law could effect people's behavior, but it is a pipe dream.
I could tear apart the rest of the post as well (no offense to you Spyder, of course), but I frankly don't see the point. We are standing across a gap that we just can't bridge and until you are willing to accept reality, argument is futile. No one is saying that those of us who feel the way we do, like that point, it's just that we've come to accept the reality that we live in.
Fentonite
06-14-2011, 02:07
All the arguments supporting drug prohibition were used, in some fashion, regarding alcohol prohibition. Hell, some of them are even used to support the prohibition of firearms. History has shown that prohibition of anything does not work, and usually benefits the bad guys. If firearms are banned, would there be no more gun ownership? Of course not, but there would no longer be firearms safety classes, safe ranges, competitions, forums like this, etc. Folks would still own guns, but would use them in a more dangerous fashion, and become a criminal by owning them.
Spyder's signature line says it well: "If you make something idiot proof, someone will make a better idiot." People will always figure out how to get what they want. Outlawing something will not make it unobtainable, it will only ensure that its possession requires criminal activity, which will likely cause harm at some level, in addition to the harm caused by the intrinsic danger of the banned item (gun, drug, booze, prostitute...).
(Hey Spyder - PM me your address, and I'll send you a copy of the book I mentioned earlier. It's a good read, even if you don't think you'll agree with it)
flan7211
06-14-2011, 02:41
Guys this is getting ridiculous. First off every law we have legislates behavior!!! You can't speed, you can't run a red light, you pay taxes for the general welfare, you shouldn't murder, etc. When I was in college smoking copious amounts of pot I was all for legalization of Marijuana. Out here in the real world though it is just ridiculous. You can't say to me that nice middle class neighborhoods will support this. It sounds fine to be against a prohibition on drugs, but we can't think libertarian idealism is equally just and rampant in the general populous as my friends on this forum. Yes reform is necessary but legalization is absurd.
The only reason people pay taxes is because it leaves your pay check before it gets to you.
TDYRanger
06-14-2011, 11:30
Hey look guys, I have a fool-proof plan that will kneecap the cartels.
Legalize drugs.
Wow, look, 98% of their funding just went away and Wal-Mart is declared the winner of the War on Drugs.
Sure was hard work, coming up with that solution. I'll take my payment in ammo. [M2]
100 years from now people will look back on this period like we look back on prohibition today. "Really? They tried to make what illegal? Were they retarded or something?"
You wan that in .223 or in 7.62x39? [Beer]
TDYRanger
06-14-2011, 12:05
Just a couple of numbers to put into your brain...
Just for pot drug enforcement $160 billion last year
north of 1,000,000 in prison with pot related cases at an average of $32,000 per inmate. So say about $32 billion in prisoner housing. So roughly $190 billion per year just on pot enforcement. ($650 per american; every man woman and child)
The entire budget for the state of Colorado for 2010 was $28 billion
My issue is we have spent and spent and spent; and as of today the only thing we have done is made criminals rich and have driven our country closer to bankruptcy. Oh and by the way IT HASN'T WORKED FOR SHIT [Bang]
Why is this? Just speaking about pot here; because; the tobacco, and petrol chemical, news paper, and burgeoning pharmaceutics industry had way better PR people (William Randolph Hearst) and better lobbyist's. Such a danger to America not criminalized until 1937.
I'll take the $200 billion per year back and maybe buy a new shotgun or save up a couple of years and go on that whitetail hunting trip
Give this a read it's pretty interesting: http://www.ozarkia.net/bill/pot/blunderof37.html
Just so it's clear as well I don't smoke weed, tried it a couple of times and it was not my bag. I'm more of a Makers Mark guy. (thank you Irish ancestry)
In his heyday, Bablo Escobar was worth over 25 BILLION prior to his death in 1993. Countless cartel members and even low level dealers within various organizations are currently worth tens if not hundreds of millions. No country can stop the will of easy money.
Spyder, I understand what you are trying to say, but it's not that easy, and believe me I have seen first hand the destruction of addiction in this country and abroad. As much as I hate to say it, legalize it. I would rather we gain a few more drug addicts "although I doubt it " rather then continue with billions in aid to a drug war the world has no chance of winning.
Lets Legalize it, tax it, and use the $$$$$ for awareness and addiction programs. Be a hell of a lot cheaper.
[Peep]
n8tive97
06-14-2011, 17:28
Maybe we should call this site "California AR-15" what are your thoughts? Looks like that's the mentality around here with some of you! Or maybe that's the reason you left that crappy state????
BREATHER
06-14-2011, 17:44
There are several different posts that should be addressed individualy, but... One guy was correct, laws are "for behaviors" Exactly correct, STUPID BEHAVIORS. Speeding, drunk driving, etc. Game laws, because people don't know how to conserve wild game. If there were no laws in place how many guys here would kill animals with impunity, until they are gone, like deer hide hunters in the east in the 1700's to the buffler hunter in the 1800's in the west....
And the government needs to put their fingers into matters, that is what governments are for. BUT, fingers in the wrong places is the problem. Because a major game with politicians and lawyers is the "good ol' boy system". They will not snitch each other out because of fear of being snitched on themselves. Too bad integrity is a forgotten word.
What the billions of dollars being spent is doing is lining the pockets of "officials". If there wasn't any bribes being paid does anyone here think that drug smuggling would be so lucrative. In my opinion, most officlal assholes think that drug use is a victimless crime..
BREATHER
06-14-2011, 17:47
Oh yeah. I forgot. Bribe taking convictions should be treated as treason...If this is was, collaberation with the enemy is treason, pure and simple...
Pancho Villa
06-14-2011, 19:26
The proper focus of the law isn't to "legislate behavior" in the sense that The Collective merely outlaws behaviors it does not approve of.
The proper role of government is to prohibit and enforce the prohibition on the violation of individual rights.
The recognition of this fact was the great triumph of the Age of Enlightenment that culminated in the creation of this very country, a fact that very few history books (and almost no conservatives) teach.
Thats right, the role of government is to make sure that someone else doesn't come around and jack your property or kill you. That's in an obviously different class of laws than regulating how much alcohol you can drink, or where you can smoke (or if you can smoke,) or what you can inject into your body, or what guns you can buy.
If you cannot see that a law prohibiting you from shooting your fellow man and a law prohibiting you from smoking in your own home or buying a pistol are fundamentally different kinds of laws, there's just no hope for you. If you think for one second that the latter kinds of laws aren't the source of our current economic woes, just talk to a real life businessman some time and ask him what's the worst part of managing any business. If you don't find it morally repugnant that your neighbors hold the right to regulate every little detail of your life, please move out of the country or at least don't vote. If you don't think that substituting the barrel of a gun (the law) for expecting gentlemanly and ladylike behavior from people has not degenerated the culture, walk down any downtown street some time. I think its long past the time when people advocating these sorts of things could claim noble motives, unless they are starkly ignorant.
If you think that its simply a matter of choosing the right ways to meddle in other peoples' lives, well, crack open a history book some time. Your kind has been trying to find the right mix of ways to screw America over and have it work since the 20s. It doesn't work, but more importantly, its flat out evil. It makes you ideological brothers to Obama and every other statist who loves nothing more than to boss their fellow men around.
Maybe we should call this site "California AR-15" what are your thoughts? Looks like that's the mentality around here with some of you! Or maybe that's the reason you left that crappy state????
This response is so hilarious to me. You must be living in a cave. You are surrounded by people who are using marijuana and cocaine every day and don't even realize it. The world you imagine if drugs were legalized is already the one you are living in, and the one that you grew up in, you've just yet to realize it yet. Why? Because it's not the big deal that the lobbyists and government paint up for you.
When there is no enemy, then the government becomes the enemy. That is the answer to this thread.
Maybe we should call this site "California AR-15" what are your thoughts? Looks like that's the mentality around here with some of you! Or maybe that's the reason you left that crappy state????
Ha, I knew that was coming, and I did take offense to being part of that "crappy State". However, I'm sure you will enlighten us as to how you would fix the issue and make me eat more crow. This is nothing more than supply and demand period. We can enforce the current drug laws, enact stiffer fines, mandatory sentences for possession, hire more cops, build more jails,etc......
But, you still have folks chasing the almighty dollar and corruption has been around since the beginning of time and is not going away any time soon. Legalization won't stop the battle, but might put a huge dent in demand, and that my friend might be the edge we need to stomp it out completely.
Like I stated above, I'm not for legalization, but I feel we don't have a choice. The sad part is with all the corruption abound, nothing we do will work.
I'm done.
[Beer]
Drugs like marijuana, opium, peyote, mushrooms, etc have been around for as long as we have, and laws against them are relatively new. As far as I know, we haven't been wiped out as a species because of them, nor has our development as a species been hindered in any way.
Pancho Villa
06-14-2011, 19:52
Drugs like marijuana, opium, peyote, mushrooms, etc have been around for as long as we have, and laws against them are relatively new. As far as I know, we haven't been wiped out as a species because of them, nor has our development as a species been hindered in any way.
But if we legalized [guns/drugs] then there would be chaos in the streets! It'd be all [gunfights/bombed out stoners] all over the place! There would be millions of [shooting/OD] deaths and society would crumble due to [high crime/low moral fiber]. The laws against [guns/drugs] are absolutely vital to our security as a nation! If you don't believe me, just read the scare story I just fabricated!
Hey guys, I think I've heard this anti-drug arguments before, but in a different context. Wonder where...
I just wonder when the terrorists are going to figure out that, if they were to spike large amounts of heroin, cocaine, meth, pot, etc. with a poison such as ricin, and then slip that into the distribution network, they could achieve their goal of killing huge numbers of us Westerners. Ricin is very effective, and it only takes a tiny amount.
Think about that. A couple of spiked kilos into each of the underground drugstreams going to major cities all around the world, and people would be dropping like flies. And since it's illegal and underground to begin with, how difficult would it be to stop? Sounds like something the CIA would do.
Pancho Villa
06-14-2011, 19:58
I just wonder when the terrorists are going to figure out that, if they were to spike large amounts of heroin, cocaine, meth, pot, etc. with a poison such as ricin, and then slip that into the distribution network, they could achieve their goal of killing huge numbers of us Westerners. Ricin is very effective, and it only takes a tiny amount.
Think about that. A couple of spiked kilos into each of the underground drugstreams going to major cities all around the world, and people would be dropping like flies. And since it's illegal and underground to begin with, how difficult would it be to stop? Sounds like something the CIA would do.
I think it would be difficult. You'd have to muscle in on cartel territory first. The cartels don't deal in poison; its bad for business to have dealers know junk from x cartel is going to kill their repeat customers.
Very risky op. A few kilos is a huge amount of money; you wouldn't be able to rely on the distribution network the cartels have already set up, so you'd have to set your own up and not get killed in the process.
Probably easier to walk onto an army base and start shooting defenseless servicemen and women.
Plus, even if you "gifted" a kilo of poisoned dope to a dealer in hopes of getting it into distribution, the dealer would be dead before he could sell any of it.
Byte Stryke
06-14-2011, 21:19
Plus, even if you "gifted" a kilo of poisoned dope to a dealer in hopes of getting it into distribution, the dealer would be dead before he could sell any of it.
only a stupid one.
rule #1: Never get high on your own supply.
I have never smoked a cigarette in my life, smoked a few cigars and never touched weed or any other drug so i consider myself quite lucky in that regard.
hope you make it!
How is that possible? They legalized cigarettes before you were born! You know how stupid American's are. They'll try and get addicted to anything.
Spyder's signature line says it well: "If you make something idiot proof, someone will make a better idiot." People will always figure out how to get what they want. Outlawing something will not make it unobtainable....
(Hey Spyder - PM me your address, and I'll send you a copy of the book I mentioned earlier. It's a good read, even if you don't think you'll agree with it)
Thanks for quoting my signature line...[LOL]I will get you my info, also, you should check out a book called "The Natural Mind", very interesting also.
No one said anything about "taxing the shit" out of drugs. Only losers suggest that. <[ROFL1]>
I just read Spyder's post. You guys are clinging to a fairy tale fantasy. The people who are prone to doing drugs, already do them. No law in the world will stop them. The people who already don't do drugs, won't start doing them just because the laws change. Everyone knows someone who doesn't drink at all, 10x more people who do drink, but don't abuse, and roughly the same amount of people whom are alcoholics as those who don't drink at all. How do the laws play into those numbers?
The fact is, you CANNOT legislate behavior.
I'm not even going to bother with comparing a government body trying to enforce laws to raising a child. This is silliness. It'd be nice if passing a law could effect people's behavior, but it is a pipe dream.
I could tear apart the rest of the post as well (no offense to you Spyder, of course), but I frankly don't see the point. We are standing across a gap that we just can't bridge and until you are willing to accept reality, argument is futile. No one is saying that those of us who feel the way we do, like that point, it's just that we've come to accept the reality that we live in.
None taken, I like readin the other side of the arguement also. At least you don't post random dumb shit.
Spyder, I understand what you are trying to say, but it's not that easy, and believe me I have seen first hand the destruction of addiction in this country and abroad.....
My stand is from what I have seen first hand also. I have had to deal with a lot of those bastards and their families as a FRA. I have also spoke to kids at the care center my aunt lives at and kids at my friends school in her class. This is one of those topics that I have a very strong opinion on and will never change. I know everyone is different and sharing their opinions based upon their own experiences and thoughts, that is all I'm doing too. Also, you have to agree, the slap on the hand people get for breaking most laws is just pathetic though. To expect anyone who has their mind set on doing something that might be illegal to care about the punishments we deal out now is dumb.
Drugs like marijuana, opium, peyote, mushrooms, etc have been around for as long as we have, and laws against them are relatively new. As far as I know, we haven't been wiped out as a species because of them, nor has our development as a species been hindered in any way.
You are correct stuving, those are not the ones I am talking about though. Actually, peyote is a different kind of "high" that is quite interesting. I um, tried some on a res a few years back, different, was definately different.
I just wonder when the terrorists are going to figure out that, if they were to spike large amounts of heroin, cocaine, meth, pot, etc. with a poison such as ricin, and then slip that into the distribution network, they could achieve their goal of killing huge numbers of us Westerners. Ricin is very effective, and it only takes a tiny amount.
Think about that. A couple of spiked kilos into each of the underground drugstreams going to major cities all around the world, and people would be dropping like flies. And since it's illegal and underground to begin with, how difficult would it be to stop? Sounds like something the CIA would do.
I don't honestly think that is going to be a worry really. The ammount of money they would be losing by killing off their customers would be too great.
I just state one side of the arguement. Yes I know there are both sides and until the government chooses one way or another (way harsher punishments, or legalizing it) no one can know which way will work or fail. We can all agree that what they are doing right now is a pathetic waste of time and money which seems to be our governments motto. No one is afraid of the consequences as it is for making, dealing, or using because our government is ran by a bunch of pussies who think that prisons should be like luxery hotels. There is something wrong here and I don't think that saying it is ok to skirt the problem is the way to solve it. That is just my stance and like I said, I could be wrong.
Just because Meth was made legal, doesn't mean that those billboards would have to disappear. Just like all the anti smoking and drinking ads.
I just wanted to throw a list out there.
Franklin
Jackson
Jefferson
Madison
Monroe
Pierce
Taylor
and Washington
All of the above grew Hemp, and just so we are clear that they all didn't just like rope, One quick quote - "sitting on my front porch smoking a pipe of sweet hemp" -Abe Lincoln, in a letter about his "favorite things" also a Harmonica was mentioned.
And finally,
“We must take human nature as we find it. Perfection falls not to the share of mortals.”
George Washington.
I have yet to, and have no plans to ever vote to hassle someone else. I vote to protect my rights and those of fellow citizens, in every way I can. If it doesn't effect me, its none of my business. Are drugs victimless, yes, how about driving high, not victimless, how about ruining your brain then leaching on the system, nope again. Those subset issues have been addressed, to a degree*, and you can imagine where I stand on those law as they are no longer victimless.
The war on drugs was started for the wrong reasons (racism i.e. opium/payote, lobby organizations i.e. wood v hemp), it continues due to ignorance and fear, and it only benefits those we wish to undermine, such as criminals and smugglers (Do you really think an evil turd Escobar would have been a billionaire with Marlbro in the game?) and it does nothing to help those Americans in need, only forces them into prisons where treatment is nearly impossible. Not to mention it is a tremendous drain on our over burdened economy due to prisons and law/border enforcement.
* DUI laws, etc.
Just to be clear about the whole California bit, not offended, but some of us don't always define conservative - "GOP party member." There are a lot of things the Republicans do that are a very "liberal" use of government and its powers. For example, don't forget who signed the law functionally taking away our machine guns by never allowing them to be built for US citizens again! Just a hint, he had an R after his name, and he didn't understand the 2nd Amendment. Don't even get me started on the Patriot Act! Also, I'm from the crappy state, Arizona.
If the lobbyists of the day had decided they didn't like tobacco instead of marijuana, how many people on here would be in jail or prison right now? How many people on here would be getting high instead of smoking cigarettes? How many people do you know that smoke cigarettes? It's bad for you, it's highly addictive, people buy cigarettes before they buy their kids cereal. What's the difference?
Fentonite
06-15-2011, 03:14
Thanks for quoting my signature line...[LOL]I will get you my info, also, you should check out a book called "The Natural Mind", very interesting also.
I gotta respect a man who's willing to read something that is likely contrary to his position - I expect you may like the book anyway. And thanks for the recommendation - I just ordered it from Amazon. [Beer]
Ok, I have a way of figuring it out. We use two states, isolate them from the rest and try our ideas. Texas will be the state that legalizes all drugs, and Arizona gets to pass laws against all drug related charges that would scare the living shit out of people. Then we just sit back and see what happens. Sound good? [Beer][ROFL1]
Fuck, yep I just started a sentence with the most colorful metaphor in the book, I'm going to bed.
Byte Stryke
06-15-2011, 06:01
Legalization won't stop the battle, but might put a huge dent in demand, and that my friend might be the edge we need to stomp it out completely.
Didn't proponents of prohibition say they same things?
:D
n8tive97
06-15-2011, 08:56
Just to be clear about the whole California bit, not offended, but some of us don't always define conservative - "GOP party member." There are a lot of things the Republicans do that are a very "liberal" use of government and its powers. For example, don't forget who signed the law functionally taking away our machine guns by never allowing them to be built for US citizens again! Just a hint, he had an R after his name, and he didn't understand the 2nd Amendment. Don't even get me started on the Patriot Act! Also, I'm from the crappy state, Arizona.[/quote]
Sorry for the California comment, didn't mean to offend anyone, just referring to their over the top medaling in everyone’s lives, crappy tax laws etc. etc. etc., my apologizes. I'm also from AZ.
No idea what the right answer is, but I can’t help but wondering if we as American's legalize drugs, what other numerous problems we would be creating. Maybe our approach isn't working but I do truly believe it is the lesser of two evils.
CrufflerSteve
06-15-2011, 09:30
"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."
Albert Einstein
We've had this war on drugs for decades and the end result is that prices are down and quality is up. I would favor legalizing it all, taxing the crap out of it and using some of those taxes to pay for rehabs.
Unfortunately it won't happen. In our government small groups with a strong stake in a policy will always trump the general set of voters who don't care that deeply. The anti-drug people have been very effective at preventing any kind of debate from happening so many people aren't even aware of other options.
There's also the special interests. All the lawyers who make their money prosecuting and defending druggies. There's all the law enforcement types who make their living fighting this crazy war. Will the DEA become the ?EA. Then there's are all the people who keep them locked up. Not to mention the drug dealers who could give lots of money to fight legalization. When drug cartels, lawyers & cops are united on an issue what is going to happen?
This thread seemed to be wanting to regard this as a war.Personally, I'd rather keep illegals out of this country. Do we really want to take over Mexico?
Something does have to happen. The spectacular failure of the anti-drug fight in Mexico is dangerous to us. There is so much money involved that it can't be controlled and is likely to spread into the US. I don't want to see our LEO's having to face gangs with RPG's and machine guns and a fondness for bloody massacres. Our civil liberties would probably not survive that.
A well known writer, William S. Burroughs, wrote in the 1950's about what he called 'The algebra of need'. No matter how many drug dealers were busted there would be more since the money was so good. He said the only way to stop it was to get rid of drug users. (He was a junkie at the time.) Either way of solving it simply won't be accepted. Legalize it or execute all drug users. Our half-assed way just makes it worse.
Steve
Didn't proponents of prohibition say they same things?
:D
They were on crack. You dont mess with a mans booze.
[Beer][LOL]
"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."
Albert Einstein
This thread seemed to be wanting to regard this as a war.Personally, I'd rather keep illegals out of this country. Do we really want to take over Mexico?
Something does have to happen. The spectacular failure of the anti-drug fight in Mexico is dangerous to us. There is so much money involved that it can't be controlled and is likely to spread into the US. I don't want to see our LEO's having to face gangs with RPG's and machine guns and a fondness for bloody massacres. Our civil liberties would probably not survive that.
A well known writer, William S. Burroughs, wrote in the 1950's about what he called 'The algebra of need'. No matter how many drug dealers were busted there would be more since the money was so good. He said the only way to stop it was to get rid of drug users. (He was a junkie at the time.) Either way of solving it simply won't be accepted. Legalize it or execute all drug users. Our half-assed way just makes it worse.
Steve
Steve +1, well said. I hate to say it but the best way to solve the issue is to eliminate the demand. The supply is not very greatly affected by our Gov't's efforts and it has taken quite the toll on our pockets and patience. I wouldn't advocate an all out war with Mexico in the same regard as we've done in Iraq, Afghanistan and other hot spots, but more a specialized war where if the Mexican Govt isn't going to do anything about the corruption in their police and military, who in turn aren't doing a thing about the cartels, then we are forced, out of our own need for security and safety, to engage without their permission. I'm not saying cut off the head and leave the country in shambles with no infrastructure, because nation building is expensive. I would argue that we eliminate their corrupt forces and cartels in one clean operation and use US Army Special Forces to aid in recruiting and training new police and military to help maintain that the void not be filled by new cartels. Striking at the source of the influx of drugs before they cross the border would lessen, not eliminate, the drugs that flood our nation on a DAILY basis.
Perhaps Mexico does need a regime change that will crack down on corruption and aid to cartels, then do something about changing from within so the country is actually livable and all the people don't want to illegally immigrate here. "Sorry folks, country's full and you burden our economy and healthcare system too much! Go home!"
We've had a lot of discussion about this issue, but haven't really gotten to the heart of the issue yet. First of all, I call it an issue because it is only as large of a problem as we are willing to make of it. If we didn't MAKE it a problem, it wouldn't be one, so I call it an issue.
Now, some people have been talking about eliminating the demand, while others talk of decreasing the supply. I feel that those are futile arguments altogether. Like almost anything, we can easily break down the economics of the illegal drug market. All this intimate knowledge of the how's and who's and where's of the market is great, but it won't and can't lead to any kind of sustainable solution.
I'd like to present this situation by using an analogy of student grading, A,B,C,D,F and the bell curve. In every classroom, there will always be a some what predictable distribution of students that fall into each grade level. For simplicity sake, lets call it 5% A students
25% B students
40% C students
25% D students
5% F students
No matter how great the teacher is, no matter what kind of standards, rubrics, lesson plan, lunch breaks, nap times, homework levels, etc are present in the class room, the statistics of the class will always roughly follow a standard bell curve. Whether the students are adults or children, whether the subject is math, social studies, or English. The fact of the matter is that there is no one teaching style, test standard, or tutor program that can allow for all students to be in the A, B, and even C categories. It is a logical, statistical, and factual impossibility. It is the exact same way with society.
**Let me take a moment here to address something that is bugging me. I am NOT trying to make one of those It's not their fault, they can't help being an "F" student, arguments. It is just a fact of life that all babies won't be perfect, all plants won't grow to the same size, all steaks will taste equal, and all bats will be home runs.**
Now, back on topic. Many of us have had teachers that thought themselves "progressive," and that they would some how shatter the bell curve, either by lowering test standards, strictly grading students into submission, etc. It never works. Students either drop the class or have false grades.
The "War on Drugs" is essentially just attempting to manipulate the bell curve of society. There will always be A, B, C, D, and F members of society. There is nothing to be done about it. If you used a magic lamp to wish away all the heroine, mescaline, opium, methamphetamine, exstacy, and cocaine out of the world, all those "D" and "F" members of society would start huffing paint and drinking Nyquill. If you got rid of modern technology, people would lick toads, get bit by venomous snakes, and choke each other out until they temporarily lost consciousness and and woke up dizzy. There will ALWAYS be "D" and "F" members of society, and there is no law, anti-drug program, rehab facility, or non-profit organization that can change that.
The war on drugs is just shifting the threshold of acceptability up the bell curve, and as a result, instead of "F" members killing themselves and "D" members going into comas or homelessness, we are paying to keep "F" members alive, put "D" members into rehab, and imprisoning "C" and even "B" members of society.
When I talk about legalizing hard drugs, it is not because I think drugs are good, or that they are not harmful. I make that suggestion because I understand the reality of the population. Fighting this kind of indisputable, unchangeable fact of life, only causes far worse problems than we had to start with. How many articles have we about teachers changing test scores to meet one size fits all test standardizations? What about decent teachers being fired because they couldn't over come statistical impossibilities just because some one told them that they had to?
California has been purging their jails of offenders that realistically should never have been there in the first place. There is corruption rampant from the top politicians, down to the most lowly police officers. At the end of the day, we're always right back where we started, only now, our pockets are billions of dollars lighter because people can not understand that their most clever political campaigns, billboard slogans, and non-profit organization protests will not, and can not, change or remove the ugly side of human existence.
+3 points to anyone who reads this whole post.
Zundfolge
06-15-2011, 12:48
On a side note, does anyone else find it funny that when this thread is on the top of the forum the title from the main forum page looks like this: "When do we stop f**king..."?
And do I even need to elaborate on what will happen if we just start killing all of our "D" and "F" members of society? I'm looking at you "C" and "B" members. There must ALWAYS be a bottom, and after all the "D" and "F" members are executed, the "C" and "B" guys and gals are next in line.
And do I even need to elaborate on what will happen if we just start killing all of our "D" and "F" members of society? I'm looking at you "C" and "B" members. There must ALWAYS be a bottom, and after all the "D" and "F" members are executed, the "C" and "B" guys and gals are next in line.
I read you complete other post, and mostly agree. Put another way, all parents are certain that their child is above average intelligence. 50% of them are wrong.
Statistically, there is always going to be a 5th percentile and a 95th percentile. Average will always be the 50th percentile. I am of the opinion that an adult should have the right to pretty much do anything they want to, as long as they accept the personal responsibility for those actions, and those actions do not compromise the rights of others. The "war on drugs" has been a political ploy from the beginning, to allow the expansion of federal powers and reward certain favored industries(graft is a nasty, if appropriate word). The nature of the original post wasn't to start a debate on the war on drugs, but to point out that the Powers That Be seem to be turning a blind eye to the fact that we are subject to an armed invasion by a foreign aggressor. When do the citizens finally say "enough" and start to form militias in the traditional sense? That is to say, defending their country against a foreign invasion, with armed force if necessary?
When do the citizens finally say "enough" and start to form militias in the traditional sense? That is to say, defending their country against a foreign invasion, with armed force if necessary?
When they fear the invaders more than they fear their own government; and when our government is more likely to deal with the invaders over dealing with the citizens. Those people down there are trapped between a rock and a dead place.
When they fear the invadors more than they fear their own government; and when our government is more likely to deal with the invaders over dealing with the citizens. Those people down there are trapped between a rock and a dead place.
That is so true. One would hope that no jury of my "peers" would ever convict me of shooting and killing 15 "invaders" of my sovereign nation in a court of law, but then why would I be punished for doing a job that my government had failed to do in the beginning. We need to make it so that the government fears it's people more than the people fear their government- sadly with all these flimsy sheeple that will never happen.
BTW, Irving, your analogy about grades to classes of society is spot on. Well said, especially since we can't kill off the "D's" and "F's" because we would drag down a large portion of C's and B's into their place. I consider myself a B.
Pancho Villa
06-16-2011, 17:37
That is so true. One would hope that no jury of my "peers" would ever convict me of shooting and killing 15 "invaders" of my sovereign nation in a court of law, but then why would I be punished for doing a job that my government had failed to do in the beginning. We need to make it so that the government fears it's people more than the people fear their government- sadly with all these flimsy sheeple that will never happen.
BTW, Irving, your analogy about grades to classes of society is spot on. Well said, especially since we can't kill off the "D's" and "F's" because we would drag down a large portion of C's and B's into their place. I consider myself a B.
I'd be curious as to the exact legal grounds you'd argue for killing 15 unarmed "invaders."
Byte Stryke
06-16-2011, 21:01
I'd be curious as to the exact legal grounds you'd argue for killing 15 unarmed "invaders."
well we have tried the "Feed, Clothe and give them Money" approach and it doesn't seem to be working.
I don't think we need to shoot the unarmed ones, but we do need to try something different.
well we have tried the "Feed, Clothe and give them Money" approach and it doesn't seem to be working.
This tactic just encourages more illegals to come here.
I don't think we need to shoot the unarmed ones, but we do need to try something different.
We need e-verify so employers are restrained from hiring illegals and so the government will be restrained from assisting illegals. Empower ICE to enforce the law. Hand out mandatory jail time and heavy fines for first offense convictions for both groups.
You folks with children better teach them English and Spanish. The way things are going in 30 years Spanish will be the dominant language in CA, AZ, NM, and CO.
yankeefan98121
06-16-2011, 22:16
This tactic just encourages more illegals to come here.
We need e-verify so employers are restrained from hiring illegals and so the government will be restrained from assisting illegals. Empower ICE to enforce the law. Hand out mandatory jail time and heavy fines for first offense convictions for both groups.
You folks with children better teach them English and Spanish. The way things are going in 30 years Spanish will be the dominant language in CA, AZ, NM, and CO.
It's funny you say that because I refuse to buy anything that has an "espanol" option as far as toys for my children. I thought to myself am I hindering them for not exposing my kids to that shit, conclusion no. If they'll succeed they will not by being bilingual, buy by being a damn HARD WORKING AMERICAN, PERIOD.
It's funny you say that because I refuse to buy anything that has an "espanol" option as far as toys for my children. I thought to myself am I hindering them for not exposing my kinds to that shit, conclusion no. If they'll succeed they will not by being bilingual, but by being a damn HARD WORKING AMERICAN, PERIOD.
Sorry to say and I don't like it any more than you do but your kids won't do it in Colorado.
I'm being a pessimist but as long as the gov and people like pancho villa cater to these folks it is only going to get worse. Illegals and their supporters do not assimilate to the traditional American way. They like their third world shithole and they are bringing it here. They like being illiterate, ignorant and filthy. They like free shit paid for by you and I and they like getting one over on U.S. citizens.
yankeefan98121
06-16-2011, 22:40
Sorry to say and I don't like it any more than you do but your kids won't do it in Colorado.
I'm being a pessimist but as long as the gov and people like pancho villa cater to these folks it is only going to get worse. Illegals and their supporters do not assimilate to the traditional American way. They like their third world shithole and they are bringing it here. They like being illiterate, ignorant and filthy. They like free shit paid for by you and I and they like getting one over on U.S. citizens.
You're probably correct on that assumption, but I refuse to change the way I raise my children on any notion of your above statement, even if it does end up being true.
I'll continue to teach and DISCIPLINE my kids according to our believes and if that some how hinders them in the future then I've made a grave mistake. But not for one second am I, nor my wife, are we going to change the way we raise out children just because SHIT BAGS are starting to invade our glorious country. (I'm Asian decent by the way, 1st generation, so I don't know any other way) Through LEGAL immigration, my parents paid their dues, so should everyone else behind them. Father fought in the Vietnam War, (Laotian side, if you don't know then you better ask somebody) and had to flee due the the "communist" pushing America out. (Communist to me being Nixon too)
I have a feeling that if it were Solmalians in the country, you wouldn't have a problem with your kids speaking Spanish one bit. You're acting pretty stubborn about not letting current events effect you, but they already have, probably in a negative way.
yankeefan98121
06-16-2011, 22:55
I have a feeling that if it were Solmalians in the country, you wouldn't have a problem with your kids speaking Spanish one bit. You're acting pretty stubborn about not letting current events effect you, but they already have, probably in a negative way.
You're right, I'm an Ameraholic
You're probably correct on that assumption, but I refuse to change the way I raise my children on any notion of your above statement, even if it does end up being true.
I'll continue to teach and DISCIPLINE my kids according to our believes and if that some how hinders them in the future then I've made a grave mistake. But not for one second am I, nor my wife, are we going to change the way we raise out children just because SHIT BAGS are starting to invade our glorious country. (I'm Asian decent by the way, 1st generation, so I don't know any other way) Through LEGAL immigration, my parents paid their dues, so should everyone else behind them. Father fought in the Vietnam War, (Laotian side, if you don't know then you better ask somebody) and had to flee due the the "communist" pushing America out. (Communist to me being Nixon too)
I sure hope I'm wrong but the policies that have been instituted and supported indicate otherwise.
Thank your father for me. What happened after '75 with Polpot was an absolutely horrifying example of what communism is really about - power and death to the opposition.
It's funny you say that because I refuse to buy anything that has an "espanol" option as far as toys for my children. I thought to myself am I hindering them for not exposing my kinds to that shit, conclusion no. If they'll succeed they will not by being bilingual, buy by being a damn HARD WORKING AMERICAN, PERIOD.
Everyone says that if you don't know Spanish you won't succeed as much as those who do... I always say- these people are the assholes who move here and REFUSE to learn our country's language. We've become so liberal and "friendly" to these invaders that I argue with people almost weekly about what our national language is, how these illegals "bolster" our economy and do all the s**t jobs we refuse to do, etc. It's all a pile of steaming liberal bull****! We need to wake up America! Tell these people that if you're going to live here you WILL speak our language, you WILL pay taxes, and you WILL contribute in some way, shape or form, and you WILL NOT leech off the flawed systems we have in place. Man, if I was president I'd surely be assassinated within the first few weeks of being in office because the truth can hurt and I'd be hurting a lot of feelings.
I wish I spoke Spanish. There are people working at my old job on the newly created "Spanish" team. 5 out of 7 of the people on the team aren't even smart enough to do the regular job, but because they can speak Spanish, they have a good paying job (that they can hardly do), and I don't. It's really pathetic. I have to hear stories about their failures and stupidity nearly every single day.
n8tive97
06-17-2011, 10:02
Everyone says that if you don't know Spanish you won't succeed as much as those who do... I always say- these people are the assholes who move here and REFUSE to learn our country's language. We've become so liberal and "friendly" to these invaders that I argue with people almost weekly about what our national language is, how these illegals "bolster" our economy and do all the s**t jobs we refuse to do, etc. It's all a pile of steaming liberal bull****! We need to wake up America! Tell these people that if you're going to live here you WILL speak our language, you WILL pay taxes, and you WILL contribute in some way, shape or form, and you WILL NOT leech off the flawed systems we have in place. Man, if I was president I'd surely be assassinated within the first few weeks of being in office because the truth can hurt and I'd be hurting a lot of feelings.
+1, well said and more people should speak up about it.
and
+1 for being an Americaholic! Love it!
DavieD55
06-17-2011, 12:19
Political Correctness and multiculturalism. The Libtards welcome this kind of behaviour into our society.
I think it would put a damper on the flow of narcotics into our nation If someone would get the guts and step up and secure the southern borders along with enforcing immigration laws. Because Barry,Eric, and Janet will not do anything about it.
Cant wait until those tanks and RPG's are in our backyards. sarcasm
Political Correctness and multiculturalism. The Libtards welcome this kind of behaviour into our society.
I think it would put a damper on the flow of narcotics into our nation If someone would get the guts and step up and secure the southern borders along with enforcing immigration laws. Because Barry,Eric, and Janet will not do anything about it.
Cant wait until those tanks and RPG's are in our backyards. sarcasm
Again on the lines of "if I were president..." I'd deploy forces to secure the border and halt incoming illegal traffic by force if necessary. If they're armed, they pose a threat- shoot. Simple clean, and should send a pretty clear message that we're not playing these games anymore. But I doubt anyone would ever do that because well, there are too many yellow bastards running this country to fix the stuff that needs it.
DavieD55
06-17-2011, 13:18
+1
Also Narcotics keep people down and dependent on things such as welfare...handing out welfare gets votes.
Pancho Villa
06-18-2011, 07:07
Ronin, I am curious how you parse this:
You're against Obamacare, right? I assume so.
Why is it the govt's job to spend billions of dollars and empower criminal gangs with billions more dollars to protect people from themselves, but not its job to make sure everyone has access to healthcare?
For the record, I'm against both, but both seem to clearly be part of the "big brother is here to protect you" philosophy. I'd like to know how the pro-drug-war folks differentiate the two philosophically.
Certainly, lack of access to healthcare ruins a lot of lives and even leads to many deaths.
Byte Stryke
06-18-2011, 08:43
Ronin, I am curious how you parse this:
You're against Obamacare, right? I assume so.
Why is it the govt's job to spend billions of dollars and empower criminal gangs with billions more dollars to protect people from themselves, but not its job to make sure everyone has access to healthcare?
For the record, I'm against both, but both seem to clearly be part of the "big brother is here to protect you" philosophy. I'd like to know how the pro-drug-war folks differentiate the two philosophically.
Certainly, lack of access to healthcare ruins a lot of lives and even leads to many deaths.
Huh?
:confused:
Fentonite
06-18-2011, 09:52
Huh?
:confused:
Really? His post makes sense to me.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.