When do we stop f**king around, and declare thsis to be a war?

[Irving]

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]

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.

[Irving]

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]

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...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. <>

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.

[Irving]

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.

[BigMat]

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.

[Irving]

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?

[n8tive97]

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]

"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

[Fentonite]

Thanks for quoting my signature line...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.