Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
People already use drugs regardless. If your theory was true there'd be no addicts. Just smokers and alcoholics.
Legalize weed. Decriminalize the other stuff. Start funding rehabilitation and alternative treatment.
It doesn't mean you sell crack, heroine, etc, it just means you change the way you treat the drugs, addicts and users.
Legalization is a start.
I can get on board with decriminalization and rehabilitation, but not legalization. I don't mind weed, but I have a serious problem legalizing the harder drugs. I don't care if people still do it. That's not the point. I do care that legalization brings a certain level of acceptance to things, and I don't think we need to go down that road just because we can make money off it.
How would decriminalization stop the drug trafficking, which is the primary cause of violence associated with drugs?
I assume you are white, and don't see police thru rose colored glasses- that's good. Unfortunately, most of white America wants to focus on the black thugs rioting, instead of corrupt police and the system that supports them.
What you actually need to understand is most of what the police do is NOT by choice but by directive and orders from "above".
Of course I'm not speaking about the few bad actors that wear a badge (and need to stand trial) but the Police as a whole.
Did the police in Baltimore want to quell the violence on the first day, right as they were being attacked? You bet they did and could have BUTTTTTT they were ordered to retreat and stand down. Y'all saw what the result was.
I can get on board with decriminalization and rehabilitation, but not legalization. I don't mind weed, but I have a serious problem legalizing the harder drugs. I don't care if people still do it. That's not the point. I do care that legalization brings a certain level of acceptance to things, and I don't think we need to go down that road just because we can make money off it.
How would decriminalization stop the drug trafficking, which is the primary cause of violence associated with drugs?
It hasn't stopped the underground (illegal) pot trade or crimes related to it in Colorado or other states.
So how do you explain all the dirt poor Republican states in the South? It really isn't about politics and if you seriously believe one party gives a damn about you any more than the other then I have some beachfront property in South Dakota to sell you. Note that this same situation with a police officer just recently occurred in South Carolina which, is one of the reddest states in the country.
And where are the riots in those dirt poor Republican states? There is a difference between white poor and minority poor. Sorry of that offends anyone, I don't really care. The rioters are not civilized humans, just that simple.
Some people call them animals. That is not true. Animals will not destroy their own habitat or kill and injure another just for the thrill of it. Animals also have to work for everything they get!
Do not disrespect the animal kingdom by this comparison.
Not surprising that they took control of the jail, as the "guards" probably thought they should "give them space." After all, Baltimore's loopy mayor thinks that it's the responsibility of the police to provide a safe place for rioters and vandals to destroy property and assault people, when they should be enforcing the law.
If you're saying to say that the mayor intentionally gave space to rioters and vandals, when she was clearly talking about the delicate balance between giving people their constitutional right to free speech and allowing others to commit violence, then either you're not very smart or you think we're not very smart and will buy that BS.
Her message was unscripted and would have been more clear if she'd added an "unfortunately" in the middle of it, but twisting her words into the exact opposite of what she meant is disingenuous and serves no purpose in any intelligent discussion of the issues.
If you're saying to say that the mayor intentionally gave space to rioters and vandals, when she was clearly talking about the delicate balance between giving people their constitutional right to free speech and allowing others to commit violence, then either you're not very smart or you think we're not very smart and will buy that BS.
Her message was unscripted and would have been more clear if she'd added an "unfortunately" in the middle of it, but twisting her words into the exact opposite of what she meant is disingenuous and serves no purpose in any intelligent discussion of the issues.
I also think she meant something else, but that delicate balance phrase is what causes it to be unclear.
Quote:
She “made it very clear that I work with the police and instructed them to do
everything that they could to make sure that the protesters were able to
exercise their right to free speech.”
“It’s a very delicate balancing act,” she continued. “Because while we tried
to make sure that they were protected from the cars and other things that were
going on, we also gave those who wished to destroy space to do that as well. And
we worked very hard to keep that balance and to put ourselves in the best
position to de-escalate.”
To me, it would have been better to leave that phrase out altogether because it makes it seem like the balancing act is between allowing free speech and giving space to destroy. Personally, I understood what she meant, but I could also understand the confusion.
And where are the riots in those dirt poor Republican states? There is a difference between white poor and minority poor. Sorry of that offends anyone, I don't really care. The rioters are not civilized humans, just that simple.
Some people call them animals. That is not true. Animals will not destroy their own habitat or kill and injure another just for the thrill of it. Animals also have to work for everything they get!
Do not disrespect the animal kingdom by this comparison.
Clearly my post went over your head. I'm not offended nor care what you consider a difference as my post didn't say anything about southern riots.
The person I responded to claimed that craziness doesn't happen in Republican run states and I just pointed to a very recent example that was all over the news where a cop shot an unarmed man in the very Republican South Carolina. So it goes beyond politics my friend. That was my point, not a debate on whether you think poor whites are better or worse than poor blacks. I agree that those committing crimes are scum and should be prosecuted as such, I just disagreed with his misguided attempt to try to politicize everything as this cop killing unarmed civilians has been occurring in both red and blue states.
I don't think anyone is shining up halos for these gang members but I do think this shows what some of us already knew - these gangs exist for more than one reason. People think gangs exist solely for the purpose of committing crimes. Not true. Many of these gangs exist in areas where the police have historically refused to go and/or where police misconduct/mistrust is high.
Historically speaking, gangs have come into being whenever a group of people, usually ethnically related (Italian, Irish, Russian, African, etc) are being oppressed by the governing body of their state. Other reasons gang come into being is economic disadvantage and disenfranchisement from the state of residence.
If you read the history of our country, or our world, you will see this type of thing happens over and over again. Its actually quite interesting to see how the patterns of behavior continuously lead to the same conclusion.
****PS - for those of you not familiar with the idea of educating yourselves, this is not an endorsement of street gangs or their behaviors. It is merely a post explaining why gangs exist. You can't fight something you don't understand.
You bring up an interesting point. I remember thinking this when I watched the HBO series, Rome. There were gangs in the poorer sections of town, and when one of the former king's guard men killed the leader it left a void and all these bad things started happening everywhere. It became chaotic, with everyone wanting their own piece of the action. Finally, Mark Antony made the guy who killed the gang leader (a former soldier under his command during the wars in Gaul) take over the gang to restore order.
I'm not condoning what these gang leaders do though. We have police who would probably serve the communities well if only the two sides could budge a little. What they do now is kill indiscriminately and get their own people hooked on drugs or thrown in prisons. Any good they do for the community is only to serve their own needs, and it's usually in direct opposition to what the community really needs.
The OP was blaming the Baltimore riot on democratic state government officals; now you are talking about City government. Perhaps you could explain yourself better because it sounds like you are attributing the riots in Ferguson to the political affiliation of the City Council?
Well, the governor is a Democrat too as well as the county executive and all of the state senate and house reps from that region.
You asked for an explanation consistent with that poster's premise, well, there's your explanation.
(I don't think the premise is very valid, the Democrat correlation happens because riots occur in dense urban areas, which lean strongly Democrat.)
And where are the riots in those dirt poor Republican states? There is a difference between white poor and minority poor. Sorry of that offends anyone, I don't really care. The rioters are not civilized humans, just that simple.
Some people call them animals. That is not true. Animals will not destroy their own habitat or kill and injure another just for the thrill of it. Animals also have to work for everything they get!
Do not disrespect the animal kingdom by this comparison.
Serious question. When was the last time a dirt poor white man was killed by a cop? If it was in recent memory and the media did not cover it then you have a point.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
