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.
The "War on Drugs" was nothing more than a way to put minority's in prison, no one really cared throughout the 1900's when whites used Cocaine, it became really popular in the 1970's especially at the corporate level for long work weekends, and sex parties ( Cocaine was the viagra of the late '60's to early 80's).
Once we started putting presssure on the countries that were distributing cocaine, cartels started making millions and higher ups in the DEA made tons of money as well off of payoffs. Anyone thinking Escobar making billions a year and didn't have certain law enforcement on his payroll were and are nuts, of course he did.
The issue was once poor folk found a way to buy and use cocaine (crack) then it became a real problem, and that's also what really kept the war on drugs going.
Right now in the US it's easier to get heroin, pills, and cocaine than it is to get a Cuban cigar, unless you're rich of course. So we can pretty much stop Cuban cigars from entering the US, but not illegal drugs, or illegal immigrants, lol. It's about money, it's always about money, if it wasn't we would of stopped cocaine and or illegal immigrants years ago.
Free market... No we don't actually have a free market, but, IF we did, drug sales would be right up there with milk and gasoline sales. People get hung up on the most trivial aspects of any government actions, ie, thinking that the "cost" of illegal drug usage is a burden on society, that thinking doesn't take into consideration all of the resulting jobs and revenue derived from said drug sales. If we take a long look at the economics of illegal drug usage, we can see it as just another potential legal commodity and, then treat the negative aspects of drug abuse as an inconvenient fact of commodification.
In that inclusion into the open markets, all drugs would simply meld into a class of substances which we use/or abuse..it's the abuse of substances that drives the negative cost factor, borne by tax dollars and a reluctant public. As a side note: it seems a bit ironic that the most adamant supporters of the war on drugs were also those who said we shouldn't tolerate any undue government meddling in our private lives. Alcohol, Cigarettes, and yes, even corn syrup is bad for humans, the destruction of the human body when partaking of these substances is an incredibly widespread health and safety concern for us all, but---they are all legal and controlled substances.
I'm certain that the architects of this war on drugs were well meaning in the beginning, but it's evolution has proven it to be a failure. When we criminalize anything, we are in essence creating a huge underground/illegal economic opportunity, bring it up to the light of day tax it, and include it in those other bad things humans have demonstrated a taste for. We desperately need to address the negative side of drug use/abuse, and give up chasing the negative aspects of our own creation, namely, the war on drugs...
Exactly, problem solved because we all know nobody would ever do anything illegal.....
Not more so than they already do. Just as with alcohol, people will use it in ways that are illegal and unsafe, just as they do now (the attitude is laughable that people don't have access to pot regardless of legality). That poster implied people who otherwise wouldn't/don't drive under the influence of anything, are going to magically start driving under the influence of pot simply because the substance itself is now legal.
Sorry, but to imply legalizing drugs is going to result in a new rash of hit and runs is more than silly, it's ridiculous.
... So, are you suggesting that drugs and associated crime are no threat to families and society in general - and that arresting drug dealers, gang members and smugglers "ruins the lives" of the 'innocent people' who buy and use drugs? Do you really believe the "justice" system is entirely to blame for the horrific drug problem ... and that the drug dealers, gangs and users have no culpability??
IMO, while some may get arrested or jailed for personal use of pot, there are a lot of laws in place covering the amount and type of drugs involved ... and implied intent to distribute. Also, in their rush to legalize pot by constitutional amendment, many places are finding they are opening 'Pandora's box.' - Not only has pot been shown to be a 'gateway drug,' pot-impaired drivers (for example), are difficult to regulate without another constitutional amendment!
First off I do not believe it's a gateway drug. IMO cigarettes are the first "drug" kids try, beer the second. Third, it's only legal for adults. In fact while it's illegal, your local junior and senior high schools are probably the easiest places for kids to get it, and it should be more than apparent to anyone that having it criminalized stops exactly no one from getting it anyway. It's ridiculous IMO to think grown men and women are going to suddenly start buying coke because pot is now legal. So in adults, what exactly is it a gateway to??
I am not a fan of cartels and gangs, no. That is one of the best reasons to legalize, to put them out of business. I never said drugs were harmless, I said drug problems should fall under health care, not the criminal justice system.
These are all people who have experience with drug users, sellers, growers, and all manner of criminal drug-related activity, and they see it as a huge waste of money and resources that harms many more lives than it helps, and are working to get drugs removed from the criminal justice system.Despite some apparent misconceptions by some, this does not mean anyone is promoting drug use or calling it harmless (see in particular the bolded, below.
Mission
The Law Enforcement Action Partnership’s mission is to unite and mobilize the voice of law enforcement in support of drug policy and criminal justice reforms that will make communities safer by focusing law enforcement resources on the greatest threats to public safety, promoting alternatives to arrest and incarceration, addressing the root causes of crime, and working toward healing police-community relations.
Vision
The Law Enforcement Action Partnership envisions a world in which criminal justice and drug policies keep our communities safer. Ending the War on Drugs and looking beyond the criminal justice system for a range of solutions to address society’s ills will better protect human rights, reduce violence and addiction, and build public respect for and trust in law enforcement.
Our Principles
The Law Enforcement Action Partnership believes that adult drug abuse is a public health problem and not a law enforcement matter.
The Law Enforcement Action Partnership does not promote the use of drugs and is deeply concerned about the extent of drug abuse and drug-related violence worldwide. However, both drug abuse and violence flourish under drug prohibition, just as they did during alcohol prohibition.
The Law Enforcement Action Partnership recognizes that drugs can be dangerous and addictive. Reasonable regulation should protect public health and include age restrictions on drug sales and use.
The Law Enforcement Action Partnership recognizes that currently illicit drugs pose different risks, requiring different models of regulation. We believe that U.S. states and other nations must be given the regulatory latitude to try new models that balance personal freedom and responsibility with the public health risks of death, disease, and addiction.
The Law Enforcement Action Partnership recognizes that it will take time to strike a proper balance, blending private, public, and medical models to best control and regulate currently illicit drugs. Our speakers advocate for a range of strategies in line with their own diverse experiences and political philosophies.
The Law Enforcement Action Partnership believes that government has a public health obligation to ascertain and clearly communicate to the public the risks associated with the use of each currently illicit drug.
The Law Enforcement Action Partnership argues that as the government ends prohibition, it should release drug offenders, expunge their records, and restore their civil rights. However, we believe that people using alcohol or other drugs must be held accountable for the harms caused to others while under the influence.
The Law Enforcement Action Partnership believes that individuals suffering from drug addiction who seek help should receive support, including drug treatment. We argue that the cost of expanding such services could be financed with a fraction of the criminal justice savings from ending drug prohibition.
As you can see from the above, NO ONE is advocating for a wild west where anyone can walk into 7-11 or a vending machine and get some meth or a joint. We are advocating for a well-regulated and controlled market just like cigarettes and alcohol, both of which are harder for kids to get than pot. For people with addiction problems, we take some of that huge pile of money currently being flushed down the toilet (and into many a rich person's pockets) and give it the health system to treat addiction.
I honestly don't understand why anyone would think the current system is working or worth keeping. It is quite apparent it doesn't work at all to cut down on drug use, so why the fears around this?
Not more so than they already do. Just as with alcohol, people will use it in ways that are illegal and unsafe, just as they do now (the attitude is laughable that people don't have access to pot regardless of legality). That poster implied people who otherwise wouldn't/don't drive under the influence of anything, are going to magically start driving under the influence of pot simply because the substance itself is now legal.
Sorry, but to imply legalizing drugs is going to result in a new rash of hit and runs is more than silly, it's ridiculous.
And you, silly girl, said in your response that it wouldn't be a problem because it would be illegal. Duh.
Location: Removing a snake out of the neighbor's washing machine
3,095 posts, read 2,040,736 times
Reputation: 2305
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marleinie
Beyond upsetting big pharma, having racist excuses to imprison/exploit minorities, lining the pockets of the elite and wasting trillions of course.
Of all the wars in human history, has there ever been a war as pointless for the common person as the war on drugs? What would it mean if it were to truly end and no one were jailed/imrpisoned for any drugs and the likes of the DEA and the ATF were completely disbanded?
Demand for such would plummet faster than a dumbbell dropped in the ocean. Regulations banning or restricting, by age or other means, the consumption of social(cigarettes, beer, wine) or hard(marijuana, cocaine, etc) drugs exist for two reasons: to make money and provide jobs(in regulation, enforcement fields).
Restricting access to, or banning something, creates an artificial demand, or inflates an existing demand.
And you, silly girl, said in your response that it wouldn't be a problem because it would be illegal. Duh.
Hoot the Deplorable
No, I said it would be the same number of people as people who get run over by people who drink and drive or use Ambien and drive. It's no different. I never said people who drive under the influence aren't a problem nor did I say no one would imbibe and drive. I simply said legalization is not going to suddenly make people who don't currently drive under the influence any more likely to do so.
There would be no high risk factor for the cartels to exit and their cash flow would be cut off. Likewise Fu ds getting dumped into this insane war by the gove9would be available for more constructive purposes. Personnel, weapons and other equipment, facilities, you name it wod no longer be needed. Scratch one money pig, a d there would be no need for all the murders and other violent measures to protect the drug operations.
The government doesn't want the war ended because there's big money involved. Sizing down government power isn't on the menu. A d the DEA, ATF, FBI xyz personnel also rake in big bucks in corrupt dealings. The cartels are speaking g fragrant grease quite liberally. Yep, this is one war that could be easily won by declaring peace. Doing so would also chop a lot of corruption off at the knees.
I agree and here is why. I have learned that Afghanistan is the biggest supplier of Heroin. If the government wanted to bring it to a halt - they could burn down all the poppy fields in Afghanistan. Aren't we over in Afghanistan? Yes we are. CIA is also involved.
I just wrote an article on my blog (outside of city data) about all of this as well as Opioid Crisis. I will give you the name of an article that my pain mgmt doctor gave to me recently. Type in Heroin in Chief ~
I was very lucky to get a pain mgmt doctor who spent 18 yrs in the Army also spent time at Walter Reed Hospital before it moved. Also worked with soldiers up in Sacramento who had been wounded and dealing with pain.
Want to know who El Chapo was angry with? "ISIS" because they were taking over all the Heroin -
No, it looks like you are concluding from a single article - that marijuana doesn't lead to hard drug usage. Now, you conclude that the entire 'gateway drug' issue is "nonsense." -- What if you are wrong?
Having spent over 30-years in 'street ministry', I've dealt firsthand with hundreds (if not thousands) of people whose lives had been destroyed by drugs. By their own stories, the vast majority of these people started-out with alcohol and a little pot -- and then moved-on to harder drugs.
Even your quoted article only says that about half of the people who tried marijuana never graduated to harder drugs ... but, conveniently ignores the other half. Sorry, I'm not buying the glib conclusions drawn by this article.
... So, are you suggesting that drugs and associated crime are no threat to families and society in general - and that arresting drug dealers, gang members and smugglers "ruins the lives" of the 'innocent people' who buy and use drugs? Do you really believe the "justice" system is entirely to blame for the horrific drug problem ... and that the drug dealers, gangs and users have no culpability??
!
Do you have something against unregulated capitalism? Is the Lemonade stand down your block registered, tested, approved and licensed? Did they pay taxes?
To answer your question - YES, I believe our racist and corrupt government...as well as our selfish and unhappy populace, are responsible for our drug problem.
To start, you can explain how Afghanistan went from almost ZERO Opium production to record harvests...protected by American forces.
Then you can explain how the CIA was deeply involved in drug running and right wing death squads in central america.
After that, read the two most important books about meth and heroin (methland and dreamland) and you will see how most all of it started HERE with "capitalism". Example:
1. Meth - was an attempt to deal with the fallout from wages being cut in 1/2 or further in the midwest during the Reagan years (the big ag producers sold to bigger corporations). Workers then had to work 2 or 3 jobs, something meth helped with. It was homemade - not imported. Only AFTER everyone was using it did some Mexicans (working those low wage jobs) decide to capitalize on the demand.
2. Heroin - thanks to Big Pharma (Perdue Pharma) and thousands of lying sales reps, PR men and doctors....and, of course, unregulated capitalism, 4 to 6 million Americans were fed "legal" opiates and addicted. But - due to the same capitalism (supply and demand) the pills got very expensive on the street as the pill mills were shut down. Guess what? Some poverty stricken Mexicans saw an opportunity for a lemonade stand....
Of course, this is a summary. But the answer, again, is YES. Americans and our government are responsible through policies, forbidden fruit (fundamentalist views), etc.
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.
