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.
I put this in the politics section because it kind of intersects with discussions from other threads about the nature of freedom in the US, the role of the police as compared to other places, and so on, as well as the "war on drugs."
Do you think that incidents like this, over time, build a case that the drug war should be scaled back or ended? How do you feel about the tradeoffs that have been made between liberty and drug interdiction over the last several decades?
Before responding, I'll say that I'll wait until I know all the facts before making any judgement. For the sake of the topic, I'll go with the current version.
I don't really see this as having any particular relevance to the drug war. This is about a couple of corrupt officers not the overall strategy. These officers would be just as corrupt if they were arresting someone for burglary, rape or speeding. It's about a willingness to plant evidence not drugs specifically.
Curently illegal drugs should be legalized, regulated and taxed to pay for the damages associated with the chemicals. This would be way cheaper than the monitary, social and political costs of attempting to prohibit these drugs. I thought this was proven during the prohibition of alcohol.
The current "war on drugs" has got to be one of the biggest domestic political mistakes of the past 50 years. Not only has it taxed our government and imprisoned a shocking percentage of our population but it has also expanded the government's reach into the personal lives of citizens in a way not seen since the 1920's. Given the money, violence and power associated with both sides in this "war" it really is not surprising that police would take such steps. I am sure it is much more common than any of us realize.
It's sad but the country that claims to be the beacon of hope and individual liberty places a greater percentage of its citizens behind bars than place like China. In many ways, our country has become the definition of a police state.
Do you think any and all drugs should be legal? If just a select few, then how does the line get drawn? I think that is the hardest thing to do. Legalize just weed, then you will have everyone saying you should legalize more.
Then how do you sell it? At a pharmacy? They have enough problems with people trying to steal controled substances, now put every other drug behind the counter and you are just begging to be robbed on a regular basis. Or even worse, just selling it off the shelf, you'd have to have a cop standing at the aisle.
I think it is easy to say just legalize it. But there is a lot more to it. But taxing the hell out of it would definitely help with everyone else's taxes, you know people would buy it regardless of the price. Just look at cigarettes.
Mike, someone recently mentioned the same type of store as an ABC or state owned liquor store.
Makes sense to me. I think they should all be legalized. People make their own decisions and other countries have found that use hasn't jumped once drugs became legal. The big difference, if I recall correctly, was that organized crime wasn't involved anymore. And that it took a big chunk out of crime, both organized and burglary.
When you declare war on drugs I find it illogical to only combat the suppliers. It is just unfortunate that the drugs trade is much too lucrative to end the war by only fighting drug cartels.
People do not only use drugs for recreational purposes; some use it because of peer pressure and others use it to escape reality. So if you also combat the causes that cause people to want to use drugs the war on drugs might become more effective.
Blaming the police of drugs flooding into the city is unproductive which might make them feel incompetent so it would be logical that they sink to the level that they plant evidence on 'known and / or suspected' drug traffickers so they at least feel that they have done something constructive. Unfortunately this way they are only fighting the symptoms and not the cause.
Yall have no respect for authority, when yer a cop ye gotter do what ye gotter do, what we need is more upstanding police officers like these two gentlemen in that ther video.
I'd say that the "pick and choose" enforcement of drugs is out of hand. If you're rich or politically influenced, there's no consequence. Also, why is it illegal to carry narcotics in your pocket, but not in a drug test. You can be fired for having it in your system, but not arrested. What's the difference? As for the video of the Gustapo planting drugs on this guy... I'm only surprised that the police recording didn't mysteriously disappear.
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.
Blaming the police of drugs flooding into the city is unproductive which might make them feel incompetent so it would be logical that they sink to the level that they plant evidence on 'known and / or suspected' drug traffickers so they at least feel that they have done something constructive.
Unfortunately this way they are only fighting the symptoms and not the cause.
