Why should we continue with the "War...
...on Drugs ??
It's been going on for over 40 years.
And the illegal drug problem is worse than ever.
Kinda like the criminal mexican difficulty.
Why don't we just admit defeat ??
It's been going on for over 40 years.
And the illegal drug problem is worse than ever.
Kinda like the criminal mexican difficulty.
Why don't we just admit defeat ??
0
-
quote:Originally posted by git_r_done
I am for legalization of some drugs!
As stated you can tax the crap out of them to help this country with money. You would help solve the gang problems as they are only fighting for the drug money. It would be easier to controll and manage in a way that alcohol is.
There are many pluses to legalizeing!!!!!!!!!!
I wouldn't mind a bottle of Vicotin every now and then....0 -
The "war on drugs" is just another excuse given by the gub'mint to take more of our freedoms.
This "we know whats best for you" mentality concerning drugs is directly related to their "we know whats best for you" mentality concerning guns.....
Besides, there's too much money to be made by controlling drugs....Pain management is big buisness.0 -
quote:Originally posted by Rack Ops
The gene pool needs chlorine....
In addition to legalization of drugs, I'd be willing to see them given away, at no expense, to the user......provided they undergo sterilization first
I used to be against the proposition of legalization, but am changing my viewpoint.
What Rack said suits me fine,......let the degenerates kill themselves off.
Give it to them, as long as they submit to "sterilization".
Will never happen, but I can live with it, and that is my answer.0 -
The problem with the War on Drugs is that like the War on Terror, we have our strategies and priorities bass ackward.
Various government retards declare war and then immediately try to figure out how their cronies can profit from it. After all, like diseases, enemies are more profitable being fought than being conquered.0 -
quote:Originally posted by ElMuertoMonkey
The problem with the War on Drugs is that like the War on Terror, we have our strategies and priorities bass ackward.
Various government retards declare war and then immediately try to figure out how their cronies can profit from it. After all, like diseases, enemies are more profitable being fought than being conquered.
How did you manage to spin the war on drugs into all bush's fault? It's some sort of a talent.0 -
quote:Originally posted by MrOrange
Folks always bring up the prohibition/alcohol situation in this discussion, and that's exactly my argument against legalizing any more drugs: Just look at all the problems alcohol misuse causes in our society!
So-o-o.... Reinstate Prohibition?
The point to Doug's posts is that, like Prohibition, the War On Drugs isn't working out. And, drugs being an illegal commodity, by definition only criminals will be involved in the drug trade. Thus, we have Crips and Bloods and God knows who else, killing one another and any police officer, honest citizen, or innocent child who happens to get in the way. They tried dealing with a similar set of problems, in the Prohibition Era, and at the time were way more willing to impose capital punishment, and to do so RIGHT NOW. The result -- failure. Having amended the Constitution of the United States in the name of legislating morality, the country was forced to backtrack and amend the Constitution once again, repealing the original prohibition.
I won't get into the profit angle of why, maybe, drugs haven't been legalized. I see it as being just as much, if not more, of a moral issue. People make the mistake of equating "right" with "legal" and blowing a gasket because they think that legalizing drugs would be to say that drug use/abuse is okay. No -- lots of stuff is legal, but not all of it is right. By legalizing the production, trade, and consumption of drugs, warring street gangs would be priced right out of their biggest reason for fighting -- Americans are notorious bargain hunters and lovers of convenience, even when they're stoned, and few if any drug users would buy an illegal product at a higher price when the option of a product of known composition (meaning no Comet in the cocaine) was available at Government-regulated rates -- same as alcohol.
Would more people use drugs? I seriously doubt it. The harm done by the drugs that are currently illegal wouldn't change one iota, nor would the attitude of most people toward drug usage. Even today, with drugs being illegal and being caught with them possibly meaning jail or prison time, the most effective deterrent to drug use is parental influence. That wouldn't change. When kids are taught to do what's right, as adults they don't need laws telling them to do so. Nor do they very often just up and start doing what they know to be wrong, simply because the law or other people's attitudes have changed.
By the way, I speak as a still-recovering alcoholic and drug addict, with about sixteen-and-a-half years sober. Few people (who are still alive and halfway sane) can claim to be as knowledgeable as I am about the damage drug and alcohol abuse do to the user, his family, his friends, and society in general. I certainly have no wish to legalize drugs so everyone can just go out and get wasted at will. If I believed that would happen, I'd be dead-set against legalization. But -- we're losing this so-called war. Good people are dying who never came closer to drug abuse than to be in the wrong place at the wrong time when a junkie needed to steal for a fix or two sets of gang-bangers decided to settle a "turf" issue with gunfire. How moral is it to continue fighting a losing battle, as opposed to the immorality of legalizing what people are going to get anyhow, if they want it badly enough?0 -
quote:Originally posted by He Dog
quote:Do you brew?
Slipgate, one could argue pretty effectively that alchol is one of the most damaging drugs out there. Seldom hear of a family of four slaughtered on the hiway by a heroin addict. Every day by a drunk. Prohibition did not work worth crap either, and the moral imperatives are just the same.
Yep, I can't disagree with that point. They tried to outlaw alcohol and failed (prohibition). If it hadn't been tried, it would not surprise me to see them trying to outlow alcohol now.0 -
I know this is a no win argument but one thing to consider is this.
Look at the number of folks who enjoy a drink now and then. Many, many more people drink than do drugs or smoke pot.
If drugs were legal all the folks who fear getting into trouble would be having them spread all over the kitchen table and getting hooked on various drugs like crack and coke.
I disagree that they should be legalized, I have known many folks over the years that stayed away from drugs due to the risk of property confiscation, jail time and the social stigma associated with being a druggie.
All the pot smokers clamor for easy access to Pot through legalization. Talk to a police office sometime about what they see and how they feel about picking up someones child that has died from an overdose of drugs.
Take a look at the wonderful hash houses in Amsterdam and their crime rate. They are starting to place restrictions on the freedom given in the coffee houses to buy hash and pot daily. Most hard core pot smokers just stop maturing at the point they become addicted to the stuff.
Sure many people can handle drugs and enjoy their effects and simply take a hit now and then, but many others don't have the ability to walk away and it takes control of their lives.
I don't see any advantage to our society by stopping the fight against drugs any more than to stop the ongoing battle to cure cancer! Drugs are a cancer in this country, in my humble opinion.0 -
Sig,......your viewpoint is how I have mostly always felt about the issue.
I have never been a drug user,.......actually yes I have, I drink, but nothing more.
I am beginning to lose faith that we can ever do anything about this epidemic, and I get sick of seeing the victims of crackheads, trying to get their next hit.
They will kill you for 10 bucks,........I don't see that with alcohol, or pot even. I do not smoke anything BTW.
The gangs are getting rich, and the Mexican cartels, that are crossing our border, and firing at our own LEO's, are another part of the issue.
I am starting to think outside of the box on this, but it is tough, as it goes against everything I have ever been tought.[xx(]0 -
Sig and Marc --
The idea of legalizing something that I know to be deadly goes against my concepts of common sense and common decency. I can't speak for anyone but myself, but my own take on the issue is that drugs ought to be legalized to cut crime, remove the legal stigma and thus, just maybe, make it easier for an addict to seek treatment, and to create a source of revenue (by way of drug sales, taxes, etc.) which, ideally, would contribute to a ramping-up of education and programs aimed at actually discouraging drug usage. I support it on the basis of the possible end -- reduced drug usage -- justifying the means, meaning legalization, as offensive as the idea is to me.
Note that I said ideally, regarding education and such. Whether or not a program of legalization would be implemented with it in mind to actually help addicts, and by extension society -- I don't know.
I definitely don't support this with the aim of making possible casual, legal drug usage. I support it because, even if only marginally, it strikes me as the lesser of two evils. What we're doing has been fairly well proven to not work. That leaves the alternative being discussed here -- unless someone has some other potentially workable idea.
But I share your uneasiness with the whole concept.0 -
This issue strikes me as a choice between "the devil and the deep blue see". One doesn't work - absolutely - it's time to try the other.
I have never been an illegal drug user, and have not had much alcohol in the last 25 years.
The tax revenues could be used for (drug)education, (drug)rehabilitation and to help allay the general fund deficits that all governmental agencies are having.
I'm still a far right conservative, but I'm not (very)stoopid.
It seems to me that there is no alternative to legalization.
I believe that it is wrong to try to legislate morality - and, by the way, it doesn't work.
Doug0 -
quote:Sure many people can handle drugs and enjoy their effects and simply take a hit now and then, but many others don't have the ability to walk away and it takes control of their lives.
If we were talking welfare, more than half this board would be all over this wanting no part of paying for anyone elses inability/disinclination to work. Either way it is going costing/will cost a buttload to pay for the failed attempt at enforcement/rehab and we are collecting no or scant taxes to help cover. How about decriminalize it and tax the heck out of it?0 -
Personally I don't think people should be protected from themselves. 0 -
Do you want people with security clearances legally to be able to use meth, crack, heroin or LSD? How about police officers and the fire fighters? EMTs? Doctors? Airline Pilots? Remember LSD can give a flashback at any time. And meth is so addictive that a person is addicted after trying it just once, and will do anything for the next hit. So they would just be doing meth all the time instead of working, etc. I bet there are lots of people that would try drugs if they were legal, but do not do drugs now for fear of losing their clearances and jobs, and medical licenses, etc. Legalize everything and a bunch of these people will try stuff and become addicts. 0 -
quote:Originally posted by Sigfan
Do you want people with security clearances legally to be able to use meth, crack, heroin or LSD? How about police officers and the fire fighters? EMTs? Doctors? Airline Pilots? Remember LSD can give a flashback at any time. And meth is so addictive that a person is addicted after trying it just once, and will do anything for the next hit. So they would just be doing meth all the time instead of working, etc. I bet there are lots of people that would try drugs if they were legal, but do not do drugs now for fear of losing their clearances and jobs, and medical licenses, etc. Legalize everything and a bunch of these people will try stuff and become addicts.
Jobs will still test. At my work if you test positive for liquor you're in some serious trouble due to having to drive company trucks.0 -
Yes.
D.0 -
quote:Originally posted by Kodiakk
quote:Originally posted by Sigfan
Do you want people with security clearances legally to be able to use meth, crack, heroin or LSD? How about police officers and the fire fighters? EMTs? Doctors? Airline Pilots? Remember LSD can give a flashback at any time. And meth is so addictive that a person is addicted after trying it just once, and will do anything for the next hit. So they would just be doing meth all the time instead of working, etc. I bet there are lots of people that would try drugs if they were legal, but do not do drugs now for fear of losing their clearances and jobs, and medical licenses, etc. Legalize everything and a bunch of these people will try stuff and become addicts.
Jobs will still test. At my work if you test positive for liquor you're in some serious trouble due to having to drive company trucks.
Drugs stay in your system a lot longer than alcohol, and LSD flashbacks can happen years later. A meth addict is much worse than a alcoholic, who can functional normally much of the time, a meth addict can't.0 -
i smoke marijuana regularly. my money goes to support local growers when i can, but i imagine it usually ends up with the mexican drug cartels who set up massive marijuana grow operations even here in oregon. i'm not quittin smokin because its illegal, i'll buy it where i can get it. i just wish i could get it legally.
marijuana is no drug. its not a gateway drug, its just a harmless natural substance, no worse than caffeine, alcohol, or nicotine.0 -
quote:Originally posted by Sigfan
quote:Originally posted by Kodiakk
quote:Originally posted by Sigfan
Do you want people with security clearances legally to be able to use meth, crack, heroin or LSD? How about police officers and the fire fighters? EMTs? Doctors? Airline Pilots? Remember LSD can give a flashback at any time. And meth is so addictive that a person is addicted after trying it just once, and will do anything for the next hit. So they would just be doing meth all the time instead of working, etc. I bet there are lots of people that would try drugs if they were legal, but do not do drugs now for fear of losing their clearances and jobs, and medical licenses, etc. Legalize everything and a bunch of these people will try stuff and become addicts.
Jobs will still test. At my work if you test positive for liquor you're in some serious trouble due to having to drive company trucks.
Drugs stay in your system a lot longer than alcohol, and LSD flashbacks can happen years later. A meth addict is much worse than a alcoholic, who can functional normally much of the time, a meth addict can't.
So they would show up on employers tests.
So you are saying it is is better for the goverment to tell us what is best, and for the good of the people, prohibition is the only answer.
Would you accept the same prohibition for firearms? the anti's make the same arguement, we must keep it from the masses, or they will destroy themselves.
Don0 -
Right on !!
Doug0 -
"There is no worse tyranny than to force a man to pay for what he does not want merely because you think it would be good for him."
- Robert Heinlein0 -
Did he say this before or after he went nuts ??
Doug0 -
quote:Originally posted by Rockatansky
quote:Originally posted by ElMuertoMonkey
The problem with the War on Drugs is that like the War on Terror, we have our strategies and priorities bass ackward.
Various government retards declare war and then immediately try to figure out how their cronies can profit from it. After all, like diseases, enemies are more profitable being fought than being conquered.
How did you manage to spin the war on drugs into all bush's fault? It's some sort of a talent.
Rock,
The Democrats are doing it, too. If you thought I was just talking about Bush, that sounds more like a guilty conscience on your part than any words on mine.0 -
quote:Originally posted by bingeebob
i smoke marijuana regularly. my money goes to support local growers when i can, but i imagine it usually ends up with the mexican drug cartels who set up massive marijuana grow operations even here in oregon. i'm not quittin smokin because its illegal, i'll buy it where i can get it. i just wish i could get it legally.
marijuana is no drug. its not a gateway drug, its just a harmless natural substance, no worse than caffeine, alcohol, or nicotine.
Ahh, a gun owner publicly admitting to using an illegal drug. How nice.0 -
quote:Originally posted by dongizmo
quote:Originally posted by Sigfan
quote:Originally posted by Kodiakk
quote:Originally posted by Sigfan
Do you want people with security clearances legally to be able to use meth, crack, heroin or LSD? How about police officers and the fire fighters? EMTs? Doctors? Airline Pilots? Remember LSD can give a flashback at any time. And meth is so addictive that a person is addicted after trying it just once, and will do anything for the next hit. So they would just be doing meth all the time instead of working, etc. I bet there are lots of people that would try drugs if they were legal, but do not do drugs now for fear of losing their clearances and jobs, and medical licenses, etc. Legalize everything and a bunch of these people will try stuff and become addicts.
Jobs will still test. At my work if you test positive for liquor you're in some serious trouble due to having to drive company trucks.
Drugs stay in your system a lot longer than alcohol, and LSD flashbacks can happen years later. A meth addict is much worse than a alcoholic, who can functional normally much of the time, a meth addict can't.
So they would show up on employers tests.
So you are saying it is is better for the goverment to tell us what is best, and for the good of the people, prohibition is the only answer.
Would you accept the same prohibition for firearms? the anti's make the same arguement, we must keep it from the masses, or they will destroy themselves.
Don
There are thousands of laws on the books telling us what is for the good of the people (you know, like: speeding laws, child sex laws, spousal abuse laws, etc), drug prohibition is no different. The war on drugs is just done the wrong way, we need to be like other countries where if you are caught dealing it is the death penalty. That would stop it quick.0 -
quote:Originally posted by Sigfan
There are thousands of laws on the books telling us what is for the good of the people (you know, like: speeding laws, child sex laws, spousal abuse laws, etc), drug prohibition is no different. The war on drugs is just done the wrong way, we need to be like other countries where if you are caught dealing it is the death penalty. That would stop it quick.
Seems like those countries also have the death penalty for speaking out against the government, nice model to emulate!
Don0 -
quote:Originally posted by dongizmo
quote:Originally posted by Sigfan
There are thousands of laws on the books telling us what is for the good of the people (you know, like: speeding laws, child sex laws, spousal abuse laws, etc), drug prohibition is no different. The war on drugs is just done the wrong way, we need to be like other countries where if you are caught dealing it is the death penalty. That would stop it quick.
Seems like those countries also have the death penalty for speaking out against the government, nice model to emulate!
Don
Don't have to copy everything they do. LOL But the "War on Drugs" is not a WAR. It is a police function. Stop arresting the users and filling up the prisons with them. Make the punishments for drug dealing and smuggling so certain and so dire that no one would take the chance. You stop the dealing and smuggling, you stop the using, so you win without having to put all the users in prison.0 -
Sigfan -
Nearly fifty years of our National experience demonstrates that your thoughts here are naive.
I'm not trying to be mean to you, just truthful.
FIFTY YEARS, and were are in worse shape than at the beginning.
Doug0 -
quote:Originally posted by Doug Wilson
Sigfan -
Nearly fifty years of our National experience demonstrates that your thoughts here are naive.
I'm not trying to be mean to you, just truthful.
FIFTY YEARS, and were are in worse shape than at the beginning.
Doug
The problem is no national will to actually do it right, so you all just want to give in and make drugs legal. Not trying to be mean either, but I wonder how many of you do drugs now, and thus want to make them legal, and won't admit it? Not me, I would rather make drug running a capital offense. Try that for 20 years and see how low the drug use gets.0 -
quote:Originally posted by Sigfan
quote:Originally posted by Doug Wilson
Sigfan -
Nearly fifty years of our National experience demonstrates that your thoughts here are naive.
I'm not trying to be mean to you, just truthful.
FIFTY YEARS, and were are in worse shape than at the beginning.
Doug
The problem is no national will to actually do it right, so you all just want to give in and make drugs legal. Not trying to be mean either, but I wonder how many of you do drugs now, and thus want to make them legal, and won't admit it? Not me, I would rather make drug running a capital offense. Try that for 20 years and see how low the drug use gets.
Heh heh heh, what do you call the DEA? the drug prohibition laws are federal, not local.
How do you explain the lack of drug crime before prohibition?
Because back then we punished the criminal who would commit the crime, not the criminals excuse.
I am sure there are people in this country who would love to make firearms possesion a capitol crime, it is the same soloution,
"it is for their own good" so we must take it away.
Don0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
74 comments