Skip to main content
Help Center Community Shop

Why should we continue with the "War...

Colt Super
...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 ??
0

Comments

74 comments

Date Votes
  • Sigfan
    quote:Originally posted by dongizmo
    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.
    Don


    DEA is federal, yes. That is not the same thing as having the national will to really fight drugs. Just look at how many people here think drugs should be legal, thus showing there is no real national will to fight drugs and beat them. As to how it was handled 75 to 100 years ago, it does not matter. The world is not the same as it was then. Making drugs legal now would just make a bunch of scum drug dealers legal businessmen. Sad that you think that would be a good idea. I would love to see you get on an airplane flown by an LSD user, and have the pilot have a flash back at 30000 feet. How would you like the legalization then? And how are you going to pay for all the medical care that all the new addicts are going to need? Just look at the medical bills people have from smoking, and the lawsuits that have come from that. Do you want the lawyers making even more money by suing the manufacturers of legalized drugs for what the drugs do to people? Or sue them for what the addict did while using their now-legal drug, just like they try to do with firearms? Just look at what Meth does to people, it destroys them from the inside. And you want to legalize that? Idiocy.
    0
  • gruntled
    [/quote]

    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.
    [/quote]

    You have that backwards. If there were no users there would be no smugglers or dealers. As long as there is a demand & a huge profit there will be an endless supply of people to supply that demand.
    This "war" has been going on for a lot longer than fourty years & the supply & demand is now far higher than it ever was. There was once a time when a kilo bust was a huge arrest & now it probably wouldn't even make the local paper.
    I remember quite some time ago when they were spraying the marijuana
    plants & it scared the bejeebers out of the users. The only way I see to affect the demand is to poison the drugs when we find them & then release them back into circulation. This would be done with a massive public information program to let the users know it was being done.
    The ones that still had a little sense would quit & those that didn't would also "quit". Problem solved. No users, no dealers.
    0
  • dongizmo
    quote:Originally posted by Sigfan

    DEA is federal, yes. That is not the same thing as having the national will to really fight drugs. Just look at how many people here think drugs should be legal, thus showing there is no real national will to fight drugs and beat them. As to how it was handled 75 to 100 years ago, it does not matter. The world is not the same as it was then. Making drugs legal now would just make a bunch of scum drug dealers legal businessmen. Sad that you think that would be a good idea. I would love to see you get on an airplane flown by an LSD user, and have the pilot have a flash back at 30000 feet. How would you like the legalization then? And how are you going to pay for all the medical care that all the new addicts are going to need? Just look at the medical bills people have from smoking, and the lawsuits that have come from that. Do you want the lawyers making even more money by suing the manufacturers of legalized drugs for what the drugs do to people? Or sue them for what the addict did while using their now-legal drug, just like they try to do with firearms? Just look at what Meth does to people, it destroys them from the inside. And you want to legalize that? Idiocy.

    You know the same can be said about the second amendment....
    We are paying for the medical already, and I guess you missed the post about employers & drug testing.
    How many distillers have been sued?..........
    0
  • Colt Super
    Try looking at this from an objective point of view.

    Taxes on alcohol have enabled efforts which have very significantly reduced alcoholism and drunk driving over the last 30 years.

    Taxes on tobacco products have significantly reduced tobacco use over the last 30 years.

    There are no taxes paid on illegal drugs, and the use continues to spiral out of control.

    I am not, nor have I ever been an illegal drug user, but I am a Patriot, and I want to see the actions taken that are best for our Country.

    Legalization and taxation of the drugs which are now not legal would have the same result.

    Our Country will be better for it.

    Doug
    0
  • Sigfan
    quote:Originally posted by Doug Wilson
    Try looking at this from an objective point of view.

    Taxes on alcohol have enabled efforts which have very significantly reduced alcoholism and drunk driving over the last 30 years.

    Taxes on tobacco products have significantly reduced tobacco use over the last 30 years.

    There are no taxes paid on illegal drugs, and the use continues to spiral out of control.

    I am not, nor have I ever been an illegal drug user, but I am a Patriot, and I want to see the actions taken that are best for our Country.

    Legalization and taxation of the drugs which are now not legal would have the same result.

    Our Country will be better for it.

    Doug


    So you really think that legalizing scum bag drug cartels and smugglers; legalizing cocaine, crack, meth, LSD, heroin and everything else and thus creating even more addicts, would make our country better? You are of course entitled to your opinion. So, would you then vacate all the sentences of drug producers, smugglers, and dealers in prison now and let them out of prison and allow them to set up legal shops to sell drugs and turn them into legal businessmen?
    0
  • Sigfan
    quote:Originally posted by gruntled



    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.
    [/quote]

    You have that backwards. If there were no users there would be no smugglers or dealers. As long as there is a demand & a huge profit there will be an endless supply of people to supply that demand.
    This "war" has been going on for a lot longer than fourty years & the supply & demand is now far higher than it ever was. There was once a time when a kilo bust was a huge arrest & now it probably wouldn't even make the local paper.
    I remember quite some time ago when they were spraying the marijuana
    plants & it scared the bejeebers out of the users. The only way I see to affect the demand is to poison the drugs when we find them & then release them back into circulation. This would be done with a massive public information program to let the users know it was being done.
    The ones that still had a little sense would quit & those that didn't would also "quit". Problem solved. No users, no dealers.
    [/quote]

    Would not work. Addicts are ADDICTED. They would still use the drugs, even though you told them it would kill them, they would not care. Just like they know the drugs themselves will kill them eventually, but they still use them. The only way to stop the use is to stop the producers and smugglers, and the only way to do that is to make production and smuggling a capital offense. First conviction and you get the needle. But, like I said there is no national will to do that. Too many people, like numerous on this board, think drugs should be legal. And that is why the "War" does not work, too many people deep down want the drugs to be legal.
    0
  • bingeebob
    why does weed get lumped in with real drugs like heroin, meth, coke, acid? its not even close, and i've tried most drugs once, but weed is the only one that i would have absolutely NO problem with being availiable to the general public legally.

    a large portion of our local law enforcement efforts go to busting small time marijuana growers, users, and dealers... it just seems like we are fighting against a harmless enemy. now meth, which is a big problem here in oregon, is a whole different story, that stuff is poison, nobody uses meth recreationally, its a hardcore drug. i just think we should leave weed alone and concentrate on real drugs.
    0
  • Colt Super
    Production and distribution would go through existing channels.

    Those convicted of crimes other than distribution, should be released.

    Look at the incredible lack of success our Country had with the prohibition of alcohol and the National 55 MPH speed limit.

    And you expect that continuing with our present program of throwing good money after bad in control of illegal drugs will have a better success than those utter failures??

    Why is that??

    Also, how about suggesting an alternatively realistic solution??

    Or, do you deny that any problem exists??

    Doug
    0
  • Sigfan
    quote:Originally posted by dongizmo
    quote:Originally posted by Sigfan

    DEA is federal, yes. That is not the same thing as having the national will to really fight drugs. Just look at how many people here think drugs should be legal, thus showing there is no real national will to fight drugs and beat them. As to how it was handled 75 to 100 years ago, it does not matter. The world is not the same as it was then. Making drugs legal now would just make a bunch of scum drug dealers legal businessmen. Sad that you think that would be a good idea. I would love to see you get on an airplane flown by an LSD user, and have the pilot have a flash back at 30000 feet. How would you like the legalization then? And how are you going to pay for all the medical care that all the new addicts are going to need? Just look at the medical bills people have from smoking, and the lawsuits that have come from that. Do you want the lawyers making even more money by suing the manufacturers of legalized drugs for what the drugs do to people? Or sue them for what the addict did while using their now-legal drug, just like they try to do with firearms? Just look at what Meth does to people, it destroys them from the inside. And you want to legalize that? Idiocy.

    You know the same can be said about the second amendment....
    We are paying for the medical already, and I guess you missed the post about employers & drug testing.
    How many distillers have been sued?..........



    True about the 2nd. As for testing, if you make drugs legal, just what are you going to test for? The drugs are now legal, just like alcohol. It is not illegal to have alcohol in your system at many places of work, it is just illegal to drive if you are over a certain limit. I know many people that have a beer with lunch, are you going to say it is ok to do a line of coke at lunch? How about a hit of LSD? Some heroin? If not, why not? You wanted it legal. So, are you going to set limits for amounts of your now legal drugs in your system at the work place? Why? I thought you were for legalizing drugs and getting the government rules out of your life? So now you are just going to replace illegality with restrictions. So....are you going to test everyone every day to see if they used drugs in the last 24 hours? And what if they did? Are they not going to be able to sit behind a desk and work on a PC or something? Do you want to work beside a meth head who has sores all over her face and her jaw is rotting off? How about someone who did some coke during lunch and is still high but you need work done?
    0
  • Colt Super
    Classic evasion.

    Answer 3 questions with 20 irrelevant questions.

    You obviously have no interest in a rational, unbiased discussion on a hugely important topic.

    Doug
    0
  • dongizmo
    quote:Originally posted by Sigfan
    quote:Originally posted by dongizmo
    quote:Originally posted by Sigfan

    DEA is federal, yes. That is not the same thing as having the national will to really fight drugs. Just look at how many people here think drugs should be legal, thus showing there is no real national will to fight drugs and beat them. As to how it was handled 75 to 100 years ago, it does not matter. The world is not the same as it was then. Making drugs legal now would just make a bunch of scum drug dealers legal businessmen. Sad that you think that would be a good idea. I would love to see you get on an airplane flown by an LSD user, and have the pilot have a flash back at 30000 feet. How would you like the legalization then? And how are you going to pay for all the medical care that all the new addicts are going to need? Just look at the medical bills people have from smoking, and the lawsuits that have come from that. Do you want the lawyers making even more money by suing the manufacturers of legalized drugs for what the drugs do to people? Or sue them for what the addict did while using their now-legal drug, just like they try to do with firearms? Just look at what Meth does to people, it destroys them from the inside. And you want to legalize that? Idiocy.

    You know the same can be said about the second amendment....
    We are paying for the medical already, and I guess you missed the post about employers & drug testing.
    How many distillers have been sued?..........



    True about the 2nd. As for testing, if you make drugs legal, just what are you going to test for? The drugs are now legal, just like alcohol. It is not illegal to have alcohol in your system at many places of work, it is just illegal to drive if you are over a certain limit. I know many people that have a beer with lunch, are you going to say it is ok to do a line of coke at lunch? How about a hit of LSD? Some heroin? If not, why not? You wanted it legal. So, are you going to set limits for amounts of your now legal drugs in your system at the work place? Why? I thought you were for legalizing drugs and getting the government rules out of your life? So now you are just going to replace illegality with restrictions. So....are you going to test everyone every day to see if they used drugs in the last 24 hours? And what if they did? Are they not going to be able to sit behind a desk and work on a PC or something? Do you want to work beside a meth head who has sores all over her face and her jaw is rotting off? How about someone who did some coke during lunch and is still high but you need work done?

    Heh heh heh,
    So the second amendment is obsolete also?
    You really don't understand that a employer can terminate you for drug and alcohol use? You also don't realize you can loose security clearance in the military for the same?
    0
  • Rack Ops
    "If we legalize drugs, everyone will become addicts!"

    "If we legalize concealed deadly weapons, gunfights will erupt on every street corner!"
    0
  • dongizmo
    quote:Originally posted by Rack Ops
    "If we legalize drugs, everyone will become addicts!"

    "If we legalize concealed deadly weapons, gunfights will erupt on every street corner!"

    Heh heh,
    The second amendment was written about flint locks, not "assault weapons"
    0
  • mongrel1776
    quote:Originally posted by Sigfan
    quote:Originally posted by dongizmo
    quote:Originally posted by Sigfan

    DEA is federal, yes. That is not the same thing as having the national will to really fight drugs. Just look at how many people here think drugs should be legal, thus showing there is no real national will to fight drugs and beat them. As to how it was handled 75 to 100 years ago, it does not matter. The world is not the same as it was then. Making drugs legal now would just make a bunch of scum drug dealers legal businessmen. Sad that you think that would be a good idea. I would love to see you get on an airplane flown by an LSD user, and have the pilot have a flash back at 30000 feet. How would you like the legalization then? And how are you going to pay for all the medical care that all the new addicts are going to need? Just look at the medical bills people have from smoking, and the lawsuits that have come from that. Do you want the lawyers making even more money by suing the manufacturers of legalized drugs for what the drugs do to people? Or sue them for what the addict did while using their now-legal drug, just like they try to do with firearms? Just look at what Meth does to people, it destroys them from the inside. And you want to legalize that? Idiocy.

    You know the same can be said about the second amendment....
    We are paying for the medical already, and I guess you missed the post about employers & drug testing.
    How many distillers have been sued?..........



    True about the 2nd. As for testing, if you make drugs legal, just what are you going to test for? The drugs are now legal, just like alcohol. It is not illegal to have alcohol in your system at many places of work, it is just illegal to drive if you are over a certain limit. I know many people that have a beer with lunch, are you going to say it is ok to do a line of coke at lunch? How about a hit of LSD? Some heroin? If not, why not? You wanted it legal. So, are you going to set limits for amounts of your now legal drugs in your system at the work place? Why? I thought you were for legalizing drugs and getting the government rules out of your life? So now you are just going to replace illegality with restrictions. So....are you going to test everyone every day to see if they used drugs in the last 24 hours? And what if they did? Are they not going to be able to sit behind a desk and work on a PC or something? Do you want to work beside a meth head who has sores all over her face and her jaw is rotting off? How about someone who did some coke during lunch and is still high but you need work done?

    You are oversimplifying the issue and assuming that legalization would prevent penalties being imposed against persons in certain professions. Yes, it's legal to have a beer at lunch. In some businesses/professions, if you do so and come back to work impaired, you're outta there. Impaired is impaired. Airline pilots, to use your example, aren't allowed to fly while drunk, or even with alcohol on their breath, so drug usage that had the potential to impair their ability to operate a plane would be similarly prohibited. School bus drivers in many areas stand to lose their jobs if they have a DUI while in their own cars, on their own time. The legality of a substance doesn't equal school districts, airlines, etc having no say-so as to what their people do on their free time. This is the case already and I see no reason for it to change.

    As for testing people -- this is the area where I see a weakness of will. Not all, but most, drug usage manifests itself in how a person acts and looks. If it didn't, to a large extent it wouldn't be a problem -- no negative effects on health, judgement, and behavior, no problem. When one's appearance, judgement, and/or behavior become suspect, then by all means that individual should be tested for drug usage. Where we fail at this, particularly in our schools (I've worked for public school systems for the past eighteen years), is due to a fear of being accused of profiling or singling out a specific kid for testing and potential disciplinary action. Parents armed with lawyers rather than good sense are the primary cause of this.

    You also seem oblivious to the fact that, in a nation governed by law, as ours is, you can't apply a specific set of standards to one situation, then expect another person or group to be denied the right to apply precisely the same standards to what they claim is a similar situation. In case you don't get my point -- all your talk about how weak-willed we are in regard to drugs, and what needs to be done about drug usage in this country, would blow up in your face if an anti-gun faction could successfully make the same case, substituting the word "guns" for "drugs". If you believe that, because you think drugs are evil and guns aren't, your logic and suggestions should only apply as you see fit, you fail Constitution 101: How It Works In This Country. The day you make it a capital crime to use, possess, or deal drugs, you hang a death sentence over the head of every gun owner in this country. All it takes is a President and Congress with the inclination to declare guns a public menace, and a Supreme Court to agree by a simple majority vote, and they'll "needle" us the same as you'd have them do those involved in drug usage. The simple fact that we are a nation of laws, with certain guaranteed protections (against unwarranted search and seizure, against punishment out of proportion to the offense, against being forced to incriminate oneself, just to name three Constitutional rights that would have to be chucked to get things done your way), prevents us from waging total war on the drug problem in this country.

    As for your implication that I, being in favor of legalizing drugs, deep down inside want it to be okay for people to use them -- you obviously didn't read anything I've posted previously on this topic, or you have too little imagination to see that I can agree with you as to the harm drugs do, and hate that as much as you do -- if not more -- but still disagree with what you feel to be the solution.
    0

Please sign in to leave a comment.

Recent Activity