What are they? Are we winning and we just don't know it; as drug abuse will always be with us and we can only hope to keep a lid on it. Is the WOD real in the sense that all hands are on board or are we at a point where the infrastructure built to fight it is too great and self-serving by keeping it going?

not much point, ppl that want to get stoned will find a way.......spend the money on educating minors, prosecuting those that sell to minors and helping those that see the light and want to get off the chit......we would be miles ahead.....

You can win the battles but not the war. Physicians and "pain clinics" have pretty much taken over the trade.

The war on drugs wasn't meant to be won. It was meant to empower government and drain the economy. What people choose to put in their bodies is their own business, and they should be free from legal liability until they actually harm or overtly endanger others. The only function the war on drugs serves is to support a gigantic illegal drug industry, and keep the dirty money flowing into the coffers of the CIA, crooked cops, and corrupt public officials, and to constantly expand, militarize, and centralize, police powers while contracting personal liberty.

We are doing exactly what we want to do. Putting up a show so that those in favor are happy but rolling over on the real issues that would have a meaningful impact. The border for one example.
So no, we are not winning and no it's not real in that all hands aren't on deck.

Just like probition. Cannot win the war, but can win the skirmishes. May as well legalize it and tax it. Funny how legal things are not as attractive. It is not going away surely could kill the profit

War on drugs has simply allowed a fair portion of law enforcement to become unaccountable to the public. Need more money -- bust a dealer, keep the cash, car, house, whatever. Laughable levels of scrutiny, supervision or accountability. Due process? Just play the "drug dealer" card.

It always surprises me that "conservatives" seem to welcome this level of government ham-fistedness. JMO, Dutch.

So we're supposed to believe no cops or public officials are being paid off? It's been a matter of public record for decades that the CIA has been heavily into the illegal drug trade (Why do you think the US military is guarding, instead of burning, opium fields in Afghanistan?). The people fighting the hardest to keep it illegal (cops and government officials) are the most suspect of corruption, in my opinion. Why else support something so obviously a huge failure, and so obviously destructive of American liberty?

Conservatives don't.

The war on drugs thing reminds me of a bumper sticker back in the fifties.

THE GAS WAR IS OVER
GAS WON.

I think drugs won a long time ago.

Unfortunately, most abused drugs usually make the user unable to function well as a responsible adult. Even if taxed and legalized, many of those users would still steal to support the habit. Some drugs release the ego while snowing inhibitions. Most ER Docs, EMT's, and cops know that with some folks, mixing stimulants like cocaine or amphetamine with alcohol frequently produces a character approximating demonic evil.

Exactly........



Casey

Wouldn't need to steal, since it would be extremely cheap. Drug addicts don't steel them in Holland.

and aint seen a law curtail any of it.....only thing ive seen make a dent is educate kids on the dangers of meth so fewer start using it...doesnt stop it but your never gonna get rid of all of it even if you start executing those that are caught using....

A war is fought to win or it really IMHO isn't truly a war.
"The war on drugs" does not fit that description.

We see on the tube 14 cops making a tewnny dolla crack bust on a street corner, then watch a reporter ride a elephant across the border while a mariachi band plays and no enforcement show up.
Something is not right with a picture like that.

Waste of time & money without STIFF penalties & MANDATED sentences. WITHOUT parole for the dealers & pushers.

A conservative here, the war on drugs is evil, far more evil than drugs.

Focus effort on the hard chit.

Around here weed ain't really hurting anyone. Not that much of a problem.

Go after the [bleep]' meth cookers.

And to an extent that's how they seem to be doing it.

There's a War on Drugs? You'd never know it by teaching a class after lunch at an American High School that has an open campus for lunch. Might as well just have munchies and nap time till 2:00.

Alan

That right there is disgusting and a shame.
School kids into drugs...what % of the parents are aware of their kids using?

The big reason there is a war on your southern flank is that there is a war on drugs.

Personally, make pot and hash etc legal and taxing the [bleep] out of it would save millions of dollars and thousands of lives.

How timely. I'm watching local news right now and the lead story is about a woman who was charged with her third DUI. Today she hit an 11 year old boy walking on the sidewalk with his dad. Shattered his leg, dislocated his jaw from his skull, all kinds of internal injuries. Hasn't regained consciousness. Not looking good for him even if he survives. She was stoned on otherwise legal prescription drugs.

I haven't read anything in this post that I disagree with. The WOD has too many people depending on its existence for their livelihood. Lots of good young people have had their futures ruined because of one mistake with drugs. We do need a war on Meth.

one of the city cops told me that given the way Montana's medical marijuana law is written even if yah dont have a card it aint worth their time to write a possession ticket for an ounce or less.....unless they hear yah have a pound or so or are growing a forest without being registered with the state they really dont care cause there aint much they can do that doesnt wind up being a waste of time....

been doing a hell of a job with the meth cookers but the county attorney keeps dropping the [bleep] ball

Meth mentioned here makes me think of the "Breaking Bad" show. Watched maybe 3 episodes and not sure what the message is. Is that mild mannered teacher-meth/cooker that turns Hulk now and then suppose to be a hero or what? Not the TV role model I watched as a kid.

boils down to i dont care if an individual uses meth.....problem is if your cooking it, especially in town, you endanger those on property that aint yours......the fumes are toxic and if the [bleep] blows good chance you will set the neighbors house on fire.....if your cooking that chit you aint just endangering yourself and those on your property.....

WOD continues to be the first big breach into our civil liberties. It was at best a psychopathic idea, that the people would accept a war on themselves by an increasingly brutal, unaccountable authority, to cleanse them of an evil this very authority has deliberately placed in their midst.
The blueprint of WOD has been expanded upon up by the WOT. WOT has brought us the TSA. Now we have demented thugs sexually molesting Americans before we can fly on a plane.
The end game in all this obvious, it is to be dominated by a psychologically deviant government class for their own profit and pleasure.

"war" on drugss?...that is a joke. Glad we weren't as inept in the wars that mattered...

And while TRH is STOOPID...on this matter he hits pretty close to a homerun...

Someone gets caught selling meth or making it? shoot them in the head and throw them in a hole.....end of problem. Handle it that way and it will go away in a hurry....

hate to tell yah Pat but im pretty sure the Chinese have tried that and it hasnt worked and they havent been worried bout being PC.....

It could work...but the world doesn't have the stomach for it...

Mentor our youth the correct way...I talk to my boys daily about it(ages 8&10). Right now I'm confident they have the right stuff.

I'll say this, I would'nt want to be the sombitch that tries to sell them meth.

just saying the Chinese do and it hasnt.....

granted that i dont have a problem with pot but i really hate meth, especially when one of the last [bleep] nailed for it here was cooking in a house that butted up to an uncles of mines place here in town.....but in all reality i dont think killing all the [bleep] will stop anything.....if i thought it did i would be all for hanging the cooks, its some nasty chit both to the body and to the environment....

same road ive chosen, figure educating my girls will do more good than any law will....and agree with the second part as well...

I don't ever remember one single parent thanking me when I called them to tell them that Johnny or Susie was high or had been caught with Dope. They were always pissed at me. I had one throw up his hands and exclaim that, "It was only trace amounts of Cocaine". They would withdraw their kids from school so they wouldn't have to serve their punishments. One dad told me, "that was my dope". Another time a girl got pissed at her dad because he had found her stash and had smoked it all with some of his friends.

I don't know what percentage of parents know their kids do drugs but it is probably higher than you'd imagine and less than I would.

Alan

no since arguing over fantasy....your way is the better option considering the stomachs of most.

Make it legal...then kill any illegal dealers....addict gets caught in crimes twice...and he/she gets death...Damn...there I go fantasizing again

Right on bro.....we live right in the middle of meth world here...breaks my heart to see the effects of that schitt..

Plus one, and the above is so blatantly obvious it shouldn't even need saying.

Supposedly free people being imprisoned for something they do to their own HEAD. Makes me want to puke.

That said there's some seriously nasty chit out there; that also obvious. Like tequila.

Seriously? Those crack heads and tweekers are breaking into houses and commiting other crimes which the rest of pay for. I say build more prisons and throw away the keys.

Will the tax be more than 1.6 billion per year... cash, not counting seized property. That's what's being made now on busts for US agencies, fed and local.

Since the legitimate drugs will be high because of the sin taxes and greed, the blackmarket will thrive... there'll need to be inforcement of laws to stop the illegal blackmarket drugs... UHHH, like's happening already.

The losers that are users will still continue to commit crimes to pay for their habit, same as now. The underground drug trade will be just as violent and come across our borders. Goverment 'Cheese' will be three times the prices now, users will still buy on the corner.

The difference is Derek will now grow pot in the garden... big F'n deal.

It'll be cool, when I get a touthache, I'll run to Wallyworld and grab a bottle of Oxycodon or Morphine next to the tampons.

Kent

for the record even with an active black market, since Montana passed its medical marijuana act in 2006 street price on black market has dropped quite a bit if your buying in bulk......

as far as the oxycodone and morphine in Walmart, lady up the street from me has a garden full of opium poppies.....

biggest drugs around here are illegally sold or stolen prescription pills and meth......

What's the price for legal MJ there or Cali? sounds like it's 300 to 500% of street drugs. I don't keep up on it but if it's that high there'll be few takers after the initial euphoria.

MJ use is pseudo/legal anyway, why pay a high price?

If you don't turn your back on all drugs being illegal, nothing changes enforcement wise.

Kent

Hey, Ohio's new governor per-poses to release a bunch of inmates in for drug abuse, and stop locking them up for it too.



More after midnight, in your living room, raping and killing your family and stealing you chit.


Oh, that's right, the Governor has 24/7 security. Never mind, important chit covered.

It will be an actual WAR on drugs when we start executing anyone convicted of dealing.



It has been thirty five years since I was in college and exposed to a group beginning to experiment with drugs. But at that time attitudes toward most illegal drugs was pretty casual. Most of the kids figured the chances of getting caught were slim to none and the repercussions not worthy of concern.

If every kid in the school had personal knowledge of a cousin or in law or classmate or uncle who had been hung from a tree in the city park for dealing...........they would sure as heck be a little less casual about taking that first toke, or considering the trade as an occupation with a bright future.

varies from cheap to street price depending where yah go....dispensaries looking to help sick ppl first and foremost sell for barely over the cost of overhead......ppl looking to make a buck are still selling at a couple hundred an ounce.....

some of the prices you see arent comparing apples to apples, some of the really high priced stuff is due to the fact some of the really potent or rare strains grown organically are touchy to grow and low yeilders so costs more.....decent stuff can be had cheap....

major thing i notice in medical patients is most arent interested in a high, ingesting stuff that hasnet seen heat either through cooking or smoking doesnt give much of a high due to a chemical reaction that happens at about 212* or so which changes the non-psychoactive THC-A to THC.....whole lot of the benefits to sick individuals dont come from THC they come from other chemicals in the pot like THC-A and CBD which dont get you stoned.....and alot of medical patients would have stuck with opiates and the like if they wanted to be stoned day in and day out.....

$320-400 ounce(delivered, according to the paper....grin).
Same price just higher quality and more of it.


In a previous life we bought some swag down in Mazatlan. Long story short got paranoid and ate it back at hotel. Bad idea....laughin!

This is in response to the topic of WOD, not anyone here.

So, if it's legalized and a huge sin tax added as some here say, will that still keep the prices in the range they are now? The only way to remove the illegal drug dealers is to undercut their product. If you don't they will continue to have a clientele. The same issues of enforcement and criminal elements/violence continues. The same people stealing to support habits will not suddenly get jobs and only shoot up in their spare time, crack houses will not disappear.

To say legalizing drugs will solve the cartel/border smuggling gang issues is silly. It just changes the name to, Law enforcement of nonsanctioned suppliers.

Kent

never said legalization would cure any border problem.....the cartels market share on pot has been shrinking for years....they still have the cocaine and heroin and are breaking into the meth trade......to say nothing of the human trafficking.....only solution to the border issue is to enforce the border legalizing drugs wont do chit for it.....

I know you didn't, tried to qualify that. Some here have, more than once.

Kent

seen it alot cheaper a few places from individuals more concerned with helping ppl than making money......whole lot of places making as much as they can while they can though.....if you have any sort of a green thumb you can grow it pretty cheap without alot of effort.....

sorry, musta missed that in my reading of it.....managed to torque my knee slipping on ice yesterday and on more pain killers than usual.....

Yep. No different than the tax on cigarettes.

Barak would say privatize without governemnt interference or regulation. In that regard, producers could make a better product on the cheap, thus keeping willy high till he dies. Sad part is, who's gonna give willy the cash to buy his dope?

I forgot to add this debate pops up here every 6 months or so. Has anyone changed their minds?

I've never bought drugs, used drugs over Tylenol until I broke my leg last year. They put me on Oxy after the operation for a month. I do see many correlations of math and life, everything has a percentage.

400 for an ounce... an ounce sounds small and the price sounds large, I'm just looking to put a picture in my mind. Street price?

So right now the Cartels and suppliers from where ever donate(seized money) 1.6 billion cash last year to LE agencies, it's a tax, cost of doing business. This money is used somewhere, hopefully in the same field. How will legalizing effect the overall price burden to the average user, will they be able to afford an increase if it causes one?

Kent

It is bogus. There is no telling what we are doing in this country. You almost have to go by your own experience in the preponderance of things anymore due to the corruption of the MSM and the unreliability of smaller sources who are many times, prone to the same inadvertent errors individuals make. Drug abuse will always be here as long as there are drugs and IMO, drugs are a good thing. "Good thing" being due to their helpfulness in relieving pain, curing disease, etc. I am not advocating their abuse nor speaking specifically of those currently in wide use for recreational purposes. I have no idea whether we are keeping a lid on it let alone whether we can expect to in the future and so can't answer that part of your question.

Your last question is perplexing. I think the "Army" fighting the "War" is composed of true believers, paycheck drawers and those who are completely corrupt in that they both encourage its perpetuation without caring about the outcome and also in some cases, play both sides for profit.

forget which country it was offhand but one European country has seen good results with heroin addicts that want help, having doctors prescribe medical grade heroin(and some countries do view heroin as just a pain killer like morphine) and giving it to the person in a clinical setting once a day and individuals being able to hold down a job where they while kicking the habit were unable to as a junkie on the street looking for their next fix......

key point being though that it had best results with individuals that made the active choice to try and kick it and the government made it possible to kick it easier, kinda like kicking tobacco with the step downed controlled doses via nicotine gum that has set doses.....

mindset is everything in kicking anything.....

No.

That's the most important thing rattler. A person has to want to kick it. Still damn hard to stay clean. That glass dick is a huge draw that some can't overcome.

and thats the problem aswell some ppl are only happy stoned any laws be damned......

On one side I really don't care what someone else does to themselves, drug use is fine with me.

But damn if I don't want to kill someone when my window is broke out and I pay 500.00 bucks cause some junky stole my 50.00 radio and sold it for 10.00. Or my Bobcat or flatbed trailer, work tools, or all my house items... or my brother stealing 20,000 from the company to support a meth/gambling habit... the pain inflicted on the family/children.

Personal freedoms stop at my wallet.

Kent

i live in a meth hot zone, fully understand where your coming from.....my chit aint been taken yet but my brothers has.....

I'd have no problem with drug users, except that they breed at a rapid rate. I can't stomach the thought of kids growing up in that environment where momma is a crack whore. Then the cycle starts, and the kids make the same mistakes as momma, and they breed yet again..

At some point it's gotta stop, or it'll bring us all down.

I don't have an answer, yet legalizing something as evil as meth or heroin, speed, extacy ect won't change the crime or human issues... just the definitions.

Kent

yeah its hard to try and find an ideal solution cause making it illegal hasnt really helped.....hell heroin abuse is making a big comeback in the States after taking a hell of a nose dive for awhile......illegal doesnt work, for the nasty chit legal aint really a good idea either other than the argument about personal freedom so long as they harm no one else....

no reason pot shouldnt be legal for adults but meth and heroin? the grip they take on a person via physical dependancy is something else......

Yep, I very seldom see meth any more, but Rx fraud, burglaries for Rx pills, pharmacy robberies, doctor shopping, etc., is rampant. Way more heroin users too, because they can't afford Oxy's.

Utah's a weird environment (yeah, there's a surprise!... ), because a lot of people don't drink alcohol because of their religious views, but think if they're doctor prescribes something, it must be okay, and a if one pill is alright, a few must be better. We see lots of DUI's with Rx drugs, and I'm pretty sure we lead the nation in Rx overdose deaths.

Haven't read the whole thread, but I'm not for legalizing anything other than marijuana. I know people claim it's a "gateway drug", but I don't buy it. I also know in my 19.5 years as an LEO, I've yet to deal with a belligerent pot-head, but have dealt with too many drunks who wanted to fight to even begin to count.

if there was such a thing as a gateway drug it would be alcohol....just cause its legal doesnt mean its not a drug.....

My solution to that is, once a person receives a welfare check, has a felony conviction or three misdemeanors (other than traffic), their asses should be sterilized or at least have a Norplant for a minimum of 5-years!

thats a big thing for me......im very pro pot, and dont care what an individual does to their body but when your doing the chit on my dime as a tax payer i should get a say.....if you need my money to help you get by you dont have extra money to get stoned.....im all for helping those that truly need a helping hand to get back on their feet but i hate leeches.....

I agree 100%. I don't have the facts to back it up, but I'd wager alcohol has ruined more lives than all other drugs put together.

Yep, they shouldn't be knocking out kids just to get more benefits/handouts. I'm all for helping out someone who's down and out on their luck, but have no sympathy for those who make living off welfare their lifestyle.

We just ain't got the money for it anymore, drugs aside. Somebody don't wanta work...fine, but they shouldn't get subsidized by my money-that's charity and if the government is doin' it without my consent nay even despite my protests, its tyranny. Wonder how much more folks would give to legit charities if the government didn't extort so much.

Even if a person ignores the fact that many of them are on welfare willingly and goes from the point of view that they need assistance, we just ain't got the money when the debt is about to crush us.

I think Senator Orrin Hatch had a great idea in the bill he sponsored that would have required drug testing for welfare recipients, but knew it wouldn't go anywhere with the dims in control.

We are getting to a point where we are kinda stuck.. whole groups of people basically have a learned helplessness thanks to welfare. Not to mention they have no concept of "family", which will ensure their kids will grow up to be just like them.

Calvin, I see it daily. I've been in the business long enough now that I'm starting to deal with grandkids of the dirt-bags I was dealing with when I first started.

Interesting view point and I don't think it's stupid, you may be right but hard to prove.

Then you would have to test all government employees also because they are also on Welfare, but they call it a Salary.

Um, okay, I have no problem with that.

"Throwing them into prison" has worked about as well as could be expected... which is to say, it hasn't.

Punish actions- like robbery- and hear no bitching from me. But do realize, it's at least partly the illegallity of the substances, that causes the actions, that you correctly lament.

People will always be dumbchits and that's not changing regardless of what laws you & yours might make. However- laws, especially strong ones that are enforced- have huge societal consequences. Humor me a moment. Let's say the mighty government, who you are empowering to do this, btw, decides that alchohol should be illegal. I mean, gosh golly, just look at the statistics! So now it's illegal- big time illegal. Go to jail illegal. Go to prison for a loooooong time illegal.

Okok, a whole lot of people you know would suddenly be outlaws.

So are they actually outlaws, or does common sense say otherwise? You decide.

words are sposed to mean something. aren't they?


I think we bandy about the word war too easily and freely.


imo when there's a war folks should be getting killed

if it's a WAR on drugs, kill anyone caught in possession of em

if it's a WAR on poverty, kill the po folks

if it's a WAR on terroism, kill em all, even the ones that danced in the street when they had their minor victory

if it's a WAR on illiteracy, start with the bastid that started using the word "war" as a way to get more money for social programs

the word war ain't applicable to football games or social programs imo

The improper use of the word "War" has opened up the flood gate to all the Mexicans , police and families,drug dealers and families, informers and families to be labeled as refugees from War, now we are seeing thousands of them escaping the war into Canada claiming refugee status. So yes the wrong use of a word can create havok in some countries thanks in part to our American friends who coined this word improperly.

I didn't read the thread. Best guess is I've heard it all before...

But I will tell ya'll, I was involved in the illegal drug market for quite a few years. My step dad was a drug runner in the late 70's. He was an X cop so knew all the ins and outs of the business and how to carry on without getting busted. I learned a lot. He'd bring our dope across the border and I helped distribute the product pretty regularly, not to mention consumed quite a lot of it. We weren't really interested in making a profit, just having our own consumption covered at reduced cost or, in many cases, for absolutely free!

It was GREAT!

We spent a lot of quality time together, he and I doing our drug, especially during the early spring walleye runs. We'd sit out on the lake all day long catching fish, talking about wimmens and the weather, and just basically enjoying the day and our time together while drinking our bootleg Coors.

Had ya going, didn't I

His business required he go to, or at least through, Colorado on a fairly regular schedule. He'd pick up a couple dozen cases on the way through and bring them to friends on this side of the border. Once the brewery decided to allow sales in other states our profits and our little side business petered out. Our Saturday fishing trips continued on as usual but we no longer enjoyed our beer at reduced cost and all the thrill of doing something illegal that went along with it. All the sneaking around. All the keeping things under wrap. All the after dark deliveries. Everything that made it fun... gone... Only thing we had left was reminiscing about the good old days and watch our old worn out recording of 'Smokey and the Bandit'.

I've always been curious. I wonder how many people continued to drink Coors beer after it became legally available right next to Budweiser or any other brand. I'd bet a very high percent quit Coors and went back to their regular brand. The fun was gone. And so were the profits! Dammit!



But seriously. It'd be interesting to know how many people stuck with the Coors brand after the thrill was gone.

I remember those days. We'd bring Coors up from NM when we went north. I also had a pretty bitchin' beer can collection. In the NM desert, you find OLD steel cans that were rusty on the up side, but nearly perfect on the side that was buried. And then there was Old Frothingslosh... The Pale Stale Ale with the Foam on the Bottom. Fat chick in a bikini. Let me see if I can conjure up a pic on my iPhone..............

With marketing scheme like that it's no wonder to me I've never heard of nor seen that brand of beer... lol

Interesting thing about my step dad was, while he was deliberately and very obviously dissing the legal system and law enforcement with our little side business, and made no bones about it, he had a real hard on for "illegal drugs". He especially hated pot, with a passion. He was one of those "kill 'em all" kinds through and through. Had I been the pot smoking type or the pill popping type he'd have beat me to a pulp, turned me over to authorities, testified against me and encouraged the judge to throw the book and assign max penalty. Then he'd have disowned me...

Always seemed VERY hypocritical to me...

(shrugs)

If it's a war... we lost.
And they drug dealers have won.

I was a teenager in New York State in the 70's when Gov. Rockefeller was "getting tough on drugs". People were getting fifteen year sentences for a single joint.

Didn't work, drugs were still all over the place.

Birdwatcher

Yep.

Sure would be nice to pull the rug out from under the Cartels though.

Birdwatcher

If a Doctor was prescribing that many to her, without restrictions, he should be in jail. If she took them not according to the prescription, it is still on her. miles

1.) In Holland, only cannibis is legal. Other drugs are prohibited.

2.) Once the government started taxing things, they would no longer be cheap. $70 for a carton of cigarettes???

Surrender
and then collect taxes.

Drug dealers, and users committing related crime, are the #1 complaint from citizens, demanding enforcement, at all levels. The problem is that the government is the sole provider of "enforcement" and is inept. Like every thing else they touch, it evolves into a huge bureaucracy where nothing gets done but waste money.

Those are some good points Pat. It would help if the government wasn't intent on prosecuting the good folks to the fullest extent of the law while making dammed sure that all the bad guys receive the best of treatment with detailed attentiveness to their rights not being violated in the least. I am simple enough that I still think in terms of good guys and bad guys and being able to pretty easily differentiate between them.

The WOD is lost, was lost 30 years ago.

There's no difference between druggies and drunks, just their choice in chemicals!
If one of the chemicals is legal then the other should be legal, or vice versa.
By making the drugs legal, the various levels of government can control and monitor chemical, tax it, etc.

Jim

If an adult wants to destroy his own life, who has legitimate authority to veto that decision? What if an adult decided he was going to eat to the point of being bed bound? Shouldn't there also be a law against that by your reasoning? After all, the result of doing that would be extremely bad for him. What if a restaurateur knew full well what his plan was, and was happy to provide him with all the food he wanted to eat in the process? Should the restaurateur be arrested too?

Big Plus One!

About the only thing you have to worry about someone who is pot baked is them getting cheeto dust on your uniform.

Liberals are pretty much against the war on drugs, it�s mostly the conservatives who keep it alive. But on this VERY conservative forum, after 10 pages, I see almost no support for the war on drugs, almost unanimous that it�s either a lost cause, or morally corrupt in concept. So it would appear to me that BOTH sides no longer support the war on drugs. So my question is; why are we still funding this war?

I�ll tell you why. Because the WOD gives billions to law enforcement, and the minute we decide to no longer fight the WOD, over 50% of US law enforcement funding goes right out the window. Pretty much every LE agency in America will have massive layoff�s. That�s massive layoff�s of armed individuals whom are used to being in authority. But by doing so, we clear up a moral wrong (to some) and we SAVE billions and billions of dollars.

So, at what point do we get organized and start telling our lawmakers that we no longer support the WOD, and we won�t support a lawmaker that doesn�t honor our wishes?

It was never about popular demand. Originally, the WOD was justified by the widely propagated notion that black men would get high on pot and chase white women. This was, however, mere propaganda put out by folks who wanted to replace the corruption by which they profited during prohibition, which profit they lost after its repeal.

Nancy, it's time you stopped using whatever it is you use....save a couple of the gray cells you have left.

It's not like you started with many.

curious what you think of those cooking the chit and harming their next door neighbor.......

Same as I would if my neighbor were making homemade nitroglycerin, or operating a private, outdoor, big cat zoo. It's inherently dangerous, so strict liability applies regardless of his level of care.

And that makes a difference to the kid (that is still minute to minute) how?
The POINT is certain drugs cause behaviors that are dangerous to society. Heck we instituionalize people that are a danger to society when they do NO take drugs. Why legalize substances that initiate the same dangerous societal behaviors? Point blank, making access easier would lessen or increase 'accidents' like I described above? They are not a 'victimless' crime. If people did drugs in their bedroom and never left the house unless stone sober, I agree, who cares. Legalize all of it. Unfortunately many causes irrational behavior that endangers the life and security of others.
There is no evidence to support that legalization 'works'. Is the WOD affective in it's present exectution? No. Do we quit? If we quit every war that didn't give us the desired results immediately, I suppose we'd all be waiting for tea time.

easier to say when you aint the one that realizes just what that weird smell is you have been breathing in for weeks cause the guy next door is cooking.....

Too many people think that it is no big deal. A lot of the people working during the day to eliminate drugs go home at night and do them to unwind. That means that at best they are halfheartedly doing their jobs. miles

The only reason there exist such home based meth labs is that other, more preferred, drugs are too expensive, and this due to their being illegal. No importation expense with meth, so even in the environment of drug prohibition it can be provided to the consumer at super competitive rates. End drug prohibition, and 1) meth will lose it's appeal as superior products become affordable, and 2) there will be no need for home based meth labs, since they can afford to operate out in the open like any other business.

meth in one for or another has been a popular drug for most of 100 years.....and there will always be home based meth labs just like there are home brewers and ppl that grow their own pot even though they can buy it from dispensaries....always gonna be someone that thinks its cool to mix up their own or think they can make a better product than is being sold.......

im pro legalization for most thing but atleast i dont bury my head in the sand and do realize what the implications really are...

with pot if yah grow your own its no more harmful to the environment than any other crop....

with heroin i can grow opium poppies in my front yard, cook up heroin in my kitchen and harm no one, same with cocaine....

cooking meth not only [bleep] up your place it can very well [bleep] up your neighbors.....

If someone causes harm to you or your property by engaging in inherently dangerous activities in your proximity, he deserves a very stiff legal penalty, not to mention strict civil liability, i.e., without consideration for level of care exercised. Like I said before, this is a different category of discussion from drug legalization. It belongs in the same category with someone manufacturing TNT in their basement, or operating a private outdoor big cat zoo in their yard.

What if a black guy has a mobile lab in his pick-up and just about runs someone over from two blocks away? How would you handle that?...

So would you rather have the cost of combating drugs paid by the citizens in higher property taxes or the druggies? Legal seizures of funds and property obtained via drug sales goes to fund continued anti-drug LE enforcement. In my jurisdiction a drug fund paid for by seizures and payments by guilty drug users pays for salaries and equipment of drug investigators, i haven't taken a cent of taxpayer money since it was started. All funded by the convicted druggies.

An utter failure.

BTW, homie isn't into Meth. he won't have a mobile lab or any lab, to include black, chocolate or yellow.

FYI, Meth. usage/production is up in the SE, this due to new processing procedures that require less Ephedrin and other chemicals and glassware etc. It can be made in a 2ltr. plastic soda bottle.

If people are stupid enough to take drugs then let them have them . The War on Drugs is there for only one reason because the Government wants you to buy their drugs and they don't like the competition.

+1

If you've been watching shows like Cops, for your info. you've been taken. It's a big put on to get folks to watch.

So very true. We're pinching more Doc's with prescription pain pill violations.

I suppose there is still the occasional oddball who makes spirits and wine in his bathtub too, but the number of those folks dropped off dramatically with the repeal of Prohibition.

Not true. With meth heads - meth is their drug of choice. They make it - just because they can and it's a cheap way to get a whole bunch.

What do you think that someone that likes speed is going to use instead of meth?

.............

Here's my two cents on legalization of pot. YES - legalize it. End the flow of weed from Mexico and the associated violence. Things right now are changing.

Pot has become so abundent from legal and illegal growing operations in California that it's dirt cheap. A friend of a friend in California is growing it to supplement his income and now he has a hard time selling it (at any price) because there's too much of it around. The going price - $1000.00 a pound for indoor hydro grown high THC content buds.

Don't pm me asking about gettin' some either. Ain't gonna happen. Trafficking drugs is not my bag - Dood.

Leagalize it, tax it and it will become readily available. The demand for black market weed will be greatly diminished and that's where the violence is. The violence, at least with pot, is limited to the people, gangs and smugglers that deal in very large amounts. Take away the motive for illegal profit and the violence and the costs of imprisoning drug offenders will drop cosiderably. Sure, maybe somebody will rob a dispensery but no it's different than robbing a liquor store.

Wiil there be repercussions to society at large? I don't think so. If you want to smoke pot - you can find it - legal or not.

FWIW, I don't think other drugs should be legalized or there be end to war on illicit drugs. It's a plague on society.

I knew you wuz a closet pot head, fish head.

To no one in particular but does anyone know what the sin tax on alcohol vs cigarettes is?

If UncSam has his way the tax will be more along the lines of cigarettes and the black market will very well still exist.

With all the drivel that spews out of your mouth I've often wondered about you ........

Jus sayin'

Wtf? There are laws against the manufacture of dangerous substances already besides just the liability after something happens. So there is a three pronged attack against your argument here. One being that if it is legal it will be cheaper and/or easier to obtain and the meth heads won't bother cooking it. Two, the financial liability to endangering your community and three the legal liability for doing so.

You can't readily manufacture cocaine and heroin out of raw materials here in the states or it would already be being done just like Meth and Pot.

I'm thinking your typical meth producer isn't going to be the type to carry homeowners insurance so civil/financial liability is out the door. Maybe if he was bigtime and managed to keep from using, he may have some cash stashed.

That WAS correct Keven, but shortly after 911, all funding for narcotics enforcement dried up at the local and State levels. It was redirected as "Homeland Security" grants. I'm not saying the money isn't getting wasted, to a large extent, but that the money is just not in the dope business anymore...at least not for government.

You're thinking in terms of the present legal environment of illegality. Once legal, it will be manufactured cheaply by regulated companies who will be able to do it more cheaply due to mass manufacture facilities.

Pat,

Question for ya.

What is Homeland Security grant money supossed to be spent on at a local law enforcement level?

I can see funding for airports or border related issues but you'd think chasing international terrorists would be at the federal level.

Isn't that what Homeland security is all about?

I know I'm missing something here. Maybe.

Once legal? ... WTF ... You're whacked out if you think meth should be legally produced.

Who do you think that's in their right mind would ever support making it legal? ... I'm curious. ...

The international banking cartel?

And you're assuming gov will keep taxes low enough unlike sin taxes on cigarettes.

I assume you mean federal only. $1.01 per pack on cigarettes and nickle per can of beer, 21 cents per bottle of wine. http://www.ttb.gov/tax_audit/atftaxes.shtml
Alcohol tax generates about $6b per year.

So, what do you figger the tax on a pack of joints would be?

Curious minds and all .....

Thanks. I pretty much thought the tax on cigarettes would be far greater.

There is a huge plus side to the economy if pot is legalized. Junk food sales like doritios/cheetos/and tacos would go through the roof. Frito Lay would make a killing.

There are numerous grants directed at homeland security at the local level. Unfortunately I know all about them. None of them involve "chasing" terrostist but go directly toward protecting critical infrastructure. In our case, that involves refineries, ports and bridges that span important waterways. I'll pull up some expendature info and post it when I can find it.

It's all here...if you can find it!

http://www.grants.gov/applicants/recovery.jsp

LEGAL Meth production ???????

"more cheaply due to mass manufacture facilities." !!!!

You're well on your way to a solid KOTY Award for 2011 TRH.

I can't believe I just read that chit.

GTC

You sound like the old biddies who pushed for alcohol Prohibition and lamented that, if repealed, demon rum would ruin the country and destroy lives. Well, yeah, certain folks will always find one way or another to ruin their lives. That's the price of freedom, i.e., you are free both to make good and bad decisions for your own life. Additionally, the problems caused to our society by drugs being legal are far outweighed by those caused by them being illegal. That said, show me in the US Constitution where the power is delegated to the Federal Government to regulate what we choose voluntarily to place into our bodies, or aren't you a believer in the rule of law? These are all state matters under our system of dual sovereignty, not national ones. If the majority in your town wish to outlaw drugs, or your county, or state, that's fine with me. What I oppose is monolithic governance and laws, especially laws that aren't within the purview of powers delegated to the national government.

We need to fight those too. Most such Federal taxes are violations of the Constitution falsely justified under the Commerce Clause. But even leaving your premise intact, there aren't a lot of folks getting into gun fights over cigarettes and alcohol, i.e., the prices are still within the reach of even homeless folks, taxes and all.

Just out of curiosity, what do you think a person is arrested for when they're picked up for possession of marijuana/cocaine/meth, etc.? The vast majority are being charged via State RSAs.

George

If you grow your own, the commerce clause doesn't in any sense authorize the Feds to tax it. It's only by a disingenuous interpretation of said clause, one which doesn't even pass the straight face test, that they tax and regulate such things. This too needs fixing.

The states enacted laws mirroring the Federal law. State legislatures figured there was no point in keeping something legal that the Feds considered a crime since they're required to enforce both anyway.

Why harsh on the dude's buzz man?

Man, are you barking up the wrong tree. I tried a tobacco cigarette when I was 16, and have suffered through about five cigars in my nearly fifty years. I cook with wine, and very occasionally have a glass with dinner, or a beer. That's the full extent of my recreational drug use history.

I'd bet the feds and state gov would tax pot even higher than cigarettes/alcohol. After all, those vices have been socially acceptable for eons. In the world I live and work in, people do steal and kill to afford things like alcohol and cigarettes.

In the statement I highlighted I strongly disagree with you. It may work in some countries to legalize hard drugs as with heroin to a certain degree. Switzerland for example. But in America?

Crack, heroin and meth - NFW. Never - ever. Not in America and especially in today's society. That's where the big issue with legalization becomes a problem. The drug culture and those that would become a part of it are so warped in their viewpoints, ethics and morals that nothing good would ever come it. Prohibition and American culture at that time was an entirely different situation.

Do really think that rampant unchecked drug use in inner cities, beyond what it is today, would benefit the rest of us? Do you think the never ending generations of the dregs of society - the welfare culture - are going benefit from cheap legalized hard drugs? Do you want to continue to support them and in even greater numbers? Crack, heroin and meth - cheap legal and easily available??????????????

It's already a nightmare.


Here's a question back at ya. What part of American society is going to benefit from the legalization of hard drugs? Which towns or cities? ... Yours?

Lots of drive-bys going on between rival cigarette shops and liquor stores, are there?

Who is required to enforce both? If I didn't have a State RSA I wouldn't be making an arrest.

Marijuana legalization gets brought up fairly often. It goes down in the flames of public opinion just as often. As I've said before, I simply don't care if they legalize drugs or not. It needs to be an all or nothing proposition, though.

I'm eagerly awaiting the day when I can empty out all the drugs in the evidence room and stick them in a barrel onn a main road. I hope the ambulance has four flats that day....

george

Liberty benefits everyone.

PS "Liberty," in the context of political science, refers to that condition in which one is free to exercise each of his legitimate rights without fear of legal consequence.

Since you own your own body, it's completely within your rights to do with it what you choose.

Lots of bums and punks stealing and mugging. Real life experience as opposed to the internet is a biotch.

That's nothing a .45 cannot resolve.

You ain't lookin' at it right. Who uses? Mainly liberal trash. If they fry their minds, less lib votes.

I would say the same in regards to someone driving a truck at me. Reality.....

George

TRH,

I'm happy with the idea that I don't have the "right" to abuse heroin, cocaine or meth. I'm also happy with the idea that the scumbags who do it don't have the "right" either. I'd rather send them to prison - and - and - I'm willing to pay for it - with my taxes.


Take that.

It ain't just your taxes. I am no longer willing to pay for it, what with the huge debt and the accumulating service thereof. If somebody wants to fry their brain, let 'em. I am also loathe to keep paying for their keep in prison, on welfare, etc. Y'all want a bunch of money to keep the military huge, so we need to get it somewhere. We are circling the drain here folks. It ain't just about civil liberties anymore-as if they aren't important enough. It's about the survival of our nation and not being overrun by the Chinese.

Less money for LE means less money to prosecute good citizens that solve a problem that way too.

Cole,

I here ya' on the issues of imprisoning users. I rather see the money spent on attempts at rehabilitation. Give em' a chance to earn a living. After that - I dunno. What do you do? Paying to imprison a crack whore or homeless heroin addict is a waste of taxpayer dollars.

On that I'll agree with you.

I still don't think legalization of hard drugs in a viable option. There has to be a deterrent. Pot? Yeah, legalize it.

everytime this subject comes up, we form into two groups, seems like?

one group wants more LE to combat illegal drugs, the other group wants to recognize that more is not always better.

the plant derived substances such as sugar, caffeine, nicotine, marijuana, cocaine, opium etc. are either our friends or our enemies or somewhere in between, depending upon the day of the week, moon phase, etc. etc.

from an economic development standpoint we might be better off legalizing marijuana. let the organic farmers developed "niche" varieties of plants, and market locally. it'll be regulated to be sure no "wrong" pesticides were used.

taxes could be paid all up and down the line. and income would flow into rural communities. some LE would be necessarily displaced. they could be assigned to mopping up the illegal alien traffic.

the illegal drug dealers would also be displaced. they'd likely have to go to work in gainful employment, or some other illegal activity. what, i have no clue.

anyways, starting small would be good. later, the industry could consolidate, R&D could continue, and better varieties ould be developed for whatever usage. a specialty market would likely develop supplying a need, and offering worthwhile employment while encouraging local self=reliance.

what to do about opium and cocaine? destroy it at it's source unless its fully regulated.

are the alcohol and tobacco industries going to sit by and let this happen? doubt it.

reminds me of the Baptist Preachers and bootleggers keeping potentially wet counties dry. they would interlock arms, and local citizens would have to drive to the next county to supply their desires. the Sheriff would set up at the countyline to extract his share of the "illegal activity."

bootleggers thereby prospered, and the Baptist Preacher had something to rail against in the Sunday pulpit. everyone seemed to benefit, almost.

"from an economic development standpoint we might be better off legalizing marijuana. let the organic farmers developed "niche" varieties of plants, and market locally. it'll be regulated to be sure no "wrong" pesticides were used."


It's already being done in the states that have legalized medicinal marijuana.

TRH,

What are doing callin' me an old biddy?

Keep it up and I'll sic the entire merry band of turdlike people on you.

lol I agree with ya on that.

yep. so there you have it. a "model" to develop, learn from, and to further tweak and optimize.

local self-reliance being augmented by what the legal medical profession demands. why not ensure it's truly "organically" grown unless otherwise posted. it wouldn't have to be, not all of it. but, i'd want to know, if i were a consumer, what the plant material had been exposed to in terms of chemical pesticides.

but that's just me.

I'm done for. Your razor wit has cut my arguments to ribbons, sir. I concede defeat.

legalize drugs and you immediately create another dependent group the government will have to be responsible for, another protected class for discrimination litigation, and another group who must be accommodated under the ADA.....and I'm sure lots of other consequences I'm not even thinking of yet.

if drugs are legal, you can't discriminate against people who fail a drug test. think about that....and its implications for....oh....say....pilots, truck drivers, surgeons....you get the idea?

They already have testing labs in California for just that sort of thing.

Dudette....are you telling us that the brainpower you have left and use on this forum hasn't been altered/damaged due to drugs/alcohol/tobacky in any way that would be defined as reckless or possibly damaging to one's mind?

Wow!

yep. once again, it's better to regulate a substance than to ban it outright. we have speedlimits, axle weights, number of legal driving hours, etc. so people who fly planes have to test "zero tolerance" for alcohol, any other mind or physically altering effects.

it's kinda like ya can't give blood if you have cold, or flu, etc.etc. it would have to be managed. right now, it's filling the coffers of the illegal drug dealers and whomever else benefits from the fallout.

No thanks.

1. Alaska
2. Arizona
3. California
4. Colorado
5. DC
6. Hawaii
7. Maine
8. Michigan
9. Montana
10. Nevada
11. New Jersey
12. New Mexico
13. Oregon
14. Rhode Island
15. Vermont
16. Washington

i don't keep up with the stuff. is that 16 for or against? certainly it's not 50 for or against. on a county by county basis, i guess it's even more diverse.

States that allow medical marijuana use/sales.

Your stupidity and hatred for the armed forces knows no bounds. Calling you stupid, gives stupid people a bad name. Oinions are like [bleep], everybody has one and they stink, yours however is particularly fetid.

I don't follow ya on this. Is an alcoholic protected under the ADA? If a person has a DUI ya either can't employ them by law or don't have to hire them by company policy...right?

At present drug screen failure is the same consequence. How would that change?

Jorge I did see in print somewhere that before the Afgan war production there was ~10% of world production and now is ~90%. Prior or maybe during Russian invasion it was high also. What do ya know bout this?

I hate corruption, not members of the armed forces, who for the most part I admire. I also hate nobly-intentioned members of the armed forces being used for corrupt purposes with little regard for the value of their lives.

Gus may be on to something, but I doubt if it what he intended.

States where medical marijuana is legal.
1. Alaska
2. Arizona
3. California
4. Colorado
5. DC
6. Hawaii
7. Maine
8. Michigan
9. Montana
10. Nevada
11. New Jersey
12. New Mexico
13. Oregon
14. Rhode Island
15. Vermont
16. Washington



States with highest average income.


1 Maryland
2 New Jersey
3 Connecticut
4 Alaska
5 Hawaii
6 Massachusetts
7 New Hampshire
8 Virginia
District of Columbia
9 California
10 Delaware
11 Washington
12 Minnesota
13 Colorado
14 Utah
15 New York
16 Rhode Island
17 Illinois
18 Nevada
19 Wyoming
20 Vermont
21 Wisconsin
22 Pennsylvania
23 Arizona
24 Oregon
25 Texas
26 Iowa
27 North Dakota
28 Kansas
29 Georgia
30 Nebraska
31 Maine
32 Indiana
33 Ohio
34 Michigan
35 Missouri
36 South Dakota
37 Idaho
38 Florida
39 North Carolina
40 New Mexico
41 Louisiana
42 South Carolina
43 Montana
44 Tennessee
45 Oklahoma
46 Alabama
47 Kentucky
48 Arkansas
49 West Virginia
50 Mississippi

Sure don't but it would not surprise me if it is higher now, but to insinuate (not you) that members of the US Armed Forces are actually "protecting" Poppy Fields I find reprehesible. jorge

jorge, your not really surprised that the usual conspiracy soaked subjects here would say or even think that are you ?

i'll have to leave it to the statisticians and other analysts to state what all of this stuff means.

but, it looks like, at a quick glance that the most "affluent" states are most engaged in allowing pot for medicine. ??? i don't really know, for sure.

my thoughts were that local small farmers, engaging in both organic and chemical production of saleable marijuana would help local economies. meanwhile, less expensive LE would be needed, since it was no longer a war going on, but a process to enable local, legal, pot production.

in context, if the Federal budgets must be reduced, then this changeover offers a conversion from cost to positive revenue for local communities who are struggling through these hard economic times.

there's likely plenty of crime for LE to be involved with beyond the drug issues. noone should ever feel threatened by a potential lack of work scenario. LE will be needed until the end of times, no doubt.

The "war on drugs" - is as misguided as any war in history - and a bigger failure than any of them.

Will we ever learn? Anyone who's ever studied the history of the prohibition - knows how futile that way of thinking is - at least when it comes to prohibiting people from doing what they want to do.

To start, I think we need to immediately totally legalize cannabis. If anyone wants to - they should be able to grow what ever amount they want to. Every smoker can have his plants. The bottom will fall out of the market - organized crime will loose their biggest source of revenue, and soon afterwards - it will cease to be profitable to grow. It's often the cannabis trade that finances the harder stuff. It gets traded for harder stuff.

With the hard drugs - and this is radical - I think we should stop trying to treat use as a crime - and start treating it's use as a societal problem.

The great majority of hard-drug users are the poorest and most vulnerable and desperate members of society. They need help - not prison time.

In some countries (like Norway) they can go to a medical center - and get their drug - for free. There, professionals, will help them, guide them, monitor them and council them. The only place they can get their free drugs - is to attend the sessions designed to help them get their lives together.

You might still end up with a junkie - but now you have a junkie living within society - instead of having a junkie that needs to expose themselves and others to HIV/AIDS, Syphilis, Gonorrhea, Hepatitis etc. They won't have to prostitute themselves, they won't have to steal hundreds of dollars per day to support their habit and they won't have do do anything illegal to exist. But - at least they'd have hope.

I know this type of thinking doesn't sit well with some conservatives. It's easier to say "kill 'em all" which will never happen anyways, and when the time comes that it's your relative or friend that they're talking about killing - then your views will change - and they change damn fast.

According to most studies - the severity of the sentence - is unrelated to the law's effectiveness in diminishing drug use. Virtually every study on the drug trade shows that. Countries with mandatory death sentences - have as much addiction problems as counties with lax laws.

The only countries that seem to actually be reducing hard drug use - are the ones that treat addiction as an illness, and as a societal problem. The societies with the most people locked up in prisons - are the same societies that presently have the biggest drug problems.

In Vancouver, for example, they now have "shooting galleries" where the heroin addicts can do their drugs. While they are there, they get counseling, guidance and medical care.

But, because they still have to prostitute themselves - or steal - to buy those same drugs - the programs today in Canada aren't as efficient as they could be. But - even as they are designed - it's a start in the right direction. And - interestingly enough - even the beat cops on the downtown east side, see those sites as part of the solution.

Our societies have just about perfected what doesn't work.

It's time we tried some radical new ideas - and tried to find what does work.

I wasn't going for razor wit. You are correct, though, most of your arguments are done before they leave your mouth.

You expect us to believe you're going to deal with muggers, etc. with a .45 yet you can't even deal with someone who was, supposedly, a direct threat to your life.

Reality.....

George

IIRC another 10 states have some form of medical marijuana act working its way through their state legislature.....only state i can think of thats put it to the voters and its been turned down lately is South Dakota which came as a surprise to alot of those there given what some residents told me when i was down there mid November as it was predicted to pass....

though not in the quoted post i see sometimes that some claim that the medical marijuana legislation is put up to vote so liberals can get other agendas through by getting ppl out to vote....one lil flaw in that logic is in 2004 when Montana passed our medical marijuana act roughly the same number of ppl voted for the act as voted for Bush over Kerry.....using the logic stated wouldnt Kerry have carried Montana?

What ya presented there is very interesting; it seems to make some sense.

Agreed.

It's not everyday I agree with Charlie and Brian. And for that, dear Lord, I am grateful!

Pat you're one of the most sensible posters on here, consistently. I applaud you.

Supply-side economics didn't work. AT least not for drugs.

"In Vancouver, for example, they now have "shooting galleries" where the heroin addicts can do their drugs. While they are there, they get counseling, guidance and medical care."


Hey,.....holding that completely bizarre fiasco up as some sorta' icon is crazy, Bud.

It's a block we've been around before here on this site, too.

GTC

Its good when your bulb lights up, eh.

I think my tax dollars already go for enough bullshit... Quite frankly, I'd rather they go for some DEA goon than a needle exchange program, rehab program, social worker salary. You're just exchanging a door-kicking program for a hand-holding program; they both have an interest in promoting their continued existance. At least with one you get high-speed guns and cool-looking sunglasses.

Our nation is already bankrupt. How do we pay for these feel good programs?

Mentally handicapped folk working at McDonald's may work okay, but as college prof's, not so much.

actually have a state legalize teh medicinal use of these plants and not just the pharmaceutical extracts from them and i could.....there are only two problems....

#1 i need more square footage than for marijuana cause in the case of poppies they are pretty short plants and in the case of coca the active chemical is a tiny portion of the plant....if poppies grew 8 foot tall like pot plants i could do it with less square feet....

#2 in the case of cocaine i run into a problem of the plant liking a certain microclimate........give me the right chunck of ground in California and i could easily supply myself....

the reason ppl dont do it in the states is its near impossible to hide what your trying to do with a couple acres of poppies and getting coca plants in the states is a beotch.....

No, I ain't. Several of y'all are reading stuff into my posts that ain't there. Maybe these rehab programs and such are a good idea. I don't know, but I do know I don't want to foot the bill for them. My thought is that we don't have money for all the wars, we don't have money for all the LE. We don't have money for all the prisons and we don't have all the money for welfare. By welfare I mean what you are calling "hand holding programs" and you can lump all the counseling and shixt in with that.

I want the cops out chasing down killers and rapists. I want the Border Patrol kicking asss on illegals. I want the soldiers home where they ain't getting kilt every day and where maybe they can back up the BP and keep us from having a dirty bomb or anthrax sewn in Houston or Tulsa. I want teachers teaching school and highway workers mowing the ditches and fixing the dammed roads. What I don't need is people kicking my neighbor's door in and arresting him 'cause he decided to toke up. I don't smoke dope or do meth. The extent of my drug taking is the odd Ibu or aspirin and maybe a Rolaids. I don't like my neighbor too much either. I just think with all this talk of the Chinese forclosing on us that maybe we need to get out ahead of some of this shixt.

We need to intensify the war on drugs. There's a few small towns around here that don't have a prison.

That's not the way I understand it from having seen it discussed in the odd article over the years, but I surrender to your expertise on the subject.

i spend alo of time trying to figure out how to get plants that shouldnt grow here to grow here.....chit thats way more touchy than an annual like an opium poppy or a bush like coca where i just need the raw leaf......now trying to figure out how to harvest fruit from a tree that needs a 200 day growing season when you go 130 between killing frosts is a beotch....

Interesting post by BCBrian and in part I agree with it.

What happens though when you apply this ideology to meth or crack heads?

Give a heroin addict a little shot and he's good to go. Doesn't work that way with with meth or crack. Addicts can't get enough. They want to go on non-stop drug binges for days on end.

So, how do you deal with that?

its a royal beotch finding a solution that works for someone that likes stimulants......depressants like heroin is easy as hell in comparison.....

I think the war on drugs has become an industry, in and of itself. It's a huge bureacracy whose primary goals are expansion and self-preservation. It's also a dismal failure. It's about as effective as the prohibition on alcohol was, and has the same effect on organized crime as the prohibition on alcohol did...it creates a huge illegal market for the illegal product, and makes the criminals tremendously rich and powerful.
There's gotta be a better way. I don't know what it is...I just know what it's not!

no clue, actually. what would Terrence McKenna have to say?

the plant derived chemicals remain with us, trying to communicate,perhaps?

Supply and Demand. Kill the supply, kill the demand. Matter of will, something we don't have.

but in your skewed world, every use of the military is corrupt, because it's all run by international bankers

"its a royal beotch finding a solution that works for someone that likes stimulants"

Nope,....TRH has that aced

....."Mass Production"

swell idea, that

GTC

LMAO!

Abortion, kids with two mommies and/or daddies, PCing us to death and now some want to finish the country with legalizing drugs.

Right. Do any of you 'free thinkers' promoting legalization have kids?

Let's keep drugs where they belong, in the gutter.

It's obvious that most people have little exposure to serious addicts of serious drugs, which is probably a good thing.

The neighbor's pothead kid is a very different animal than a hardcore meth / crack addict.

The war on drugs has never been serious. It just keeps things in line and keeps the money coming in under the table.

+1000

Our kids are all gonna be in the gutter when we can no longer even service the debt for all these fun and games. We simply can no longer afford all the welfare and all the stupid shixt. It seems clear that in a free country if some assclown wants to blow his mind on drugs he should be able to do so. Just don't make me pay for his upkeep.

The internet is a wonderful way to communicate knowledge, experience and insight...particularly for those that have none.

For me, it's pretty nice. I don't have to run around in the street at town sayin' "look at me, look at me". Overall it's right nice. But I digress. What was it we was talkin' about?

Some body give me a cheeseburger!

Sorry, George, but those scenes you see in TV cop dramas of a round from a snub nose .38 causing a pickup truck to explode into a ball of fire and then fly harmlessly over the shooter are just fiction. Not real. Most folks with common sense realize that the first order of business is getting out of the way in those sorts of situations. Somehow, I doubt I would've been able to convince the cops that I needed to blow the driver away, either. That is, assuming I'd have (as a pedestrian) survived the impact of the truck after the driver was amazingly hit between the eyes from my snubby. You guys crack me up with this BS.

Hey, get the Extra Value Meal and I'll take the fries and Dr. Pepper. Don't forget to Supersize.

Another excellent post, Cole.

+1

No doubt Blue! Nothing like a toothless meth head scratching shiite that aint there, tweeking like he's gonna explode.

Creates alot of experts outta thin air.

To object to corrupt use is not to object to the nobly-intentioned soldiers themselves, most of whom are positively admirable.

I'm glad you realize that. I, OTOH, don't watch cop shows. No need, I actually do, rather than just talking/typing. Some of us actually take our firearms and shoot at and from vehicles so we know what actually happens in the real world. Novel concept for many teachers, I understand, but it's reality.



I've been in "those sorts" of situations. I've ducked vehicles and I've seen driver's stop when they realize what's going to happen if they don't.



So, in reality, it wasn't what you made it out to be here on the 'Fire. Good to know...



Since you're a constant source of laughs for many of us here, it's nice to return the favor once in a while .

George

Yep.

I just don't understand what folks who normally are just as scandalized as I am about the nature of our debt, trade deficit, interest, etc. are thinking when they want to continue these extremely high-dollar and unneeded programs that are strangling the lifeblood out of our country. People used to drink frickin' cocaine in their pop. Dope is just a dammed weed. I don't even like the term "legalize" it. It never should have been illegal in the first place. We don't have money for all this crap. Some problems simply solve themselves unless you won't allow them to.

They're just misunderstood! Harmless, really, and they should be left to do their own thing.

George

Agreed, hence my "put all the drugs in a big pile and let 'em have at it" theory. I also stand behind my statement that we shouldn't have amubalances responding to the ODs and the ERs should be able to throw 'em back out the door.

George

Give the addicts a governemnt subzidized hot shot to make sure they don't come back for more. Problem solved but It's not very "Christian like".

I'm tired of paying to keep them from doing what they wanta do, paying to arrest them, paying to keep them in jail, paying to try them and then paying to imprison them. Then when they get out I get to pay for them being on welfare. Can't we just deport them to Mexico? Can't we just deport all the politicians who want to continue this? I'm getting dammed tired of nobody keeping the roads up and my ditches not getting mowed and all sorts of other shixt just so we can keep chasing assclowns down and putting them in jail.

I can't tell you how many bodies I've stood over, barely clinging to life, brought back by a shot of narcan. How much cheaper in the long run would it be to just let them go?

You got all these people wringing their hands and wanting to "help" and all this other stuff. Some of them wouldn't pisss on my family if we were on fire but they'll give away my money in public programs to keep meth heads in food stamps so they can use their money for beer, meth and cigs. Our country is like Disneyland for Dummies.

Much. You and I both know that most aren't ready to go down that road. Hell, we have folks that want to "save" them in prison...

George

Does your BS have no limit, George? Unbelievable.

I too, think that is an excellent post, and a good example of the frustration and futility that most Americans feel. In the meanwhile, things have to get done, and the game has to be played by the existing rules.

I don't know why this just cracked me up,....It's not at all funny , and yet IS.

What is is is, anyway,.....

Or is it are is ?

"Mass Produced" meth,......one more head shake and wow on that crap.

GTC

To quote one of our more profound members, it was the only move you had. Congats?

George

Happy birthday George! Sorry I missed it earlier.

I hear ya.

Too true.

Just another day brother. Spent it snowblowing, working the dogs and doing work around the house.

One day closer to a ride in the ferry....

George

It may come to that regardless because the greenbacks are running thin. Sad part is good people will pay the price as well.

I believe in calling a spade a spade.

So do I. Those of us who "do" rather enjoy calling out those who like to talk about it.

Agreed to both Cole and the Boss.

Like Stick says, "Experience trumps guessing everytime."

Who the hell brought up cheeseburgers? Now I'm tweeking for one.

Funny you say that. I've had a jones for one of those "new" [bleep] burgers that Burger King has been advertising. Saw it while I was lifting last night and have been craving since.

Whatever happens won't be a quantum leap, just another little slip into the abyss.

Never ending BS.

2 daughters.......figured early on education trumped any laws on the books.....ive got no problem with pot and i can promice you my daughter doesnt smoke it cause she gets piss tested randomly as a athlete at the school...she decided on her own sports would be more fun than getting stoned.....

really find it funny how many seem to think drugs are a new problem, and more importantly that alcohol and highly addictive nicotine aint or are some how acceptable just because even though they have a huge drain on our society and health care costs too......got no problem with someone preaching the dangers of drugs and how they should all be abolished so long as they are talking their cigar and beer aswell otherwise your a hell of a hypocrite......

Everybody that's said they want a cheeseburger or a Happy Meal or whatever - has the munchies.

That's a sure sign of being a pothead.

I'm makin' a List.

If you're referencing what many of us witness when you blather on, you're correct.

George

Yo,...Happy Birthday !

GTC

Thank you, sir.

George

Long live the McRib!!!!!!

It's not really a burger, but damn those things are good. I can feel my arteries clogging as we speak.

George

NH K9/George,

And another Happy Birthday to you!

Doesn't take you off the "List" though.

Just don't tell my boss, OK?

George

Little Debby's Swiss Cake Rolls do it for me.

http://www.stormsrestaurants.com/

Storm's Special in the basket with a Diet Cherry Dr. Pepper.

Y'all gotta stop. I've already had to get up for ice cream. I'm rockin the orange sherbet.

Dang that looks good. I had chocolate Drumstick (icecream) yesterday.

Both of these won't end. As far as Meth. it's gotten too easy to make in small amounts. Even if large amounts from Mex. sources are shut down. The technology to produce from less ingredients is present. As i've stated before you can produce Meth. using a 2ltr. plastic soda bottle and ingredients that unless they're all together in one place, will not cause any alarm on LE radar. These drug folks, might be dumb, but they're far from stupid. What they don't consume, is a great sales product.

It's interesting about cracking down on drug users in this country. When LE does we're the bad guys, manytimes. You wouldn't believe the family members both male and female in their 60's, 70's and 80's, these are good upstanding people who contact me. To see what i can do to help their poor poor grandchild or other family member who got caught with felony drug charges. It's funny that these older citizens are the same ones, who state, "throw the book at druggies". Yet when it's a member of their family, "it's all about giving them a break".

Oh boy. Knowing what alcohol does to millions in America and yet you somehow think legalizing several more drugs to reduce crime and the associated expense (is that really your argument?) will better the country. Some of us can have a drink or two and not behave in an uncivilized manner. I don't believe drug users know much about moderation....the intent is to get F'd up, isn't it?

Cocaine is OK for people to ingest. It should be available anywhere, anytime for anyone.

Until it turns YOUR teenager into a $20 working girl.

Eric, you're a white trash, East Texas boy, as am I. What happened when they changed fire-huntin (hunting game at night with a light... for my northern brethren) from a $50 fine to prison time, overnight?

spot lighting sure didn't pick up....

That post should be banned. FLOTUS will be coming to see you.

Ya didn't get thrown in the pokey didja? Ya know I'd come bust you out.

Spot lightin and junk food.... This has taken a turn for the better fer shoor.

Well, we never lit the woods up...that is, until about 5 years ago and now we do it all the time. Hogs!

Junk food gets a bad rap.

You really need to let me know when you come back this way.

I'll be down the end of next month to Broaddus for a 94th birthday party. I'll letcha know when for sure, it might be a mad dash of a trip but I could be talked into something...

I scheduled a week off around the last weekend in March. It's shift change-I took 2 for 8.

Demand drives this clusterphuck. If it is completely ignored, or at the very most, the current token wrist slapping joke, it will continue to be an exercise in futility. Supply will always find a way to the demand. Always. That couldn't be more clear.

Spend the billions being wasted currently, instead, only on crimes comitted against others. Dipschidts want to burn their brains on drugs, have at it. (No free medical either..) When a crime against someone else happens stop the revolving prison doors that serve as training grounds for lifetime criminals.

A fraction of the billions spent would put up a lot of well guarded tents and no parole, full sentence, rock breaking chain gangs..

Please do. I spend every weekend 30 minutes away.

I can't say that I disagree. Dopers and the ones who commit crimes against others are one and the same.

Yep. The current system has been gamed & the original intent is totally lost. It will take a complete re-tooling that too few are willing to even consider, much less actually do. It creates frustration within and outside of the system, while dirtbags everywhere benefit.

I try to remember that the people who form juries are the same ones who elected Obama.

I got called for jury duty last spring. I lasted about 5 minutes before I was excused.

Juries are formed by people who have no opinions. That's good, many would say, but honestly? Who has no opinion?

People with a vacumn between the ears;

My view, off the cuff, SOC style, is that Nancy Reagan (bless the auld lass) and her famous 'just say no' campaign of the 80s was grossly underrated. I think it was really effective at deterring young folks! Hey look, a snowflake!

Despite the advertisement for the wonders and greatness of socialized medicine that was woven into the post, I agree.



People who want a "war" on drugs should pay for it. Pull all public funding for every aspect of the foul thing, enforcement efforts, court and lawyer costs, incarceration costs, everything. Cut the public funding 100% and see how far they get on donations. The "war" would be over in 2 weeks.

Count up the billions and billions spent, then add the billions and billions leaving the country only to support 3rd world drug lords and corrupt government officials of their countries, and we'd be absolutely amazed at the funding available to fix roads and other needed services.

The drug war is NOT a needed "service". It's a sign of insanity if you ask me. It don't add up no matter how you look at it. I'd bet a dollar to a day old donut every increase in funding for the "war" is paralleled by an indentical increase in profits for the black marketeers.

It's time to end the bogus war on drugs. If people want to fight crime the first thing they need do is define the word. It was not a crime before the legalities passed and it is not one now. Your just spinning your wheels. It's an unaffordable and unsustainable waste of money and manpower. And there's no excuse for it. America needs productivity now more than ever. All government positions that don't actually produce, need axed. Producing the abysmally poor results the drug war has doesn't qualify as production. Nothing useful has ever or will ever come of it. 100% waste and Zero gain.

Did anyone ask him?

Are you askin?


I take back what I said above about no gain. There was one thing gained there for a while. The war on drugs gained votes for certain politicians. I can't help but notice in recent years there isn't much talk from campaigning politicians about it. For a while it was among the top priority of platforms. Kinda on the back burner now.

Even Kalifornians shot down legalizing grass.....

Nobody important, or with any common sense, wants drugs legalized. And that statement isn't meant to suggest that common sense, or importance is to be associated with Kalifornians. We all know that ain't happening. GRIN

LOL.

I think it's going to have to happen, though, regardless of how many in favor or against. Finances just aren't there for it anymore (actually never were...). It's like a lot of other things in this country, they're going to have to be cut whether people like it or not. Broke is broke.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ all in the negative column...

Yep, we need to stop calling bad personal choices a crime. Taking these drugs is no more a crime than eating trans-fats, smoking, or frequenting tanning salons. It was only originally labeled a crime because those who stood to profit from it being a crime spread the propaganda that black men would get high on pot and chase white women. Got enough white men sufficiently angry with that idea to support it being labeled a crime. Similar explanation for the first gun control laws.

Crime =
1. Damage someone's property.
2. Injure someone's person.
3. Deprive someone of their rights.

That is all.

Is fighting crime really fighting a crime?
Or just assuming a power over another? A power that is not even yours but is issued by what you perceive as a higher power backing you.

Perhaps it's all just a head game.
Perhaps it fits squarely in the definition of insanity...

Precisely.

I think people should step back and look at the bigger picture. If during the carrying out of a duty was one of the three committed? Was property not belonging to you taken? It doesn't matter if the government replaces the word stolen with the euphemism recovered. You cannot recover what was never yours. It doesn't matter if the government assigned you the duty, you're the one doing the deed. You can't say "I was ordered", that's not an acceptable excuse. We are responsible for our actions, period. When standing under the spotlight answering for our deeds we will stand alone, each and every one of us. "The Government" won't be there backing you. Your enablers won't be there backing you.

There is no "I was ordered" or "I was under contract". These things do not exist. Everyone makes his own decisions. Always has and always will. We are free moral agents in all situations. Always. There is no escaping it.

Well said.

It's reason enough for me to never try and fight a "war on drugs". That I'm forced to help finance it grieves me. For me it's a morality issue. And it's devoid of any... empty set... nada... bankrupt... etc.

I'm gonna play devil's advocate to legalizing drugs for a minute.

What put Al Capone in jail? Taxes. It wasn't really what he was guilty of - as far as violence on society - but it put him in Alcatraz till he died.

How many violent gang members are arrested on drug charges just because they can't be convicted on their real crimes against society?

Do you want to take away a viable convictable offense/tool in stopping crime?

Start thinking about it. These are only a couple of examples off the top of my head. I can think of a whole bunch more.

People packing heat would go a long ways towards thwarting violent crime, from gangsta types or whomever.

Maybe if seeking drug charges was out of the way dectectives could focus more effort and resources on the actual crimes.

I dunno.

???

Point taken. It is a factor.
I'll take your advice and think about it.

Sure you want to go down that road?

I want to put you in jail but you're not doing anything that's currently illegal enough to do so. I know, I'll make up a new crime.

Hypothetical situation: I'm a voter but I hate guns and the people who own them. Guns are a scourge on society. You own a gun but I can't get rid of you for society's sake and I really am thinking of society's sake here. I know, let's tie gun ownership with something else that isn't very serious right now.

Have a gun in your possession when you're caught going 5 mph over the speed limit? Automatic 10 year sentence.


I can think of other ways to just make up new crimes which I can use to throw your ass in jail if you want me to.

Here's one of thing I thought about last night.

A guy that works smoking a joint with his friends in his home? There's no real crime there.

A group of herion addicts in a abandoned building that's a shooting gallery? None of em' work and they all rely on stealing to support their drug habit. What about this one?

And the moral of the story is: Government SUCKS!

Every time you pass a new law, all you do is give government a chance to f*ck you and me over just a little bit more.

The very definition of a police state, i.e., the police can put you in jail if they want to, no exceptions. Under the rule of law, which is the opposite of a police state, the laws are designed such that anyone can choose to remain completely within the law at all times, thus (short of fraud on the part of a cop or other government official, which itself will, as a matter of law, be investigated, prosecuted, and severely punished) immune from the threat of arrest.

how many ppl go out on Friday night intent on getting [bleep] up....

i said i have no problem with someone screaming for drug prohibition so long as they include all recreational drugs....on the list of chit harmful to the body pot rates way lower than either alcohol or tobacco, whole lot of psychedelics aswell....its kinda like the whole gun control debate alot of gun owners are willing to look the other way so long as it aint their guns being taken....

federal government rates cocaine and methamphetamine as having useful medicinal qualities but they say pot and psilocybin doesnt though there are thousands of peer reviewed medical studies that say otherwise.....the US lists heroin as no medicinal value but a number of other first world nations say it does.....if you actually pull your head out of your arse and put some study into this chit you will find that how the US gov't lists drugs as useful or not has no basis on fact kinda like gun control....

now i aint saying some of the chit isnt dangerous as [bleep] if abused but so is alcohol.....focus on those trying to [bleep] with minors and leave adults alone unless they break a real [bleep] law like trying to steal chit or driving impaired....do you really think if you take away the criminal possession laws that all the sudden your friends with a brain on their heads are gonna suddenly say "Hey lets give meth a try!" [bleep] no just like most ppl with a head on their shoulders dont get chit faced drunk every night.....educate ppl on the dangers, kinda like gun safety and let cops deal with real crime....

I thought of a couple things.
Means to an end.
Short cut.
Sorta kinda like cheating. Cheaters never win.
It's kind of underhanded. Successful, but...

I appreciate what you're saying but we're talking about drugs not guns. Here's another thing. It's about current laws not hypothetical changes in law.

Obviously this is a BS "crime" and I agree with you... Have a gun in your possession when you're caught going 5 mph over the speed limit? Automatic 10 year sentence.


All I can say is ... Has there ever been anyone sent to prison for ten years for a 5 mph over the speed limit ticket? I don't think so?

In a few hours I go to my "legal pusher"
So I can support the major drug dealers!

I say open it up for the little guys.

Just this week Columbus PD and feds busted a factory and home in the city.
Messicans arrested with 2 TONS of pot and $950,000 !

I say the cops can buy new cars and pistols now!

Just think if the country, state and county could have taxed those profits?

Did lowering the BAC for DUI make motorists safer?
Is that additional 2 tenths of one percent really the defining line between safe and not safe?
Did the government get more drunk drivers off the road?

Maybe all it actually does is put more cases across the Clerk's desk. More people's names in the paper. More jobs for defending lawyers. More money flowing from private sector to public. More arrests without making more stops. More arrests without additional manpower or other additional resource costs.

More power and more control in the hands of government...

I think the answer lies right here in this post.

Here's my biggest issue with legalizing hard drugs. Is it truely a victimless crime?

Think about it.

is alcohol?

Michel jackson rocks

There's an article in today's *Alexandria (Louisiana) Town Talk* which relates an interesting fact. 1 in 26 Louisiana citizens is either in jail or on probation or parole. Got that? 1 in 26.

In other words, the State of Louisiana wastes billions of dollars putting people in and through the criminal justice system for committing victimless crimes.

Abusing alcohol isn't a victimless crime either.

That's where this whole issue starts getting complicated.

Is meth, crack or heroin worse than alcohol?

The one thing with legal alcohol is there isn't the violence asscoiated with drugs. Then you have to ask the question "If hard drugs were legalized would that stop the violence that goes along with it?"

So many difficult to answer questions? ..............

You're gay!

you'll never stop the violence.....you can get the death penalty for killing someone yet ppl still kill.....honestly doubt that legalizing even the hard drugs will change useage rates much at all, majority wont touch them legal or not just like plenty of ppl dont drink or smoke.....education has far more preventive power than legislation.....

When there's a victim, prosecute for the act that victimizes. When no victim, no crime.

OK. Define the convictable act of druggie parent that treats their kids like schit (no violence involved - no other laws broken) and is found in possesion of "hard" drugs during a traffic stop. Would a little jail time be wake up call? A deterrent to stop abusing drugs for fear of losing their children? Remember, in this scenario drugs is the only convictable offense. Treating your kids poorly, in and of itself, is not always against the law.

they dont do much if its alcohol.....whether thats right or wrong is a different issue....grew up in a house full of booze but wasnt physically abused......[bleep] sucked at times but not sure i would go back and change anything cause i like how i ended up even after going through that hell......had it been different not sure i would have wound up being my own boss at age 27......right or wrong it is what it is and its how i got to where i am.....

I'm just tired of the whole idea that throwing people in jail is the best solution for everything.

Okay, you're stupid, and you made bad choices in life for whatever reason and you (currently) have little to offer society. You haven't hurt anybody, you're just a stupid loser with zero self esteem.

To make it better, we're going to throw you in with a bunch of really rotten and violent people where you will get beaten up and/or buttf*cked (that'll increase your self esteem), but we'll tax everybody else to pay for your incarceration, meals and health care.

When you get out, your lack of suitable job skills will be further hampered by a criminal record.

There - We showed your sorry ass! Now you'll become a contributing, worthwhile member of society!! So get to work!





If someone is out there killing and hurting people, or say, taking graft to distribute government jobs to their friends, or something else that DIRECTLY hurts people*, fine , remove them from society and maybe punish them.

But just because someone has made a couple of bad choices in life we throw them in jail? There has to be a better way.


* Once agin, this whole "indirectly hurts people" stuff is a greased 90 degree slope. The classic example of this is the farmer up on the witness stand and the prosecuting attorney is accusing him: "So you admit that you grew the grain that the whiskey company turned into alcohol that my client drank heavily before he went out and ran down five people in his car! You vicious criminal - lock him up!"

When the victimization rises to a crime, prosecute. When not, don't. Different states will draw different limits in this regard, as it should be. There should be a very strong legal presumption that such issues fall within the purview of a private family matter, and there should be a very high standard required to overcome this presumption, such as overt and proven risk of actual physical injury or death. Sounds harsh, but anything less places the family in a subordinate position in relation to our government. Families should be presumed sacrosanct and outside of the control of the government.

"There has to be a better way."


No disagreements on that one. With all my agruments against legalizing hard drugs I don't agree in full with the current philosphy of imprisoning "users".


That part ain't working. Like you said, "There has to be a better way."

I done for now. I'm going out to the prairie for a little target practice with the 30-06 and my new to me Winchester model 69 .22.

No drugs will be involved in my endevour.

I'm not going to break the speed limit getting there either.

If the banning of potentially harmful substances works - then the people who believe that - should be drawing up new laws and rules and penalties to those who sell junk food. Perhaps we should round up all the obese people for the harm they are doing to themselves? And what about people who sell junk food to children?

Obesity has a larger cost to society, and kills more people, than all the illegal drugs combined.

Knowing that - how do those of you who support the prohibition of drugs, feel about that idea?

Doesn't that analogy clear things up for you?

So, ordering a No 1 at Burger King is the same as using illegal drugs?

Obesity is way more dangerous than pot.

But, pot leads to Burger King No 1.....

ice cream is better, cures the munchies and cotton mouth

I'm all for locking up junk food dealers. Not only does obesity directly hurt people, but all that money is going to some nasty, nasty people.

You let a junk food dealer into a neighborhood and all kinds of bad things happen - including prostitution.

A junk food dealing pimp and his hooker right across the street from a schoolhouse...

If you think that a pile of "Messicans" was gonna pay taxes on $950K you're frigging insane.

That's the laughable part of the whole taxation argument. These guys break the law by possessing / distributing drugs now, but if drugs are legalized they'll obey the tax law. What a joke.

Any money saved from ending the drug war would go toward funding a war on tax evasion. Do y'all REALLY want that?

The cheeseburgers are a "gateway drug" before you know it you are craving the whoppers, large fries and a giant soda!

Somehow, that line of reasoning sounds vaguely familiar.

The donut shop's gonna get pissed !

We can argue about "gateway" drugs - but you are correct.
Personally, I think it all begins - with cookies.
Once a person thinks of a cookie as a food - his future path in life is pretty much determined. It's all downhill after that.If we could just have death sentences to those who sell junk food to children - we wouldn't have any more problems with obesity.

Huh. I've never met a teen turned to prostitution to get her next fix of freedom fries. Or seen a house burglarized so a fatty could get money for another burger. Or known someone shot in bed because he was trying to sell snickerdoodles on someone else's turf.

But you're right, junk food is the same.

depends on what ruler you use to measure.....based on emotional trauma? no, definitely no comparison.......based on cost to us via health care costs likely surprising on how similar it really is.....

I'm talking about the trauma of getting shot in the face. It happens over drugs on a regular basis.

That's the ruler....not a hard one to see.

Some people eat to get the nutrition they need, and some eat to fulfill an emotional need. They feel like no matter how much they eat it isn't quite enough.
I think that is how food is similar to drugs. Some people just want to feel a little buzz to be social, others want to drown their sorrows, and don't care if they die trying! (Sometimes they kill others while behind the wheel.)
whelennut

War? What war?

happens over money and family feuds just as much.....see more ppl killed round here cause they said the wrong thing to someone and the guy decided it was worth killing the [bleep] over.....more times than not alcohol was in their system but quite often no more than that....

I've read this whole thread [shows how empty my life is lately ] and there cerainly is no clear picture of what de-criminilizing drugs would do .We make distinctions between products within a generic group all the time as far as what should be legal and what should be regulated .But drugs are either legal , or illegal .

People keep mentioning alcohol in the same breath as drugs and there is a big difference :

Alcohol has no addictive properties inherently .

Meth most assuredly has addictive properties .

Marijuana probably falls in between these two and other drugs could be rated according to their addictive properties .

Regulation , or prohibition , of them BY THE STATES , NOT THE FEDS , based on their addictive qualities makes more sense than the way it is done now .

Some of the arguments used here, that seem legitimate to the presenter, are a prime example of why kids shouldn't use drugs.

Y'all are right. Yesterday I had a steak finger basket from DQ. Today I'll shoot up. How utterly frigging retarded.

The ironic part of it is that most shootings happen as a result of somebody using drugs and/or alcohol.
The political solution is to ban handguns?
What part of DUH don't they understand?*





*Buffy the vampire slayer

Rattler, show me a teenage whore working for Dr. Pepper. Show me a violent turf war between McDonald's and BK.

Bottom line, it happens with drugs and not junk food.

It never happens - where marijuana is legal either.

Talk to a cop.

Ask him how many domestic violence calls are related to - alcohol consumption.

Then ask how many domestic violence calls he's had - where marijuana was to blame.

Meth addicts and coke pushers are suddenly peaceful where pot is legal?

How many deaths can you attribute to marijuana in a year in the USA?

How many death are due to obesity?

Now tell me - which one is more dangerous?

My point was that drug violence is due to the drugs in question - being illegal.

How many people OD each year on burgers and ice cream?

How many people OD each year on meth/coke/heroin (yeah, I'll leave weed out)?

Now tell me-which one is more dangerous?

George

Drug violence is due to drugs. Will legalizing it make some of it go away? Maybe you'll do away with some of the dealer-on-dealer/gang-on-gang type schit. You'll still have Daddy Methhead tunin' the schit out of Momma. Those numbers will be going up.

George

the point is them being illegal hasnt stopped chit, infact use is growing.....time tor try a different solution, if that dont work try something else.....heroin being illegal isnt stopping heroin use from growing......stupid to keep throwing money at a solution that doesnt solve a [bleep] thing......

Use drugs, get a bullet in the ear. The might not deter folks either but will stop those caught from being repeat offenders.

I'll play.

How many people are killed by drugs every year?
How many people are killed by obesity?
The fact that some drugs kill quickly - while obesity kills slowly - is about the only real difference.

If you want a war - perhaps a war on obesity would save more lives.

I don't care if someone wants to kill themselves, slow or fast. I've not known of someone tweeked out for a burger slaying someone. That you miss the point surprises me none dumbshitt.

I believe it was Einstein who said "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results".

I agree that it's time for something to change. I'll buy into the arguments that people (myself included) are sick of paying for dope heads to be arrested, go through trial, and then jail. Personally, I don't want to pay for the medical services they need either.

If drugs are going to be legalized, so be it. Ambulances and ERs shouldn't be dealing with the ODs if that's the case. Personal responsibility and all that...

George

I don't care about the "war" on drugs. If they're legalized I can focus on other issues that concern the citizens that pay me. The difference is, I have no problem walking over a tweeker ODing in his trailer. When society can let natural selection take its course I'll be happy.

George

I'm done arguing with a bunch of potheads about greasy food.

How many of your local elementary school kids are in danger from being killed by a druggie?

How many are in danger of dying early - due to how they eat?

I can't believe you miss the point.

The REAL point was - if harsh laws actually deter people from doing what they want to do - then the banning of junk-food - and the execution of people who sell such stuff to kids - will eliminate obesity.

If doing that won't work on obesity - you have your answer - to why it won't work for drugs either...

Because you now might - finally - have managed to figure out my real point - I'll take you calling me a "dumbshitt" as a term of endearment.

Same arguments, launched by the same idiots, same results, same moronic positions, same.......

I can't believe that you're actually trying to compare what someone does to themselves vs. what happens to others as a result of what someone does to themselves.

Let me be a little more clear:

I don't give a schit what someone puts into their own system or does in their own home.

I start to "care" when that private act starts impacting others. Where the rubber meets the road, that's the real problem.

George

Agree 100%

Legalize it all - treat addicts as sick people instead of arresting them as criminals.

People are going to do - what they are going to do. Law - or no law.

It's the illegality of the drugs that makes them expensive and it's what makes the selling of them profitable for criminals - the drug trade itself - might well cause more damage to society - than the actual drugs themselves.

And that's where we diverge. Treating addicts as sick people is now making it "my" problem. If they want to take the drugs, they can deal with it. If a dope head has insurance and needs medical treatement, so be it. If he doesn't and gets a bad fix, oh well...

George

Why treat? Let die. If they don't care I sure as hell don't.

Funny, that's how a lot of junkies already justify their behavior; claiming it's a sickness, rather than a choice, and I call bullshitt!..

Why treat any health problems related to obesity? Why not just let all the fat people die? Take one glance when they come to the hospital - if they are overweight - don't treat them. They made their bed - let them sleep in it.

No one held a gun to their heads and made those people do that to themselves either.

Oh - I forgot - obesity is a "sickness" - not a choice.

Okay with me but I'm not sure society as a whole is ready for it.

George

Okay by me as well.

Where did I say treat them dipshitt? I'm continually amazed at the number of dumb sperm that find an egg.

Scary that you and Hawkeye teach kids. Thankfully he ain't found a gal in his parent's basement to spread his seed with. I keep trying to [bleep] the stupid out of Canadian women because of the likes of you.

I'm amazed you can bed any self-respecting Canadian chick - well actually, if you scrape the bottom of any barrel...

honestly i think the best solution is to get rid of the Schedule setup we have, think most of us agree DC Bureaucrats should be deciding what does and does not qualify as medical treatment if im willing to pay for it out of my own pocket and accept the risks....

legalize pot for adult use cause quite frankly the worst that can be said of it is it makes doing nothing interesting.....and tax it and for those that say but ppl will just grow there own.....well no chit and ppl can brew their own beer but the majority are gonna take the easy way out and buy it at a store...my wife couldnt grow a chia pet if her life depended on it and she isnt the only person with a black thumb.....your gonna get alot of taxes...fine the hell out of those that sell to minors like you do wih alcohol...

decriminalize possession of small amounts of the harder chit....if you still want to go after the importers and meth cookers have at it....

with the Schedule rating system gone, docs that want to can prescribe measured medical quality doses to users in a clinical setting, use the pot taxes to fund the the rehab centers or whatever you want to call them.....dont allow junkies to pick it up and leave with it but allow them to take the dose on the property...and have counciling available to those that want to kick it..quite frankly this is the only solution that has allowed any country to make a dent in heroin use and getting ppl clean, any other solution or half arsed plan doing this half way has had pretty poor results.....

The thing I hate about our current system is, they're locking up drug dealers/users, while letting child molesters, etc. walk the streets. Don't know the whole solution, but my dad always said it's cheaper to build cemeteries than it is to build prisons, and I tend to agree.

Worrying about what people put in their bodies ain't keeping me up nights.

People who can't moderate their use of hard drugs have a very limited length of time to practice their lifestyle.

Pot smokers are as harmless as people get.

The war on drugs is just another leftist "do gooder" initiative that's intended to create the perfect society.

There ain't gonna be no perfect society that's inhabited by humans,...get used to that reality.

Enacting laws which make the attempt to achieve such an idea just makes enemies of those who are tasked with enforcing those laws.

Government needs to get the hell out of people's personal business.

That's it,..that's all.

the major flaw with this thinking for drug users is most lose their taste for it as soon as its their brother or daughter or grandson.....so long as its someone elses problem they are all for it not so much when they are the ones dealing with it.....

I know one thing, I'm jonesing for a Whopper and a chocolate shake!...

You just had to go an bring up donuts didn't ya? lol. I only like homemade fried cakes dipped in milk.

My experience is, that way of thinking goes beyond drug dealers/users. Don't know how many times I've had mom, dad, husband, wife, brother, sister call wanting dipchitt arrested but when you go to their residence, they wanna fight you for taking them into custody. Like I said, I'm far from having all the answers,.

Bullshiite. It may be legal to possess or grow very small quantities but the major weight is still being fought over.

+1

Was in Montana last spring and there was an article in the local paper about a legal grower and at least one helper who were murdered by a dealer(s) because they were infringing on their turf.

I mean REALLY legal - as in totally. As in - grow all you want - it's none of our business - legal.

It was said before and not addressed. Who the [bleep] is going to pay to treat these addicted pieces of shiite? Robbing peter to pay paul. Recidivism is so high how many chances does a person get? [bleep] em. Give em a hot load and be done with it.

You are wrong about one thing. It's not the "leftist" countries of the world - that have the "war on drugs".

In case you missed it - that war is happening in a right-wing country. It's that same right-wing country that has more people in prison for drug offences - than all the "leftist" countries of the world combined...

Every time Canada comes close to legalizing marijuana - we get the threat of trade sanctions - from you know who.

I agree, but you got people surrounding you that wanna be all up in your business. I see it every day. I pretty much keep to myself and am fortunate in that I can, since that ain't the case with most folks. That being the case, you would think that at least some people could understand basic math and how we just ain't got money for being all up in everybody's business anymore. It was all fun and games for all the folks that want to dictate every facet of their neighbor's lives for a long time. Now the rubber is meeting the road though and some just can't let it go. They'd rather pay to put their neighbor in jail over a joint because he don't know somebody high enough up the food chain to rat out to keep his freedom than to pay to educate their kids or fix the potholes in the road. We just gotta have all these laws or somebody might smoke a doob or maybe dance or somethin'....

I'm done here. Nobody seems to understand that when you are borrowing money you are out of same-otherwise why borrow? I don't want to borrow any more money just to keep people in jail for doing things that shouldn't be illegal in the first place and hurt nobody but themselves except in some oblique manner. Arrest them for stealing to support their habit. Arrest them for beating hell out of their wife. Whatever. I'm sick and tired of everybody telling me I gotta support all these laws and wars and shixt.

Just for the record you're right about drugs being legalized, but you're still a dickweasel.

No,...you're wrong.

They're leftists.

They might fly the conservative banner,...but when they start digging into people's personal business, they establish themselves as leftists,...regardless of what their T-shirts say.

Conservatives don't fug with people's personal liberties.

Not sure you can call America a right wing country anymore.

If that's what you think of me - that's a compliment. If you started singing my praises - I'd have to re-examine everything I believe in.

Unless it concerns drug use, homosexuality, abortion, religion, conscription etc. - correct? On those issues - conservatives ALWAYS seem to always want to regulate other people.

X2

No,...you're wrong.

They're leftists.

They might fly the conservative banner,...but when they start digging into people's personal business, they establish themselves as leftists,...regardless of what their T-shirts say.

Conservatives don't fug with people's personal liberties. [/quote]

I don't disagree with your definitions but just wondering if there are any conservative countries anywhere according to that definition?

Again,...they're not conservatives.

The term has a very defined meaning.

Those who make the attempt to establish themselves as conservatives while dictating acceptable modes of behavior for the general populace are leftist tyrants and their ignorant ass syncophants.

,...and there's lots of them out there.

Then - according to your own explanation of things - guys like Rush Limbaugh, Newt Gingrich, Glen Beck, George Bush, Pat Buchanon and gals like Sarah Palin - are "leftists"?

You are straining credulity now...

leftism - a radical or liberal position or doctrine, especially in politics. � leftist (liberalism) 1. a political or social philosophy advocating the f reedom of the individual, parliamentary legislatures, governmental assurances of civil liberties and individual rights, and nonviolent modification of institutions to permit continued individual and social progress.

Of course they are.

Do they strike you as small government kinda people?

There's only a handful of conservatives in America,..and they fly the libertarian banner.

The rest of the talking heads are hard core, imperialist leftists.

Buchanan might get a pass,...

He's starting to come around.

Most folks with simple possession amount of MJ aren't arrested. It's a citable offense in this state, as in many others. Pay a fine and have a nice day. The drug folks that are getting locked up are those who are manufacturing or possessing felony weight of drugs. In the vast majority of states child molesters are hunted hard. They're investigated and prosecuted. It puts LE in a bad legal position, if action isn't taken in these types of situations.

thats not exactly what i meant but i understand what you are saying and dont disagree....

what i was getting at was to those saying just put a bullet in the head of the junkies.....most think its a great solution if no one in your family is one.....

were my brother to rape gal i would give the chick a bat and help hold my brother down till she is satisfied....were he to rob someone i wouldnt stand in the way of him getting locked up.....but him just liking to get stoned on heroin and does nothing eles to hurt anyone, doesnt steal to support his habit, doesnt get behind the wheel and kill someone? no way i could shoot the [bleep], hell cant even figure on putting him in jail over it.....

i hate meth and i hate tweekers but so long as they aint stealing chit or killing anyone i couldnt put a bullet in their head.....if i aint willing to do it to my flesh and blood for a similar situation i wouldnt do it to a stranger....

Lots of that.

The definition of leftism is that philosophy of government which prefers central control, monolithic law, and collective solutions. Those fighting for stricter, centrally determined, drug laws are leftists, not rightists. Rightism is a philosophy of government which prefers local and diverse solutions, preferring privately arranged solutions to publicly arranged ones, but if it must be public, it ought to be local, and diverse from one locality to the next. Rightism opposes central/collective/monolithic solutions handled through government and prefers most things be handled privately and/or locally.

The idea that Stalinism is leftist and Hitlerianism is rightist was a concoction of leftist intellectuals in anticipation of a universal condemnation of leftism that would have otherwise followed WWII. Since the left controlled higher education, they succeeded in obfuscating what had once been a very simple concept to understand. They did it through the fantastical and nonsensical model of the circular left/right political continuum, according to which Hitler's form of a centrally controlled, police state, society was of the right while Stalin's was of the left, a concept that only makes sense (left vs right wing politics, that is) when considered lineally, but which if considered lineally places both Hitler and Stalin on the same side of the scale, i.e., both on the far left. The opposite of a leftist like a Hitler, in other words, would more nearly be someone like a Patrick Henry (a far right winger), not a Joe Stalin who properly belongs at about the same position on the left/right scale as Hitler.