|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
July 16, 2013, 09:59 AM | #26 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 1, 2011
Location: Texas, land of Tex-Mex
Posts: 2,259
|
Agreed.
|
July 16, 2013, 10:03 AM | #27 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 30, 2013
Location: Colorado
Posts: 320
|
Quote:
Nothing in life is easy, milk sales are not easy or bread, water treatment, schools every thing in community has problems but non violent problems do not need sub machine guns and armies to fix them. |
|
July 16, 2013, 10:06 AM | #28 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 28, 2009
Location: North Central Illinois
Posts: 2,704
|
Quote:
Being in EMS, I have seen drug related problems that would make a normal person cringe with fear. Stop the “War on drugs” and those drug related problems would multiply out of control. Money saved by stopping the “War on drugs” would have to be spent on EMS and Hospitals. Also the morgue and funeral homes, but that part doesn’t bother me so much as it’s Darwin’s way of thinning the heard. The answer? Unfortunately, I don’t have one, short of executing drug dealers / users on the spot, I’m of little help. |
|
July 16, 2013, 10:44 AM | #29 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: March 30, 2013
Location: Colorado
Posts: 320
|
Quote:
To think that the drug war is holding back a massive tsunami of drug abuse is false and outdated as "reefer madness". Quote:
Many people in the day of alcohol prohibition wanted to do this with alcohol users. As we see today many productive members of society use alcohol in a safe manner, their is a difference between use and abuse. |
||
July 16, 2013, 11:59 AM | #30 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 16, 2002
Location: alaska
Posts: 3,498
|
Quote:
I don't know if she pulled that concept out of thin air, or had knowledge of such a system working in other countries, but I am convinced it would not work in American society. Citizens of this country are enthralled with taking everything to the extreme. Doesn't matter if its a hobby or a sport or just entertainment, we want to see the biggest, the baddest, the fattest, the fastest, the super ultra mostest extreme of anything and everything. That same mentality also applies to drug addicts.
__________________
"Every man alone is sincere; at the entrance of a second person hypocrisy begins." - Ralph Waldo Emerson "People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use." - Soren Kierkegaard |
|
July 16, 2013, 01:01 PM | #31 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 15, 2011
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 317
|
Quote:
If society cannot find a solution to a difficult problem, it should realize its limitations, and defer, rather than creating "solutions" which are as bad as, or worse than, the problems themselves. |
|
July 16, 2013, 01:20 PM | #32 |
Staff
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 28,617
|
You will never solve the "problem" completely, until you can change the fact that people like to get "high". And that's not going to happen anytime soon, if ever.
Ancient people developed brewing and fermenting, and found plants that could be eaten or smoked to make them feel good. That hasn't changed, and isn't going to. I see two separate, but intertwined problems. First, that (some) drugs are illegal, and second, how we go about enforcing those laws. We are constantly hearing about the "costs to society", and while there is a validity to the concept, I think we have gone well overboard with our concern about it. We too often look at results from a group, without considering that the group is made up of individuals. The focus on possession and use of drugs as criminal, is, I feel, the wrong way to deal with the problem. What people do under the influence is what causes the problem, not the possession of a plant or compound. A drunk driver nearly killed my family. It wasn't the beer that made that happen, it was the drinker. And what he choose to do after drinking. In some ways, its a lot like gun control. The problem isn't the guns, its what some people do with them. And what is the answer our govt and (some) segments of our society give us? A top down war on things, more than on harmful actions. Of course, if you don't have a thing, you cannot do bad with it. So we all get forced to live so that stupid people are slightly less likely to be stupid? As a people, we are kind, caring and considerate (of course individuals can be petty and spiteful). We dislike seeing anyone hurt or suffering, even through their own actions. This is a noble sentiment, but there are limits to which this is practical, or effective. AND those limits must be balanced against our personal liberties and freedoms. We make compromises to our freedoms all day, everyday. That's how society functions. We have set rules, and generally follow them. About virtually everything. However, where one sets the rules, and how they are enforced is critical to our liberty. Our history is full of things that are now crimes, that once were not. We've tried a lot of things, and often the "solution" only made the problem worse, or actually created more problems than it solved. To my eyes, the war on drugs has created more, and worse problems than it has solved. In war, when you consistently fail to achieve your objectives, its time to seriously consider changing tactics. I think that's quite apt to the war on drugs as well.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better. |
July 16, 2013, 01:28 PM | #33 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 13, 2007
Location: Whereever Uncle Sam wants to put me
Posts: 415
|
Maybe making the penalty for having drugs something like... using every bit of drugs you are found with within 10 minutes... it would get rid of the market pretty fast, and make marijuana legal.
Yes, I am being sarcastic... sort of.
__________________
Trigger control: The skillful manipulation of the trigger, which causes the weapon to fire, while maintaining sight alignment and sight picture. |
July 16, 2013, 01:58 PM | #34 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 4,436
|
Quote:
This issue contains some extremes that can cloak substantial agreement, and that when it ignored or conflated can stoke an illusory disagreement. I would guess that very few people are enthused about locking up people who smoke marijuana. 30 years ago, Bill Buckley wrote about the injustice of sentencing a young man to 20 years of incarceration over a small amount of marijuana. On the other hand, crack and methamphetamines are grotesquely addictive and all too often can be the first step on a short and ugly journey to death. I believe it would be difficult to persuasively argue that the prohibition on crack and methamphetamines is worse than the problems we would see from legalizing their use.
__________________
http://www.npboards.com/index.php |
|
July 16, 2013, 02:13 PM | #35 | |
Junior member
Join Date: December 20, 2012
Location: The "Gunshine State"
Posts: 1,981
|
Quote:
Too many are too concerned with what they DONT have and that leads to a lot of societal ills, envy, grudges, depression, etc., all feeding the drug abuse issue'. Might as well tax it, regulate it, ala Nevada and prostitution, and use the police resources for better things. As to the title of the thread, the police where I live have been a paramilitary force for some time, including having APC's, breaching teams, SWAT, etc. Maybe if they spent more time back walking beats, talking to the locals and getting to know them better, instead of waiting for something to go bonkers and then react like a SEAL team, they would have a better image, folks might get along better, and some of the crime issues might lessen |
|
July 16, 2013, 03:37 PM | #36 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 26, 2012
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 779
|
Having lived in California for 5 years, the Marijuana, Coke, LSD, and Ecstacy/MDMA trade is practically a joke. While Mary J might be partially legal, the other three are far from it. Legalizing all 3 would not effect their consumption at all, it would only lower prices and get the financial leverage off illegal drug cartels.
For anyone that is older and doesn't believe me, go to an electric music carnival. 90% of the people there are on Acid or Coke or Ecstacy, or a combination. That's not even including pot or alcohol. Mind you the one I went to (I was the designated driver, I have a severe dislike for real drugs like this) had over 100,000 people. EDC in Las Vegas brought 4-5 times as many people. These concerts get these numbers all over the country. I want you all to realize how much Ecstacy/Pot/Acid is being consumed, just on special bi-annual events. Millions of pills at each show. One of my best friends is an associate at PWC and another at NY Life. They are in the minority of those who don't do coke on a regular basis. Anyone who thinks the War on Drugs is anything more than a moneypit sham is going to extensive lengths to remain delusional. I'm sorry if I sound terse and confrontational, but it is literally the least effective enforcement of law in the country. "If you look at the drug war from a purely economic point of view, the role of the government is to protect the drug cartel. That's literally true."-Milton Friedman
__________________
I told the new me, "Meet me at the bus station and hold a sign that reads: 'Today is the first day of the rest of your life.'" But the old me met me with a sign that read: "Welcome back." Who you are is not a function of where you are. -Off Minor |
July 16, 2013, 03:38 PM | #37 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 4,436
|
As a general matter, I cannot agree that the "War on [....]" formula can be problematic to the degree it invites a suspension of our ordinary caution.
Quote:
I have yet to encounter the group who do not mirror the basic bell curve of humanity generally with a small number of extraordinary people at one end, and a small number of people one would rather not meet at the other end. POs, like attorneys, have an inherent PR problem: when most people encounter one, they are not having a good day.
__________________
http://www.npboards.com/index.php |
|
July 16, 2013, 03:38 PM | #38 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 20,064
|
Folks, a generalized insult to all police doesn't do us any good. We have members who are police and serve.
Saying that all police are XYZ is as useful as saying all gun owners are rabid nuts. So let's skip that. I've deleted some. Next time is an infraction. Thanks Glenn
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens |
July 16, 2013, 03:49 PM | #39 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 12, 2007
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 530
|
I can not remember a single burglary, scrap metal theft, or shoplifter in my 17 years in LE that was not to buy drugs. I have arrested a heroin addict that was doing 6-10 burglaries a day. Every day, he got up and went stealing to buy heroin. Thats it. I had one that I investigated where he stole the jewelry box of an 80+ year old man. Took what he thought was worth money and chucked the rest in a dumpster. That jewelery box cam from India. The victim brought it back from WW2 and had it for 60 years, until a heroin addict stole it, and then tossed it in the trash. That is one arrest out of many.
Making drugs legal is not the answer. |
July 16, 2013, 04:45 PM | #40 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 26, 2012
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 779
|
Quote:
How the government wastes my money is my problem
__________________
I told the new me, "Meet me at the bus station and hold a sign that reads: 'Today is the first day of the rest of your life.'" But the old me met me with a sign that read: "Welcome back." Who you are is not a function of where you are. -Off Minor |
|
July 16, 2013, 04:53 PM | #41 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 12, 2007
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 530
|
It could be your problem when they steal from you, rob you, etc.
|
July 16, 2013, 04:53 PM | #42 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 30, 2013
Location: Colorado
Posts: 320
|
Quote:
yeah it is a waste of life but at least it is only theirs and they would not be robbing innocent citizens to support the contraband business. |
|
July 16, 2013, 05:00 PM | #43 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 12, 2007
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 530
|
I just don't see how making it legal will drive the price down. Heroin is $8.00 a bag by me. There is no way that making it legal, making it FDA inspected and compliant, taxing it, and selling it in stores and storefronts will make the cost go down. I just don't see that working.
I also don't see the Gov making it legal and not doing all of the above. Just let the drugs come in, and be sold, and be legal with no Gov regulation or taxation. Not happening, IMHO. |
July 16, 2013, 05:33 PM | #44 |
Staff
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 13,057
|
General drug policy is off-topic for this forum. Let's stick to the article and its arguments.
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change. --Randall Munroe |
July 16, 2013, 06:38 PM | #45 | |
Junior member
Join Date: December 20, 2012
Location: The "Gunshine State"
Posts: 1,981
|
Quote:
Sounds like the liberal education system -completely self-serving These folks COULD be doing something, but too much politics/empire building going on - at payer's expense |
|
July 16, 2013, 06:41 PM | #46 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 12, 2007
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 530
|
I don't know why he wasn't in jail. He should have been. But he wasn't.
|
July 16, 2013, 06:42 PM | #47 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 12, 2007
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 530
|
And I just read Tom's warning. No more drug talk.
|
July 16, 2013, 11:00 PM | #48 | |
Staff
Join Date: October 13, 2001
Posts: 3,355
|
Quote:
Drug prohibition is unconstitutional. We had a constitutional amendment for alcohol prohibition. Where's the constitutional amendment for drug prohibition? The legislative branch is not permitted to pass whatever laws they think will be popular, and the executive branch is not permitted to enforce them. That's not rule of law, and it's not how a constitutional republic is supposed to work. The Legislative and Executive can pass and enforce unconstitutional laws, and they have, but if you want to know why people disrespect the rule of law or why certain social constructs are crumbling, Government not respecting the highest law of the land figures into it somewhere. I would say complexity of the law is another. The idea that you have to go look a substance up on the DEA's website before growing, buying, selling, or ingesting it is... well, I don't have words for it that are appropriate in polite company.
__________________
“The egg hatched...” “...the egg hatched... and a hundred baby spiders came out...” (blade runner) “Who are you?” “A friend. I'm here to prevent you from making a mistake.” “You have no idea what I'm doing here, friend.” “In specific terms, no, but I swore an oath to protect the world...” (continuum) “It's a goal you won't understand until later. Your job is to make sure he doesn't achieve the goal.” (bsg) |
|
July 16, 2013, 11:22 PM | #49 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 25, 2013
Location: Keystone Heights, Florida
Posts: 3,084
|
tyme, if I can respectfully go down the line of conversation you've opened (sorry Mr. Servo!), what makes you think it is unconstitutional? I am quite curious to hear.
I realize that may sound sarcastic but I really am interested in hearing your opinion. Anyways, I think it's very easy to see how DEA and many other police organizations are becoming paramilitary. This does not mean that they abide by the same rules, but with their armored cars, automatic weapons, sniper rifles, breaching tactics, confiscation, raiding, lockdowns, patrols (i.e. Boston), I think the argument could be made. However, is having military qualities enough to establish a military? Does it need to be a standing militia? Are the police expected to help take up a fight if there is a war? On American soil? Off? Are they subject to martial law? If not, are they overstepping their boundaries by acting like the military without operating under the same constraints? I think these questions will help clarify the initial question. |
July 16, 2013, 11:51 PM | #50 |
Staff
Join Date: October 13, 2001
Posts: 3,355
|
I hope that arguing that drug laws are unconstitutional isn't off topic.
What do you mean, why? Isn't the argument crystal clear based on the constitutional amendment that was required for alcohol prohibition?
__________________
“The egg hatched...” “...the egg hatched... and a hundred baby spiders came out...” (blade runner) “Who are you?” “A friend. I'm here to prevent you from making a mistake.” “You have no idea what I'm doing here, friend.” “In specific terms, no, but I swore an oath to protect the world...” (continuum) “It's a goal you won't understand until later. Your job is to make sure he doesn't achieve the goal.” (bsg) |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|