Police Brutality

[quote]lanchefan1 wrote:
eigieinhamr wrote:
phil_leotardo wrote:

They could claim that, but they would not have a shred of evidence to back up their ridiculous fabrications. Besides, the harshest laws should be applied to the root source of laws, i.e. the people who actually produce it from raw materials.

Most of the producers of the raw materials are probably just poor villagers trying to earn enough to provide for their families, under the control of the drug syndicates.

But seriously if I want to take Meth or Heroin you shouldn’t be able to send armed thugs to attack me because of it.

In many cases with Meth this is not true, it is addicts cooking it in their residence with kids being exposed to the toxic off gases and waste from its production.

So unfortunately if you want to produce meth I’m all for armed thugs coming to get you.[/quote]

We could build a designated meth cooking area and meet at sunday afternoon for a beer and watch them blow up.

We could even bet on different trailers.

Just not on the internet.

Because that might hurt the children.

[quote]orion wrote:
lanchefan1 wrote:
eigieinhamr wrote:
phil_leotardo wrote:

They could claim that, but they would not have a shred of evidence to back up their ridiculous fabrications. Besides, the harshest laws should be applied to the root source of laws, i.e. the people who actually produce it from raw materials.

Most of the producers of the raw materials are probably just poor villagers trying to earn enough to provide for their families, under the control of the drug syndicates.

But seriously if I want to take Meth or Heroin you shouldn’t be able to send armed thugs to attack me because of it.

In many cases with Meth this is not true, it is addicts cooking it in their residence with kids being exposed to the toxic off gases and waste from its production.

So unfortunately if you want to produce meth I’m all for armed thugs coming to get you.

We could build a designated meth cooking area and meet at sunday afternoon for a beer and watch them blow up.

We could even bet on different trailers.

Just not on the internet.

Because that might hurt the children.

[/quote]

Yes I detect yoru sarcasm, the whole idea I’m doing it to “save the kids”. I’m sure you have looked up what ingredients go into meth. If you can tell me for one second that either smoking or injecting some of those products are safe?

And I would be all for the legalization of these products the only problem is that we humans have this problem with abuse. Whether they be legal or illegal substances (you can draw the gamut from tobacco to herion on this).

[quote]lanchefan1 wrote:
orion wrote:
lanchefan1 wrote:
eigieinhamr wrote:
phil_leotardo wrote:

They could claim that, but they would not have a shred of evidence to back up their ridiculous fabrications. Besides, the harshest laws should be applied to the root source of laws, i.e. the people who actually produce it from raw materials.

Most of the producers of the raw materials are probably just poor villagers trying to earn enough to provide for their families, under the control of the drug syndicates.

But seriously if I want to take Meth or Heroin you shouldn’t be able to send armed thugs to attack me because of it.

In many cases with Meth this is not true, it is addicts cooking it in their residence with kids being exposed to the toxic off gases and waste from its production.

So unfortunately if you want to produce meth I’m all for armed thugs coming to get you.

We could build a designated meth cooking area and meet at sunday afternoon for a beer and watch them blow up.

We could even bet on different trailers.

Just not on the internet.

Because that might hurt the children.

Yes I detect yoru sarcasm, the whole idea I’m doing it to “save the kids”. I’m sure you have looked up what ingredients go into meth. If you can tell me for one second that either smoking or injecting some of those products are safe?

And I would be all for the legalization of these products the only problem is that we humans have this problem with abuse. Whether they be legal or illegal substances (you can draw the gamut from tobacco to herion on this).[/quote]

Let me introduce a radical new idea for you.

Either you have the freedom to fuck up and fail epically or you are not free at all.

Furthermore, if someone saves you at gunpoint from your vices you will never learn to outgrow them, you will never set an example for other people, you will never master your own live BUT you will have learned to bow to people with guns.

Right now there are people who want to outlaw smoking because they are too weak to quit.

Apparently they have learned their lesson well.

Let me introduce a radical new idea for you.

Either you have the freedom to fuck up and fail epically or you are not free at all.

Furthermore, if someone saves you at gunpoint from your vices you will never learn to outgrow them, you will never set an example for other people, you will never master your own live BUT you will have learned to bow to people with guns.

Right now there are people who want to outlaw smoking because they are too weak to quit.

Apparently they have learned their lesson well.
[/quote]

You’re not introducing a radical new idea for me, I have failed at many things over the course of my lifetime and made it through the other side.

I am just in a unique position to see what addictions do to people and the strain it imposes on several systems at once. I’m not advocating straight out prohibition, but if people think the solution is to make everything legal we have seen to fine examples (alchohal and tobacco) that prove people overall are not strong enough to overcome an addiction. A person is but as a group most are not. Many people have the ability to fuck up and fail all on their own, I just don’t like being on the tab for their fuck up (i.e. CPOD pt in their 60’s lifelong smoker who still won’t put the cig down).

Also the idea that taxing these products will curb their use can be pointed out as not true also (see the above legalized examples).

And it is apperant that by a person saving themselves or at gunpoint does not matter by the amount of relapses that occur.

[quote]lanchefan1 wrote:

roducts will curb their use can be pointed out as not true also (see the above legalized examples).
[/quote]

You clearly know nothing about the topic if you think this. People’s consumption of alcohol is very price dependent, raises in the absolute and relative cost will lead to less consumption.
Whether it’s right to have sin taxes is one thing, but on some level they do work.

[quote]eigieinhamr wrote:
lanchefan1 wrote:

roducts will curb their use can be pointed out as not true also (see the above legalized examples).

You clearly know nothing about the topic if you think this. People’s consumption of alcohol is very price dependent, raises in the absolute and relative cost will lead to less consumption.
Whether it’s right to have sin taxes is one thing, but on some level they do work.[/quote]

Yeah, they do create black markets.

Most smuggled drug in the world?

Cigarettes!

[quote]eigieinhamr wrote:
lanchefan1 wrote:

roducts will curb their use can be pointed out as not true also (see the above legalized examples).

You clearly know nothing about the topic if you think this. People’s consumption of alcohol is very price dependent, raises in the absolute and relative cost will lead to less consumption.
Whether it’s right to have sin taxes is one thing, but on some level they do work.[/quote]

Really! Worked in a liquor store for several years, it is not price dependent. People just buy cheaper stuff. If you started out drinking Absolute, you move to Smirnoff, then McCormik and finally Skol (less than $2.00 for a pint). I’ve seen people come by everyday at the same time and could have their bottle sitting on the counter and their change cause I knew EXACTLY what they would pay with.

Also with my career now I can’t begin to count how many times I have taken the same person back to the hospital because they were a drunk who was experiencing nausea and or vomiting. While thier niehbor stands there with the persons kids and watches us wheel them out the door again. Legal or illegal it doesn’t matter an addict will find a way to get the fix they need.

[quote]lanchefan1 wrote:
eigieinhamr wrote:
lanchefan1 wrote:

roducts will curb their use can be pointed out as not true also (see the above legalized examples).

You clearly know nothing about the topic if you think this. People’s consumption of alcohol is very price dependent, raises in the absolute and relative cost will lead to less consumption.
Whether it’s right to have sin taxes is one thing, but on some level they do work.

Really! Worked in a liquor store for several years, it is not price dependent. People just buy cheaper stuff. If you started out drinking Absolute, you move to Smirnoff, then McCormik and finally Skol (less than $2.00 for a pint). I’ve seen people come by everyday at the same time and could have their bottle sitting on the counter and their change cause I knew EXACTLY what they would pay with.

Also with my career now I can’t begin to count how many times I have taken the same person back to the hospital because they were a drunk who was experiencing nausea and or vomiting. While thier niehbor stands there with the persons kids and watches us wheel them out the door again. Legal or illegal it doesn’t matter an addict will find a way to get the fix they need.[/quote]

I had to do a study on alcohol price and consumption, so if you want some reputable sources for what I said I can provide.

[quote]eigieinhamr wrote:

Most of the producers of the raw materials are probably just poor villagers trying to earn enough to provide for their families, under the control of the drug syndicates.[/quote]

The poor villagers could easily farm something else. Things that don’t kill, poison people and make criminal syndicates wealthy.

[quote]eigieinhamr wrote:
But seriously if I want to take Meth or Heroin you shouldn’t be able to send armed thugs to attack me because of it.[/quote]

I fail to see the connection between yourself and people involved in the cultivation of heroin or cocaine.

[quote]orion wrote:

Let me introduce a radical new idea for you.

Either you have the freedom to fuck up and fail epically or you are not free at all.[/quote]

Actually hard drugs like crack, heroin and meth decrease the amount of freedom that many people have. There are certain neighborhoods in America where people can’t even walk to the corner store without fear of getting injured or killed due to those drugs. Or people that get their hard earned pay or things stolen by them by people who would not otherwise do these terrible things unless they were compelled by drug addiction to do so.

Making them legal won’t do shit either; those kind of hard drugs drive the sanity out of people and into criminal means to support their habit.

[quote]orion wrote:
Furthermore, if someone saves you at gunpoint from your vices you will never learn to outgrow them, you will never set an example for other people, you will never master your own live BUT you will have learned to bow to people with guns.

Right now there are people who want to outlaw smoking because they are too weak to quit.

Apparently they have learned their lesson well.
[/quote]

But there are plenty of people prone to these genetic traits like addiction. If they were weak and just killed themselves, I might be able to live with that social Darwinian approach to weeding them out. The problem is, is that their addiction turns them criminal sociopaths who hurt, kill and rob other people.

[quote]phil_leotardo wrote:

But there are plenty of people prone to these genetic traits like addiction. If they were weak and just killed themselves, I might be able to live with that social Darwinian approach to weeding them out. The problem is, is that their addiction turns them criminal sociopaths who hurt, kill and rob other people.

[/quote]

I see alcohol causing far more crime than drugs. Time to ban?

[quote]phil_leotardo wrote:
orion wrote:

Actually hard drugs like crack, heroin and meth decrease the amount of freedom that many people have. There are certain neighborhoods in America where people can’t even walk to the corner store without fear of getting injured or killed due to those drugs. Or people that get their hard earned pay or things stolen by them by people who would not otherwise do these terrible things unless they were compelled by drug addiction to do so.

Making them legal won’t do shit either; those kind of hard drugs drive the sanity out of people and into criminal means to support their habit.
[/quote]

Most of that crime is directly related to the illegality of drugs. There will be addicts that commit theft and the like in order to fund their habit, and they should be dealt with. However, the vast majority of the violent crime associated with drugs comes from the drug cartels.

Oh and people are already getting their “hard earned pay” stolen at the rate of billions a year by the government to pay for this war on drugs.

[quote]Unaware wrote:

Most of that crime is directly related to the illegality of drugs. There will be addicts that commit theft and the like in order to fund their habit, and they should be dealt with. [/quote]

I disagree with that statement. Those drugs both develop tolerance and sever addiction for the user which turns people into sociopaths who care only about their next high. This is why the usage of these drugs and criminality go hand and hand. Making them decriminalized or legalized would not change this inherent trait about them either.

Oh yeah…they would NEVER be able to be legal because the FDA would never approve them and no pharmaceutical company would touch them for many reasons.

[quote]Unaware wrote:
However, the vast majority of the violent crime associated with drugs comes from the drug cartels. [/quote]

I disagree with that statement too. Besides the obvious fact that junkies commit violent crimes to support their drug habits, many low level drug dealers are involved in constant gun battles over a myriad of things: profits, turf, score settling,etc.

[quote]Unaware wrote:
Oh and people are already getting their “hard earned pay” stolen at the rate of billions a year by the government to pay for this war on drugs. [/quote]

Actually I don’t like the way the government is fighting the war on drugs; it is akin to clipping leaves off of a plant here and there instead of uprooting it to kill the plant.

Its not a matter of opinion.

False, many of these drugs are already produced by pharmaceutical companies.

  • Methamphetamine: Approved by the FDA for treatment of ADHD, Formally produced by Abbott labs, now producted by Lundbeck Pharmaceuticals under the brand name Desoxyn. Home

  • Diamorphine(Heroin): Produced by Novartis for terminal pain treatment. Used in the United Kingdom.

-Benzodiazepines: Numerous benzo derivatives are produced by many different pharmentaceitucal companies.

Most of these low level dealers would be eliminated if drugs were legalized. Junkies do and will continue to commit crimes in order to get drug money. However with the supply no longer squeezed as it is today, the price would inevitably drop requiring far less theft to support their habit. Regardless the overall crime committed by junkies is far far lower than that of organized criminals in the Drug Trafficking business.

How do you suggest the government go about eliminating the plants? Most of these drugs are grown in far off regions of the world. Using herbicides on poor farmers in sovereign nations is going to inspire a new generation of anti-American radicals. Not to mention the cost.

The point is not that drugs are good, or that drugs do not cause harm. Even if legalized drugs would still kill people, incite crime, addict kids, waste taxpayer money. The point is that making them illegal makes all of these things worse.

-It encourages violent cartels and gangs and worse yet provides them with funding. According to the National Drug Intelligence Center Mexican Drug Trafficking Organizations represent “the greatest organized crime threat in the united states” and that “Mexican and Colombian DTOs generate, remove, and launder between $18 billion and $39 billion in wholesale drug proceeds annually.” http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/concern/18862/ndic_2009.pdf

-According to the study mentioned above, the Federal Government alone spent $14 billion enforcing drug laws, and the DEA Budget has increased almost every year from $65 million in 1972 to over $2 Billion in 2007. http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/agency/staffing.htm

-Despite all of this the overall drug use rate has increased since 1970 with 31% of people admitting to ever using an illicit drug in 1970 compared to 41% in 2001. Office of National Drug Control Policy | The White House

-“The number of drug-related emergency department episodes increased from 323,100 in 1978 to an all time high of 638,484 in 2001.” Source: As above.

Obviously what were doing isn’t working. Time to switch it up.

[quote]phil_leotardo wrote:
orion wrote:

Let me introduce a radical new idea for you.

Either you have the freedom to fuck up and fail epically or you are not free at all.

Actually hard drugs like crack, heroin and meth decrease the amount of freedom that many people have. There are certain neighborhoods in America where people can’t even walk to the corner store without fear of getting injured or killed due to those drugs. Or people that get their hard earned pay or things stolen by them by people who would not otherwise do these terrible things unless they were compelled by drug addiction to do so.

Making them legal won’t do shit either; those kind of hard drugs drive the sanity out of people and into criminal means to support their habit.

orion wrote:
Furthermore, if someone saves you at gunpoint from your vices you will never learn to outgrow them, you will never set an example for other people, you will never master your own live BUT you will have learned to bow to people with guns.

Right now there are people who want to outlaw smoking because they are too weak to quit.

Apparently they have learned their lesson well.

But there are plenty of people prone to these genetic traits like addiction. If they were weak and just killed themselves, I might be able to live with that social Darwinian approach to weeding them out. The problem is, is that their addiction turns them criminal sociopaths who hurt, kill and rob other people.

[/quote]

All of them? Some of them?

And robbing is surely a function of the price of drugs?

I mean, a weak person would not rob someone if the price of their fix was 2$?

I do not think that the problems of drug use would disappear with legalization of drugs.

The problems caused by prohibition though would.

Since that would free dozens of billions of dollars we could afford to give every addict his personal MD to take care of him.

[quote]Unaware wrote:

I disagree with that statement. Those drugs both develop tolerance and sever addiction for the user which turns people into sociopaths who care only about their next high. This is why the usage of these drugs and criminality go hand and hand. Making them decriminalized or legalized would not change this inherent trait about them either.

Its not a matter of opinion. ]

Oh yeah…they would NEVER be able to be legal because the FDA would never approve them and no pharmaceutical company would touch them for many reasons.

False, many of these drugs are already produced by pharmaceutical companies.

  • Methamphetamine: Approved by the FDA for treatment of ADHD, Formally produced by Abbott labs, now producted by Lundbeck Pharmaceuticals under the brand name Desoxyn. Home

Let me re-phrase this statement then: no pharmaceutical company will touch it for the off label recreational usage that you are suggesting. Even doctors are weary of prescribing methamphetamine HCL even for ADHD: http://mental-health.emedtv.com/methamphetamine/prescription-methamphetamine.html

[quote]Unaware wrote:

  • Diamorphine(Heroin): Produced by Novartis for terminal pain treatment. Used in the United Kingdom. [/quote]

Yes but illegal in the US. Again… no doc will prescribe this for off recreational usage.

[quote]Unaware wrote:
-Benzodiazepines: Numerous benzo derivatives are produced by many different pharmentaceitucal companies. [/quote]

Don’t see what those have to do with coke,heroin or meth.

[quote]Unaware wrote:
I disagree with that statement too. Besides the obvious fact that junkies commit violent crimes to support their drug habits, many low level drug dealers are involved in constant gun battles over a myriad of things: profits, turf, score settling,etc.

Most of these low level dealers would be eliminated if drugs were legalized. Junkies do and will continue to commit crimes in order to get drug money. However with the supply no longer squeezed as it is today, the price would inevitably drop requiring far less theft to support their habit. Regardless the overall crime committed by junkies is far far lower than that of organized criminals in the Drug Trafficking business. [/quote]

The government would tax the shit out of those industries if they were sold like cigarettes.
If doctors prescribed them to people, in our litigious society both the docs and pharmaceutical industries that actually produced these drugs would both be getting sued out the wazoo too. The places that sell these drugs better have machine gun armed guards behind the counter too (or do you think that the unemployed thugs would give up criminal activities?). Not to mention that if you legalized these drugs, you would have more addicts too.

Actually I don’t like the way the government is fighting the war on drugs; it is akin to clipping leaves off of a plant here and there instead of uprooting it to kill the plant.

[quote]Unaware wrote:
How do you suggest the government go about eliminating the plants? Most of these drugs are grown in far off regions of the world. Using herbicides on poor farmers in sovereign nations is going to inspire a new generation of anti-American radicals. Not to mention the cost. [/quote]

Most people don’t know this, but in 10 or 20 years or so there is going to be an agricultural crisis in the world; the consumption of corn is particularly critical as developing countries like China consume FAR LESS meat than America does, despite having a way larger population than the US does; however, meat consumption correlates with GNP and as China’s economy has been growing so has their meat consumption. There are also ethanol mandates cutting into the corn supply too.

A country like Columbia supplies 90% of the Cocaine and 50% of the Heroin in America.
If the coke plants alone were replaced by other crops (corn, switch grass) they could have a thriving ag/ethanol industry there. We need to replace the illicit drugs with other crops.

[quote]Unaware wrote:
The point is not that drugs are good, or that drugs do not cause harm. Even if legalized drugs would still kill people, incite crime, addict kids, waste taxpayer money. The point is that making them illegal makes all of these things worse.

-It encourages violent cartels and gangs and worse yet provides them with funding. According to the National Drug Intelligence Center Mexican Drug Trafficking Organizations represent “the greatest organized crime threat in the united states” and that “Mexican and Colombian DTOs generate, remove, and launder between $18 billion and $39 billion in wholesale drug proceeds annually.” http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/concern/18862/ndic_2009.pdf

-According to the study mentioned above, the Federal Government alone spent $14 billion enforcing drug laws, and the DEA Budget has increased almost every year from $65 million in 1972 to over $2 Billion in 2007. http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/agency/staffing.htm

-Despite all of this the overall drug use rate has increased since 1970 with 31% of people admitting to ever using an illicit drug in 1970 compared to 41% in 2001. Office of National Drug Control Policy - The White House

-“The number of drug-related emergency department episodes increased from 323,100 in 1978 to an all time high of 638,484 in 2001.” Source: As above.

Obviously what were doing isn’t working. Time to switch it up.
[/quote]

That’s why we need to destroy the plants and control our borders better.

[quote]orion wrote:

All of them? Some of them?[/quote]

Nooooo… They are a tiny minority of drug users. There is also a huge movement here to de-criminalize drugs like coke, meth and heroin too. Forget the stuff you read in the American papers about taxing people out of smoking; it’s just a fringe element.

Why Dr. Phil and Oprah are going to be featuring a weeks worth about successful professionals who hit the ol crack pipe at work or soccer moms who shoot up before they pick little Johnny at practice…

You should come to NYC one time, go to the South Bronx with your blackberry and commiserate with some addicts sometime…

[quote]orion wrote:
And robbing is surely a function of the price of drugs?[/quote]

It’s more like the fact that people who do those drugs like to be high all of the time and that work detracts away from this. Not to mention that they don’t give a fuck about anything else besides getting high.

[quote]orion wrote:
I mean, a weak person would not rob someone if the price of their fix was 2$?[/quote]

Try getting a pack of cigs for that price.

[quote]orion wrote:
I do not think that the problems of drug use would disappear with legalization of drugs.

The problems caused by prohibition though would.

Since that would free dozens of billions of dollars we could afford to give every addict his personal MD to take care of him.
[/quote]

Great… so I get to subsidize medical treatment for them too?

I find people bitching about police brutality very amusing. In this day and age criminals have more rights than the police officers do, it is pathetic.

[quote]ironmaniac508 wrote:
I find people bitching about police brutality very amusing. In this day and age criminals have more rights than the police officers do, it is pathetic. [/quote]

FUNNY:) thanks

[quote]phil_leotardo wrote:
orion wrote:

All of them? Some of them?

Nooooo… They are a tiny minority of drug users. There is also a huge movement here to de-criminalize drugs like coke, meth and heroin too. Forget the stuff you read in the American papers about taxing people out of smoking; it’s just a fringe element.

Why Dr. Phil and Oprah are going to be featuring a weeks worth about successful professionals who hit the ol crack pipe at work or soccer moms who shoot up before they pick little Johnny at practice…

You should come to NYC one time, go to the South Bronx with your blackberry and commiserate with some addicts sometime…

orion wrote:
And robbing is surely a function of the price of drugs?

It’s more like the fact that people who do those drugs like to be high all of the time and that work detracts away from this. Not to mention that they don’t give a fuck about anything else besides getting high.
orion wrote:
I mean, a weak person would not rob someone if the price of their fix was 2$?

Try getting a pack of cigs for that price.
orion wrote:
I do not think that the problems of drug use would disappear with legalization of drugs.

The problems caused by prohibition though would.

Since that would free dozens of billions of dollars we could afford to give every addict his personal MD to take care of him.

Great… so I get to subsidize medical treatment for them too?

[/quote]

There are some terrible drugs out there that have ruined many lives, but our present approach is very expensive, with very little results, you say ratchet up our losing efforts. Do you not think that that would just make a bigger loss?