Another example of confirming the obvious

evhudsons

Most people who have been breaking laws have never been in court or jail so that type of punishment doesn't work. What level of deterrent exists is only at street level. Fear of jail is more rhetorical than real. Peer or societal pressure is the best deterrent. I think the country needs to re-evaluate the current prohibition laws. Prohibition never went away, it only was selectively amended to allow alcohol. If a drug is common enough to be seen in semi-public and is tolerated by otherwise decent members of society then it is not viewed as a dangerous or immoral drug to many people. Those drugs may need to be evaluated. The other drugs are so extreme that even "drug users" would not have any experience with them or desire to do them. "common drugs" would be pot, cocaine, ecstasy, and maybe mushrooms or LSD. Many people have been around it or knew someone around it. I have never seen nor have I heard of anyone I knew that have ever been around heroin, crystal meth, PCP, or many other nefarious and truly dangerous drugs. Cocaine can be very dangerous but it potentially could be controlled enough to make it less dangerous if supplied easily enough. It's so addictive it may not be repealed, but it is a theoretical possibility to have it successful repealed.
If you remove the more common drugs seemingly accepted by many people in society although not the majority then we really have such a small group left that it would be much easier to treat these people and much cheaper for taxpayers because we don't have the prisons filled. Prisons should be for real menaces to society. Those people won't change for the most part.

The dutch have experimented with some form of tolerance which is in effect a form of legalization. They have had many years of petty crime but no major cartels dismembering folks.

The United States of America legalized another drug which led to many deaths of innocent people. Alcohol is a major factor in road deaths, but in comparison to creating the crime syndicate of rum runners it is accepted that legalization of alcohol is better than illegalization of alcohol. We tax it, and we can openly support addicts in this society without having to put them in jail.

DarqueKnight

tonyb wrote: »

Punishment has no fear because the punishment isn't really punishment when you get 3 squares a day, tv, recreation. Thats just killing time, not punishment.

Obviously most (sane) criminals have some fear of punishment because they take some measures to conceal their crimes. No one in their right mind considers prison to be "just killing time". Some people are willing to risk their safety and freedom for the compensation of illegal financial gain. In other words, their greed outweighs the fear of punishment.

Think about how it would be for you to be under house arrest with another same sex criminal, your "housemate", "Bubba", for the next five years. You most of the comforts of home, but you can't leave your house, you are locked in under armed guard...and you can't have any sex...at least, not the kind of sex you want. Even if you like same-sex sex, you probably aren't going to be attracted to your housemate in any way. But what if your much larger and much stronger housemate is attracted to you but you aren't attracted to him? Do you consider sexual assault to be "punishment", or is it just another way to kill time?

Weather permitting, you will be allowed a couple hours of "fresh air" in your backyard under the watchful eye of armed guards. Bubba always looks forward to your exciting "touch football" sessions in the backyard. The guards like to watch your "games".

Also, no Internet access. Your mail and telephone conversations would be rationed, monitored and censored. No privacy either...there are cameras in every room...even the toilet...just like in a "real" prison where there is always someone looking at you, whether its your cellmate looking (leering) at you when you are using the in-cell toilet or a prison guard looking (leering) at you when you are taking a shower. By the way, your kitchen appliances, utensils and dishes will be removed. Your meals will be brought to you at assigned times and served on paper plates with soft plastic utensils. You eat whatever gruel the state wants to serve you. Wake up time and bed time are controlled by the state. No late night tv or reading. Lights out promptly at 10pm. Lights on at 6am with "roll call" at 6:15am.

I assume you would not consider the above to be real punishment because the advantages of free food, tv, and recreation, far outweigh the loss of personal freedom, privacy, and satisfying consensual sex. After all, you're just "killing time" for five years...it would be no more difficult than a walk in the park on a bright sunny spring day.

Gatecrasher

tonyb wrote: »

Punishment has no fear because the punishment isn't really punishment when you get 3 squares a day, tv, recreation. Thats just killing time, not punishment.

How much time have you spent in prison? It ain't no cakewalk. Not by any stretch of the imagination.

tonyb wrote: »

Legalize drugs and a new one will pop up you can't get.

Let me clue you in Tony. There aren't any drugs on the planet you can't already purchase illegally.

DarqueKnight

Gatecrasher wrote: »

How much time have you spent in prison? It ain't no cakewalk. Not by any stretch of the imagination.

I've never been imprisoned, but I can fully understand that it ain't no cakewalk (or walk in the park).

I have been standed on airplanes, stranded in airports and hotels and prevented from leaving home, all due to adverse weather. I didn't particularly enjoy those experiences. By extrapolation, I can see where I wouldn't enjoy being an involuntary guest at "the rock" for any length of time.

One recurring theme among repentant ex-prisoners is that they say they never realized how precious freedom was until it was taken away from them.

nooshinjohn

DarqueKnight wrote: »

One recurring theme among repentant ex-prisoners is that they say they never realized how precious freedom was until it was taken away from them.

I have a very bad feeling that we are ALL going to find out how true this statement is real soon...

DarqueKnight

Why do you say that?

polkfarmboy

One thing that really struck me when I was locked up was how much I really missed the sunshine in the blue sky

tonyb

Gatecrasher wrote: »

How much time have you spent in prison? It ain't no cakewalk. Not by any stretch of the imagination.
Let me clue you in Tony. There aren't any drugs on the planet you can't already purchase illegally.

Have family members and a few friends who spent short and long stints behind bars.
Yes, I know a million drugs can be obtained legally, but that still doesn't answer the question. Are we a nation of laws or social experiments ?

By legalizing drugs, your trading one pusher for another. You don't think the government would throw you in jail for substance abuse ? UH...they already do. Since we all know you can't legislate moral behavior, you can legislate behavior in general. You have to, otherwise society would be a free for all. Society has to have a certain level of civility to it, and to do that you need laws with consequences for breaking those laws.

Some of you brought up morals, and thats a good point. But from where I sit, I see nothing but an attack on morals, the family unit, religion. Everything that comes out of Washington these days is designed to tear us apart, not unite us. Religion is attacked, marriage, class warfare, circumvention of our constitution and congress, no jobs, welfare, energy issues, healthcare, etc.....and some of you wonder why we are losing morals at an alarming rate ? Sure, it starts at home, but home these days isn't what it was years ago. The family unit is now a single parent, a divorced parent, 2 mommy's or 2 daddy's ......sending their kids to indoctrination classes while the food police rifle threw the lunch boxes. Where schools are no longer about learning the basics, but agenda driven while at the same time cutting out music,arts, recess, and even sports. Your vote in some area's is being stolen, your voice silenced, and your welfare check is in the mail. Morals ??? How bought some of us demand some morals from our elected officials. Morals ?? How about we demand the church purge itself of these child molesters instead of shuffling them around. Morals ?? How about we demand all have a civil discoarse, not just the ones that make it polically conveinant. Morals ?? How about some demand change in your school districts, go to meetings and speak up. Jesus H. Christ....morals isn't a god given right, you have to live it every day, teach it every day, demand it every day. Don't cry about morals in our society when you demand nothing....because thats all I see when I go to village meetings....nothing but a bunch of sheep unable to find a voice, afraid of what will happen if they say something or say too much. Well folks, society today is a result of being afraid to say something. Want to blame someone for the lack of morals in society today, look in the mirror.

gdb

DarqueKnight wrote: »

Why do you say that?

Probably said it because Glen Beck will never have a chance to be POTUS !

nooshinjohn

Bravo Tony!!!:cool:


Very well said.

DK, you asked why I made that statement... well i happen to believe that there is a bad tendency to confuse liberty and freedom...

Freedom is the exemption from control by some other person, or from arbitrary restriction of specific defined rights like Worship, or Speech. Liberty is the sum of the rights possessed in common by the people of a community/state/nation as they apply to its government, and/or the expectation that a nation's people have of exemption from control by a foreign power.

Freedoms are things that people EXTRACT from their government; Liberty is less derivative, more formative; a thing GRANTED by the people to the people in common. The ability to Assemble, for instance, while commonly thought of as a freedom, is really an aspect of liberty.

Freedoms end when they encounter a contrary freedom of another person. You are free to smoke, until you encounter my freedom not to inhale your smoke. Liberty lacks that distinction: my liberty never contradicts or limits yours.

In other words, laws and regulations CAN be passed to restrict or deny my freedom, and they pass more and more evrey single second of the day. We spend more time fighting over rights, freedom if you will, and never for liberty. We have given our liberty to the government in exchange for freedom, and now the government can take that too.

nooshinjohn

gdb wrote: »

Probably said it because Glen Beck will never have a chance to be POTUS !

I would never vote for him, but I would vote for someone of sound moral character that exemplified the kind of courage, self sacrifice, devotion to God and his country that George Washington exemplified. I want a man(or woman) to stand up not for the power or the glory of the office, but for the good of the country. Sadly such men perished with the fall of Abraham Lincoln, though Ronald Reagan tried. Even he comes up short.

tonyb

Wasn't it Abe who said, " Any man can stand in the face of adversity, but to test a mans character, give him power."

I see little if no character in those with power today.

snow

An interesting topic. I think that substance abuse will never end whether it be alcohol, heroin, cocaine, crystal meth or any number of other ones regardless of whether these drugs are legalized or not. That being said what we as a country are doing now to combat drug use is simply not working, there are more drug and drug addicts than ever before.

We are constantly building new prisons to house people convicted of drug related crimes whether it be a dealer or an addict that committed a crime to get his/her drugs, hospitals are full of overdoses and other drug related medical issues because the addicts never know whether what they are buying is too strong or has been cut with something that makes them sick enough to get there or violence associated with the drugs themselves both innocent people getting beaten stabbed etc by an addict robbing them and addicts and other dealers trying to either rob each other or getting rid of their competition.

The costs associated with both building/housing the addict/convicts in these prisons, the court costs, the police agencies in the USA and overseas local state and federal, the medical costs are huge.

I read a few years ago that roughly 75% of all felony convictions were drug related in some fashion either dealers or addicts who were attempting to get enough money to support their habit when they committed their crimes.

Now lets say that the federal government decided to legalize these drugs with one requirement, registering as an addict and supply the addicts with their drug of choice, this would within a very short period of time cut down greatly on the afore mentioned costs, less people committing crimes to get their drugs less people in court less people going to hospitals less police dealing with drug related activity.

Now lets toughen drug sales convictions to 1st offense to an adult to life in prison with no possibility of parole, sales to a minor the death penalty. Now we have taken away both the monetary incentive for dealers because most users are registered and made selling convictions tough enough to recreational users that no one wants to take the risk.

With no one willing to sell to children means fewer drug addicts in future generations also.


I really believe the only way that we as a country are ever going to beat this problem or even slow it down substantially is to take away the market, with few people to sell too and penalty's harsh enough that no one wants to sell it can happen but not the way its being done now.



REGARDS SNOW

DarqueKnight

snow wrote: »

Now lets say that the federal government decided to legalize these drugs with one requirement, registering as an addict and supply the addicts with their drug of choice, this would within a very short period of time cut down greatly on the afore mentioned costs, less people committing crimes to get their drugs less people in court less people going to hospitals less police dealing with drug related activity.

Several European countries have had programs similar to what you are proposing. Correct me if I'm mistaken, but to my knowledge, all of them have been miserable failures. The problem with these drug "charities" is that very few people want to register their addiction. Really, considering the humongous stigma that surrounds drug addiction, how many hard drug addicts would step forward into the bright glaring lights of government scrutiny and admit to their addiction? Who wants to be seen entering and leaving these "clinics"? Who wants to sit in the waiting room waiting on their free fix?

I know it seems crazy, but given a choice between going to a clinic, registering and getting drugs free of charge or scoring drugs in some dark back alley (at considerable risk) most addicts choose the latter. Most people value their privacy...especially when they are doing something so socially unacceptable.

snow wrote: »

Now lets toughen drug sales convictions to 1st offense to an adult to life in prison with no possibility of parole, sales to a minor the death penalty. Now we have taken away both the monetary incentive for dealers because most users are registered and made selling convictions tough enough to recreational users that no one wants to take the risk.

Well, I don't think trying to remove the profit incentive will work due to the reasons I gave above. With regard to stiff penalties...up to death, the drug gangs deal with this reality every single day. The biggest threat to the narcotics gangs is not intervention from law enforcement and the courts, but rather the daily threat of being murdered by a rival gang. Do you think the average narco gang member in Mexico gives a gnat's **** hair about being caught and convicted by the authorities? That is the least of their worries. Dealing with cops is somewhere in the far reaches of their imagination. Up top is dealing with the 24/7 possibility of being captured, tortured and decapitated by a rival gang.

snow wrote: »

I really believe the only way that we as a country are ever going to beat this problem or even slow it down substantially is to take away the market, with few people to sell too and penalty's harsh enough that no one wants to sell it can happen but not the way its being done now.

To summarize:

1. The market for illegal recreational drugs, like the market for anything else, is not going to go away until people loose the desire for it.

2. The penalties that drug gangs deal out to each other are far, far worse than anything a government agency would dish out. Narcos don't have to worry about the following from law enforcement:

A. Your entire family killed. Then they torture and kill you.
B. Your entire family killed before your eyes. Then they torture and kill you.
C. Your entire family tortured, raped and killed before your eyes. Then they torture, rape and kill you.

In view of 2A, B and C, life in a state prison or even a state execution, is a comparative walk in the park.

sucks2beme

There isn't a law that's going to fix this. It's illegal to bribe a senator, too.
Yet it appears people are buying influence every day. Giving free fixes isn't a solution.
Sending people to jail doesn't appear to work. Shooting them on the spot might deter
users, but certainly not the distribution. Educating people on the dangers has not effect.
The real fix is to remove the reasons people start with drugs. And as a country we
say one thing, yet the culture is pro-drug, pro-booze. Don't be a nerd.
Movies and tv show people abusing their substance of choice all the time.
Everyone knows smoking is bad for you, yet 1 out of 5 high school students is smoking.
To be in, people do all the above. Add a sense of frustration about their future
and they fall victim to the lure of drugs.

tonyb

Some of this reminds me of the mafia wars back in NY decades ago. They haven't completely gone away, but have been drasticaly reduced. That and alot of them went into semi-legit buisnesses to launder their coin. Drug money is no different.

Before throwing out the whole playbook on drugs, enforcement, jail time, you have to consider the fact that we as a nation are not doing our part. What part is that ? Border security and illegal immigration. Lets face it, it's not the freckle faced kid from the Hollywood hills smuggling drugs across the border. If you can't get a handle on the supply side, you'll never change the demand side. But that arguement has been twisted and turned in so many directions which is why nothing ever gets done.

Some of us will say that government has no desire to control the border or illegal immigration, and thats probably spot on, while at the same time limiting what law enforcement can do. Big money is involved for cheap labor and drug money and that always filters back to political donations. Some even advocate for open borders. But that conversation again gets twisted into racism, profileing, hate, whatever terminolgy you want to use. Someone needs to step up to the plate with a set of balls to do the right thing or these bandaid fixes we are talking about will just continue while the problems get worse.

BlueFox

All good and interesting points. However, some posts appear to indicate some confusion about drug addiction. Simply because someone might use a drug does not mean they are a drug addict. The drug addicts are only a very small percentage of the drug user population. It appears the biggest cause of drug problems are the laws making drugs illegal. I guess I am a Libertarian on this issue. Responsible adults should be able to do pretty much want they want in their homes. Irresponsible adults need to pay the price for being irresponsible.

bmbguy

sucks2beme wrote: »

And as a country we say one thing, yet the culture is pro-drug, pro-booze.

Boy, ain't that the truth. People go to the doctor for this or that little problem, and what do they want? "Gimme a pill for it." And the doctors are all too willing to comply. Trying to control things first with proper diet, exercise, and (heaven forbid, discipline) are out the window.

Too many young people already on mind-altering meds, and too many older people on far too many meds. I mean, c'mon - if your doctor(s) have you on 5 different blood pressure meds, have you ever stopped to think, "That doesn't make much sense."

We know of eye doctors that are refusing to treat some young people, because the meds the kids are on interfere with the doctor's ability to actually correct their vision properly.

tonyb

Like I said, you traded one drug pusher for another. Medicine, for the most part, has become all about treating the symptom than the problem.

nooshinjohn

tonyb wrote: »

Like I said, you traded one drug pusher for another. Medicine, for the most part, has become all about treating the symptom than the problem.

Ain't that the truth... I need a surgery to correct the alignment of my shoulders from a hockey injury 6 years ago. One shoulder is two inches higher than the other, causing alignment issues in my upper spine. My neck pops all the time and occasionally, I get tingling down my right arm, all the way to my finger tips. They wont fix it because an occasional pill takes care of pain. They tell me to come back if it gets to the point where pain is chronic. I fear the knife more than I fear the pill, so it is easier to just go along. They count on that.

sucks2beme

I don't think anyone in a suburban school has some guy in a hoodie hanging out at the basketball court.
It's the guys in the nice preppy clothes with the drugs. Grass, pills, something else with a name that
doesn't quite describe what it really is. He shows up at all the parties and helps keep things going.
This is the face of drugs in most schools. The other guy does exist, but he's normally in the areas
that have already lost hope.
I hold no hope that anyone running for office is going to fix it. Or anything else. They talk a good game,
but I expect them to pretty much take care of all the guys footing the $10 million dollar a day campaign
costs. They will get into office, open up banking regulations again, so they can go back to running
their big money scams. As always, it's all about money. They only difference between them and the
dealers is the dealers use guns, the senators us a pen and a firm handshake.

bmbguy

sucks2beme wrote: »

I hold no hope that anyone running for office is going to fix it. Or anything else. They talk a good game,
but I expect them to pretty much take care of all the guys footing the $10 million dollar a day campaign
costs. They will get into office, open up banking regulations again, so they can go back to running
their big money scams. As always, it's all about money. They only difference between them and the
dealers is the dealers use guns, the senators us a pen and a firm handshake.

Tellin' it like it is. And the more people that figure that out, the closer we get to the "I'm mad as hell and I'm not gonna take it anymore" moment. I just don't know if that happens in what's left of my lifetime.

tonyb

bmbguy wrote: »

Tellin' it like it is. And the more people that figure that out, the closer we get to the "I'm mad as hell and I'm not gonna take it anymore" moment. I just don't know if that happens in what's left of my lifetime.

Ok man, thats it....your on the list.

....of 10 best new members.:cheesygrin:


Yep, when one guy robs you, he's called a thief. When 4-5 guys rob you, they are called a gang. When 500+ rob you, it's called congress.

bmbguy

Gosh... I'm speechless...

Oh wait, no -- I've got plenty to say. Just that most people don't wanna hear it!

tonyb

bmbguy wrote: »

Gosh... I'm speechless...

Oh wait, no -- I've got plenty to say. Just that most people don't wanna hear it!

Thats because your from Texas....you know....the ones that keep clinging to your guns and religion.

bmbguy

tonyb wrote: »

Thats because your from Texas....you know....the ones that keep clinging to your guns and religion.

You bet, that's us!

Well, I do have to confess that I'm not a native Texan. But I've been here long enough that I can play the part fairly well...

nooshinjohn

tonyb wrote: »

Thats because your from Texas....you know....the ones that keep clinging to your guns and religion.

We do the same here in California, but we just have to keep it a secret.:cheesygrin:

rhulett

Prohibition does not work, that was proven with alcohol in the 20's. Education is the key to battling addictions. Portugal decriminalized drugs and use rates went down, because they treated the people rather than incarcerate them. Prescription abuse is a bigger problem here anyways, with more people dying from prescription abuse than car accidents, but hey, they have better lobyiests.

gdb

I think that everyone should spark a doob and chill on this contentious thread.