The War On Drugs

Most of those who are in favor of decriminalizing drugs claim that that would stop a lot of crime and illegal drug trading because it wouldn't be illegal anymore. According to this story out of California about weed, that hasn't worked so I find it unlikely that it would work if we decriminalized all drugs. Who wooda ever thunk that criminals could produce drugs cheaper than the government or private business?



https://www.yahoo.com/news/california-voters-legalized-cannabis-last-120058421.html

 

Not all drugs, but making weed illegal is silly. Its about as dangerous as earl grey tea. Clearly those other drugs should not be legal. and war on drugs. Why don't we make this "WAR ON DRUG DEALER AND THE GANGS THEY WORK FOR"

 

This is such misleading fallacy - and just so wrong headed politically.

1) Crime Reduction - and illegal drug trading.

Crime reduction due to decriminalization spans a whole lot more than crime associated with the illegal drug trade .. a wildly false assumption/conflation

Crime that is associated with the illegal Drug trade .. is separate from the Illegal drug trade . just because there is an illegal drug trade .. doesn't mean that "Violent Crime" .. as opposed to the actual crime of drug dealing .. has not decreased .. which is what we are after .. and all kinds of other associated crime.

The fact of the matter is that alcohol prohibition .. folks can produce cheaper than the Gov't "Who wooda thunk" ?? who wouldn't have thunk ? The fact of the matter is that when prohibition ended ..most of the crime associated with booze being illegal vanished.. but it did not vanish overnight .. silly assumption #3 on your part.

The fourth false assumption --- is that the crime associated with illegal selling stays the same .. something completely untrue .. while folks may still be growing and selling pot - . the violent criminal element decreases .. simply because the money has decreased .. .. also because you can't corner the market .. anyone can grow - sell or give small amounts to friends .. and no one cares .. it is legal as long as you don't have over so many plants .. The profit drops off the map .. they might as well open up a bubble gum shop and sell bubble gum ..

The Crime associated with Pot being illegal .. first off .. you just turned 30% of the population into Criminals - The cost of chasing down pot smokers .. immense .. taking up most of the drug budget throughout the history of this war -- money that could have been put towards going after real criminals - or hard/ dangerous drugs. Putting these people through the justice system costs money .. and marginalizes these people .. which is related to criminality overall. Then actually jailing someone .. the most effective way to turn a human into a monster .. has a huge effect on crime.

Then there is the violation of essential liberty -- an anathema to the founding principle .. anathema in law and Justice . anathema to the constitutional republic . and the constitution .. and here is the part where you need to listen closely >>>>> on the basis of "Fallacious Utilitarianism" ..

Law justified on the basis of Utilitarianism is an anathema to the founding principle - as it allows for an end run around the safeguards put in place to protect essential liberty .. as this justification for law looks only at what will increase happiness for the collective.

You recognize it as "Harm Reduction" "if it saves one life" -- as justification for law - an insidious and evil justification in of itself .. that you are blissfully unaware .. never mind "Fallacious Utilitarianism" .. thats where its not even a good Utilitarian argument .. but this changes no the fact that you have managed to jump over the safeguard .. removed the limitations to Gov't power -- which will then be used to in other legislation that you don't like .. even though you loved violating the principles for things you like. This is the problem with belief in LIberty "only for things we agree with" .. everyone believes in that .. this is not belief in liberty at all .. as belief in liberty is belief in liberty for folks to do things you disagree with .. that you would not do yourself.

The Drug war was a fail on so many levels .. a significant factor in our descent into a collectivist Orwellian Totalitarianism -- breaking down many huge walls .. Privacy being a big one .. not that anyone cares about privacy anymore these days .. but .. it should be mentioned .. that the drug war was major factor in descent .. "Banking" -- under the guise of "Money Laundering" No banking privacy for you .. now in these days every time you buy something is tracked .. where you were .. what time you were there .. but no one cares .. cause . You know .. we will catch more criminals this way..

Yes-- if we put a big eye in the sky .. that monitors every persons every action .. we will catch more criminals. No one would have agreed to this logic 50 years ago. Now people beg to give their liberty away .. please take it .. for some temporary illusion of security .. the result of decades of brain washing via the Drug war.

And Yes . that was the plan .. knowing you would not agree with incursions to liberty at the time the Goblins wanted to implement the plan - which was to restrict liberty - increase Gov't Power.. but knowing the US public would never go along with that .. Wolfowitz-Pearl Doctrine under Bush Sr... suggested we needed some external threat .. which turned out to be 911 .. .. giving us the Patriot Act .. act which made our Patriotic duty to give up liberty.

Was the same rational for the drug war .. . the Drug war had little to do with Drugs .. and a whole lot to do with bending the citizen down and sodomizing from both ends.

 

That's a lot of words but the bottom line is, the more we decriminalize these things the higher the crime rate goes. I didn't need to write a 1,000 word essay to state that.

 

That is false nonsense .. sometimes more words better than less ... which is why in my post I had more than a naked claim .. a claim without support.. and in your case a ridiculously false claim .. that was supported by nothing.

I did give support for my side .. which took a few more words .. .. I also took the time to point out 4 fallacies .. on your part . .and explain why they were fallacies .. and this took some words.

Not only did you not address your ridiculously false assumptions in this post . you repeat your claim again .. with zero support .. as if repetition of claim constitutes an argument for something .

"independent thinker" thats a bit of a misnomer given what you have proffered thus far ..

 

It's not false nonsense at all. Liberal policies, including being easier with drug sentences, have led to higher crime rates. Do you deny crime rates are higher just about everywhere?

 

Because without the drugs you wouldn't have the drug dealers and gangs

 

i am a recovered addict with 20 plus years sobriety, i abused Rx drugs and drank a lot, i have worked with other addicts in recovery for those years gaining more knowledge
simply rolling back Rx laws and allowing people to legally obtain Rx drugs at the lower Rx price and be treated in a health conscious environment would do wonders for all concerned
in general the population has been swayed to ignorance about addiction, because of prohibition BS...if the government itself gets involved in sales they jack up the price allowing for
cheaper competitors to still florish

 

first your was that overall crime was increased by decriminalization -- next thing you are talking about Liberal Policies in general being the cause for crime increase .. like not putting folks in Jail for theft - which I agree in a second increased crime but .. One has nothing to do with the other - This is a steaming pile of illogical nonsense .. and again .. with ZERO substantiation for claim .. this time trying to move the goal posts.

Do you know what an argument is mate ? perhaps not so let me assist. An Argument consists of 2 things 1) statement of claim 2) some explanation, evidence, proof .. that shows claim is true.

"Crime rates increasing Everywhere" .. but Pot has not been legalized everywhere .. so obviously there must be another reason for increasing crime rates in places where pot has not been legalized ... So thanks for proving yourself wrong if nothing else

And Last .. we are talking legalization of Pot .. not "Drugs"

 

Excessive taxation always leaves room for profit by criminals. Of course, we are only discussing criminals leaving a little room for other criminals!

If a crowd of drunks blocks your path, you are in danger. If a crowd of stoners blocks your path, just toss them a Hacky Sack!

 

Actually, the cartels could be put out of the drug business quickly and permanently without a shot fired or an arrest made- but the politics required would take a lot more mature thinking than we have right now.
Popular ideas sell easier than practical ones, even when the popular ones don't work. The "War on Drugs" started with Nixon. Last year, a record 107,000 people died of drug overdose.... it would appear we aren't winning.
Answer- Give up trying? Try harder? Or- try a new plan?
Always reminds on of the Einstein quote about doing the same things over and expecting different results.

 

You seriously believe that if drugs were legalized all would be well.?

As for the 'War on Drugs" we aren't really trying.

 

Your mistake is in thinking that all people who use drugs are just average Dick and Jane's doing recreational stuff. That's just not the case most of the time. Most of the time these people are criminals and commit crimes. You're equating the whole thing to people going to bars for a few drinks.

 

What we need to do for those addicted is mandatory treatment time and not just 30 days and visiting AA once a week. We need to keep addicts locked up for good in treatment until they are free of their addiction, even if it is months or years. Those who sell should be sentenced to jail time, with that time increasing for every future infraction.

 

Or we could adopt the tactics that Mao used to end the century long Opium crisis in China.

 

Not in the fashion you are assuming.
As for trying, we have put a huge number of people in prison for drug charges, from the major smugglers to the street peddler to the user, and failed to slow the flow.
The first step should be to stop the illicit drugs, which among the many evils are used to involve new and often very young addicts, result in deaths due to impure and variable strengths,result in all kinds of crimes to support habits, etc. The cartels and drug smugglers are there for ONE reason- and that is profit. Develop a system that destroys the potential for profit, and they are out of business. The- you have control of the drug market and have neutralized all the side effects, and can concentrate on helping the addicts recover. Step one- kill the cartels. Until they do that, they can't control anything else.

 

i have worked with hundreds of addicts and they are quite otherwise normal people just like many sons, daughters, and moms and dads...they are not otherwise criminals, you are way off base which i attributed earlier to false info war on drugs propaganda

 

I've worked with recovering addicts, and a surprising number of them were impressive people. Caught in bad habit and addicted, but not wanting to be criminals. Some wind up dealing drugs to support their own habits. There are evil people in the drug world, that primarily prey on otherwise good people. Drugs imprison people, make them captives without bars. Drug peddlers enable that, but behind it all are the drug makers and smugglers, and these are the true enemies. There should be no leniency for those people. No quarter. Some in the drug world can be saved, some must be removed. It's possible- but politics make it difficult.

 

If you want to stop the drugs, stop the CIA from their involvement. This is but the tip of the iceberg from the past.

THE CIA-CONTRA-CRACK COCAINE CONTROVERSY:
A REVIEW OF THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT'S
INVESTIGATIONS AND PROSECUTIONS

https://oig.justice.gov/sites/default/files/archive/special/9712/ch01p1.htm

 

No .. that is not my mistake. and what part of " We are talking about Pot" "The War on Pot" did you not understand the last time I pointed it out specifically .. in the last post.

The conversation is not about bars and drinks .. but the effect of legalization on Societal Harm .. Violent crime being one of the measures.

Dick and Jane have zero to do with it .. paying less for their smoke is not going to turn them into raging criminals .. a criminal paying less for their smoke is not going increase his criminality..

This is gibberish .. and on the basis of this gibberish irrational .. you figure you should be able to force your personal belief on others through physical violence . Restrict their liberty -- for no legitimate reason .. on the basis of "Collectivism" "Harm Reduction" .. Utilitarian Justification for law .. but not even a good Utilitarian argument .. cause what you propose increases harm to society . .not decreases.

hence the term "Fallacious Utilitarianism"

This progressive hatred and disrespect for essential liberty - founding principle - Republicanism .. way on the extreme even for Blue .. .. well .. not that far these days .. Blue done gone stray far off that turnip truck these days .. so far they found a few RINO's roaming around the field .. indoctrinated them .. very insidious this kool-aid .

 

Those are myths that only the ignorant believe.

 

You don't know how to use the word "ignorant", do you? Ignorance is where one is oblivious to information, and doesn't want to know. I think you're looking for 'gullible'.
For you, naive would be what I'd use for you. To think that it never happened.
Here are some more.

The movie plot "American made", is based on a true story.



https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/big-white-lie-cia-and-cocainecrack-epidemic

INTELLIGENCE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1999 (House of Representatives - May 07, 199
A Tangled Web: A History of CIA Complicity in Drug International Trafficking
https://irp.fas.org/congress/1998_cr/980507-l.htm

Exposing the CIA’s Involvement in the Cocaine Trade
https://www.freedommag.org/magazine...he-cias-involvement-in-the-cocaine-trade.html

Would you like more? There is plenty more.

 

At least 20 more from unbiased sources of unquestionable veracity.

 

Yeah, it's all made up, isn't it? Tell me, where would you expect to find"unbiased" and "unquestionable" sources? MSM sites.
Interesting, you never even picked up on the "Congressional Record". Aren't you the super sleuth?

 

I'll accept The Economist and The National Review.

Don't know why you would think I'm some kind of "super sleuth"?