USA - Government, Cartels, Militias, and Cocaine Users...

[dbjay417]

I hate that the governments of the world try to guilt the people of the world by blaming the violence caused by gang warfare and military/malitia clashes on users.

The violence connected to cocaine, is created largely by prohabition enforced by the governments of the world, not by users purchasing cocaine.


While legalization sounds like the solution, one must think.

There are a lot of people in this world that are stupid assholes. Do the responsible users of this world want those people having open access to drugs that will ultimately wreak havoc on those idiots that will not consider the possible dangers of drug use and addiction?

[richpull]

The politicians make out like bandits, as do the cartels and the exporters, the smaller level traffickers, dealers and users are the only ones being exploited and they don't have any say in the matter. Plus with the level of propaganda and the advent of crack, there is not much of a groundswell to legalize cocaine. Plus most people can't handle their shit wit coke.

[thrillhouse6146]

the way i see it, sure, buying exotic (not locally produced) drugs can help fund "terrorism" (although fairly unlikely for the most part),

the sole reason why so many shady type grow and sell drugs is because of the bullshit laws we have, regardless of how many addicts and violent people abuse drugs, the fact of the matter is:

If they legalized, regulated and properly taxed all recreational drugs, less people would be killed by gang violence, I would venture to say the crime rate would decrease at least 20-30%.

And the taxes gained from selling, pure, reliable, government regulated product would be able to cure world hunger if some of the bigger countries got on board.

People will always find drugs if they want them, the problem society is faced with is figuring out what the lesser of two evils is, do we maintain the artificial and fairly obviously bullshit moral high ground and say "drugs are bad mmkay" or do we make the intelligent choice and not sell to kids or junkies, and allow our nation to prosper from the vices we choose.

If liqour is legal and it's probably one of the physically, mentally and socially most harmful drugs, as well as addictive, they have no solid basis to make things like pot, and shrooms illegal, let alone meth and heroin.

[wreckreational]

In America there is supposed to be a Constitutinal right to the "Pursuit of Happieness" swim doesn't quite understand how this can be said and yet drugs are in a state of prohibition. Do drugs cause some people pain and suffering? Yes. But so does sex , gambiling, over-eating etc. and yet these things are all widely availible. Anything can destroy your life if you abuse it to the point you neglect everything else, but if drugs were legal, even if it was just in red light districts the benefits would far outweigh the negatives.
-First the direct correlation between drugs and crime would be broken, no more being run by thugs, gangs, and cartels.
-Second this would make for a consistant and taxable product at an affordable cost to the consumer. Which would help put money back in to our government, to aid in the fight against terrorism plus take away billions of dollars from the terrorist groups who use illicet drug profit to fund thier attacks, sleeper cells, etc.
-Third if leagalized drug use could be monitered and medically administered, helping to put an end to overdose from unknown potency and cut. This would also help to insure that someone with a habit couldn't get a job that would put the public in danger i.e. flying planes, doing brain surgery, etc.
-Fourth this would give people who have commited victimless crimes thier life back and uncrowd our overpopulated prisons. This would also free up police to focus on real criminals and terrorists.
The list of benefits seems to go on and on, and yet nothing changes. A blind man could see that the war on drugs will never be won. We need to stand together vote and lobbey for change, unfortunately swim doesn't think change this radical is on any of the candidates platforms.
If anyone knows which candidates have anything close to change in plan for drug policy please post, swim would like to make thier vote count.

[Benga]

thread forwarded to the drug policy reform and politics forum

b

[zera]

Originally Posted by wreckreational

If anyone knows which candidates have anything close to change in plan for drug policy please post, swim would like to make thier vote count.

Ron Paul, who is running for the Repucliban nomination, wants to end the drug war.

Incidentally back when he was running for president in 1988 as the Libertarian Party candidate he appeared on a trash talk show to defend his position on drugs, the video is just fabulous to watch as Dr Paul totally rips apart the argument from the uneducated idiots in the audience. My favorite part is when a guy asks why we should let people make bad decisions and Paul explains how in America we are suppose to have freedom of choice then says: I notice you are a little overweight, how would you like it if the government started controlling your diet. Video here

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IHB2I83_N_k

[wreckreational]

[quote=zera;311213]Ron Paul, who is running for the Repucliban nomination, wants to end the drug war.

Thanks. He does look like the best choice, not just on drugs but across the board. he's got my vote.

[Woodman]

Until I feel differently, it's Ron Paul for me!

I'll bet ya the Dems are going to try to field a guy on their side who comes up with a similar agenda, if only to run a "Ron-Paul-Spoiler" on the basis that "Republicans are Eeeeevill."

I say, Fuck your party loyalty.
Consider a candidates agenda and their commitment to it; otherwise, what good are you outside of being a "useful idiot".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Useful_idiot

[Woodman]

Originally Posted by zera

Ron Paul, ... wants to end the drug war.

Incidentally back when he was running for president in 1988 as the Libertarian Party candidate he appeared on a trash talk show to defend his position on drugs,
... Video here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IHB2I83_N_k

That was the Morton Downey Jr. Show.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morton_Downey_Jr.

"In 1996, Downey was diagnosed with lung cancer and had one of his lungs removed. He did a complete about-face on tobacco use, going from a one-time member of the National Smokers Alliance to a staunch anti-smoking activist. He continued to speak against smoking until his death from lung cancer in 2001 at age 68.[19] After being diagnosed with lung cancer, he said, "I had spawned a generation of kids to think it was cool to smoke a cigarette. Kids walked up to me until a matter of weeks ago, they'd have a cigarette in their hand and they'd say, 'Hey, Mort,' or, 'Hey, Mouth, autograph my cigarette.' And I'd do it."[3] He also blamed tobacco companies for lying to consumers about cigarettes.[3]
Author Adrian Havill later said that Downey's cancer and subsequent anti-smoking commercials, like other celebrity causes for certain diseases, served as a publicity tool."

So, it was okay for Mort to use his shit, but all of you other mother-fuckers can go suck wind, eh?

Thanks, Mort.

Nice legacy.