The Failed War On Drugs

Discussion in 'Politics' started by poncho, Jan 19, 2014.

  1. poncho

    poncho
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Messages:
    19,657
    Likes Received:
    128
  2. poncho

    poncho
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Messages:
    19,657
    Likes Received:
    128
    The Latest War-on-Drugs Propaganda

    I just watched a Faux News TV report on a new government-funded “study” that claims that smoking pot may turn your children, grandchildren, and even great-grandchildren into heroin addicts, even if THEY never smoked pot. The “study” was a study of rats, not humans, and it concluded that the rats’ offspring exhibited addicted behavior after their parents were given the ingredients of pot. From that it was concluded that if YOU smoke as few as eight joints, all of your descendants may well become heroin addicts — or worse.

    There is of course no reason to believe that humans will behave exactly like rats (politicians excepted). Real scientists know this, and the reporterettes at Faux News probably do, too, but they seem hell bent on stirring up hysteria over ending any part of the disastrous and immoral “war on drugs.”

    http://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/the-latest-war-on-drugs-propaganda/
     
  3. thisnumbersdisconnected

    thisnumbersdisconnected
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2013
    Messages:
    8,448
    Likes Received:
    0
    Spoken like the potheads I treat on a regular basis who deny they have a problem and think pot is the answer, not the cause, of their difficulties with the law, employment, and socialization. The legalization of marijuana and other drugs is not the answer. These are the words of Lee P. Brown, Bill Clinton's "drug czar" from 1994-97

    Now comes the strongest point of the text. It is the view that every drug addictions counselor in the country has, with the exception of the idiots who think their clients can be counseled to "use less," which is another development in the treatment industry that is doomed to failure.
    I agree with the views of the "decriminalization" crowd to a point, that being that the end user isn't a criminal, he/she is an addict, and needs treatment, not confinement. The problem is, forced treatment doesn't work. The client has to be cooperative in the effort, or it's just a waste of his/her time and that of the counselor. Further, forced treatment usually costs the client a job that otherwise helps support the habit they have, and as a result, they wind up being on the other side of the fence: A supplier, and therefore, a criminal.

    As Brown states, decriminalization is not the answer for these people, treatment is the answer. But for them to be effectively treated, they first must be effectively educated, and the bogus, criminally negligent and outright falsehoods told by the decriminalization industry works against success at that education. Therefore, the laws stay in effect, users go to jail, and it is an endless cycle. We must find a way to overcome the lies, disinformation, and unscrupulous methods of the decriminalization crowd.
     
    #4 thisnumbersdisconnected, Jan 28, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 28, 2014
  4. poncho

    poncho
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Messages:
    19,657
    Likes Received:
    128
    Show me where anyone in any of the videos or articles I've posted is advocating "forced treatment".
     
  5. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,386
    Likes Received:
    790
    It doesn't matter what the issue is. If it has been made illegal and you do it anyone then you only have yourself to blame when you end up in prison.

    If it is illegal then hey......don't do it.
     
  6. poncho

    poncho
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Messages:
    19,657
    Likes Received:
    128
    Two strawman arguments in row from different posters. Hmmm, I wonder if that's a BB record?

    No one seems to be arguing that the "war on drugs" is a success. Hmmm, wonder why?
     
    #7 poncho, Jan 28, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 28, 2014
  7. thisnumbersdisconnected

    thisnumbersdisconnected
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2013
    Messages:
    8,448
    Likes Received:
    0
    When a user is arrested and charged with possession, shock time, probation, and treatment are almost universally the judge's reaction at sentencing. Sentencing someone to treatment is "forced treatment." They may not have used the terminology, but that is what they were talking about, and even if they weren't, had you actually read my post, you would have seen that I referred to it in direct context of preferring treatment over jail time. For a supposed intellectual, you aren't very fast on the uptake most of the time.
     
  8. thisnumbersdisconnected

    thisnumbersdisconnected
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2013
    Messages:
    8,448
    Likes Received:
    0
    Could be because there hasn't really been one, and even the man credited with "coining the phrase," Richard Nixon, didn't use it. He just said drugs were "public enemy #1." That's a far cry from declaring a "war on drugs." The phrase is popular among advocates for legalizing drugs, using a term that was supposed to scare "docile citizens" into thinking there was a shooting war going on in their backyard. It was a bad tactic that didn't really scare anyone because the American public was and is largely against drugs, drug use, and drug legalization, and would just as soon the drug supply was cut off and the drug suppliers all shot in the public square at high noon.

    The U.S. government's policy has been interdiction and severe prison terms for pushers and suppliers. That's not a war. That's law enforcement. To claim that hasn't been successful is an outright lie. Ask the Cali and Medellin cartels. Oh, wait, you can't. They're all dead or in prison.
     
    #9 thisnumbersdisconnected, Jan 28, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 28, 2014
  9. poncho

    poncho
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Messages:
    19,657
    Likes Received:
    128
    In other words you can't find anyone advocating "forced treatment". Just what I thought.
     
  10. poncho

    poncho
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Messages:
    19,657
    Likes Received:
    128
    In the span of 40 years we've spent hundreds of billions of dollars, gave the govt and police more power over our lives every time they asked for it, put thousands of non violent drug offenders in prison and yet drugs that are now stronger, and cheaper are still plentiful on the street and being unregulated as they are any teenager can get his/her hands on them.

    Even the inmates in our huge public private prison system can get their hands on drugs.

    Sounds like the interdiction and severe prison time isn't having the desired effect to me. And I'm still trying to figure out how wasting so much money, increasing the size and scope of govt and turning the prisons into "public private partnerships" (oops there's that corporatism coming into play again) can be considered "conservative".


    No that's providing job opportunities for the next drug suppliers in line that took the place of the few that were killed or busted in a New York Minute. If it was successful you'd be out of a job and so would all the DEA agents that made a pact with the Sinaloa cartel that allowed the organisation to smuggle billions of dollars of drugs in exchange for information on rival cartels.

    And the public private prisons would be suing all the municipalities that signed contracts that guaranteed them a 90 - 95% incarceration rate for 20 years.

    And the police would have more time to pursue real criminals like murders and rapists instead of chasing people around that might be guilty of having a dime bag of weed.

    And the banks would be royally ticked off because they'd lose 500 billion dollars annually in profit from their drug money laundering racket.

    And the govt would be beside itself because it would have one less "reason" to terrorize the public by busting down doors and pointing guns in peoples faces in the middle of the night.

    With the kind of big money and power the big banks and govt would lose if the "drug war" or whatever you want to call it were ever won there's no real incentive to win it or end it.

    There's just too much money and power to be had by continuing it and all at the tax paying citizen's expense in money and liberty.

    And the beat goes on the banksters get richer, the govt gets more powerful and intrusive, the police get more militarized, the big drug cartels get federal protection from arrest and prosecution and the drugs keep getting shipped in by the ton under the watchful eyes of those that are charged with stopping it.

    The only people not making out like bandits from this "war" are the small time dealers and users and tax paying citizens.

    Bet ya dollars to doughnuts the "honest and credible folks" at Saudi Faux Snews will never put all these points together in one place and broadcast them. No that would actually be informing the people with facts they could use to make an informed decision for once instead of being forced to rely on govt propaganda and media scare tactics used to fool people into letting this failed 40 year old policy go on and on and on forever.

    Cui Bono?
     
    #11 poncho, Jan 28, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 28, 2014
  11. poncho

    poncho
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Messages:
    19,657
    Likes Received:
    128
    Silence Or Insults?

    If TND holds to his usual pattern we'll see one or the other next because answering my last question is out of the question. :smilewinkgrin:
     
    #12 poncho, Jan 29, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 29, 2014
  12. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,386
    Likes Received:
    790
    The war on drugs is no different than the battle against any crime. Using the same logic we could say that the war on murder has failed. Just because it has not been done away with is no reason to stop enforcing it.
     
  13. InTheLight

    InTheLight
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2010
    Messages:
    16,272
    Likes Received:
    620
    That study was funded by the banksters of the Federal Reserve. They want people to try marijuana to get them addicted, then have it legalized so they can tax sales. That way the governments, which are really run by the corporations, will have more fiat currency to pay back to the banksters.

    So legalizing pot is a Federal Reserve plot.
     
  14. thisnumbersdisconnected

    thisnumbersdisconnected
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2013
    Messages:
    8,448
    Likes Received:
    0
    He doesn't need any help in coming up with tin-foil-hat conspiracies, ITL.

    [​IMG]

    Anyone who thinks marijuana is a benign drug is already brainwashed by the far-leftist Marxist conspiracy anyway.

    See? I can do that too!]
     
  15. Gina B

    Gina B
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2000
    Messages:
    16,944
    Likes Received:
    1
    You don't see an issue with that black and white way of thinking?

    Can you think of any laws that exist in the world or in the United States that make your statement a problem?
     
  16. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,386
    Likes Received:
    790
    Unless they go against the word of God no. And pot aint one of them.
     
  17. poncho

    poncho
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Messages:
    19,657
    Likes Received:
    128
    So your "logic" is to compare apples to oranges? :rolleyes:

    In the case of murder the law is used in an attempt to protect us from others.

    In the case of drug prohibition the law is used in an attempt to protect us from ourselves.

    If you believe the law should be used to protect us from ourselves you are placing yourself in the same camp as Michael Bloomberg, Hillary Clinton, Michael Moore, ITL and TND.
     
    #18 poncho, Jan 30, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 30, 2014
  18. poncho

    poncho
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Messages:
    19,657
    Likes Received:
    128

    Very predictable isn't he? :smilewinkgrin:
     
  19. InTheLight

    InTheLight
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2010
    Messages:
    16,272
    Likes Received:
    620
    So Poncho believes in legalization of pot. And cocaine. And heroin. And meth.
     

Share This Page

Loading...