It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Drugs; We Are Losing This One

page: 3
7
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 19 2006 @ 07:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by semperfortis
The problem is, how do we know that is what would happen?

There are masses of people that are very despondent and dissatisfied with their lot in life. Would not the ready availability of narcotics also offer them an escape, thereby increasing the use?
Is it not also possible, that some "would be" users, do not because of a certain sense of right and wrong?

Semper


First off, we don't know what would happen. But is the current system working either? Has this not become a great moneymaker for a lot of people who are dipping into the pot when they shouldn't be?

There are tons of people unhappy with their lives, some of them, maybe many of them, do turn to drugs. However, that too is still happening, so we don't know, but we do know that it isn't working right now with the current methods.

Some "would be" users maybe wouldn't use it because of right vs. wrong. However, was it considered wrong before it was made illegal? Were the people that used it before making it illegal wrong or were they just everyday citizens who got a few kicks during the day?

May I also mention, that if they really wanted to finish the "war on drugs", wouldn't they have finished by now? Also the reality that through all the methods "drugs are bad" is brought to the public is a sign that people really aren't rising up to fight it. Possibly because they don't see how it's important?


Of course, I want you to know that I am not belittling you or your job function in the least. I find you to be one of the most incredibly open-minded officers I have ever spoken to, be it offline or in my real life. I respect your opinions greatly, and will enjoy this debate.




posted on Aug, 19 2006 @ 07:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by DeusEx
Intrepid, in reference to the use of meth to wean heroin addicts...that doesn't make sense to me. Meth is more toxic, more addictive, and more widely available than H. Hell, if that's not criteria for being 'worse', I hardly know what is.

Meth IS the boogeyman a lot of people think it is. Don't believe me, believe the statistics. 85% of property crimes in the state of Oregon are meth related. Junkies steal, cheat, kill, whatever to get their next fix, which is why they are in the system to begin with, largely.

Now, the war on pot is an idiotic lost cause. The war on meth? Meth is the stuff of nightmares. Go to Oregon, and they'll tell you what kind of a mistake not fighting is.

Frontline did a really good special on it. I suggest everyone watches it.

DE


That goes for a lot of drugs Deus, crack being the formost. I don't know what goes on in Oregon BUT I know what goes on here. Legal Meth is keeping addicts from B&E's. Are they cured? Hardly but the benefit to society is better than letting them commit crimes on persons.



posted on Aug, 19 2006 @ 07:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by intrepid
The only difference is that, if legal, they would be LESS expensive.


Not true, my mothers prescripts cost more than say most illegal drugs. She has three herniated discs in her spine, and that has alot to do with it. But less expensive is not correct in all cases. Over all in general yes perhaps for the most part, but not every one.



posted on Aug, 19 2006 @ 07:08 PM
link   
The real problem of drugs I think is that the problem is so extensive that everyone is imperceptible to the full extent of the problem.

Something from an old article dated Sunday April 21, 2002 :

"But illegal drugs make up eight per cent of world trade, says the United Nations, and are worth more than the combined global market for textiles, clothing, iron and steel."

observer.guardian.co.uk...

I don't know exactly the numbers whereas I'm still researching.



posted on Aug, 19 2006 @ 07:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by ADVISOR

Originally posted by intrepid
The only difference is that, if legal, they would be LESS expensive.


Not true, my mothers prescripts cost more than say most illegal drugs. She has three herniated discs in her spine, and that has alot to do with it. But less expensive is not correct in all cases. Over all in general yes perhaps for the most part, but not every one.


Damn man, I didn't say that prescription drugs were cheap. I'm saying that the illegal ones, if legalized, would be cheaper. I wonder WHO doesn't want that to happen.



posted on Aug, 19 2006 @ 07:13 PM
link   
From what I have read, the profits of drug cartels is much higher than the GNPs of the three richest nations. That was the big money maker then.

Today I havn't a clue, but with an educated guestimate I would say not much has changed besides inflation.



posted on Aug, 19 2006 @ 07:14 PM
link   
Like I said, its personal choice to use it. Who am I to tell some one else they can or cant do something? I can tell them "if you do that and some one gets killed, you were warned, therefor you will be hit with the full extent of the law". And thats the end of the story, from their its human decision. A guy on crack kills somebody, he gets the chair. One more murder off the street.

Maybe Im just a bit to libertarian/rural for most of you. A bit too "toby keith- beer for my horses"

"Grandpappy told my pappy, back in my day, son
A man had to answer for the wicked that he done
Take all the rope in Texas
Find a tall oak tree, round up all of them bad boys
Hang them high in the street for all the people to see that

Justice is the one thing you should always find
You got to saddle up your boys
You got to draw a hard line
When the gun smoke settles we’ll sing a victory tune
We’ll all meet back at the local saloon
We’ll raise up our glasses against evil forces
Singing whiskey for my men, beer for my horses

We got too many gangsters doing dirty deeds
We’ve got too much corruption, and crime in the streets
It’s time the long arm of the law put a few more in the ground
Send ’em all to their maker and he’ll settle ’em down
You can bet he’ll set ’em down ’cause "



posted on Aug, 19 2006 @ 07:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by ADVISOR
Not true, my mothers prescripts cost more than say most illegal drugs. She has three herniated discs in her spine, and that has alot to do with it. But less expensive is not correct in all cases. Over all in general yes perhaps for the most part, but not every one.


Advisor, judging by stories that I read though (and I'm going to use marijuana as an example, as it's the most easily legalized, imo), growers go very far out of their way for bulk production. They have to hide the grow lights, the electricity, the co2 machines, the fans, the smell, the people going to the location, and the risk. This drives up cost considerably I would imagine. So I think cost would stabilize.

Different grades would go for different prices, I am sure, but I do believe cost would stabilize greatly.

And please folks, remember something, before I am now accused by anyone of speaking from experience, I am not. I am streetsmart though, and know what is going on. I just would like to ask that in advance so the thread won't get derailed, because I think this is an important debate to have.



posted on Aug, 19 2006 @ 07:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by intrepid
That goes for a lot of drugs Deus, crack being the formost. I don't know what goes on in Oregon BUT I know what goes on here. Legal Meth is keeping addicts from B&E's. Are they cured? Hardly but the benefit to society is better than letting them commit crimes on persons.


Yeh, well the statistic is (from Oregon) I believe about 45% of muggings are commited by addicts.

I agree- if rehabilitation is possible, go for it. The problem is that it is a combination of ineffective and costly. My objection to the Vancouver is that while the site protects users from aids and overdose, it does nothign to protect the citizenry from the addicts.

Me and Duzey have a good discussion about the site started here. You may not agree with my views, but hey.

Oh, Intrepid...for the record, how does Corrections obtain the meth?

DE



posted on Aug, 19 2006 @ 07:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by DeusEx


Oh, Intrepid...for the record, how does Corrections obtain the meth?

DE


We don't, it's through the pharmacies, the drug system.


Edit to add: Apologies for being glib, this falls under the Minisrty of Health, not the Ministry of Corrections.

[edit on 19-8-2006 by intrepid]



posted on Aug, 19 2006 @ 07:19 PM
link   
Ill tell you what protects citizens from an addict...a gun



posted on Aug, 19 2006 @ 07:24 PM
link   
Fed Pharms MAKE meth? What, go to Wal-mart, raid the cleanign and car supply aisles, and get to work?

For the record, Grim...you shoot someone up here in self defence, and even in a clean case you have a fifty-fifty chance of going to jail. Probably more, since storing a weapon loaded here is an offence.

DE



posted on Aug, 19 2006 @ 07:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by DeusEx
Fed Pharms MAKE meth? What, go to Wal-mart, raid the cleanign and car supply aisles, and get to work?

For the record, Grim...you shoot someone up here in self defence, and even in a clean case you have a fifty-fifty chance of going to jail. Probably more, since storing a weapon loaded here is an offence.

DE


thats a problem with the justice system. There is no reason you shouldn't be allowed to have it so long as its legal and such. That law never stopped a gangbanger from carrying an illegal gun, just a legal gun owner from being able to defend themself.

[edit on 19-8-2006 by grimreaper797]



posted on Aug, 19 2006 @ 09:00 PM
link   


Meth, causes extreme paranoia and additional psychological problems that again, translate themselves into violence.

That is a problem. They are not cigarettes.


As a cigarette smoker, I can say none of the drugs I've tried in my life (which would be most of them) are quite as addictive as cigarettes. Nicotene withdrawals can be very rough psychologically, and the only reason we don't see crimes commited by deranged nicotene addicts looking for a fix is because the damn things are so cheap and readily available.

A friend of mine is a recovering crack addict and ex-smoker - although the crack certainly screwed her life up more, she found the cigarettes much harder to stop using.



posted on Aug, 19 2006 @ 09:28 PM
link   
There is no war on drugs. Drugs are peddled by the CIA almost every day in the U.S., shipped from South American countries. The billions reaped from the drug money is used to fund black op. mind control projects, which is then tested on cell phone towers by emitting certain frequency waves.



posted on Aug, 19 2006 @ 10:11 PM
link   



Working with the CIA

This translates to a higher degree of threat for clandestine human operations.
Parameters, Winter 2001-02, pp. 28-39



Sure thing, I won't derail the topic and further, or encourage it. Just was adding that is all, figured it had relevance.



Point is, the "War on Drugs" is a sham and even if as a whole it is indented to clean up, there will always be the sub parts that are not so well inclined. No one is infalable or perfectly resistant to corruption, and once hooked that is only used to further reel em in.

One mad cow gives the whole herd a bad name.

Besides, the USA has the highest drug demand in the world, how do you fight that....?



posted on Aug, 20 2006 @ 12:06 AM
link   
Advisor,

That is my point exactly. What could we be accomplishing as a Nation, with that kind of money put elsewhere???

We are not only not winning, we are effectively doing nothing except losing lives in the pursuit of what??

Even the best General knows when it is time to retreat....

Semper


df1

posted on Aug, 20 2006 @ 12:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by semperfortis
Proof?

Prohibition did not work with alcohol and prohibition is not working any better with drugs. This is proven over and over and over again. Only a cop on the take would deny the complete failure of the drug war.
.



posted on Aug, 20 2006 @ 01:51 AM
link   
I went to hempfest in seattle today, with over 170,000 people in attendence.



posted on Aug, 20 2006 @ 02:37 AM
link   
Does anyone know what numbers are involved with the narcotics industry? I still can't find the slightest clue as to what kind of money is in this matter. But then again no one will ever know because it is illegal/black market. Could it be a trillion dollar industry? Or is that even possible? It definatley does not compare to the oil industry though, thats for sure.

On this similar topic: The song "Peruvian Cocaine" by Immortal technique is a must listen for this topic.

These are the very last lines:
"I'm not guilty. YOU'RE the one that's guilty. The
lawmakers, the politicians, the Columbian drug lords,
all you who lobby against making drugs legal. Just
like you did with alcohol during the prohibition.
You're the one who's guilty. I mean, c'mon, let's kick
the ballistics here: Ain't no Uzi's made in Harlem.
Not one of us in here owns a poppy field. This thing
is bigger than (Immortal Technique). This is big
business. This is the American way."



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join