It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Why Doesn't the US Declare War against US Gangs?

page: 3
<< 1  2   >>

log in


posted on Mar, 14 2009 @ 04:03 PM
Don't assume that the only way to nail consumers is by putting them in jail.

First up, marijuana should be changed. And anyone caught selling to teens and younger SHOULD be put in jail.

Fines. Taxation. Medical tests that make you ineligible to be covered if you use. Required detox. Mandatory couselling. Increased jail sentences for domestic or violent crimes commited under the influence (the opposite of what happens now). There are ways of making the consequences hurt. Hurting the pocket book is always a great option.

posted on Mar, 14 2009 @ 06:30 PM
reply to post by BorgHoffen

Well Jam321, you have to ask some serious questions here.
1.How much money does the prison system make private corporations every year?
2.How does the war on drugs aid in this profit?
3.How do gangs increase this profit?

Everything you say I have to agree with. A lot of people and companies are profiting off this illegal business and want everything to continue as is.

posted on Mar, 15 2009 @ 04:01 AM
Here in Texas the gangs are very strong, esp mexican mafia . The drugs are run from Laredo or El Paso. That's why so many murders amongst the police or politician who won't take a bribe. Many have their heads cut off.

Rick Perry is complicit in not doing enough to stop the trafficking of drugs, prostitution, kidnapping, home invasions, ad nauseum. He is of the globalist elite ilk.

40% of our federal prisoners are illegals. We have a load of illegals on welfare and medicaid.

IMHO I believe Texas should secede and secure our borders. We have 80% of the refineries and tons of food. Ron Paul can be president, Chuck vp.

Don't mess with Texas.

posted on Mar, 25 2009 @ 07:46 PM
reply to post by Aeons

most of the consumers are addicts. this negates the(make the risk to great) factor because an addict does not consider risk, reward or consequences when looking for the fix.

posted on Mar, 25 2009 @ 08:01 PM
A "War On Gangs" would problaby just be more laws that take away freedoms, like no standing in a group of four or more.

No wearing certain colors anywhere at anytime

Not all "gangs" are Super-Millitant-Mafia level Cartels either.

Ever heard of the "Blood-Hound Gang" lol

posted on Mar, 26 2009 @ 03:45 AM
i believe no matter what happens the situation wouldnt look good
like others suggested...a war on gangs would be mean new rules..(more Patriot Acts) or more limitations of speech and other things
On the other hand perhaps the gangs are funded or vice versa help fund the governments or perhaps its just...well an idea to let us hate each other...divide us up in every aspect country race religion sex politics region and even group or neighborhood
Or aybe if things really crash and any kinda police state action goes down what better way to get recruitments than to say to the gangs that you do our work for us and we take care of you
who knows..the point us we need to not declare war on drugs or the gangs but understand wtf is all of this really that important to be killing each other daily?
hard connection to make and a resolution doesnt come easy

[edit on 26-3-2009 by Akoostikreiki]

posted on Mar, 26 2009 @ 11:33 AM
All of you guys are correct that a war on gangs would only invite more government into our lives. That is something we clearly don't want. However, with or without a war on gangs, our government will still find a way or reason to meddle in our life.

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2   >>

log in