Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Breotan wrote:

 Dreadwinter wrote:
So just because it doesn't solve all the problems, only a majority of them, we should keep it illegal?

Please tell me what problems will be solved by making Meth legal. Meth addicts don't want treatment, they want more meth. Meth addicts can't hold jobs so they turn to crime to fund their addiction. You rarely find meth addicts in treatment except for when treatment is imposed on them as part of the criminal justice process and even then recidivism is very high. The only ones who win by making Meth legal are the ones who make and distribute Meth. The cost to society vastly exceeds any revenue that could be received by taxes. Same with crack cocaine.

 Dreadwinter wrote:
Nobody is saying legalization will solve all of the problems, but it will reduce all of them in a major way. From there, they can be managed much easier.

How? Show me specifically how Meth and Crack would be "managed easier" or that the problem would be reduced "in a major way".

The closest thing I have seen to a possible solution is Portugal's decriminalization of the addict's drug use and pushing them into treatment instead of prison. The problem with this in the US is that treatment centers are almost always full to capacity and drug offenses often include non-drug crimes such as theft, breaking & entering, etc. so the user is likely headed to prison anyway. Then there are the civil liberties issues. In the US, we simply cannot force people into treatment no matter how impaired they are or how many lives it would save. So what works in another country isn't easily imported to ours.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Eldarain wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:
War on Drugs is fading away though. Look at how many states are thinking of legalizing "weed" for consumer use. Its going to change to Tax on Drugs.
Though the hardcore opiates I can see the fight going on for awhile.

Unless they were peddled by a doctor. The War on Drugs looks more like a bid for monopolization when Pharma, Cigarettes and Alcohol are considered.

In Washington State, the revenue expected from pot sales isn't coming in as much as was anticipated. Illegal pot growers can still import their stuff to Washington and sell it cheaper than the legal growers can, thus the black market still exists and is a significant portion of sales in Washington State. Gangs and cartels haven't really been hurt by legalization. In other words, legalization isn't doing what was promised because the taxes are so high the criminals can easily undercut the legal stuff and make a lot of money. Also, downtown Seattle stinks. Seriously, it is not a pleasant odor.

As a side note, Washington and Colorado are being treated at as laboratory experiments by the Fed. Legalization/decriminalization hasn't been in place long enough to get good metrics on how effective it is which is why everyone is in a sort of holding pattern nationally. Also, the effects of pot use on people is another thing being looked at in these states and that will need a long term study to get the facts straight.

Depends on the addict. Some want out, some want more. Lets try not to assume everybody is the same. So what will legalizing meth do? Fewer arrests, safer manufacture, and higher grade product. That means fewer meth lab explosions and less death because of gakky product. This also means you will be freeing up a lot of money we can also put towards rehab centers for those that want to quit. Pretty easy question. Actually, I just answered both your questions, very easily! Wow!

As for your black market argument, there is a black market for everything. It shows that the product is not accessible to everybody. The problem is that not everybody can grow their own, like it should be. instead, only a certain amount of places are given the OK to grow and sell. That causes a low supply. But if the demand is high, people are going to be paying more. The problem isnt with legalization, it is with half-assed legalization.

 Breotan wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
WA has collected over $200 million in tax receipts from marijuana

And yet the black market still exists and takes in more than the legal market.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/05/legal-pot-and-the-black-market/481506/

The new system has clearly not replaced, or even threatened, corner dealers either in Washington or Colorado. Rather, they fit into the cracks of a new world, where middle-class stoners are able to engage in a favorite pastime without fear of prosecution, and an expensive legal market keeps everyone else looking for a bargain. The result: Small-time, under-the-table dealing remains lucrative enough to entice young black men to cross the line, to be arrested far more frequently than their white peers. And the hustle continues.

Actually, the biggest fear I have with legal pot is that the tobacco companies will come in and take over the market. Once they start dumping chemicals into the pot, you'll see all the same health issues you see with tobacco but by then it will be accepted and society will have forgotten the lessons learned and paid so dearly for.

That's the problem with "sin taxes" they are punitive by nature so it doesn't discourage illegal sales. Eric Garner was a habitual offender of illegally selling individual cigarettes so people could avoid the taxes. Marijuana is more popular than tobacco so if people can get it easily without having to pay heavy taxes they'll do it. Making something legal and then taxing it heavily to discourage it's use is bad policy. It makes no sense to punish people for choosing to do something that's perfectly legal and it incentivizes black markets and illegal behavior. If states/municipalities with legal marijuana only levied the normal sales tax on it the legalization would have a larger positive effect.

Smoking cigarettes is a declining behavior. It's still legal but fewer people are choosing to smoke because we know it's bad for you. If drugs like meth were legal but we all still knew it was a terribly destructive habit I don't see why usage would significantly increase just because of legalization. All of the crimes associated with drug additction would still be illegal and still be prosecuted, we'd just stop punishing people just for using/possessing drugs.

Everyone knows Meth is a terribly destructive habit. Hell, one of the most popular tv shows ever was showcasing that very fact.

Meth growth is still climbing though.

 djones520 wrote:
Everyone knows Meth is a terribly destructive habit. Hell, one of the most popular tv shows ever was showcasing that very fact.

Meth growth is still climbing though.

Possibly due to the Hollywood drama spun into the business of making meth. Add it into that it's pretty damn easy to make, and no wonder it's booming.

 djones520 wrote:
Everyone knows Meth is a terribly destructive habit. Hell, one of the most popular tv shows ever was showcasing that very fact.

Meth growth is still climbing though.

If the prohibition against meth is already proven to be wholly ineffective then what's the positive in continuing it? We can legalize it and regulate it while increasing education about it and get the govt trying to put users into rehab instead of prison. If we've reached the point where widespread meth use is inevitable then our policies should reflect that reality.

Like all stories, there's another side to this. Most of the time the drug dealer who got pinched is begging to provide information to our narcotics guys in exchange for a good plea deal or a dismissal of their charges. He isn't even approached by our narcotics people. Having a felony on your record is a strong incentive to help law enforcement. Even more so if it isn't your first one and will likely face a prison sentence if you were distributing.

Most of the time they promise the world but only deliver one minor dealer, then act like they don't know anyone else in the area. Then we prosecute them anyway because they failed to deliver. I've done this dance so many times I know all the steps. And I'd rather have the risk be on them than an undercover officer.

For those of you complaining about not funding treatment, that isn't entirely true. Often I'm revoking peoples' probation for drug offenses that refused to go to court ordered treatment. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make them drink. Every now and then someone surprises me and successfully completes their treatment, but most go right back to using and/or dealing. Some even have great jobs, but deal on the side. Nothing is sadder than seeing someone who makes more than me dealing. The poor people I can at least understand.

I don't understand how people can throw their lives and families away for this junk. There's a popular myth these days about the non-violent drug offender. Drugs almost always lead to more crime. Be it burglaries, theft, credit card fraud, drug induced traffic accidents, or domestic violence. I've seen young kids sent to the emergency room by drugs. It will always be my express pleasure to prosecute habitual drug offenders, as I want none of them in my community.

For some reason few manage to use in controlled amounts in the privacy of their own homes without bothering others. If this was the case I wouldn't have a problem with it. I always shake my head when I get another report of dumb kids with drugs in their cars. If you're going to use, do it in your home and don't bother anyone. You won't find yourself in a situation like that described in the OP.

Safer manufacture is another popular myth. In California marijuana simply is no longer enforced. BHO (butane hash oil) can be produced if you get a permit. The trouble is these permits are just a cheap tax to raise money, and don't impose any safety restrictions. The last drug conference I went to we watched dopers light themselves on fire making that stuff legally. Meth is even more volatile. That's why we have a specially equipped response team for meth labs. The last thing I want is my neighbor getting a permit to produce a volatile narcotic.

Most people do use in the privacy of their own homes. You are only catching the ones who have either done something stupid or got incredibly unlucky. The vast majority of drug users never get in to trouble with the law. You have a bias because you see "so many people" go through the system but in reality, it is a small percentage. I, personally, have never been in trouble with law enforcement in any way. Despite my drug use.

I find it ridiculous in a country where freedom is supposed to be the most important thing, we take it away from people who make personal choices about drugs. Then when we make life as hard for them as possible, we get upset when they resort to crime to survive.

 Dreadwinter wrote:
Most people do use in the privacy of their own homes. You are only catching the ones who have either done something stupid or got incredibly unlucky.

My point exactly. We don't go hunting for private users. They come to us frequently.

You missed my entire point that it is not as frequently as you think it is.

 Dreadwinter wrote:
You missed my entire point that it is not as frequently as you think it is.

I had to go to college twice. I think I've got a firm grasp on the amount of recreational users that never get pinched. Many of them are now practicing lawyers.

 Monkey Tamer wrote:

For some reason few manage to use in controlled amounts in the privacy of their own homes without bothering others.

Really? Because this comment directly contradicts what you said.

As far as BHO manufacture, it is pretty safe in a well ventilated or outside area. The problem comes when you are forced to do it in an area that is not either of these so you do not get caught. Considering it is still not legal to do a lot of these things in California, I assume they were attempting to do it without being caught.

However, most extracts are made in labs in legal states like Colorado, they are also not made with Butane as the way of collecting the THC from the plant.

http://www.coloradoextraction.com/

Don't do drugs kids, you might end up a lawyer and no one wants that.

You know, I read the OP post and thought maybe there'd finally be a wonderful discussion on OT. We could talk about not drugs, but the way we fight them. How police bully people into situations that are incredible dangerous, and that they have no business being in, and how there's near no accountability of police for when these people get hurt or even killed. We could talk about the reality that someone has been killed over $20 of weed without debating drug use, because how in the hell is there even a question about the how wrong it is that someone wound up dead over a Jackson.

Then I read the thread.

Why was I so optimistic about this topic?

Why would you assume a thread involving a kid killed directly because of our war on drugs would not talk about the war on drugs?

 Dreadwinter wrote:
Why would you assume a thread involving a kid killed directly because of our war on drugs would not talk about the war on drugs?

I don't think the thread is talking about the drug war, hence why I said;

We could talk about not drugs, but the way we fight them

This thread reads like a check off list of a generic "why do people do drugs, and why isn't weed legal" conversation. It stopped being about the drug war, or even the original topic a dozen posts in, and half of those posts were a really bitter and defeating discussion about whether America or Mexico has it worse, because lets not talk about why people die lets talk about whose death(s) was more depressing

 TheCustomLime wrote:
So what? Thousands of Mexicans died because of the cartels. Am I supposed to feel bad for one white kid?

(Apologies if I come off as incensed. I have family ties to Mexico.)

Edit: To clarify my thoughts, I do feel bad for the informant that got shot. Especially since he was pressured into doing it by local cops when he wasn't really qualified for it.But when the thread title is "Casualties on the war on drugs" and it's just about an American student in North Dakota it rubs me the wrong way. Especially since Americans are largely responsible for the violence in Mexico.

Exalted to the nth degree. The Latinos I know tell me the Gringos don't give a gak aboutBrown people dying as long as they get their drugs. Let one Gringo get killed and it's suddenly a catastrophe. This is something I've said for years and why I have no problem with Latinos coming to this country in order to escape the hell hole down there the drug users here were accomplices in creating.


This man is right on the mark:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=VYU25aJpg5o

 Tannhauser42 wrote:

 jreilly89 wrote:


I don't know the right way to get rid of drug cartels, but America's current policies obviously aren't working.

There is no magic bullet solution to the drug problem. You can't force people who don't want help to get help. All I'll say, is that people who think we're losing the war on drugs, don't realize that we could be losing a whole lot worse than we are.

While I agree that there is no magic bullet, I do think we can look at what other similarly industrialized/civilized countries have done, and at least emulate it. By that I mean, take a look at what Portugal and Spain have done, see that it works and actually has cut down on other types of crime on top of clearing out a bunch of prison space.

 Krinsath wrote:

 cuda1179 wrote:
So.... let me get this strait. A young narcotics dealer gets busted for peddling his supply on school grounds. He directly contributed to a cruddier society and likely funded worse guys (his suppliers).

In order to save his own rear from the punishment he new awaited him he decided to be a rat instead.

While I feel sympathy for his family I don't think the world is necessarily worse off without him. He knew the risks going in and he was an adult.

Point of order: Cannabis/marijuana is not legally defined as a narcotic. .

Wrong. On a Federal level Marijuana is still classified as a schedule one narcotic.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
So, apparently there is a little snag that might pop up at some point. States that are legalizing weed might be in for shock. Regardless of what they say, there is NO legal sale of recreational weed in the US. It is still illegal under federal law. What does that mean? Technically states can not tax it, as it is proceeds from an illegal sale. If the Federal Government ever got a stick up its butt, they very well could force the states to cough up every cent they have ever collected in taxes. Those taxes are technically proceeds of the sale of illegal drugs and the DEA can confiscate them.

 Dreadwinter wrote:

 Monkey Tamer wrote:

For some reason few manage to use in controlled amounts in the privacy of their own homes without bothering others.

Really? Because this comment directly contradicts what you said.

As far as BHO manufacture, it is pretty safe in a well ventilated or outside area. The problem comes when you are forced to do it in an area that is not either of these so you do not get caught. Considering it is still not legal to do a lot of these things in California, I assume they were attempting to do it without being caught.

However, most extracts are made in labs in legal states like Colorado, they are also not made with Butane as the way of collecting the THC from the plant.

http://www.coloradoextraction.com/

Allow me to clarify. The ones that wind up in front of me are the ones I'm referring to. I realize there are plenty that don't get caught. Just like there's plenty of drunk drivers that didn't get caught this weekend.

And no, BHO isn't perfectly safe outside. One doper lights up like an idiot and kaboom! And every single BHO fire I watched at laughed at occurred in a permitted operation. Despite the law not caring about it in California the DEA has plenty of pictures in their slideshow from that state. Some put it in their refrigerator because they think it will be more potent. The gas seeps out, falls to the bottom, then the compressor kicks on. Instant dead dopers.

You can pretty much pick the posters in here who've never dabbled in their lives. They're always the first ones to shout that drug users are nasty criminals and society is better off for having them shut away for good.

Outside of America many countries are moving from a 'drug addiction is acriminal offence' to 'drug addiction is a sickness' and are seeing usage rates and prison numbers drop.

I'm currently in Thailand where the penalties for drugs are some of the worlds harshest. It's easier to get drugs here than back home in New Zealand.

Thanks to the OP for sharing that first story. It's a pretty powerful story about what is wrong with treating very minor drugs like marijuana as criminal offences.

 Breotan wrote:
Please tell me what problems will be solved by making Meth legal. Meth addicts don't want treatment, they want more meth. Meth addicts can't hold jobs so they turn to crime to fund their addiction. You rarely find meth addicts in treatment except for when treatment is imposed on them as part of the criminal justice process and even then recidivism is very high.

None of this is correct. I don't know the exact number, but a very large number of meth addicts are high functioning - they continue to work and function as part of society. I know of two people who revealed their meth addiction. One talked about it when he broke up from his long time girlfriend, the other when he started going to rehab. Both were working people, one of them continued to work while working their way off the drug. Obviously that's just anecdotal, but here's a stat for you - in Australia about 230,000 working people take ice, compared to about 50,000 unemployed people.

Nor do meth addicts refuse treatment any more than with any other addictive substance. As with all addictions the much greater hurdle is the shortage of decent treatment facilities.

I'm not in favour of legalising meth. It's a really dangerous drug. But that's all the more reason we should understand the drug as it really is, and how it really affects society, and not just rely on what's been presented in crude scare campaigns.

 Monkey Tamer wrote:

 Dreadwinter wrote:

 Monkey Tamer wrote:

For some reason few manage to use in controlled amounts in the privacy of their own homes without bothering others.

Really? Because this comment directly contradicts what you said.

As far as BHO manufacture, it is pretty safe in a well ventilated or outside area. The problem comes when you are forced to do it in an area that is not either of these so you do not get caught. Considering it is still not legal to do a lot of these things in California, I assume they were attempting to do it without being caught.

However, most extracts are made in labs in legal states like Colorado, they are also not made with Butane as the way of collecting the THC from the plant.

http://www.coloradoextraction.com/

Allow me to clarify. The ones that wind up in front of me are the ones I'm referring to. I realize there are plenty that don't get caught. Just like there's plenty of drunk drivers that didn't get caught this weekend.

And no, BHO isn't perfectly safe outside. One doper lights up like an idiot and kaboom! And every single BHO fire I watched at laughed at occurred in a permitted operation. Despite the law not caring about it in California the DEA has plenty of pictures in their slideshow from that state. Some put it in their refrigerator because they think it will be more potent. The gas seeps out, falls to the bottom, then the compressor kicks on. Instant dead dopers.

Nowhere did I say it was perfectly safe outside. I did say it is safe outside. I also assumed that people would understand that butane is flammable and you cannot have fire near it. You are really only proving that people need to take a basic chemistry class or read the bottle of butane before attempting to make BHO. But, this would all be a non-issue if it was not illegal and people used the alcohol extraction method or common sense.

 Monkey Tamer wrote:
And no, BHO isn't perfectly safe outside. One doper lights up like an idiot and kaboom! And every single BHO fire I watched at laughed at occurred in a permitted operation. Despite the law not caring about it in California the DEA has plenty of pictures in their slideshow from that state. Some put it in their refrigerator because they think it will be more potent. The gas seeps out, falls to the bottom, then the compressor kicks on. Instant dead dopers.

We best ban all flammable substances then to protect all the idiots

 LordofHats wrote:
You know, I read the OP post and thought maybe there'd finally be a wonderful discussion on OT. We could talk about not drugs, but the way we fight them. How police bully people into situations that are incredible dangerous, and that they have no business being in, and how there's near no accountability of police for when these people get hurt or even killed. We could talk about the reality that someone has been killed over $20 of weed without debating drug use, because how in the hell is there even a question about the how wrong it is that someone wound up dead over a Jackson.

Then I read the thread.

Why was I so optimistic about this topic?

When the thread is titled "Casualties of the war on drugs" instead of say "Police bully kid into becoming informant, gets shot" it's hard not to fall into a discussion framed as a debate of the overall drug war.

But I think I'm going to stay out of this thread from now on as I don't believe I can remain (Even on the surface) unbiased in this discussion as, again, it hits too close to home.

Ya i was going to respond to the poster that blamed Americans for Mexico's problems. I mean it's not like "white kids" are holding guns to they're heads and making them cartel members. But I'll just leave it alone too.

 Breotan wrote:

Everybody except those killed by drunk drivers. Or those who's employment/families are ruined by alcoholism. Or the cost to the economy of the chronic homeless who are alcoholics, those who need medical care for alcohol related conditions such as liver failure, etc.

Now add to that all the extra problems from all the other drugs legalized. Robberies and muggings will still be a thing because meth addicts can't hold down a job to afford drugs even if they were legal. And prostitutes? What about them? Many women do it voluntarily but many more do not. Countries that legalized prostitution still have problems with human trafficking - how is that possible if legalization solves everything?

Would any of that go away if alcohol became illegal again?

 MarsNZ wrote:
You can pretty much pick the posters in here who've never dabbled in their lives. They're always the first ones to shout that drug users are nasty criminals and society is better off for having them shut away for good.

Outside of America many countries are moving from a 'drug addiction is acriminal offence' to 'drug addiction is a sickness' and are seeing usage rates and prison numbers drop.

I'm currently in Thailand where the penalties for drugs are some of the worlds harshest. It's easier to get drugs here than back home in New Zealand.

I've never dabbled in alcohol, tobacco and harmful drugs. I count that as a win for me. You seem to disagree? Tell me how engaging in harmful illegal activity makes your opinion on harmful illegal activity less biased and more valuable than mine.
I know people who have used drugs who are close friends and not nasty criminals. They have supported criminal enterprise through their use of illicit substances, with all that entails. They are not using drugs now but they were not blameless innocents when they were.

The issue is that while users are victims in a sense, and 'sick' in a sense, they are also responsible for demand and therefore supply.

Besides, calling an 18-20 year old an adult is iffy. Sure, they're legally an adult, but most are still new to the real world.

Glad to see another human's life means so much to you.

Yet the government gives them heavy weapons, artillery, and mandates they follow the military code of justice.

yellowfever wrote:
Ya i was going to respond to the poster that blamed Americans for Mexico's problems. I mean it's not like "white kids" are holding guns to they're heads and making them cartel members. But I'll just leave it alone too.

It's also not like violence is isolated to just those within the cartels. The drug users here in this country, through buying the cartels product, have given them the money they need to turn Mexico into a hell hole. Not that the drug users give a damn about it, or the tens of thousands of lives lost per year down there, of course.g

As far as your statement about White kids not holding guns to people's heads goes, people in Mexico and other countries south are murdered in large numbers by the cartels if they refuse to work for them.


http://www.nbcnews.com/id/38867434/ns/world_news-americas/t/migrants-killed-refusing-be-assassins-teen-says/#.V3z7xZBOKrU

Relapse wrote:

yellowfever wrote:
Ya i was going to respond to the poster that blamed Americans for Mexico's problems. I mean it's not like "white kids" are holding guns to they're heads and making them cartel members. But I'll just leave it alone too.

It's also not like violence is isolated to just those within the cartels. The drug users here in this country, through buying the cartels product, have given them the money they need to turn Mexico into a hell hole. Not that the drug users give a damn about it, or the tens of thousands of lives lost per year down there, of course.g

As far as your statement about White kids not holding guns to people's heads goes, people in Mexico and other countries south are murdered in large numbers by the cartels if they refuse to work for them.


http://www.nbcnews.com/id/38867434/ns/world_news-americas/t/migrants-killed-refusing-be-assassins-teen-says/#.V3z7xZBOKrU

Gee, like I said, it's almost like there's some sort of rampant police corruption and poverty that fund these cartels. Again, this is not "white people vs. brown people", this is "the war on drugs is failing".