Police becoming a military force? ABA Journal Article

[zukiphile]

I've seen it first hand what drug abuse can do to people. It's not just the people that use the drugs that are affected. The amount of property crime that goes along with drug use is staggering. Shoplifting, burglary and scrap metal/metal theft is through the roof near me. Every one I have caught or run across has been a drug user. Mostly heroin by me. I don't have a solution. Sadly.

I concur.

Speaking very broadly, virtually all of my libertarian friends see legal controls over drugs and prostitution has a moralistic overreach by meddlesome government.

What relatively affluent people with stable lives and sufficient personal resources usually do not see is the cascade of poor choices made by and presented to people with few resources who permit themselves to be exploited. As you note, those poor choices do not only hurt the user, but can also trap the family and friends who care for the user.

We do not need to be deaf to concerns about civil rights in order to recognize that at a pragmatic level these "social ills" do great harm to people.

 

[csmsss]

Tyme, you attributed a quote to me that was made by another poster. Please correct.

 

[deepcreek]

“The War on Drugs”

If you look past the surface of the “war on drugs” is an excuse to wage war/import arms/train/build armies that our government has used for decades. Our government has used it as a very effective export to create armies in many of our countries of interest.
The drugs then make it to our country and another army is ready to fight the “war” on its own civilians.

Though out the years their has been a good amount of proof that our “drug war” money gets spent on shadow armies that only take control of drug production before it comes into our country. So in many cases we pay for the drugs to flood the country then pay to have the population policed for them.

The “drug war” is massive global army that is a multi-billion dollar industry. And US tax payers pay for the foundation of it.

Legalize drugs and it would fade over night. In Colorado marijuana has been legalized and all of that profit went from illegal growers and Mexican gangs to city and state taxes, legit jobs, advertizing, shops, basically money into the community instead of the violent shadows of crime and illegal activity.

I am not saying drugs are good but it is proven that the drug war has not worked to decrease use, many studies show it has only increased use. It has only turned users to criminals and increased price the price and profit of drugs.
Drugs are bad so is alcohol the difference is people don't need to commit crimes to get alcohol and gangs cannot profit from the sales.

 

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Many of the negative consequences of drugs come from the economic turf battles to control illegal traffic as happened in Prohibition.

The rise in gun violence we saw was at the same time as the crack epidemic. It was market control. Arresting the kingpins didn't stop drugs and it led to more gun crime as folks battled to get to the top.

Economic opportunity is the driver. Fix that and you control a large number of drug users. There are no longer gin mills for little kids in the UK as the economic and labor picture changed.

 

[zukiphile]

Legalize drugs and it would fade over night.

That is not the Dutch experience.

Illicit drug markets do have some interesting economic characteristics, including a demand curve that can rise with increased cost that is generally associated with the effort at prohibition.

We have had legalized alcohol for a very long time, but I still step over some side characters who built their lives around it. That does not mean that prohibiting that well established facet of our culture would be the better policy; we should take from it that simply legalizing a new class of harmful but merely recreational pharmaceuticals will not improve that culture.

As Connecticut trooper suggested, we are not faced with any easy solutions, full legalization included.

 

[zincwarrior]

Agreed.

 

[deepcreek]

That is not the Dutch experience.

Much of the Dutch problem was "drug tourism" they were still surrounded by drug prohibition so the crime elements were still there and thriving.

Nothing in life is easy, milk sales are not easy or bread, water treatment, schools every thing in community has problems but non violent problems do not need sub machine guns and armies to fix them.

 

[Mike38]

The "war on drugs" certainly has had little impact on drug use anyway either…

I respectfully disagree. The tons, literally tons, of illegal drugs confiscated by law enforcement yearly, would suddenly become available on the streets if the “War on drugs” came to a sudden halt. Those tons of drugs would escalate the overdose problems, family problems, societal problems common with drug abuse. There are those that say crime would drop if the “War on drugs” ended. I disagree. Okay, it would no longer be a crime to posses, transport, sell or use drugs. But, motor vehicle deaths, overdosing, family problems (domestic abuse) and societal problems (stoned people roaming the streets) would increase enough to make up for the once illegal act of position, sales and transportation.

Being in EMS, I have seen drug related problems that would make a normal person cringe with fear. Stop the “War on drugs” and those drug related problems would multiply out of control. Money saved by stopping the “War on drugs” would have to be spent on EMS and Hospitals. Also the morgue and funeral homes, but that part doesn’t bother me so much as it’s Darwin’s way of thinning the heard.

The answer? Unfortunately, I don’t have one, short of executing drug dealers / users on the spot, I’m of little help.

 

[deepcreek]

I respectfully disagree. The tons, literally tons, of illegal drugs confiscated by law enforcement yearly, would suddenly become available on the streets if the “War on drugs” came to a sudden halt. Those tons of drugs would escalate the overdose problems, family problems, societal problems common with drug abuse.

Even law enforcement and the DEA admits they only seize a small portion of drugs on the street. Drugs are ready available to those who seek them.

To think that the drug war is holding back a massive tsunami of drug abuse is false and outdated as "reefer madness".

The answer? Unfortunately, I don’t have one, short of executing drug dealers / users on the spot, I’m of little help.

Many Muslim countries do this and still have massive drug abuse rates.

Many people in the day of alcohol prohibition wanted to do this with alcohol users. As we see today many productive members of society use alcohol in a safe manner, their is a difference between use and abuse.

 

[spacemanspiff]

Legalize drugs and it would fade over night.

Its been years since I have debated this particular notion, but my opinion hasn't changed. In fairness, the explanation given to me by a dear friend who believes that fairytale, is that addicts commit crimes solely out of anxiety of getting their next fix. And her solution was not just to legalize the drugs but also to allow government to provide limited amounts of drugs. Thus taking away the 'need' for an addict to commit crimes in order to procure money for buying those drugs.

I don't know if she pulled that concept out of thin air, or had knowledge of such a system working in other countries, but I am convinced it would not work in American society.

Citizens of this country are enthralled with taking everything to the extreme. Doesn't matter if its a hobby or a sport or just entertainment, we want to see the biggest, the baddest, the fattest, the fastest, the super ultra mostest extreme of anything and everything.

That same mentality also applies to drug addicts.

 

[speedrrracer]

As Connecticut trooper suggested, we are not faced with any easy solutions, full legalization included.

Yet we have enforced solutions which are obviously failing and having devastating effects on our society.

If society cannot find a solution to a difficult problem, it should realize its limitations, and defer, rather than creating "solutions" which are as bad as, or worse than, the problems themselves.

 

[44 AMP]

You will never solve the "problem" completely, until you can change the fact that people like to get "high". And that's not going to happen anytime soon, if ever.

Ancient people developed brewing and fermenting, and found plants that could be eaten or smoked to make them feel good. That hasn't changed, and isn't going to.

I see two separate, but intertwined problems. First, that (some) drugs are illegal, and second, how we go about enforcing those laws.

We are constantly hearing about the "costs to society", and while there is a validity to the concept, I think we have gone well overboard with our concern about it. We too often look at results from a group, without considering that the group is made up of individuals.

The focus on possession and use of drugs as criminal, is, I feel, the wrong way to deal with the problem. What people do under the influence is what causes the problem, not the possession of a plant or compound.

A drunk driver nearly killed my family. It wasn't the beer that made that happen, it was the drinker. And what he choose to do after drinking.

In some ways, its a lot like gun control. The problem isn't the guns, its what some people do with them.

And what is the answer our govt and (some) segments of our society give us? A top down war on things, more than on harmful actions.

Of course, if you don't have a thing, you cannot do bad with it. So we all get forced to live so that stupid people are slightly less likely to be stupid?

As a people, we are kind, caring and considerate (of course individuals can be petty and spiteful). We dislike seeing anyone hurt or suffering, even through their own actions. This is a noble sentiment, but there are limits to which this is practical, or effective. AND those limits must be balanced against our personal liberties and freedoms.

We make compromises to our freedoms all day, everyday. That's how society functions. We have set rules, and generally follow them. About virtually everything. However, where one sets the rules, and how they are enforced is critical to our liberty.

Our history is full of things that are now crimes, that once were not.

We've tried a lot of things, and often the "solution" only made the problem worse, or actually created more problems than it solved. To my eyes, the war on drugs has created more, and worse problems than it has solved.

In war, when you consistently fail to achieve your objectives, its time to seriously consider changing tactics. I think that's quite apt to the war on drugs as well.

 

[warrior poet]

Maybe making the penalty for having drugs something like... using every bit of drugs you are found with within 10 minutes... it would get rid of the market pretty fast, and make marijuana legal.

Yes, I am being sarcastic... sort of.

 

[zukiphile]

In some ways, its a lot like gun control. The problem isn't the guns, its what some people do with them.

And what is the answer our govt and (some) segments of our society give us? A top down war on things, more than on harmful actions.

Of course, if you don't have a thing, you cannot do bad with it. So we all get forced to live so that stupid people are slightly less likely to be stupid?

As a people, we are kind, caring and considerate (of course individuals can be petty and spiteful). We dislike seeing anyone hurt or suffering, even through their own actions. This is a noble sentiment, but there are limits to which this is practical, or effective. AND those limits must be balanced against our personal liberties and freedoms.

We make compromises to our freedoms all day, everyday. That's how society functions. We have set rules, and generally follow them. About virtually everything. However, where one sets the rules, and how they are enforced is critical to our liberty.

Our history is full of things that are now crimes, that once were not.

We've tried a lot of things, and often the "solution" only made the problem worse, or actually created more problems than it solved. To my eyes, the war on drugs has created more, and worse problems than it has solved.

One way in which this issue differs substantially from that of firearms possession is that it is quite easy to note all sorts of beneficial uses for firearms. On the other hand, I would be hard-pressed to note the benefits of smoking crack.

This issue contains some extremes that can cloak substantial agreement, and that when it ignored or conflated can stoke an illusory disagreement.

I would guess that very few people are enthused about locking up people who smoke marijuana. 30 years ago, Bill Buckley wrote about the injustice of sentencing a young man to 20 years of incarceration over a small amount of marijuana.

On the other hand, crack and methamphetamines are grotesquely addictive and all too often can be the first step on a short and ugly journey to death. I believe it would be difficult to persuasively argue that the prohibition on crack and methamphetamines is worse than the problems we would see from legalizing their use.

 

[BigD_in_FL]

You will never solve the "problem" completely, until you can change the fact that people like to get "high". And that's not going to happen anytime soon, if ever.

And those folks do that because their reality is, in their minds, too painful to deal with on a daily basis.

Too many are too concerned with what they DONT have and that leads to a lot of societal ills, envy, grudges, depression, etc., all feeding the drug abuse issue'.

Might as well tax it, regulate it, ala Nevada and prostitution, and use the police resources for better things. As to the title of the thread, the police where I live have been a paramilitary force for some time, including having APC's, breaching teams, SWAT, etc.

Maybe if they spent more time back walking beats, talking to the locals and getting to know them better, instead of waiting for something to go bonkers and then react like a SEAL team, they would have a better image, folks might get along better, and some of the crime issues might lessen

 

[Dr Big Bird PhD]

Having lived in California for 5 years, the Marijuana, Coke, LSD, and Ecstacy/MDMA trade is practically a joke. While Mary J might be partially legal, the other three are far from it. Legalizing all 3 would not effect their consumption at all, it would only lower prices and get the financial leverage off illegal drug cartels.

For anyone that is older and doesn't believe me, go to an electric music carnival. 90% of the people there are on Acid or Coke or Ecstacy, or a combination. That's not even including pot or alcohol. Mind you the one I went to (I was the designated driver, I have a severe dislike for real drugs like this) had over 100,000 people. EDC in Las Vegas brought 4-5 times as many people. These concerts get these numbers all over the country.

I want you all to realize how much Ecstacy/Pot/Acid is being consumed, just on special bi-annual events. Millions of pills at each show.

One of my best friends is an associate at PWC and another at NY Life. They are in the minority of those who don't do coke on a regular basis.


Anyone who thinks the War on Drugs is anything more than a moneypit sham is going to extensive lengths to remain delusional. I'm sorry if I sound terse and confrontational, but it is literally the least effective enforcement of law in the country.


"If you look at the drug war from a purely economic point of view, the role of the government is to protect the drug cartel. That's literally true."-Milton Friedman

 

[zukiphile]

As a general matter, I cannot agree that the "War on [....]" formula can be problematic to the degree it invites a suspension of our ordinary caution.

Cops firmly believe in one thing.

This kind of statement is rarely accurate.

I have yet to encounter the group who do not mirror the basic bell curve of humanity generally with a small number of extraordinary people at one end, and a small number of people one would rather not meet at the other end.

POs, like attorneys, have an inherent PR problem: when most people encounter one, they are not having a good day.

 

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Folks, a generalized insult to all police doesn't do us any good. We have members who are police and serve.

Saying that all police are XYZ is as useful as saying all gun owners are rabid nuts.

So let's skip that. I've deleted some. Next time is an infraction.

Thanks

Glenn

 

[Conn. Trooper]

I can not remember a single burglary, scrap metal theft, or shoplifter in my 17 years in LE that was not to buy drugs. I have arrested a heroin addict that was doing 6-10 burglaries a day. Every day, he got up and went stealing to buy heroin. Thats it. I had one that I investigated where he stole the jewelry box of an 80+ year old man. Took what he thought was worth money and chucked the rest in a dumpster. That jewelery box cam from India. The victim brought it back from WW2 and had it for 60 years, until a heroin addict stole it, and then tossed it in the trash. That is one arrest out of many.

Making drugs legal is not the answer.

 

[Dr Big Bird PhD]

I can not remember a single burglary, scrap metal theft, or shoplifter in my 17 years in LE that was not to buy drugs. I have arrested a heroin addict that was doing 6-10 burglaries a day. Every day, he got up and went stealing to buy heroin. Thats it. I had one that I investigated where he stole the jewelry box of an 80+ year old man. Took what he thought was worth money and chucked the rest in a dumpster. That jewelery box cam from India. The victim brought it back from WW2 and had it for 60 years, until a heroin addict stole it, and then tossed it in the trash. That is one arrest out of many.

Making drugs legal is not the answer.

How a person lives their life is their problem

How the government wastes my money is my problem