Police Strike Innocents Again!!

mrat, I know that policy exists.

However, we make a serious mistake of logic if we assume we cannot change one dismal governmental policy because of a second dismal governmental policy. They are both goofy.

The world is not static, it is dynamic. The War on Some Drugs must end, while there is still a little of the Bill of Rights left. And, ending that 'War' will likely require the rationalization of other policies as well ... policies that are also significantly flawed.

Regards from AZ
 
The problem with legalizing drugs is they want us, the american taxpayers to pay for their treatment and upkeep.

Mrat, that's pretty funny. So, instead of paying for their "treatment and upkeep", you'd rather spend TENS OF BILLIONS on more prisons, more cops, more "no-knock" raids, more judges, more prison guards, more DEA, more FBI, more Ruby Ridges and Wacos, more.....

Get the idea? Man, methinks you (and others with your mindset) need DESPERATELY to look at the "big picture". And please.... do it soon....
 
I believe it should all be legal however, if your caught in a crime while under the influence you should get a mandatory stiff sentance. No plea bargain, No parole, No bail.
The same should apply for guns. Making them legall across the board, but punish the hell out of those that abuse their right.

------------------
"It is easier to get out of jail then it is a morgue"
Live long and defend yourself!
John 3:16
NRA lifer
GOA
GSSF
KABA
 
double tap, sorry
------------------
"It is easier to get out of jail then it is a morgue"
Live long and defend yourself!
John 3:16
NRA lifer
GOA
GSSF
KABA

[This message has been edited by leedesert (edited September 15, 2000).]
 
Leedesert, I agree. The same is true for alcohol.

And the TAXES collected on the sales could be used EXCLUSIVELY for treatment of "addicts", instead of the current policy of using general fund tax dollars. Let them pay for their own treament via their "sin tax".

Works for me.
 
Speaking from a family memeber who has been in trouble with drugs his whole life, I don't think legalizing it would have help him out or made things better. I feel if he could go down to a gas station and buy some crank and a pound of weed he would be dead right now. Right now he is in jail on a parole violation for having crank on him and is doing a years worth of time. I much rather have him in jail than six feet in the ground and praise the cops that have arrested him all the times that he had drugs on him. He is enrolled in a fire program and is fighting Californias wild fires as we speak. So he is just not sitting in there rotting away, but actual doing some good. Some people would waste there entire lives on seaching for money to buy these legal drugs because they are addicted to them. I agree alcohol is a strong drug but when compared to coke it does not even come close. How would you limit the amount of coke someone could buy? Everyone knows that it is easy to OD and die on it. No company in the world would want to sell a product that could and would kill thousands of people every year. Yes I know cigerettes do,but you can't od on cigerettes like you can with coke or other sustances. Would you feel the same if a family memeber was legal buying it at a gas station and you found them dead in there room? I dont think so. Sounds real easy to just legalize it but there are just way to many complications that come with it that most people would not want to deal with. So there are mistakes being made by the SWAT teams recently, and I agree many times there are in the wrong. But what we need then is to better train these people and to alter the current laws on these types of raids. Sorry guys for the rant but it has been building up reading all these posts of this subject.

markd
 
MarkD, your ignorance is showing here.

People CAN and DO O.D. on alcohol all the time. Thousands die from it each year. Many are addicted to alcohol and cigarettes. Both are drugs. Much suffering has been brought to society because of these substances.

Before Prohibition, nearly every "illegal" drug was legal here. Where do you think "Coca Cola" got its name from? To say that the "legal drugs" are okay (because they're legal?) but others aren't (because they're NOT legal?) is ridiculous.

If your family member (or mine for that matter) has an addiction problem, they need treatment. Either that, or they can O.D. and die off, and leave society in peace. Liquor isn't sold in the gas station on the corner, but evidently you think that drugs would be?

Sounds like you're making excuses. Folks like you just REFUSE to see the damage to society done by the "war on drugs". IMO, it's NOT worth the stripping of our civil rights in order to be "safe" from drugs.

Isn't it Ben Franklin who said "thoose that would give up essential liberties for temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety"?

I think you need to reflect long and hard on this issue, because you are DEAD WRONG, and the wrongness is proven by LEA's on a daily basis. Just ask that 11 year old boy "accidentally" shot by LEO's. Oops! You can't, because he's DEAD (but your family member is alive and doing "good things".) Was that an equitable trade? Personally, I think not. You, however, may have a different opinion.

Learn the lesson of history. Unpucker your sphincter, and reassess your position.

Prohibition never works. Period. Not against booze, not against drugs, not against guns. Hold the INDIVIDUAL responsible for their actions when abusing the item in question, but do NOT restrict its availability via "prior restraint". As a gun owner, I'm surprized and disheartened by your inability to see the connection. This is why we're LOSING...
 
Sorry Mark, but I disagree. The war on drugs hasn't stopped addiction and hasn't stopped addicts from dying. But even if it DID...I don't mean to be brutal and I don't wish you or your relative any grief, but it's better that a few drug addicts die than the rights we have fought several wars and sacrificed millions of lives to defend be given up for nothing.
 
Well I feel I am not showing my ignorance on this subject, just expressing my opinion on it. Not all of us see life through your eyes and feel the way you do about it. I'm sorry we do not see eye to eye on it, but that is the way life is. That is why we have civilized discussions such as this to see if we can come to some sort of compromise. Maybe if you have lived the life I have than you will have some sympathey for my beliefs.

markd
 
Maybe if you have lived the life I have than you will have some sympathey for my beliefs.

Mark, on many/most issues, I'd absolutely agree. But not on prohibition. Note: I WAS a hard-core party animal (MANY years ago), and walked away one day, because I didin't like how my head felt (like it was in a pillow case all the time).

No cravings, no uncontrollable desires, no nuttin. Just used up the last of it, and never bought more. (You can insert your drug(s) of choice here, as I did most of them.)

An "addict" IMO is a weak-willed person, who can't control their craving. I am one with food (and have the gut to prove it). I have no sympathy for ANY addict, myself included.

No high-horses or self-righteousness on this topic, dude. BTDT. Have the t-shirt.
 
There is no doubt that drug addiction is nasty, but loss of freedom is even nastier. I have never met a drug addict that couldn't score dope 24-7. I know there's a lot of illegal drugs out there, but a lot of people don't use it anyway. Just like alcohol, some people are alcoholics some are not. I think education, leagalization and treatment availability would benefit us much more then taking joe crank geek and locking him up in prison with real criminals and then letting him back out w/o treatment. The fact that some folks will screw themselves up is unfortunate, but where do we draw the line ? Some people are to incompotent to use plastic bags propperly but we haven't outlawed them. The drug war has caused too many casulities to our rights, and to individuals who , having not committed a real crime, have had their lives ruined by the court system. It is not easy and cut & dried, but I think the freedom is worth the cost, as it is this is not working.
 
Dennis you are very strong for being able to do that, but many people are not nearly strong enough to break the habits. It is just really sad to see people who you grew up with that were really smart and fun people to be around end up like zombies. Some people need strong authority figures to tell them what is right from wrong, because they are not able to reason for themseleves. I myself was a strong enough person to pull myself out of their loop because I feared the long arm of the law. That fear is what kept me in school and my nose clean. So that is where I am coming from.

markd
 
Some people need strong authority figures to tell them what is right from wrong, because they are not able to reason for themseleves.

That would be PARENTS, not "prior restraint" by the "nanny state". And I never considered leaving the drug culture to be a "strong" thing to do. It did nothing for me (in the long run) except cost me money (as do cigs & booze), and made me feel like sh*t. And THAT was reason enough to quit.

Humans suffer from many "addictions", and are strong in one area and weak in another. Is it genetic or behavioral? Are gays "made" that way? All these answers depend upon whom you ask. Tough questions, with no easy answers.

But the attempt to make our society "drug free" has NOT worked, in 20 years of trying. It will NEVER work. Neither will gun control. Ultimately, it's up to the INDIVIDUAL to be strong enough to walk away from destructive behavior. (That's why we're called "adults".)

The destruction of our freedoms in the name of Prohibition cannot be allowed. It was tried (for 10 years) in the 30's. Didn't work then, either. But it DID create the gangsters, and it DID fill up the jails. For what purpose, ultimately?

I oppose drug use. I also oppose ANY form of prohibition, which is, after all, the "nanny state" deciding what we, as their "children", are allowed to have.

And good for you on getting away from the cancer of drugs. Regardless of why you did, the fact remains that you were successful. You were strong. Your family member was not. Ultimately, that's just Darwinism in action.
 
Markd,

You mention how you appreciate all the times the cops have arrested your relative and put him away rather than him being 6 feet under if drugs were legalized and easy to get.

#1: Drugs are already easy to get if you're using them. You know who to go to....

#2: Would you feel the same way if, due to his addiction, he got in a situation where he raped/killed/assaulted/maimed or permanently disabled someone/s or all of the aforementioned? Or would you then say, "It would have been better off if he had died from his addiction, then no one else would have been hurt"? Just a question I think you should ask yourself....
 
Joe Q. Public helped the current season on rights by demanding that "criminals quit being released on technicalities" (I.E. read that rights violations). But instead of expecting law enforcement to work through proper channels we instead helped to do away with these "tecnicalities" for "the good of the people". I read a lot of articles in publications like Readers Digest proclaiming how unnessasary these rights were and how damaging upholding them is. Now that it's trickled down to us, we don't like it. When this first started happening a friend of mine, who happened to be a bleeding heart liberal so I took it with a grain of salt, said this would be the outcome. Now I eat crow because what he said has really come to pass.
I saw this same post on the AK15 website and wasn't surprized at how many LEO's defended the practice.
 
Dennis O is right, I dont care to say more about why, most of it has already been said.

It is sad but true :(

------------------
"Defiance"
And yet...it moves
(Galileo Galilie)

"Spay or Nuter your Socialist Pets"
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Dennis Olson:

Mrat, that's pretty funny. So, instead of paying for their "treatment and upkeep", you'd rather spend TENS OF BILLIONS on more prisons, more cops, more "no-knock" raids, more judges, more prison guards, more DEA, more FBI, more Ruby Ridges and Wacos, more.....

Get the idea? Man, methinks you (and others with your mindset) need DESPERATELY to look at the "big picture". And please.... do it soon....[/quote]

No I don't think I need to change my mindset. What I was saying in my post is that it is absolute BS that I (and all taxpayers) have to pay for the "teatment and upkeep" of some jacka$$ that wants to sit around all day and get high. If they want to do dope fine, but I will NEVER agree to one cent of my money going to these degenerates. These people need to get out of their poor me attitudes and get a job like the rest of us. Public assistance is supposed to be for someone who is disabled or down on their luck, not for someone who thinks welfare is a career and it is their right.
 
Mrat,

I was talking about ending the "War on Drugs", and legalizing (and controlling the dispensing of) drugs. YOU are talking about welfare. Sorry, wrong issue. Welfare and public assistance has NOTHING to do with legalizing drugs.

Besides, the taxes on those drugs could be channelled DIRECTLY into treatment programs, so no tax money would be used. You'd actually end up SAVING money (bucketloads), due to the fact that all that criminal infrastructure is no longer needed.

Also, you seem to be saying that anyone who does drugs will turn into a drooling basket case, and never benefit society again. Sounds a LOT like the anti's angle that putting a gun into the hands of an otherwise normal person turns them instantly into a raving serial killer.

Your stereotypes are showing, dude.

Evidently you also don't understand that the prices of LEGAL drugs would be so cheap that a drone at Micky-D's could afford his daily high. Also, most drug users are NOT addicts. They just use them recreationally.

I stand by my earlier statement that you should re-evaluate your opinions and position on this, and quickly.


------------------
"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary." - H.L. Mencken
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top