the people get the goverment they deserve

[luis545x39]

as some might know mexico had its presidential elections yestersay ( yes i am aware i no longer live there that being said its still my land i belive i am both an american and a mexican or a true mexican/american not an american of hispanic descent) and im sad to say the results didnt surprised me at all there were 3 mayor candidates ill just mention the party to make this simpler

PRI "partido revolucionario institucional" meaning revolutionary institutional party, it got its name by being the first party after the revolution, the revolution was a good thing but after the original leaders got killed captured escaped etc some bastards took advantage of the whole mess just to take power (note= this party was in power for about 72 years in a one "party democracy" where they party itself would choose the next candidate making these "the perfect dictatorship"  it was not untill the year 2000 untill they got out of power

PAN "partido accion nacional" meaning national action party finally won the elections on 2000 on 2004 it declared war on drug cartels (PRI just stood idley by as they commited their twisted treachery) election took place again on 2006 (presidential terms last 6 years on mexico) where they won again you guys might remeber that bold guy with the glasses well his name is Felipe Calderon he was actually a relatively good president

and finally PT "partido del trabajo" the workers party just a stupid socialist party which candidate lost in 2006 and kept bitching about it for 3 years making tv adds about it just a big spoiled 58 years old kid

anyway after PRI kept brainwashing the country for over 70 years by making our educational system shit and using their vast resources thet they gathered in such years they took advantage of the poor by doing this shit



here you can see some groceries an 500 pesos roughtly about 40 bucks its like voting on high school all over again its fucking ridiculous ho by the way they fucking won becouse of that shit i deeply belive this is americas future maybe even present just something to think about

going back to the title the ignorance of our people leed us to this

[Treaded]

Drug money buys an election. It's amazing how many Americans have no clue about what the impact of this is.  PRI gave rise to the Cartels and pretty much ignored their existence.  Sure under PRI the government would conduct a drug bust once in a blue moon but by and large it and the cartels that grew up under it stayed in a state of truce.  Prior to this election the Cartels (especially Los Zetas) dumped tons of money into PRI. 

Now that the era of Mexicos war on drugs is going to pretty much be over that means the cartels are once again going to grow in influence.  Expect even more drugs and crime to move north.  Even the statement by Nieto shows it pretty clearly:

"The fight against crime will continue with a new strategy to reduce violence and protect the lives of Mexicans," he said. "Let it be clear, with organized crime there will be no pacts or truce."

They'll go back to a once in a blue moon bust and the Mexican people will live in a somewhat safer state.  IT's now in our court as to how to contain the problems that are going to be coming north.  The obama administration is pretty tone deaf when it comes to border security however unlike Mexico local Sheriffs have a lot of power.  IMHO we're going to see a pretty big leap in cross border violence in the next six months.

 

[luis545x39]

maybe not much violence but definatly way more cartel presence but one thing is certain dark days lie ahead...

[EJR914]

Decriminalize or Legalize all drugs, and the cartels influence literally disappears over night.  It would be greatly reduced.

The reason this will never happen in the United States is that way too many politicians, bureaucracies, (CIA) and probably mainly Police Officers are making WAY too much money off the illegal drug trade to ever let them be decriminalized or legalized.

The "War on Drugs" is going to END one day, either because it is forced, or it can be ended because its the logical thing to do.  The choice is ours.  Its going to end one day, its just how do you want it to end?  By force, or by choice?

[Treaded]

EJ how would we pay for the astronomical increase in rehab and healthcare?  Every country thus far that has legalized has suffered both economically and socially for it. 

[special-k]

...Every country thus far that has legalized has suffered both economically and socially for it.

Poppycock.

[NOLA556]

...Every country thus far that has legalized has suffered both economically and socially for it.

Poppycock.

agreed. people are going to do it whether it's illegal or not. by legalizing, all you're doing is removing the violent black market element.

this whole debate really is pretty simple, mainly because we have a prime example in modern history. prohibition = Al Capone / war on drugs = Los Zetas. it really is just that simple.

[Treaded]

...Every country thus far that has legalized has suffered both economically and socially for it.

Poppycock.

OK, name a country.

[EJR914]

EJ how would we pay for the astronomical increase in rehab and healthcare?  Every country thus far that has legalized has suffered both economically and socially for it.

Just ANOTHER reason to end the NANNY STATE!  Fuck the Nanny State, Fuck the Welfare State.

I've got news for you Treaded, we are ALREADY paying for it!

Please click this link and read all of it.  Then get back at me.  http://www.cato.org/pubs/wtpapers/greenwald_whitepaper.pdf

[Treaded]

Already familiar with it.  I knew you were going to bring up Portugal because I've had this argument before.  The CATO report lacks a few data points and cuts off at a critical point in the data set (2005/2006). Lemme fill in some blanks.

The Portuguese have had a huge increase in what we would call "misdemeanor" or "civil infractions" through the drug policy. It has driven rehab demands and the requirements to increase the judicial system to handle the load (more $). Digging into Wikipedia brings this: "From 2000 to 2008, the number of people in Portugal receiving substitution treatment increased from 6040 to 25,808 (24,312 in 2007), 75 % of whom were in methadone maintenance treatment."  Again more $.

"Reported lifetime use of illicit drugs increased from 7.8% to 12%, lifetime use of cannabis increased from 7.6% to 11.7%, cocaine from 0.9% to 1.9%, ecstasy from 0.7% to 1.3%, and heroin from 0.7% to 1.1%. It has been proposed that this effect may have been been related to the candor of interviewees, who may have been inclined to answer more truthfully due to a reduction in the stigma associated with drug use. Statistical trends in neighboring Spain and Italy during the same period also suggested an unclear relation between decriminalization and increased drug use, comparatively"

If you go to the Euro Center for drug monitoring and addiction (http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/data/tre...ortugal#demand) it shows that the number of new clients entering treatment in Portugal during the following years: 2007: 5124, 2008: 7019, and  2009: 7643.  More $ every year.

One positive the CATO Institute study found that the EMCDDA stats concur with was that the Portuguese drug policy (along with an increase in HIV awareness programs) could be directly tied to a declining number of HIV cases. However the study also recognized an increase in the number of drug related deaths.

What I'd like to see is the cost in $ chart for the increases in rehab. But overall it looks like a mixed bag - more deaths from drugs and a higher # of rehab cases vs. lower HIV deaths.   

[NOLA556]

Already familiar with it.  I knew you were going to bring up Portugal because I've had this argument before.  The CATO report lacks a few data points and cuts off at a critical point in the data set (2005/2006). Lemme fill in some blanks.

The Portuguese have had a huge increase in what we would call "misdemeanor" or "civil infractions" through the drug policy. It has driven rehab demands and the requirements to increase the judicial system to handle the load (more $). Digging into Wikipedia brings this: "From 2000 to 2008, the number of people in Portugal receiving substitution treatment increased from 6040 to 25,808 (24,312 in 2007), 75 % of whom were in methadone maintenance treatment."  Again more $.

"Reported lifetime use of illicit drugs increased from 7.8% to 12%, lifetime use of cannabis increased from 7.6% to 11.7%, cocaine from 0.9% to 1.9%, ecstasy from 0.7% to 1.3%, and heroin from 0.7% to 1.1%. It has been proposed that this effect may have been been related to the candor of interviewees, who may have been inclined to answer more truthfully due to a reduction in the stigma associated with drug use. Statistical trends in neighboring Spain and Italy during the same period also suggested an unclear relation between decriminalization and increased drug use, comparatively"

If you go to the Euro Center for drug monitoring and addiction (http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/data/tre...ortugal#demand) it shows that the number of new clients entering treatment in Portugal during the following years: 2007: 5124, 2008: 7019, and  2009: 7643.  More $ every year.

One positive the CATO Institute study found that the EMCDDA stats concur with was that the Portuguese drug policy (along with an increase in HIV awareness programs) could be directly tied to a declining number of HIV cases. However the study also recognized an increase in the number of drug related deaths.

What I'd like to see is the cost in $ chart for the increases in rehab. But overall it looks like a mixed bag - more deaths from drugs and a higher # of rehab cases vs. lower HIV deaths.

that's all assuming that the taxpayer has an obligation to pay for all that crap. the way it should be: you decide to ruin your life with drugs, tough shit. you made your bed, sleep in it.
another thing that you seem to be overlooking is the stats on drug-related violent crime. of course, I've never seen those numbers for that country so they could say anything for all I know, but it's a key piece of the puzzle.

[Treaded]

Sadly Nola under the current system addiction is grounds for disability and medical treatment sponsored by the state.  Can you imagine what the screams from the "free shit army" would be if they tried to change that?  I agree, hell I believe we should piss test anyone applying for welfare. 

In reality knowing what Americans are like I can't honestly say they would be able to remain responsible.  I did a quick Google and came up with this page http://www.rehabinfo.net/drug-rehab/statistics/

There's a lot illustrating how the statistics show almost everything increased dramatically.  For ER visits alone from 2004 to 2009:

    Emergency room visits for nonmedical use of pharmaceuticals alone: 117 percent increase
    Emergency room visits for pharmaceuticals with illicit drugs: 97 percent increase
    Emergency room visits for pharmaceuticals with alcohol: 63 percent increase
    Emergency room visits for pharmaceuticals used with illicit drugs and alcohol: 76 percent increase

 That's a lot.  Really a lot. 

[thatGuy]

Wait a minute.. being a drug addict is a disability? Like a real recognized disability?

[luis545x39]

i belive we got a bit off topic

[Treaded]

In a way.  Once substance abuse has created irreversible damage that is not expected to improve if the person stops abusing, the condition becomes eligible for disability coverage if it prevents the person from engaging in work.  That includes mental conditions.

YUP - BOT.  "Pena Nieto said he will maintain President Felipe Calderon's strategy of using the military to target drug cartels and capture top criminals. But he vowed to focus on quickly bringing down the number of killings and kidnappings."

Anyone got a clue of how he intends to do that? 

[EJR914]

Already familiar with it.  I knew you were going to bring up Portugal because I've had this argument before.  The CATO report lacks a few data points and cuts off at a critical point in the data set (2005/2006). Lemme fill in some blanks.

The Portuguese have had a huge increase in what we would call "misdemeanor" or "civil infractions" through the drug policy. It has driven rehab demands and the requirements to increase the judicial system to handle the load (more $). Digging into Wikipedia brings this: "From 2000 to 2008, the number of people in Portugal receiving substitution treatment increased from 6040 to 25,808 (24,312 in 2007), 75 % of whom were in methadone maintenance treatment."  Again more $.

Don't make me laugh.  If you legalize drugs, why would there be an increase in judicial cost?  Sounds like that makes an argument that all out legalization is much better than just decriminalization.  Do you have ANY idea how much money we spend on the War on Drugs?  The Militarization of our police that has occurred, and the cost this has had to our Liberty and Freedom as they SWAT family homes in the middle of the night, kill two dogs, and drag the screaming children out of their beds and the parents, all just to find a ONE JOINT of weed?  Not to mention the FINANCIAL cost that is directly on the back of the taxpayers.  You know that has a cost all on its own, and has a huge PRICE Tag.  If we end the War on Drugs, we'll have the money for rehab, and if you can't already imagine it, the War on Drugs has ALREADY had a huge cost to our judicial system.  Its a quid pro quo. 

"Reported lifetime use of illicit drugs increased from 7.8% to 12%, lifetime use of cannabis increased from 7.6% to 11.7%, cocaine from 0.9% to 1.9%, ecstasy from 0.7% to 1.3%, and heroin from 0.7% to 1.1%. It has been proposed that this effect may have been been related to the candor of interviewees, who may have been inclined to answer more truthfully due to a reduction in the stigma associated with drug use. Statistical trends in neighboring Spain and Italy during the same period also suggested an unclear relation between decriminalization and increased drug use, comparatively"

Big deal, 10 percent more people started smoking marijuana?  Good, I'm sure it chilled them out.   

If you go to the Euro Center for drug monitoring and addiction (http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/data/tre...ortugal#demand) it shows that the number of new clients entering treatment in Portugal during the following years: 2007: 5124, 2008: 7019, and  2009: 7643.  More $ every year.

End the ridiculous war on drugs and we get our FREEDOMS and liberty back, as well as all the horrible case law that has all but DESTROYED our 4th amendment rights because of the War on Drugs, and we'll save tons of money that can be spent on rehab.  Quid pro quo. 

One positive the CATO Institute study found that the EMCDDA stats concur with was that the Portuguese drug policy (along with an increase in HIV awareness programs) could be directly tied to a declining number of HIV cases. However the study also recognized an increase in the number of drug related deaths.

Its called freedom, the opposite of a Nanny State, which is what we currently have. 

What I'd like to see is the cost in $ chart for the increases in rehab. But overall it looks like a mixed bag - more deaths from drugs and a higher # of rehab cases vs. lower HIV deaths.

I don't give a damn if it does cost 10 percent more money, when we take the money that we now spend on the militarization of police, he extra judicial spending, rehab, whatever, WE WILL HAVE OUR FREEDOMS BACK.  It will be one more step to destroying the ever increasing fascist nanny state that we have and are always adding to as well.  No thanks, I'll have my freedoms and liberty, thank you.

[EJR914]

Sadly Nola under the current system addiction is grounds for disability and medical treatment sponsored by the state.  Can you imagine what the screams from the "free shit army" would be if they tried to change that?  I agree, hell I believe we should piss test anyone applying for welfare. 

In reality knowing what Americans are like I can't honestly say they would be able to remain responsible.  I did a quick Google and came up with this page http://www.rehabinfo.net/drug-rehab/statistics/

There's a lot illustrating how the statistics show almost everything increased dramatically.  For ER visits alone from 2004 to 2009:

    Emergency room visits for nonmedical use of pharmaceuticals alone: 117 percent increase
    Emergency room visits for pharmaceuticals with illicit drugs: 97 percent increase
    Emergency room visits for pharmaceuticals with alcohol: 63 percent increase
    Emergency room visits for pharmaceuticals used with illicit drugs and alcohol: 76 percent increase

 That's a lot.  Really a lot.

That's why we need to END the Nanny State.  Like Nola said, we need to change all the laws.  You destroy your life with drugs, and tough shit, deal with it.  You're not going to STEAL my money, and give it to some loser, because he made poor choices, no different than this Too Big To Fail bullshit.  They fucked up and should pay the consequences.  Why are the taxpayers given the bill for someone else's shitty choices? 

At its essence, this is what is wrong with America, as well as the fascist, trying to use all these BS excuses to limit our freedoms and liberties. 

[Treaded]

EJ you'll be lucky if you get any semblance of the freedoms you've lost in the last ten years back during your lifetime.  This brings to mind a famous quote: "A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the majority discovers it can vote itself largess out of the public treasury. After that, the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits with the result the democracy collapses because of the loose fiscal policy ensuing, always to be followed by a dictatorship, then a monarchy." - Alexander Tytler.

We are in the midst of such a transformation now.  We will not be regaining those freedoms until said dictatorship is done and gone.  The process has yet to finish playing out but history has shown it indeed will.  And when the majority of people wake up and remember one of the inalienable rights is the Right to Revolution and topple said dictator or monarch then and only then does restoration of the republic stand a chance.

[NOLA556]

EJ you'll be lucky if you get any semblance of the freedoms you've lost in the last ten years back during your lifetime.  This brings to mind a famous quote: "A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the majority discovers it can vote itself largess out of the public treasury. After that, the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits with the result the democracy collapses because of the loose fiscal policy ensuing, always to be followed by a dictatorship, then a monarchy." - Alexander Tytler.

We are in the midst of such a transformation now.  We will not be regaining those freedoms until said dictatorship is done and gone.  The process has yet to finish playing out but history has shown it indeed will.  And when the majority of people wake up and remember one of the inalienable rights is the Right to Revolution and topple said dictator or monarch then and only then does restoration of the republic stand a chance.

so in a pretend dream world where we DO manage to reverse course in this country, then what's your stance on legalization?

[EJR914]

EJ you'll be lucky if you get any semblance of the freedoms you've lost in the last ten years back during your lifetime.  This brings to mind a famous quote: "A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the majority discovers it can vote itself largess out of the public treasury. After that, the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits with the result the democracy collapses because of the loose fiscal policy ensuing, always to be followed by a dictatorship, then a monarchy." - Alexander Tytler.

We are in the midst of such a transformation now.  We will not be regaining those freedoms until said dictatorship is done and gone.  The process has yet to finish playing out but history has shown it indeed will.  And when the majority of people wake up and remember one of the inalienable rights is the Right to Revolution and topple said dictator or monarch then and only then does restoration of the republic stand a chance.

No crap, and to add to that, I've used that quote 100 times before, and it has never been properly documented who said that quote, and it simply cannot ever be proven if Tytler ever wrote it or said it. 

[Treaded]

OK at best the Tytler quote is apocryphal.  But clear in it's reasoning nonetheless. Legalization?  I am thoroughly against it on the grounds of increased addiction rates.  Drug and alcohol addiction is a societal cancer.  It destroys families, lives, and tears at the very fabric of the morals, ethics, and values of any culture.  Regardless of what banner people live under (freedom, democracy, theocracy, etc..) addicts are a problem.  If I even began to believe people could be responsible in their use of a substance maybe.  But statistics don't lie and Americans addiction rates have risen despite illegality.  And as illustrated in Portugal and Holland legalization leads to higher addiction rates.  I'm ashamed to say it but Americans are highly irresponsible when it comes to moderating their own behavior and that hasn't gotten better over the years.  Quite the opposite.  And it'd be foolish to think that's going to change.   

[RS762]

  I'm ashamed to say it but Americans are highly irresponsible when it comes to moderating their own behavior and that hasn't gotten better over the years.  Quite the opposite.  And it'd be foolish to think that's going to change.   

Personally im for legalization but the list of downsides would indeed be long. And i think your sentence sums up pretty well "why" things would get immediately worse.

Usually i'd throw up something like "It was social stigma that kept addiction rates down in the early 20th century" but then again we are not the same country we were in the 20's and 30's. I think if all drugs were legalized it would create a permanent underclass of addict for whom there is no real chance at rehab or treatment.

That being said, there are ZERO good reasons Cannabis should not be fully legalized.

[Treaded]

RS I used to think the same thing about Cannabis until I worked for a week with a few guys that enjoyed a "one blunt lunch" - and some of the shit I saw those cats do was downright scary.  Where and how would we draw the line at what constitutes impairment?  And how would we test for it?  Field "sobriety" tests?  Think about this as well:  You'll get more government to establish standards and enforce them, taxes, and costs.  Want a glimpse into what'll happen?  Take a look at what moonshiners go through - it's still illegal in the US to distill whiskey without a license - because of tax revenues.  You think unca sugar is going to let you grow something he can't tax the shit out of?  Awww hell no.  So the IRS grows, the EPA grows, the DoJ grows, the FDA grows and we get bent over for the cost.  Welcome to the world of the $20 joint.

[RS762]

RS I used to think the same thing about Cannabis until I worked for a week with a few guys that enjoyed a "one blunt lunch" - and some of the shit I saw those cats do was downright scary.  Where and how would we draw the line at what constitutes impairment?  And how would we test for it?  Field "sobriety" tests?  Think about this as well:  You'll get more government to establish standards and enforce them, taxes, and costs.  Want a glimpse into what'll happen?  Take a look at what moonshiners go through - it's still illegal in the US to distill whiskey without a license - because of tax revenues.  You think unca sugar is going to let you grow something he can't tax the shit out of?  Awww hell no.  So the IRS grows, the EPA grows, the DoJ grows, the FDA grows and we get bent over for the cost.  Welcome to the world of the $20 joint.

Shit did i work with you at some point?
Anyways, as far as the taxable revenue is concerned i can't argue with you there.
Impairment? Field sobriety tests work for people who are way to damn high too.

Would you say moonshining-based crime and violence increased or decreased after prohibition? If you say increase i will slap your face right through this computer screen.

[EJR914]

OK at best the Tytler quote is apocryphal.  But clear in it's reasoning nonetheless. Legalization?  I am thoroughly against it on the grounds of increased addiction rates.  Drug and alcohol addiction is a societal cancer.  It destroys families, lives, and tears at the very fabric of the morals, ethics, and values of any culture.  Regardless of what banner people live under (freedom, democracy, theocracy, etc..) addicts are a problem.  If I even began to believe people could be responsible in their use of a substance maybe.  But statistics don't lie and Americans addiction rates have risen despite illegality.  And as illustrated in Portugal and Holland legalization leads to higher addiction rates.  I'm ashamed to say it but Americans are highly irresponsible when it comes to moderating their own behavior and that hasn't gotten better over the years.  Quite the opposite.  And it'd be foolish to think that's going to change.   

And you believe that its the GOVERNMENT'S job to outlaw and ban certain chemicals to decrease these addiction rates, even alcohol, because it destroys families, lives, tears moral fabrics, ethics and values?  So since you see Americans as highly irresponsible its the GOVERNMENT'S job to 'keep them from harming themselves?" 

So you support the Government Nanny State?

Sugary Drinks, Fast Food and Junk Food probably kill more people by cutting their lives short more than any other thing or accident in this country, do you think its the GOVERNMENT'S job to CRIMINALIZE those that would drink Coke, Eat Fast Food and Junk Food?

Cigarette's kill tons of people every year.  Do you think its the GOVERNMENT"s job to CRIMINALIZE cigarettes because they harm people and families as well?

Since you see alcohol as such a horrible world destroying drug, do you think its the GOVERNMENT's job to CRIMINALIZE alcohol as well to save the people from their own choices and substances they have in their possession and put inside their body?  You know so the people don't HARM themselves and their families?

How about FIREARMS?  Since people are killed by firearms everyday, and the harm done to families and individuals, would you agree with the government doing away with the 2nd amendment, and then the Government to CRIMINALIZE firearms because of all the irresponsible and hateful acts that are committed with firearms everyday?  IS THAT THE GOVERNMENT'S JOB AS WELL?

The Government's job is to treat every citizen like they are a CHILD, and to CRIMINALIZE substances, food, and items that IRRESPONSIBLE Americans might HARM themselves with, and do untold harm to their families?

I'm sorry, but I find your argument completely disgusting, fascist, and RIDICULOUSLY AUTHORITARIAN. 

I simply cannot believe that you have been so brainwashed by the Conservatives in this country that you support THE NANNY STATE and The WAR on Drugs.