Chicago...it's a bloodbath

[RGH'sBaba]

View attachment 496261

Wait a minute....wasn't Yoda wise

 

[Racey]

Yeah, I actually did exactly as you suggest. I could see that either death or imprisonment was my immediate future after decades of crack use. I quit on my own,just drive away from Alaska and 30 years of my adult life, and started over alone, by myself in a state where I knew nobody.
It wasn't the fear of death, but rather the fear of being exposed from arrest.


I completley understand the points you are making, it seems completley logical. BUT, my opinions are formed from being in the trenches from homeless junkie, a paid mule running kilos coast to coast and Canada, direct dealings with Mexican cartel members, street dealers, dirty cops, attorneys making $$ on the side by informing distributors of Intel from Le and court clerks...pretty much seen it all at some time or another.

My opinion, and I believe it to be 100% correct, is that NOTHING good would ever come from legalizing hard drugs.
I'm not talking pot, but meth and heroin

I would remind you guys that I have never considered myself a right winger. I have said many times that the paradigm shift of the last 8 years has deposited me here.

Politicizing things like the Chicago murder rate, drug laws, etc. is what comes from the top down, from smart guys like you and 530...and you guys ARE like the smart ones here!
But my view is from the other side of the issues, the view from the ally.
I've seen a 13 yo fall over with a needle in his arm, I've seen the damage from drug use in many many lives lost and families destroyed.

You can not blindly just make everything legal and up to individual responsibility. Some things are just too fucking evil. Heroin and meth being in that list.

I get what you are saying, but my point is, are we better making criminals out of these people? which turns them into repeat offenders once they can no longer get jobs because of their records? Or would we be better decriminalizing and focusing our intentions on prevention and rehabilitation? Countries like the Netherlands where drug use is basically 100% decriminalized have far few abuse rates then us. Because there is no criminal stigma attached with quiting, and they instead funnel criminal jail resources that tie up a system that should be housing violent people, with drug users, into a more productive use of treatment.

You are proof that people can turn their lives around, but could you have done that IF you had of gotten one bad dice roll, all other things being equal, and then had a felony conviction on your record? Do you deserve a life sentence (not in prison, but societally) for a bad choice like that? Preventing you from ever being able to lead a productive career, as a productive member of society?

The thing is, there is no evidence showing that legalizing drugs leads to higher use, in fact the contrary is almost always true.

 

[AzGeo]

And when alcohol was made illegal, criminal gangs and criminal activity skyrocketed.

If Tommy thinks "hard" drugs should be illegal due to their affects on society, it only stands to reason that so should alcohol.

I believe neither should be illegal, people should be responsible for their own choices and deal with the consequences.

But then again, as AzGeo states, that is liberal left wing logic in the RDP universe.

A 50 MPH motor scooter can kill, so why in the hell would 'any stupid Republican' want or need a 700 HP Hellcat, or DCB ? Vehicles and tools of all kinds can kill, why does the GOP insist on owning 'assault vehicles' ?

I call it what it is because you are attempting to equate a 'generally accepted, universally sold item (s)', (like it or not) to an item (s) that is 'not sold legally in stores, and generally is obtained by illegal means' .

The current laws make the drugs illegal, so any activity related to them IS BREAKING the LAW . CHANGE the LAWS FIRST, and then we can discuss the equation and effects of the two substances on an equal basis .

TWO different animals, once again grouped by political correctness, for left wing simplicity. "You don't need alcohol or do drugs, because they both bring the same bad results ". "You don't need guns, because they kill people, and we don't want you to do that" . Brainwash and restrict the masses, avoid the facts and truth at all costs .......

I 'personally' have no problem making today's currently illegal drugs/compounds LEGAL .

I 'personally' have no problem with the death penalty, either .

I do how ever insist that NO state nor federal monies go towards re-hab, or health treatment of alcohol or drug use problems . Get your own health insurance, don't tax me for your problems .

This is similar to the 'left wing gun control ignorance', blaming the GUN rather than who operates it . Knowing full well that CRIMINALS never 'buy guns legally', but emotional and unstable people roam among us with access to ; guns, bombs, cars, knives and other means of terrible distruction .

Would the 'logical left' wish to remove all 'sharp objects' from our world ? They want to protect all of us . But it's as 'logical' as equating illegal drugs and alcohol by Mr 530 .

The left foolishly thinks they can 'control guns and their uses', while being completely 'weak kneed' on 'gun crime punishment' . Their 'new gun laws' NEVER address all the criminal acts done with illegal guns, they just go after those who try to abide by the laws .

The left has been 'removing morality and family from our primary schools for over 60 years', they have produced the kind of 'anarchy' we see in people today .

Will it take this country 60 more years to teach it's kids that 'freedom requires responsibility', or will they just be reduced to sheeple in a sea of left wing correctness and total distruction of the US Constitution ?

 

[Yellowboat]

facts are we could give all these gang bangers 1 mil cash now, do what ever you want with it. maybe 1 in thousand would actually change.

most would be broke in less then a couple months.



most of us could take that same million and build wealth with it, granted some would buy that new boat, but most of us are level headed enough to invest part of it and turn it into income or hell even just retire.


me personally I would buy about 5 house and just live off the rental income for the rest of my life.

 

[was thatguy]

I get what you are saying, but my point is, are we better making criminals out of these people? which turns them into repeat offenders once they can no longer get jobs because of their records? Or would we be better decriminalizing and focusing our intentions on prevention and rehabilitation? Countries like the Netherlands where drug use is basically 100% decriminalized have far few abuse rates then us. Because there is no criminal stigma attached with quiting, and they instead funnel criminal jail resources that tie up a system that should be housing violent people, with drug users, into a more productive use of treatment.

You are proof that people can turn their lives around, but could you have done that IF you had of gotten one bad dice roll, all other things being equal, and then had a felony conviction on your record? Do you deserve a life sentence (not in prison, but societally) for a bad choice like that? Preventing you from ever being able to lead a productive career, as a productive member of society?

The thing is, there is no evidence showing that legalizing drugs leads to higher use, in fact the contrary is almost always true.

I never got caught. Extreme paranoia can do that!!:yikes

The only people I know that have ever gotten serious prison time were big dealers. I know many many normal taxpayers that have been arrested for possession. In most, if not every, case I can honestly say it was the best thing that happened to them. It saved their life.
My stepson got arrested twice 2 years ago. He got 1 year and rolled that into an in-house rehab center. Came out clean, got a good job as an electrician apprentice, and made it a full year. Unfortunately he is not clean now and is likely on his way down.

Not every possession arrest is a dramatic life sentence of stigma.
A junkie doesn't just hurt himself. He destroys his family, everyone who cares about him, and everyone that comes in contact with him.
Every parent I know with a junkie child that is out on the streets prays that they get arrested so they don't die.

 

[was thatguy]

facts are we could give all these gang bangers 1 mil cash now, do what ever you want with it. maybe 1 in thousand would actually change.

most would be broke in less then a couple months.



most of us could take that same million and build wealth with it, granted some would buy that new boat, but most of us are level headed enough to invest part of it and turn it into income or hell even just retire.


me personally I would buy about 5 house and just live off the rental income for the rest of my life.

The guys I knew clocked a mill a week...

 

[Yellowboat]

The guys I knew clocked a mill a week...

i have little doubt.


I was talking about the street level thugs( low rung).


I knew a state employee, getting scrips from other state employees and selling them to other state employees. she was bringing in about $5k month off one small office( under 100 people0. all with just pills. from what i understand is norcos were going for $2-3 a pill back then. now they are closer to $5


when you think that you can get 120 pills in a bottle that's a big chunk of change.... and the state employees co pay is $5. so give that person $100 for the bottle then sell it for $300. one addict can go thru that bottle in under a week... just 5 addicts and 20-30 suppliers = $$$$$

 

[spectra3279]

I get what you are saying, but my point is, are we better making criminals out of these people? which turns them into repeat offenders once they can no longer get jobs because of their records? Or would we be better decriminalizing and focusing our intentions on prevention and rehabilitation? Countries like the Netherlands where drug use is basically 100% decriminalized have far few abuse rates then us. Because there is no criminal stigma attached with quiting, and they instead funnel criminal jail resources that tie up a system that should be housing violent people, with drug users, into a more productive use of treatment.

You are proof that people can turn their lives around, but could you have done that IF you had of gotten one bad dice roll, all other things being equal, and then had a felony conviction on your record? Do you deserve a life sentence (not in prison, but societally) for a bad choice like that? Preventing you from ever being able to lead a productive career, as a productive member of society?

The thing is, there is no evidence showing that legalizing drugs leads to higher use, in fact the contrary is almost always true.

How about we criminalize the dealers and the users that get caught go to a year long rehab, then the record is sealed unless they get caught again?

Then when they are clean and sober they are helped to gather a productive job.

 

[wsuwrhr]

Because hellcats aren't really that fast.

A 50 MPH motor scooter can kill, so why in the hell would 'any stupid Republican' want or need a 700 HP Hellcat, or DCB ? Vehicles and tools of all kinds can kill, why does the GOP insist on owning 'assault vehicles' ?

 

[Yellowboat]

How about we criminalize the dealers and the users that get caught go to a year long rehab, then the record is sealed unless they get caught again?

Then when they are clean and sober they are helped to gather a productive job.

the thing with that is a lot of users do criminal acts to pay for their habbits.

our own FBT said more then once, they would get a good meth bust, and with in 6 months close 80% of the property crimes in the county. think about that... 80% of the theft in the county could be traced back to 1 bust( and the leads that generates)


to me that is scary as hell.

 

[spectra3279]

the thing with that is a lot of users do criminal acts to pay for their habbits.

our own FBT said more then once, they would get a good meth bust, and with in 6 months close 80% of the property crimes in the county. think about that... 80% of the theft in the county could be traced back to 1 bust( and the leads that generates)


to me that is scary as hell.

True. But if they can be recovered as a human being, then I say give them the chance. You can stop or lower that 80% if the people will stay clean.

But not the dealers. Hell no.

 

[AzGeo]

I get what you are saying, but my point is, are we better making criminals out of these people? which turns them into repeat offenders once they can no longer get jobs because of their records? Or would we be better decriminalizing and focusing our intentions on prevention and rehabilitation? Countries like the Netherlands where drug use is basically 100% decriminalized have far few abuse rates then us. Because there is no criminal stigma attached with quiting, and they instead funnel criminal jail resources that tie up a system that should be housing violent people, with drug users, into a more productive use of treatment.

You are proof that people can turn their lives around, but could you have done that IF you had of gotten one bad dice roll, all other things being equal, and then had a felony conviction on your record? Do you deserve a life sentence (not in prison, but societally) for a bad choice like that? Preventing you from ever being able to lead a productive career, as a productive member of society?

The thing is, there is no evidence showing that legalizing drugs leads to higher use, in fact the contrary is almost always true.

IN FACT, your last sentence (above) is pure opinion, since no country has relevant long term info on 'no drug restrictions' .

Putting people into Prisons is not 'tying up the system', it's 'doing the job' .

If you will be hiring all these 'rehabilitated drug felons', that's great . But I sure as hell don't want to be around them, and have kept my distance for a number of decades .

It's not my fault, and certainly not the fault of society, for the shortcomings of some losers, so why is it our fault these people can't find jobs and go forward ? THEY made their choices, we made our's, and I feel no guilt about their failures .

If the 'thought' of prison time did not deter their 'drug use', then what would 'scare them straight', before any conviction ?

Change the laws, or throw them into prison and make them WORK for their entire sentence .

So tired of being REQUIRED to babysit adults who can't control themselves, and become felons .

NEVER money for re-hab, when that money should be spent on people with ILLNESSES, who can't help themselves . I'd gladly give money for illnesses, and people with birth defects, they bare no blame, but NEVER money for any drug re-hab bullshit .

With freedom comes responsibility .

 

[t&y]

I get what you are saying, but my point is, are we better making criminals out of these people? which turns them into repeat offenders once they can no longer get jobs because of their records? Or would we be better decriminalizing and focusing our intentions on prevention and rehabilitation? Countries like the Netherlands where drug use is basically 100% decriminalized have far few abuse rates then us. Because there is no criminal stigma attached with quiting, and they instead funnel criminal jail resources that tie up a system that should be housing violent people, with drug users, into a more productive use of treatment.

You are proof that people can turn their lives around, but could you have done that IF you had of gotten one bad dice roll, all other things being equal, and then had a felony conviction on your record? Do you deserve a life sentence (not in prison, but societally) for a bad choice like that? Preventing you from ever being able to lead a productive career, as a productive member of society?

The thing is, there is no evidence showing that legalizing drugs leads to higher use, in fact the contrary is almost always true.

What is to say a company cannot hire a convicted felon or a self admitted drug user? You own/operate a business and there is a self admitted heroin user applying for a job. You going to hire him/her?

 

[AzGeo]

we will be changing the 'felony bank robbing laws', because a lot of people don't have much money, and they only need to rob a bank 'once in a while' .

If they use a GUN, we'll send them to 'gun re-hab' .

If they use a 'note', we'll send them to 'handwriting re-hab' .

If they use a get-away car, we can send them to 'traffic school' .

"All the local left wing brain washing seems to be taking hold" . "I hope I don't shoot, drive, vote, or do drugs or re-hab with anyone after this episode"............ HA HA

 

[Yellowboat]

True. But if they can be recovered as a human being, then I say give them the chance. You can stop or lower that 80% if the people will stay clean.

But not the dealers. Hell no.

only issue with that is... I have only met 2 people that were heavy into meth that got out and remained sober for even just 5 years.


one had a kid and it straightened him right out. he had only been on it about 6 months. the other lost every thing, house, family, biz... it took him spending a total of ( 2 stints)8 years in folsom, and 3 trips to rehab before he did it. he struggles with it every day, I mean every day. I met him thru a good friend that was a HIV counsler ( RIP Emily) even him getting HIV did not stop him, he just hit the meth harder. I talk to bob a few times a year. he is still really active in the sacramento HIV community trying to help those that are in where he was 15 years ago.

being in construction I have met way to many people that take meth. most end up dead, all of them ended up getting sick some how, rather it was HIV, heap c or some massive organ damage. had a inlaw that when he got fucked by child support( one of those went from making $$$$ to $ when the econ tanked and they would not change his amount so they took his DL and contractors lic... which made him unemployable as he was a plumber), lost every thing he turned to meth. 20+ years later he still on it.

 

[Yellowboat]

What is to say a company cannot hire a convicted felon or a self admitted drug user? You own/operate a business and there is a self admitted heroin user applying for a job. You going to hire him/her?

can't own a gun if you are addicted to a substance ( even boose) let alone using illegal substance. so if you a medical pot person.... guess what if you buy a gun and lie on the form, you have commited perjury and the federal level.

 

[530RL]

What is to say a company cannot hire a convicted felon or a self admitted drug user? You own/operate a business and there is a self admitted heroin user applying for a job. You going to hire him/her?

Absolutely not. If one does and that employee makes the slightest of mistakes, the company will be held to a much higher legal and monetary standard. They should have known given the employees past indiscretions. The employer should not have let him drive, should not have left him alone, should not have left him fill in the blank.

I fundamentally disagree with how the system works on this matter, but pioneers get shot by indians. No good deed goes unpunished in America.

 

[Yellowboat]

Absolutely not. If one does and that employee makes the slightest of mistakes, the company will be held to a much higher legal and monetary standard. They should have known given the employees past indiscretions. The employer should not have let him drive, should not have left him alone, should not have left him fill in the blank.

I fundamentally disagree with how the system works on this matter, but pioneers get shot by indians. No good deed goes unpunished in America.

this is one of the reasons I say what you do on your time is my business. it should not have to be like that, but it is. I can't tell you the number of people that I have googled/ looked for on social media that posted the dumbest pics you can think of.


now do I care if you get high on the weekend? no, but you better be 100% sober Monday. I don't care if its hung over, if your production/quality suffers, you will get a pink slip.

 

[was thatguy]

Absolutely not. If one does and that employee makes the slightest of mistakes, the company will be held to a much higher legal and monetary standard. They should have known given the employees past indiscretions. The employer should not have let him drive, should not have left him alone, should not have left him fill in the blank.

I fundamentally disagree with how the system works on this matter, but pioneers get shot by indians. No good deed goes unpunished in America.

So even if heroin was legal, you would still impose a life sentence (sociativly speaking) on the user.
Might as well keep it illegal.

 

[530RL]

So even if heroin was legal, you would still impose a life sentence (sociativly speaking) on the user.
Might as well keep it illegal.

The issue was not whether or not they are a good employee, but the stain and notification to the employer from the arrest and conviction.

If it was legal and therefore there was no arrest and conviction, there would be no problem hiring them, they would be the same as everyone else.

 

[was thatguy]

The issue was not whether or not they are a good employee, but the stain and notification to the employer from the arrest and conviction.

If it was legal and therefore there was no arrest and conviction, there would be no problem hiring them, they would be the same as everyone else.

So you are saying that a heroin using employee would not bring liability to the employer in the event of a company driving mishap or financial misdeed?

The only determining factor for you would be a criminal record?
Using your earlier comparison, an admitted alcoholic who has no record would be equally employable?

 

[was thatguy]

Hell, what are we even arguing about?
It's already been proven that a cocain dealer can be fucking POTUS...

 

[wsuwrhr]

Hell, what are we even arguing about?
It's already been proven that a cocain dealer can be fucking POTUS...

Wasting your time discussing serious issues with someone just playing games.

 

[530RL]

Wasting your time discussing serious issues with someone just playing games.

https://mic.com/articles/110344/14-years-after-portugal-decriminalized-all-drugs-here-s-what-s-happening#.1sASkILbk

 

[AzGeo]

They did not decriminalize all drugs, they have 'two levels of enforcement', and so that alone shows that 'all drugs and amounts are not just openly legal' .

In the case of a 'lesser amount of illegal drug violation', 'it's still called a violation/infraction', the person goes before a review board . The board may offer full release, or various punishments on up their scale .

Sounds like a really nice, expensive way for the government to play Big Brother, for their weak citizens .

With the amounts of 'total forgiveness' many offer here, I wonder why anyone would even attempt to be 'honest, and law biding' ?

Some here would give you a 'free pass' no matter how deep you fuck up ...............

 

[Old Texan]

I get what you are saying, but my point is, are we better making criminals out of these people? which turns them into repeat offenders once they can no longer get jobs because of their records? Or would we be better decriminalizing and focusing our intentions on prevention and rehabilitation? Countries like the Netherlands where drug use is basically 100% decriminalized have far few abuse rates then us. Because there is no criminal stigma attached with quiting, and they instead funnel criminal jail resources that tie up a system that should be housing violent people, with drug users, into a more productive use of treatment.

You are proof that people can turn their lives around, but could you have done that IF you had of gotten one bad dice roll, all other things being equal, and then had a felony conviction on your record? Do you deserve a life sentence (not in prison, but societally) for a bad choice like that? Preventing you from ever being able to lead a productive career, as a productive member of society?

The thing is, there is no evidence showing that legalizing drugs leads to higher use, in fact the contrary is almost always true.

Legalizing hard drugs is not the answer to the issue nor the answer to what you are advocating. Separating hard drug use from the criminal justice system into a medical/addiction rehabilitation program is the proper approach. That is more of what the Dutch have done. Drugs are not officially legal there, they are just handled differently.

Register junkies and provide a support system to help them deal with their addiction. Junkies, alcoholics, addicts in general are never cured, they are all one hit or drink from falling off the wagon and must work at controlling their demons every minute of every day. Removal of drug use crimes from the penal system with special circumstance legislation to me is the answer to the argument here.

 

[was thatguy]

During the 8 pages we have debated, 4 more dead.

338 now for the year.

 

[Old Texan]

The left has been 'removing morality and family from our primary schools for over 60 years', they have produced the kind of 'anarchy' we see in people today .

Will it take this country 60 more years to teach it's kids that 'freedom requires responsibility', or will they just be reduced to sheeple in a sea of left wing correctness and total distruction of the US Constitution ?

To me those 2 sentences are the major point being ignored by current society. The quest has been to coddle the victims of society and ignore the causes making them victims.

Those advocating middle ground using personal responsibility as their platform, are living a fantasy if they think their idea of solution will happen on it's own. Cause and effect cannot be left to cure themselves of flaws. The biggest reason we are at the current point is the apathy of believing everything will right itself in it's own good time, because we've conditioned ourselves to believe it always has righted itself in the past.....That's just depending on Lady Luck to do the hard work. Sorry folks, luck always runs out.

 

[Old Texan]

The issue was not whether or not they are a good employee, but the stain and notification to the employer from the arrest and conviction.

If it was legal and therefore there was no arrest and conviction, there would be no problem hiring them, they would be the same as everyone else.

And with today's legal system's penchant for filing all sorts of civil suits seeking damages against responsible parties of any incident, you honestly believe that last sentence?

Why would any employer put themselves in the position of being the one with the deep pockets enabling a questionable employee to fuck up????????

 

[Old Texan]

They did not decriminalize all drugs, they have 'two levels of enforcement', and so that alone shows that 'all drugs and amounts are not just openly legal' .

In the case of a 'lesser amount of illegal drug violation', 'it's still called a violation/infraction', the person goes before a review board . The board may offer full release, or various punishments on up their scale .

Sounds like a really nice, expensive way for the government to play Big Brother, for their weak citizens .

With the amounts of 'total forgiveness' many offer here, I wonder why anyone would even attempt to be 'honest, and law biding' ?

Some here would give you a 'free pass' no matter how deep you fuck up ...............

The bottom line is drug use in society isn't going away. The reaction to how to control is the issue. Using the legal system to incarcerate and try and end the problem obviously does not work. 530 has advocated from the beginning the "War on Drugs" has long failed and he's correct.

So we need to try alternative solutions. Treating addiction as a health issue, to me, makes the most sense. Pare down the users, pare down the associated crimes. Though I do not want to have to pay for it, I realize I already am paying for it with funding required by the WoD, LE enforcement time, and public prisons. The drug HC funding needs to come from those programs by eliminating or reducing their costs.

But bottom line is the drug issues will not cure themselves or go away. Realistic solutions need to be considered rather than throwing money into the wind and living with all the attached issues like gang murders..

 

[was thatguy]

The bottom line is drug use in society isn't going away. The reaction to how to control is the issue. Using the legal system to incarcerate and try and end the problem obviously does not work. 530 has advocated from the beginning the "War on Drugs" has long failed and he's correct.

So we need to try alternative solutions. Treating addiction as a health issue, to me, makes the most sense. Pare down the users, pare down the associated crimes. Though I do not want to have to pay for it, I realize I already am paying for it with funding required by the WoD, LE enforcement time, and public prisons. The drug HC funding needs to come from those programs by eliminating or reducing their costs.

But bottom line is the drug issues will not cure themselves or go away. Realistic solutions need to be considered rather than throwing money into the wind and living with all the attached issues like gang murders..

I do agree, but has been mentioned there is two distinct sides to the problem.
The "addicts" are the required piece of the puzzle for the drug operations to function. There is a distinct line between the business of selling drugs, and the users of drugs.

The business side, from what I have seen, detests drug use and drug users. They call them "fiends".

They simultainiously foster the population of fiends, while also considering them less than human.

The "war" isn't against the users, it is against the business.

There is no easy solution, especially when that line is blurred.
If you could stop addiction, the business dissapears and vice versa.

The killings are multifaceted.
You have the top level of business killing for territory and / or supply routes.
You have street level killing for corners and or demographic of buyers.
And you have what may be the worst of the bunch...those who kill and rob dealers for cash and stash.
Fiends don't kill much...they just want the dope and are herded around depending on who is alive and where they are told to buy their drugs.

Dealers in the worst areas will beat fiends to force them into their market, then other dealers just start shooting those dealers to get the fiends back.

If you want to "cure" the fiends and remove the market, you MUST just start eliminating the suppliers simultainiously or they WILL keep fostering new buyers.
So all out LE war against dealers, while at the same time "curing" the fiends is the approach.
No where in that equation does legalizing drugs become advisable.

 

[Old Texan]

I do agree, but has been mentioned there is two distinct sides to the problem.
The "addicts" are the required piece of the puzzle for the drug operations to function. There is a distinct line between the business of selling drugs, and the users of drugs.

The business side, from what I have seen, detests drug use and drug users. They call them "fiends".

They simultainiously foster the population of fiends, while also considering them less than human.

The "war" isn't against the users, it is against the business.

There is no easy solution, especially when that line is blurred.
If you could stop addiction, the business dissapears and vice versa.

The killings are multifaceted.
You have the top level of business killing for territory and / or supply routes.
You have street level killing for corners and or demographic of buyers.
And you have what may be the worst of the bunch...those who kill and rob dealers for cash and stash.
Fiends don't kill much...they just want the dope and are herded around depending on who is alive and where they are told to buy their drugs.

Dealers in the worst areas will beat fiends to force them into their market, then other dealers just start shooting those dealers to get the fiends back.

If you want to "cure" the fiends and remove the market, you MUST just start eliminating the suppliers simultainiously or they WILL keep fostering new buyers.
So all out LE war against dealers, while at the same time "curing" the fiends is the approach.
No where in that equation does legalizing drugs become advisable.

Most certainly the business part needs to be eliminated. Unfortunately it's a business of opportunity in many instances. LE takes out dealer A, dealer B fills the void. The Cartels have replaced the Mafia is an example.

Back in my younger days, recreational drug use was openly accepted after Nam. Most everybody smoked pot. Many got going on cocaine. Heroin was hard core and declined but later resurrected itself. Dealers were college kids to aging hippies. Most was harmless and good to go. Then the Columbian Cartels moved in rather than sending product out by whatever means possible. I knew many Shrimpers and service boat operators that became modern day "pirates" or more accurately smugglers. It became a closet industry. The War on Drugs shut those folks down and the Columbians took over the movement and they din not play nice as the "amateurs" had been.

That era faded out with the advent of "crack" which morphed into even more addictive street concoctions like meth.

Today it's all out dangerous business with the players being ruthless killers after territory and users who they addict, the ones that do the petty crimes that fund the whole of the "business".

Certainly we need to stop the business, but we also need to separate the addicted users and treat them for what they have become.

Saying it's strictly a personal choice is incorrect. Many addicts are created in these ghetto areas. Kids and even adults are forced into using the needle, not by choice, and they become the "fiends". That is a fact rarely reported. Drugs are far from the recreational high in the modern ghetto, they are big business. The WoD just never adapted to what is now the norm.

 

[was thatguy]

Most certainly the business part needs to be eliminated. Unfortunately it's a business of opportunity in many instances. LE takes out dealer A, dealer B fills the void. The Cartels have replaced the Mafia is an example.

Back in my younger days, recreational drug use was openly accepted after Nam. Most everybody smoked pot. Many got going on cocaine. Heroin was hard core and declined but later resurrected itself. Dealers were college kids to aging hippies. Most was harmless and good to go. Then the Columbian Cartels moved in rather than sending product out by whatever means possible. I knew many Shrimpers and service boat operators that became modern day "pirates" or more accurately smugglers. It became a closet industry. The War on Drugs shut those folks down and the Columbians took over the movement and they din not play nice as the "amateurs" had been.

That era faded out with the advent of "crack" which morphed into even more addictive street concoctions like meth.

Today it's all out dangerous business with the players being ruthless killers after territory and users who they addict, the ones that do the petty crimes that fund the whole of the "business".

Certainly we need to stop the business, but we also need to separate the addicted users and treat them for what they have become.

Saying it's strictly a personal choice is incorrect. Many addicts are created in these ghetto areas. Kids and even adults are forced into using the needle, not by choice, and they become the "fiends". That is a fact rarely reported. Drugs are far from the recreational high in the modern ghetto, they are big business. The WoD just never adapted to what is now the norm.

Exactly.

 

[Letsride22]

I am NOT my brother's keeper .

I cannot blame anyone else for my; drug use, gang violence, fatherless children, neighborhood intimidation, thefts and arrest record . I can't because I don't have any .

I don't have any because I; got a job, worked on my education, stayed out of troublesome groups, took care of my family, always had respect for my family, neighbors, and local authorities .

So don't ask me to 'come together' and help out those who will not help themselves . FUCKUM .

Not one of those criminals has a 'ball and chain' holding them in their 'hoods'. They stay to perpetuate their 'thug lifestyle', They do not want to be better adults, they just want what they have . "Kings of the Shit Holes" .

People of all colors and back rounds come to this country LEGALLY, with virtually nothing and they go forward to enjoy their 'American dreams', because they have the desire to go forward and they work hard to realize their dreams . Many must live in 'poor neighborhoods', yet they don't join gangs, many see what 'other's have', yet don't resort to 'violence or theft', so WHO is really responsible for the criminal inner city problems we have today ?

The Legislators ?

The gun makers ?

The BAD COPS ?

The welfare workers ?

The criminals who demand 'everything' while 'offering nothing' ?

The LEFT has made 'criminal behavior' a political circus, and they deserve whatever the 'animals' give them . The US prisons are full of criminals for a reason, but don't ever allow the LAW to get in the way of another well funded mindless liberal release program .

I don't usually comment on the topics discussed in this section, but this post hit it dead on!

 

[Racey]

https://mic.com/articles/110344/14-...-all-drugs-here-s-what-s-happening#.1sASkILbk

Just your opinion Danny boy...... :rolleyes

 

[AzGeo]

quote a bunch of your enriching posts here, but I will say this .

As to 'waking up and everything magically becoming right', That is a tiny part of our current problem .

The 'brainwashing' has gone on for so long that 'being alright' is TOTALLY different for the 30> somethings and us old guys .

Their 'alright' and our 'alright', will never meet, and this country is not going forward, but backwards at about 50 mega bites per second . I fear that we will never have (rhetorical) "Baseball, Apple pie, and Cheverolet" ever again ......

The young people in Havasu see nothing wrong with having; warrants, arrests, jail time, multi babymoms and kids, no steady work, driving without a license, having their names in the SMALL TOWN PAPER (regularly) .

They live that 'early 70's mantra; "I'm OK, you're OK, and who gives a shit if we fuck up" .

As long as they have; 'my phone, my peeps, chow, and drink , I'm good to go' . NO ambition, no desire to improve, no thought further than what to do tomorrow .

US OLD PEOPLE, and those smart people in between the ages that see the differences between 'existing and effort', 'moving and moving forward', 'reproduction and being productive', seem to be doomed to the 'extinction lists' .

"I don't need a job right now, I'll protest somewhere, get paid $15.00, get on TV, and then text all my buds about it" . "Maybe tomorrow, I'll do the same?"

I am a 'greedy capitalist', and I learned well from my environment . I thank God that I stopped jerking around and learned what I needed to do, to get where I wanted to be .

I know life gets 'tougher' for each new generation, I hope and pray for them all, but I see very few of them really getting themselves together . All the fuckups will just be loading more burdens on the backs of the smart hard working honest kids .........

I feel that my "60 years of decline, will take MORE than 60 years to correct" ...........

 

[530RL]

Saying it's strictly a personal choice is incorrect. Many addicts are created in these ghetto areas. Kids and even adults are forced into using the needle, not by choice, and they become the "fiends".

Here is the conundrum for me Tex,

Clearly we as a society want and have laws that protect people from doing things to others, but If sticking a needle full of heroin in ones arm sitting in their house is not "strictly a personal choice", what other vices or human frailties are also not "strictly a personal choice"?

And if government should protect people from injecting themselves with drugs, what other things should the government expand its scope in our lives to protect ourselves from?

And the biggest problem for me is, who makes this list of vices or frailties that qualify and who pays for the government protecting people from these personal choices that are not "strictly a personal choice"?

I get that some who have had drug addictions want to argue that it was not solely their fault, but there are a lot of things where one can make these arguments. For me, the best solution is less government and more personal responsibility as harsh as it sounds because the more the government gets its nose into stuff, the more government expands.

 

[Yellowboat]

Here is the conundrum for me Tex,

Clearly we as a society want and have laws that protect people from doing things to others, but If sticking a needle full of heroin in ones arm sitting in their house is not "strictly a personal choice", what other vices or human frailties are also not "strictly a personal choice"?

And if government should protect people from injecting themselves with drugs, what other things should the government expand its scope in our lives to protect ourselves from?

And the biggest problem for me is, who makes this list of vices or frailties that qualify and who pays for the government protecting people from these personal choices that are not "strictly a personal choice"?

I get that some who have had drug addictions want to argue that it was not solely their fault, but there are a lot of things where one can make these arguments. For me, the best solution is less government and more personal responsibility as harsh as it sounds because the more the government gets its nose into stuff, the more government expands.

unless some one held you down and stuck that needle in your arm, made you smoke that crack, snort that coc or take that meth... then it is 100% your fault. my reasoning behind that is simple, you wanted to try it. you knew the risk, you rolled the dice and lost. its on you.


the way I see things, you can do what ever you want as long as you are hurting no one but yourself and not leaching off the system.

most drug addicts fail at both of those.

 

[Old Texan]

Here is the conundrum for me Tex,

Clearly we as a society want and have laws that protect people from doing things to others, but If sticking a needle full of heroin in ones arm sitting in their house is not "strictly a personal choice", what other vices or human frailties are also not "strictly a personal choice"?

And if government should protect people from injecting themselves with drugs, what other things should the government expand its scope in our lives to protect ourselves from?

And the biggest problem for me is, who makes this list of vices or frailties that qualify and who pays for the government protecting people from these personal choices that are not "strictly a personal choice"?

I get that some who have had drug addictions want to argue that it was not solely their fault, but there are a lot of things where one can make these arguments. For me, the best solution is less government and more personal responsibility as harsh as it sounds because the more the government gets its nose into stuff, the more government expands.

And the conundrum for me, is I agree with less government. But it's hard to allow that to happen with the numbers the population has reached. I shake my head at the growing number of opiate prescription drug addicts our healthcare system has created. The number of stuggling alcoholics or simple overeaters addicted to food that get strung out on pain pills or diet pills after simple surgeries or treatments is astounding. Why don't Drs look into a patient's history prior to prescribing addictive medication? Why should the government have to watch over proffesionals??????

Society is at a damned if we do, damned if we don't place......

 

[boatdoc55]

And the conundrum for me, is I agree with less government. But it's hard to allow that to happen with the numbers the population has reached. I shake my head at the growing number of opiate prescription drug addicts our healthcare system has created. The number of stuggling alcoholics or simple overeaters addicted to food that get strung out on pain pills or diet pills after simple surgeries or treatments is astounding. Why don't Drs look into a patient's history prior to prescribing addictive medication? Why should the government have to watch over proffesionals??????

Society is at a damned if we do, damned if we don't place......

Agreed !! IMO, the largest and worst load on people now days is, there are just too many people and long after I'm gone, mankind will go the way the geese went in the Great North. starved to death.

 

[530RL]

And the conundrum for me, is I agree with less government. But it's hard to allow that to happen with the numbers the population has reached. I shake my head at the growing number of opiate prescription drug addicts our healthcare system has created. The number of stuggling alcoholics or simple overeaters addicted to food that get strung out on pain pills or diet pills after simple surgeries or treatments is astounding. Why don't Drs look into a patient's history prior to prescribing addictive medication? Why should the government have to watch over proffesionals??????

Society is at a damned if we do, damned if we don't place......

It is a conundrum, but the fundamental premise of our Constitution, for better I think, is that people are free to make really bad choices for themselves.

I accept others vehemently disagree, but for me when government attempts to provide good outcomes for people on drug addictions, other people expect them to solve their own respective problems such as poverty, unemployment, lack of healthcare, homelessness, reproduction without the means to support their offspring and a long list we can all provide.

Greater government intervention over the last 100 years, has made American Citizens more reliant upon the government to provide other good outcomes, and that is for me the primary reason America is losing its fundamental founding principle of self reliance.

Once Government gets back to creating a leadership culture of equal opportunity, self reliance and consequences, the sooner America turns back around.

I leave this as it sums up best my non-original thoughts. :thumbsup

[video=youtube;dC3x7fvUGwo]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dC3x7fvUGwo[/video]

 

[regor]

Once Government gets back to creating a leadership culture of equal opportunity, self reliance and consequences, the sooner America turns back around.

I'll add controlling immigration to individuals that "help" the country, not "depend" on it.

 

[was thatguy]

And the beat goes on...

340 as of Saturday.

That's 53.9 per month average, or 647.6 extrapolated for the year.

The modern day record is 509 in 2012.

 

[Wombat]

And the beat goes on...

340 as of Saturday.

That's 53.9 per month average, or 647.6 extrapolated for the year.

The modern day record is 509 in 2012.

I was watching Fox over weekend and Chicago came up a few times.
Some are saying it will be closer to 700 than 600 this year.:thumbsdown They put the possible increase down to the election year and increased hostilities (notice l didn't say Passion) that will be generated.:yikes

 

[just_floatin]

BLM shopping spree and rioting last night in Chicago. Mayor left foot to have a press conference this morning.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1292776970556715008

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1292753400388415489

 

[RitcheyRch]

They know nothing will happen to them. Christmas came early

BLM shopping spree and rioting last night in Chicago. Mayor left foot to have a press conference this morning.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1292776970556715008

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1292753400388415489

 

[pronstar]

BLM shopping spree and rioting last night in Chicago. Mayor left foot to have a press conference this morning

We already know how this press conference will go:

We need more gun laws just because.
Trump.
Racism.
We need more money.
Trump.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Sleek-Jet]

The loop is closed this morning.

Somehow this will all be the fault of everyone but lightweights administration.

 

[Backlash]

Let it burn. That idiot thinks there is nothing wrong with her damn city just shows you how stupid she is and how out of touch with reality she is. Put a fence around it and let the fockers kill each other.

 

[Carlson-jet]

Nobody minds if I play a fiddle do they?