Idiot 9th Circuit Judges Owned Again

[Corn]

....except for:

but, perhaps they won't have to steal as much to get the drugs given the price ought to be lower.. costs as much as a candy bar to make, I understand.

So do music CD's and a bottle of half way decent whiskey, yet they still cost $15-20. Besides, you know the guvvy has got to sin tax the now illegal drugs to death...... I doubt the "retail" price of most now illegal drugs would be much different. The price is set by what the market will bear, as it is with all things........

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: LunarRay
Lets see... Booze is legal and it affects folks.. But, is it addicting? Maybe! Cigarettes are addicting and it affects folks. Prescription Rx can be addicting and it surely affects folks..
All while young folks go about their lives...
Who is gonna consume illicit drugs.. probably the same folks who do now.. but, perhaps they won't have to steal as much to get the drugs given the price ought to be lower.. costs as much as a candy bar to make, I understand. It would reduce the jail population and perhaps increase the unemployed levels (For DM's sake I include this).

I think for the longest time the same drugs that are illegal were legal.. or non existent. I think it is a personal thing. If you drink and drive or do dope and drive you belong in jail... I don't think the % of that will ever change..

I think I would not oppose legalized use of drugs.. I would not support it but, I'd not oppose it..

I would support it. Not because I favor drug use.. It should still have a negative stigma but also get it out in the open so more negativity and support groups could develope. But mainly I believe it would reduce crime from theft to get artifically high priced drugs and mainly inner city violence of "drug wars" since no profit incentive would be there. Second it would unclog our courts and prison system saving us tax payer money. third, it would free up police resources to pursue real crimes with actual victims.

Drugs were legal until the 1930's and we had little problems drug related...barley a mention in history books. but then the puritanical movement developed centered around the protestant faith and outlawed both alcohol and drugs around the same time.. we finally loosened up when we saw the havock the alcohol war was causing but keep on the drug war because such little users. Well I think were at the same position as then with alcohol as we are with drugs today. Wiser men ran the governemnt back then though and did'nt pander to fear and the least common denominator as today.

I have no illusions, legalization of drugs will not happen for a long long time if at all. But IMO that's a big mistake.

 

[Jhhnn]

Chess9 pretty much defined the reality of the situation- Cops won't actually let you answer the door when they have a drug warrant. If you had your hand on the knob when they yelled "Police!", you'd probably be injured by the door flying off the hinges..

15 (Nano) seconds is more like the truth, and yes, I think the court is willfully clueless in such matters. They see drugs strictly as a law enforcement issue, the idea that it might be an issue of privacy, personal freedom or an issue better dealt with on the level of public health doesn't have a prayer of penetration...

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: Corn
....except for:

but, perhaps they won't have to steal as much to get the drugs given the price ought to be lower.. costs as much as a candy bar to make, I understand.

So do music CD's and a bottle of half way decent whiskey, yet they still cost $15-20. Besides, you know the guvvy has got to sin tax the now illegal drugs to death.... CD's arn't addictive... The crack queen will sell her soul though for a hit.. I doubt the "retail" price of most now illegal drugs would be much different. The price is set by what the market will bear, as it is with all things...... Yes but you are introducting an artifical inflator in the supply demand equation with the risk of prison or death by a hit squad for dealing drugs this risk reward signifigantly impacts price..

 

[dmcowen674]

You guys have done well on the posts on this especially keying on the failed prohibition effort of early last Century.

"As long as you have a Market you will have Suppliers."

Having a half-ass Nanny State has certainly proven to not work and an absolute waste of money. If the "War" on drugs is to truly succeed all "Users" would have to "taken out" since that is the only way to eliminate the "Market". Take away the Market and the Suppliers would be forced to go elsewhere.

There is an attempt taking place to "take out" the consumers and place them in taxpayer supported housing (Jail) as they build more and more monsterous Jail facilities to do so. Reports have already shown how the percentage of incarcerated population increasing.

That being said having a "Nanny State" to begin with is not a good thing including the "Half-Ass" Nanny State we now have.

Policing and Law Enforcement would certainly be a lot more successful in handling any "Consumers" or "Suppliers" that cross the line of the Law. Of course the "Line" itself would need to be re-drawn and tweaked.

 

[rjain]

Sure CDs are addictive. People are so addicted to them that they need their music on the subways, on the sidewalks, at work...

Not all illegal drugs are addictive either. And many people just don't get addicted to things. If you are too weak-willed or are chemically predisposed to being addicted to something, DON'T DO IT. A wise man once said, "Know thyself."

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: rjain
Sure CDs are addictive. People are so addicted to them that they need their music on the subways, on the sidewalks, at work...

Not all illegal drugs are addictive either. And many people just don't get addicted to things. If you are too weak-willed or are chemically predisposed to being addicted to something, DON'T DO IT. A wise man once said, "Know thyself."

Show me one scientific study where CD's are addictive. Until then I'll take this post as the joke that it is and just hahaha.


PS- Agree with being weak willed..never understoond or emathised with addiction other than to say some people are just weaker than others. That's the way of things..Still legality won't stop the user.

 

[miguel]

Originally posted by: SuperTool

Because children cannot provide informed consent, those selling drugs to kids should be punished, like those selling cigarettes and alcohol are. But that doesn't mean transactions between consenting adults should be criminalized. As far as high people, they should be held responsible for their actions whether high or not. If they do something illegal while under influence, they should be punished, if they don't they shouldn't. Again, this is nothing new, just look at alcohol.

No, I'm talking about the children of the drug addicts.

 

[rjain]

Originally posted by: Zebo

Show me one scientific study where CD's are addictive. Until then I'll take this post as the joke that it is and just hahaha.

Well, personally, I have to say that I find music addictive, but I tend to just get a song stuck in my head while I sleep.
Studies have shown that the internet (I suppose that means chat and forums like this one) is addictive. Should we regulate internet usage? The same for video games. Should we now have a war on the internet and a war on games? (Of course, this applies to the people who think the war on drugs and sex is a good thing.)

PS- Agree with being weak willed..never understoond or emathised with addiction other than to say some people are just weaker than others. That's the way of things..Still legality won't stop the user.

Yep, and it'll just impinge on the freedom to enjoy what we have for those who have self-control.

Oh, and we should have a war on fat, too, because there are so many obese people. (Oh wait, that was already suggested.)

 

[rjain]

Originally posted by: miguel

No, I'm talking about the children of the drug addicts.

What about children of workaholics and internet addicts?

 

[miguel]

The thrust of the argument for legalizing drugs seems to be a "hands-off" approach and let everyone do what they please and suffer the consequences of their actions. Is this correct?

If that is so, then maybe all the taxpayer funded social programs should go too? Why have help for the homeless? They chose their own path in life, right?

 

[rjain]

Restricting people's opportunities is a different issue from providing people with opportunities.

 

[miguel]

Originally posted by: rjain
Restricting people's opportunities is a different issue from providing people with opportunities.

I guess it's half glass thing then. I tend to think laws making drugs illegal and arresting drunk drivers (even before they crash! Imagine that!) are there as preventive measures to stop homelessness, death and poverty.

 

[rjain]

Arresting drunk drivers has nothing to do with making drugs illegal. Where exectly did I advocate irresponsibility with a dangerous tool? Do you support making alcohol illegal?

Making drugs illegal has caused homelessness, death, and poverty because it creates crime where there was none before. Instead of someone just getting high, now we have him stealing from a neighbor and his dealer killing a rival.

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: miguel
The thrust of the argument for legalizing drugs seems to be a "hands-off" approach and let everyone do what they please and suffer the consequences of their actions. Is this correct?

If that is so, then maybe all the taxpayer funded social programs should go too? Why have help for the homeless? They chose their own path in life, right?

I don't see the cooerlation. Social welfare is an insurance policy for people, while the drug war is a punitive policy on the people. One is a benefit to it's reciepiants while the other is a punsihment. Perhaps drug help progams and welfare would be lumped in the same catagory since thier goals are similar in helping their enrollees. And no I don't think we should do away with either of those..cause if someone asks for help I think we have a duty to help them. But I think people should be also free to choose thier destiny from drug addict, to homeless man, to stock broker to house wife..

 

[miguel]

Originally posted by: rjain
Arresting drunk drivers has nothing to do with making drugs illegal. Where exectly did I advocate irresponsibility with a dangerous tool? Do you support making alcohol illegal?

Making drugs illegal has caused homelessness, death, and poverty because it creates crime where there was none before. Instead of someone just getting high, now we have him stealing from a neighbor and his dealer killing a rival.

I didn't say you advocated irresposibility. My statement about drunk driving had to do with the argument of letting people do drugs and just punish them if they do something illegal. This is a forum discussion, not personal email, you know.

Alcohol is legal now and we have people throwing their lives away, drinking every day on the sidewalk and sleeping in their urine. And we spend millions providing support for these people. The problem will get worse if drugs are legal. And there are indirect victims, such as children, who, because society said it was OK to shoot herion, will become state-supported as well. Society should help people become all they can be, not be a "do what you want and we'll take care of you" environment.

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: miguel

Originally posted by: rjain
Restricting people's opportunities is a different issue from providing people with opportunities.

I guess it's half glass thing then. I tend to think laws making drugs illegal and arresting drunk drivers (even before they crash! Imagine that!) are there as preventive measures to stop homelessness, death and poverty.

You may have a point there if you can show a couple things.

1. Alcoholism has been reduced since MADD efforts started in the 1960's
2. Alcohol related accidents have been reduced nationwide since the 60's as an (divers in USA/fatalities plotted against time) %.

Sure there may be some socieital benefit to these punative alcohol measures, (but then alcohol is legal) but IMO with the drug war they don't negate the chilling Black violence in the inner cities, 1/4 of black young males in prison or on parol and the huge expense of the drug war form prisons to courts, and millions of young lives ruined for life by having a drug conviction for pot on thier record.

 

[miguel]

1. I don't see how proving that alcoholism has gone down since MADD started is relevant. MADD doesn't put people in Jail. They do campaigns to teach people not to drive drunk.
2. I think alcohol related accidents have actually increased, but like you said, alcohol is legal.

As far as the

chilling Black violence in the inner cities, 1/4 of black young males in prison or on parol and the huge expense of the drug war form prisons to courts, and millions of young lives ruined for life by having a drug conviction for pot on thier record.

Black violence in the inner cities is not cause solely by drugs. If it were, it would not only be blacks or minorities. It's part of a bigger problem, which includes cultural influences, self-respect and family breakdown. Single Black Mothers are much larger than Single White Mothers. This does lead to young black males going to prison. And yes, a lot of lives ruined by their own actions.

Like I said, go ahead and legalize pot, I can live with that. But legalizing drugs that make people crazy (literally) is just plain naive. If You or I or my son were to experiment with drugs, no real negative problems because there is a family and social structure that can protect and support us. Poor minorities do not have that luxury.

 

[Zebo]

Alcohol is legal now and we have people throwing their lives away, drinking every day on the sidewalk and sleeping in their urine. And we spend millions providing support for these people. The problem will get worse if drugs are legal. And there are indirect victims, such as children, who, because society said it was OK to shoot herion, will become state-supported as well. Society should help people become all they can be, not be a "do what you want and we'll take care of you" environment.

Under the taliban and in most muslim countries you loose you head for possesion of drugs. That fear does'nt even stop them. Afghanistan is the #1 producer of heroin and usage of drugs in these countries has plenty of decapitations every weekend in public.

As I said earlier you think someone who does'nt care about thier body will care about our silly little drug laws? Ya "I better not commit suicide cause it's illegal in all 50 states."

 

[miguel]

Originally posted by: Zebo

As I said earlier you think someone who does'nt care about thier body will care about our silly little drug laws? Ya "I better not commit suicide cause it's illegal in all 50 states."

I don't have all the solutions, but arguing that criminals don't care about laws is stating the obvious. "We have laws against murder, yet there are millions of murders a year!"

C'mon, man!

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: miguel
1. I don't see how proving that alcoholism has gone down since MADD started is relevant. MADD doesn't put people in Jail. They do campaigns to teach people not to drive drunk.
2. I think alcohol related accidents have actually increased, but like you said, alcohol is legal.

As far as the

chilling Black violence in the inner cities, 1/4 of black young males in prison or on parol and the huge expense of the drug war form prisons to courts, and millions of young lives ruined for life by having a drug conviction for pot on thier record.

Black violence in the inner cities is not cause solely by drugs. If it were, it would not only be blacks or minorities. It's part of a bigger problem, which includes cultural influences, self-respect and family breakdown. Single Black Mothers are much larger than Single White Mothers. This does lead to young black males going to prison. And yes, a lot of lives ruined by their own actions.

Like I said, go ahead and legalize pot, I can live with that. But legalizing drugs that make people crazy (literally) is just plain naive. If You or I or my son were to experiment with drugs, no real negative problems because there is a family and social structure that can protect and support us. Poor minorities do not have that luxury.

I can agree with most of all that.. But you still refuse to answer the question, how has them being illegal ever stopped anyone from going "crazy" (or using)? And secondly is the price we pay for the war worth it just to say we're not "sanctioning" drug use?

 

[miguel]

Originally posted by: Zebo

I can agree with most of all that.. But you still refuse to answer the question, how has them being illegal ever stopped anyone from going "crazy" (or using)? And secondly is the price we pay for the war worth it just to say we're not "sanctioning" drug use?

I don't know the answer to your first question. But I do know that making it legal doesn't make sense. It would destroy the ones who are barely making it. As for your second question: I say yes. I've seen the effects of hard drug use. Making it legal would also require me to pay for making drugs available at a lower cost through the taxes I pay.

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: miguel

Originally posted by: Zebo

As I said earlier you think someone who does'nt care about thier body will care about our silly little drug laws? Ya "I better not commit suicide cause it's illegal in all 50 states."

I don't have all the solutions, but arguing that criminals don't care about laws is stating the obvious. "We have laws against murder, yet there are millions of murders a year!"

C'mon, man!

You keep bringing this example up and it's flawed reasoning, people, even crimminals, have a different attitude about laws that restrict thier personal freedom and are consentual behavior. Call it civil disobiance if you want, but everyone feels differnet about laws where there is no third party victim. It's called natural law.

 

[miguel]

Originally posted by: Zebo

Originally posted by: miguel

Originally posted by: Zebo

As I said earlier you think someone who does'nt care about thier body will care about our silly little drug laws? Ya "I better not commit suicide cause it's illegal in all 50 states."

I don't have all the solutions, but arguing that criminals don't care about laws is stating the obvious. "We have laws against murder, yet there are millions of murders a year!"

C'mon, man!

You keep bringing this example up and it's flawed reasoning, people, even crimminals, have a different attitude about laws that restrict thier personal freedom and are consentual behavior. Call it civil disobiance if you want, but everyone feels differnet about laws where there is no third party victim. It's called natural law.

I beg your pardon. You keep bringing up that people use drugs even if they are illegal, so just legalize it. How is that not flawed reasoning? Yes, you are right, comparing drug use to murder is not that same. But comparing anything to anything is not the same. That's just logic. My bringing up the murder thing is to argue the point about illegal behaviour despite it being illegal. It has nothing to do with how many people are involved.

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: miguel

Originally posted by: Zebo

I can agree with most of all that.. But you still refuse to answer the question, how has them being illegal ever stopped anyone from going "crazy" (or using)? And secondly is the price we pay for the war worth it just to say we're not "sanctioning" drug use?

I don't know the answer to your first question. But I do know that making it legal doesn't make sense. It would destroy the ones who are barely making it. As for your second question: I say yes. I've seen the effects of hard drug use. Making it legal would also require me to pay for making drugs available at a lower cost through the taxes I pay.

Thats a drop in the bucket compared to what we pay for SWAT teams, courts, prisons, insurance costs from theft and inner city caualites. Most drugs grow like weeds or are trivial to manufacture in the case of synthetics they would be almost free.

I've seen the effects of hard drug use.

Welp, lets just keep locking them up because no law will stop them. It can only come from within' or by locking them up as a temporary solution.