Mexican Drug war in pics (boston.com)

[SphinxnihpS]

Originally posted by: QueBert

Originally posted by: BeauJangles

Originally posted by: QueBert

Originally posted by: SphinxnihpS
Worked for booze.

No one should be prevented from putting whatever they want to into themselves either. I am for this for MANY more reasons than the FACT that it will ELIMINATE street gangs in the US withing 1 year.

You logic that not legalizing because there are corrupt politicians is flawless...

huh? Most gangs in the US have nothing to do with drugs at all, if US had zero drugs we'd still have a huuuuuge gang problem. If you believe legalizing drugs will eliminate gangs I don't know what to tell you. There are plenty of gang members in my neighborhood and they fight over colors, not Cocaine or any other drug.

You do realize that most of the biggest and most violent gangs in the country get most of their money from drug trafficking, right?

he said it would ELIMINATE street gangs, the bigger ones are funded by drugs, but the smaller ones are the ones you need to worry about. Why? because there are 100 times the numbers of small ones. Look at all the gang related shootings in Detroit, I would bet any amount of money that less than 5% are due to these large gangs you speak of which are funded by drugs. If drugs were legal the larger gangs in the US would just find a new main source of income. Prostitution & GTA come to mind or maybe even selling children into slavery. Organized gangs - which make up a very small percentage of gangs in the US are very intelligent when it comes to making money, and they will always find a new outlet for $$$ when one dries up.

You will never get rid of gangs in America, never.

Like I already said please go do some research before that crow gets any bigger and more bitter. You are not correct. You are very far from correct.

 

[Aharami]

marked

 

[InflatableBuddha]

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
germany is a small country. fine, their population is smaller as well. so what. the berlin wall is quite different, it was a wall through a city. if you got over, you were where you needed to be right away, yet they were able to defend it anyways. much of our border is just desert land on both sides, which is technically much easier to defend if we wanted to. you don't have to stop them at the fence, you only have to detect them really because on foot theres only so far they can run into the scrubland before you send forces out to round them up. you can use automated detection as well as a fence. and we have every right and need to control the borders. don't even compare this to nk or berlin, those were walls to keep people in not out. the idea that this or that is impossible or too hard is just the limitations of small minds.

Your inability to think "outside the box" is what is limiting.

The Berlin Wall was rebuilt in four separate stages of increasing fortitude because people still rebelled and attempted to subvert the unjust principle of being held under a broken system (Communist dictatorship).

The Wall was not a long term solution. The will of the people to rise up against an unjust government and system, with the aid of international support (including the US), caused the wall to eventually fall, after 28 years. The wall in North Korea will eventually fall, for similar reasons.

By erecting this wall, the US is willfully ignoring the failure of both its drug policy and economic policy. Cracking down on drug suppliers does not reduce the demand for drugs. Exploiting the cheap labour of Mexicans to ensure cheap good for America, and unfairly subsidizing American corn growers hurts the profits of Mexican corn growers, both of which breed resentment among Mexicans, who seek a better standard of living in the US.

Instead of tackling the root problems (i.e. thinking outside the box), policymakers attempt to stem the flow of drugs and immigrants into the US by brute force, which is not only expensive, but ineffective.

This is neither sustainable, nor effective, and it will fail.

 

[QueBert]

Originally posted by: SphinxnihpS

Originally posted by: QueBert

Originally posted by: BeauJangles

Originally posted by: QueBert

Originally posted by: SphinxnihpS
Worked for booze.

No one should be prevented from putting whatever they want to into themselves either. I am for this for MANY more reasons than the FACT that it will ELIMINATE street gangs in the US withing 1 year.

You logic that not legalizing because there are corrupt politicians is flawless...

huh? Most gangs in the US have nothing to do with drugs at all, if US had zero drugs we'd still have a huuuuuge gang problem. If you believe legalizing drugs will eliminate gangs I don't know what to tell you. There are plenty of gang members in my neighborhood and they fight over colors, not Cocaine or any other drug.

You do realize that most of the biggest and most violent gangs in the country get most of their money from drug trafficking, right?

he said it would ELIMINATE street gangs, the bigger ones are funded by drugs, but the smaller ones are the ones you need to worry about. Why? because there are 100 times the numbers of small ones. Look at all the gang related shootings in Detroit, I would bet any amount of money that less than 5% are due to these large gangs you speak of which are funded by drugs. If drugs were legal the larger gangs in the US would just find a new main source of income. Prostitution & GTA come to mind or maybe even selling children into slavery. Organized gangs - which make up a very small percentage of gangs in the US are very intelligent when it comes to making money, and they will always find a new outlet for $$$ when one dries up.

You will never get rid of gangs in America, never.

Like I already said please go do some research before that crow gets any bigger and more bitter. You are not correct. You are very far from correct.

I live in a "gang" area and trust me none of them are here because of drugs. I also hang out in Long Beach & LA, and the majority of people I use to hang out with when I lived in LB were gang members. MS-13 would possibly be the only gang in California that is here because of drugs and uses drugs to grow in size and power. MS-13 is HUGE but if you combined all the small unorganized gangs they are far more members than in a MS-13. Show me proof that says otherwise, I will not dispute there are places where what you say is true. But the average gang member in America is nowhere near connected enough to have anything to do with any shipments of Cocaine or Heroin, on any level. Not even selling it.

 

[SphinxnihpS]

Originally posted by: QueBert

Originally posted by: SphinxnihpS

Originally posted by: QueBert

Originally posted by: BeauJangles

Originally posted by: QueBert

Originally posted by: SphinxnihpS
Worked for booze.

No one should be prevented from putting whatever they want to into themselves either. I am for this for MANY more reasons than the FACT that it will ELIMINATE street gangs in the US withing 1 year.

You logic that not legalizing because there are corrupt politicians is flawless...

huh? Most gangs in the US have nothing to do with drugs at all, if US had zero drugs we'd still have a huuuuuge gang problem. If you believe legalizing drugs will eliminate gangs I don't know what to tell you. There are plenty of gang members in my neighborhood and they fight over colors, not Cocaine or any other drug.

You do realize that most of the biggest and most violent gangs in the country get most of their money from drug trafficking, right?

he said it would ELIMINATE street gangs, the bigger ones are funded by drugs, but the smaller ones are the ones you need to worry about. Why? because there are 100 times the numbers of small ones. Look at all the gang related shootings in Detroit, I would bet any amount of money that less than 5% are due to these large gangs you speak of which are funded by drugs. If drugs were legal the larger gangs in the US would just find a new main source of income. Prostitution & GTA come to mind or maybe even selling children into slavery. Organized gangs - which make up a very small percentage of gangs in the US are very intelligent when it comes to making money, and they will always find a new outlet for $$$ when one dries up.

You will never get rid of gangs in America, never.

Like I already said please go do some research before that crow gets any bigger and more bitter. You are not correct. You are very far from correct.

I live in a "gang" area and trust me none of them are here because of drugs. I also hang out in Long Beach & LA, and the majority of people I use to hang out with when I lived in LB were gang members. MS-13 would possibly be the only gang in California that is here because of drugs and uses drugs to grow in size and power. MS-13 is HUGE but if you combined all the small unorganized gangs they are far more members than in a MS-13. Show me proof that says otherwise, I will not dispute there are places where what you say is true. But the average gang member in America is nowhere near connected enough to have anything to do with any shipments of Cocaine or Heroin, on any level. Not even selling it.

I don't care where you live, you obviously know zero about it other than you see people you think are in gangs not selling drugs. Your experience and education on the subject compared to mine is too limited to make accurate assessments. You arguments are all "little picture" in nature, but there is a forest behind that tree I assure you.

 

[Ns1]

Originally posted by: SphinxnihpS
Your experience and education on the subject compared to mine is too limited to make accurate assessments.

I must know, now that you've opened up the door, how you know so much more than us, seeing as how we live smack dab in the middle of gang territory.

 

[SphinxnihpS]

College research subject on several occasions. I have interviewed, addicts, cops, counselors, wardens, judges, gang members, gang leaders, read professional periodicals, books, viewed numerous films and have just as much living on the wrong side of the tracks experience as anyone. After college one of my best friends was the ex-leader of a local branch of the Latin Kings. He explained to me how the operation works. Small gangs have ties with larger ones, and sometimes act at the direction of them.

Not even most of the members of these gangs actually sell drugs, but with drugs there would be no impetus to form. Many of the members come to fill other needs because they are promised comradeship, friendship, loyalty, protection, respect, and family however these principles and recruiting methods are handed down from larger more sophisticated operations, which are directly tied to drug money. They operate in much the same way as a large church or religion operates. Not everybody is directly involved, but without money, there would be no gang.

Of course not 100% of gangs operate in this manner, and not all of them deal in drugs, but those gangs are very manageable in comparison to the large and ever growing violent gang problem we have had since the start of the drug war.

Try not to make everything out I say as wrong just because it is incomplete, or I do not explain every detail of why something is the way it is. I am not here to write a thesis every time there is a thread on this subject, though I do like to express ideas in most of them. Try and do a little thinking on your own, and perhaps give me some credit for not being a complete idiot. I may be rude sometimes or often depending on your perspective, but I am obviously not stupid.

 

[SphinxnihpS]

Further... prior to college my life was a train wreck. I used, sold, and became heavily dependent on the Charlie. I started out with an 8 ball, and by the time I was done, I was moving quarter and half keys. I know who I was dealing with, and where my money was going. After that I spent a long period of time in a treatment facility and many years in 12 step recovery. I attended various 12 step meetings where I met and befriended innumerable people involved in the drug trade on some level, including some who were very high on the food chain (so they claimed, but their claims were very believable). During college, since much of my life experience at the time had been with drugs, I did many projects to that regard.

Happy?

 

[Ns1]

Yes.

w/o context you just sound like a know it all douchebag.

 

[Hyperlite]

wow. fantastic pictures.

 

[SphinxnihpS]

Originally posted by: Ns1
Yes.

w/o context you just sound like a know it all douchebag.

I am😀

 

[invidia]

I live in a gang ridden area. I don't see drugs as a major factor to most street gang violence, particularly here. 3 people were shot last week over territorial shit.

 

[QueBert]

SphinxnihpS you are talking about organized gangs, which sorry the majority of gangs AREN'T, unorganized gangs fight over colors and streets not Kilos of coke. If I'm not mistaken NS1 lives in near South Central LA, I would take anything he said over anything you said, I don't care how much 'research" you've done. It's one thing research and interviewing people and another living near or in a gang infested location. If I was to "research" men on their penis size I'm sure my findings would be grossly inaccurate as people lie. If you expect me to believe a completely unorganized gang would be capable of complex operations all I can do is laugh. You did researched, I lived in the east side of long beach off 3rd street. In my life I've known probably 100 gang members, while sime sold drugs, most sold weed. And the ones who sold Crack had other hustles. Take away the Coke to make the Crack they will survive just fine. I have a sister who was a speed freak and I have been in the kitchen of peoples houses while they were cooking up Crack. I would save come back after you've live in Long Beach for 4 years like I did. Research.

I'm not arguing that gangs are somehow involved in most big drugs in this country, but those gangs don't make up a big %. A shit ton of common street thugs with no direction > A small number of highly educated organized gangs members who control drug trafficking. The people I know/knew in gangs joined because it was what you did in that area to stay safe. Nobody recruited them, in some neighborhoods you either join or you get your assed kicked. And while I did know some who slanged Crack, but nobody forced them to it was to make easy money. And they would go elsewhere to buy the Coke, because nobody in their gang supplied it. That's where the organized/dis organized comes into play. And the people I knew made peanuts in the big picture, because they didn't have a connection. They'd buy from somebody who bought from somebody who knew the big dogs.

New Jack City was a great movie, and the basis for the projects in it are supposedly The 69 Ville Projects in Oakland. That's not the norm though that's the exception. And if you wipe out all the exceptions in America, you're still let with a metric shit ton of every day bangers who's direction in life isn't to get rich by selling drugs but to terrorize people from the rival gangs. People with small and feble minds like this couldn't handle anything to do with the drug game and the czars from other countries wouldn't want people like this in their operations, even if it's just selling for them.

invidia also speaks the truth. 99% of gang related shootings my my town are over territorial. And I believe we had about 118 last year. And most of the gang members I know are dirt poor and either work a shit 9-5 or collect unemployment. If they were heaving into selling drugs they would have Escalades and Benzs. You don't see many of these around here.

 

[Arkaign]

Que and Sphinx, I think the truth of your debate lies somewhat in the middle.

Gangs wouldn't magically vanish, but I'd bet dollars to doughnuts that gang activity would very notably subside. Think back to the liquor prohibition days, that really didn't ever get curtailed by law enforcement, and the criminal element sank back due to prohibition being repealed, taking huge sums of money out of play. The other activities of the mob were maintained : protection, numbers rackets, gambling, prostitution, extortion.

With most of the smaller gangs, there's nothing profitable for them to do outside of selling dope. And a lot of their tertiary activities (stealing cars, mugging, etc) are primarily to get quick cash to get guns/drugs. Taking the drug money out of the equation simply makes that kind of lifestyle unsustainable. Particularly if by saving hundreds of billions on prosecuting drug crimes we shift some of that focus towards increasing sentencing for violent crimes and theft cases. If some guy is suddenly looking at a 20-year sentence for stealing a car instead of 6 months, you get a double win : the guy might have second thoughts about risking spending decades in prison, and if he does go through with it, he's off the streets for a very damned long time.

Done right, full legalization could have an incredibly positive result in our nation.

 

[Mide]

impressive photos

 

[0roo0roo]

Originally posted by: InflatableBuddha

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
germany is a small country. fine, their population is smaller as well. so what. the berlin wall is quite different, it was a wall through a city. if you got over, you were where you needed to be right away, yet they were able to defend it anyways. much of our border is just desert land on both sides, which is technically much easier to defend if we wanted to. you don't have to stop them at the fence, you only have to detect them really because on foot theres only so far they can run into the scrubland before you send forces out to round them up. you can use automated detection as well as a fence. and we have every right and need to control the borders. don't even compare this to nk or berlin, those were walls to keep people in not out. the idea that this or that is impossible or too hard is just the limitations of small minds.

Your inability to think "outside the box" is what is limiting.

The Berlin Wall was rebuilt in four separate stages of increasing fortitude because people still rebelled and attempted to subvert the unjust principle of being held under a broken system (Communist dictatorship).

The Wall was not a long term solution. The will of the people to rise up against an unjust government and system, with the aid of international support (including the US), caused the wall to eventually fall, after 28 years. The wall in North Korea will eventually fall, for similar reasons.

By erecting this wall, the US is willfully ignoring the failure of both its drug policy and economic policy. Cracking down on drug suppliers does not reduce the demand for drugs. Exploiting the cheap labour of Mexicans to ensure cheap good for America, and unfairly subsidizing American corn growers hurts the profits of Mexican corn growers, both of which breed resentment among Mexicans, who seek a better standard of living in the US.

Instead of tackling the root problems (i.e. thinking outside the box), policymakers attempt to stem the flow of drugs and immigrants into the US by brute force, which is not only expensive, but ineffective.

This is neither sustainable, nor effective, and it will fail.

wrong, your simplistic need to think that everything is equivalent to some past occurrence is what is limiting your thinking. things change. and your comparison of the us protecting its border to communist systems trying to preserve their fundamentally corrupt governments is completely off the mark and shows how far you need to twist that comparison to get it to work for you. if what a wall does is let the corrupted society like mexico or a communist state fall over time and thus allow it to build anew then frankly it will have done its job.