the reality of your war on drugs

mosaik · Post by **mosaik** » 5/29/2003, 3:51 pm

i did. and i found that little or no violence has been documented. the only "force" they're using is economic pressure. and a job where you work 12 hours for $1 a day is better then no job at all.

Bill Gates doesn't use force to sell his product and he's profitable.

But since i'm not getting through here, let me spell it out.

The mexican drug lords lose their shipments at the border when the drugs are confiscated by federal agents because they are illegal. The mexican drug lords must make up their lost incomes, so they turn to atrocity - or so reno alleges.

if the federal agents didn't confiscate the drugs, they would not be lost. the need to chop up humans and sell them would vanish.

Narbus · Post by **Narbus** » 5/29/2003, 4:08 pm

if the murdering drug cartels didn't make the poisonous, mentallly adversive, physically damaging, and very illegal drugs, well then the need for federal agents to patrol the border and look for this type of thing would vanish.

mosaik · Post by **mosaik** » 5/29/2003, 4:20 pm

the reason the cartels are the ones making the drugs, as opposed to nice, kind pharmecuticals is because the drugs are illegal in the first place.

if people want to do drugs, let them. the LAWS create the violence, not the drugs or profit.

Narbus · Post by **Narbus** » 5/29/2003, 6:52 pm

doug wrote:i did. and i found that little or no violence has been documented. the only "force" they're using is economic pressure. and a job where you work 12 hours for $1 a day is better then no job at all.

A job in sub-standard, hazardous conditions, with no medical benefits, where you live in fear of the supervisor because he will fire you at the drop of a hat, and noxious fumes and poor to no ventalation are the order of the day is really better than no job at all?

You = strange.

the reason the cartels are the ones making the drugs, as opposed to nice, kind pharmecuticals is because the drugs are illegal in the first place.

if people want to do drugs, let them. the LAWS create the violence, not the drugs or profit.

And if the nice, kind pharmecuticals did make drugs, they would have certain standards of cleanliness, purity, etc etc etc to hold up. Drug cartels don't have such standards. They would still be making the drugs, and they'd still be asses about it because they have no reason not to be.

I really can't believe that you are suggesting that murderers who (supposedly) carve up people for money will suddenly turn all sunshine and kittens if their product became legal. They'll still be money grubbing assholes who put profit above people.

Bandalero · Post by **Bandalero** » 5/29/2003, 7:34 pm

doug wrote:the reason the cartels are the ones making the drugs, as opposed to nice, kind pharmecuticals is because the drugs are illegal in the first place.

if people want to do drugs, let them. the LAWS create the violence, not the drugs or profit.

it all comes down to the habbit, remove the habbit and there is no force what so ever. there's no reason for drug cartels, there's no reason for the government to enforce these laws and there is no reason for the killing. everything in the chain of events comes down to the people who smoke the pot, or do the drugs.

the government sees it necessary to defend it's people of the dangers of drugs because it's a costly habbit. both for the individual and the government itself. just because you think it's not the governments place to tell you what to put or what not to put into your body doesn't make you right at all. that's like saying i'm gonna buy a gun. the government has no right to tell me what i can/cannot do with it, even though it's wrong if i kill someone with it. get over it guys they have that right because in the end they have to pay for services that you need because of the health risks that you took on doing drugs. they would rather spend the money on keeping you away from drugs and healthy then for you to end up like a veggie. and you can't tell me that KB doesn't fuck you up worse then beer. that shit is nasty. something that potient is sure to mess you up in the long run. and while the government is overpaying HMO's and handing out food stamps while people use their paycheck to blow on crap, were stuck with the bill. were stuck with the budget cuts, were stuck with the higher taxes and were stuck taking care of stupid people who thin it's fucking cool to do drugs......

mosaik · Post by **mosaik** » 6/1/2003, 10:38 am

Narbus wrote:A job in sub-standard, hazardous conditions, with no medical benefits, where you live in fear of the supervisor because he will fire you at the drop of a hat, and noxious fumes and poor to no ventalation are the order of the day is really better than no job at all?

You = strange.

I believe that it is. I believe that it is the choice of the workers who apply for the jobs in the conditions you described that it is better then no job at all as well.

How does that make me strange?

And if the nice, kind pharmecuticals did make drugs, they would have certain standards of cleanliness, purity, etc etc etc to hold up. Drug cartels don't have such standards. They would still be making the drugs, and they'd still be asses about it because they have no reason not to be.

I really can't believe that you are suggesting that murderers who (supposedly) carve up people for money will suddenly turn all sunshine and kittens if their product became legal. They'll still be money grubbing assholes who put profit above people.

The reason I am sure that large drug companies would open their doors like McDonalds instead of being murderers is because it would make them more money to sell to everybody. A better public image and an easily accesable product coupled with (most importantly) a hassle-free buying experience would sell a hell of a lot better then meeting a half crazed killer in an alley to participate in legal comerce just like you did back in the days when it was against the law.

alcohol used to be prohibited. people got killed over it. it was smugled and sold illegally and the mob rose up because of it. then they legalized it. now you can go to a liquor store and buy as much of it as you want.

the same thing would happen with drugs.

mosaik · Post by **mosaik** » 6/1/2003, 10:40 am

again, reno, all your complaints are with the government. they're the ones who make you pay for a users habit, and they're the ones who keep the cost of drugs up by not allowing big investors with money to spend to get in on the market.

the government has no right to tell me to do anything, ever, period. just thought i'd state that once more.

and just so everybody knows, i do not do drugs, i will never do drugs, and i would rather nobody do drugs at all. but i don't feel that it's my right to force anybody to believe what i do about drugs. i want freedom, that means for everybody. not just the people who think like me.

Narbus · Post by **Narbus** » 6/1/2003, 11:40 pm

The point that I keep trying to make is as follows:
There is no such thing as a perfectly individual person. All of us rely upon, and in turn are relied upon by, a larger society. Our individual choices, no matter how individual they may seem, will have an effect on the larger society, and therefore on other people who are also dependent upon/depended upon by that society.
Given this, the statement "I have no right to tell anyone what to do, and neither does anyone else, because I'm my own person" is inherently flawed. You are not your own person, and unless you move to the wilderness and buy a shack where no one else ever comes, and you never interact with anyone, the statement will always remain flawed.

Bandalero · Post by **Bandalero** » 6/2/2003, 3:47 pm

doug wrote:again, reno, all your complaints are with the government. they're the ones who make you pay for a users habit, and they're the ones who keep the cost of drugs up by not allowing big investors with money to spend to get in on the market.

ok then i say we leave all the druggies and their health problems alone, let them die off and fester around us no more. that's the equivalent to the Nazi's killing off the disabled but you know what, fuck it, if it's gonna save me a nickel a year, i say fuck em. they dug their fucking grave now throw em in it, with no regard for who they were before they were addicts.

what's the point of legalizing this? the cartels aren't going to go away, they'll just move on to another illegal profitable buisness. competition will rise and eventually you'll have someone making pot that will be so potient it might kill you.

mosaik · Post by **mosaik** » 6/5/2003, 10:55 am

or, you'll have somebody making coke so clean it won't kill you.

the point of legalizing it is that there's no good reason for it to be illegal. it's just the government legislating morality and it's unreasonable.

Corey · Post by **Corey** » 6/5/2003, 10:58 am

doug wrote:or, you'll have somebody making coke so clean it won't kill you.

the point of legalizing it is that there's no good reason for it to be illegal. it's just the government legislating morality and it's unreasonable.

That's assuming there is a governement institution legislating its production and ensuring it is safe. There are no wicked chemicals in alcohol because it must pass FDA standards. So you either have the government making it illegal, or the government making it safe.

mosaik · Post by **mosaik** » 6/5/2003, 11:19 am

i think that the drug companies would make it safe because selling a product that kills it's consumers is bad for business.

they would strive to make it the safest and most effective product because guys like me care about that.

Corey · Post by **Corey** » 6/5/2003, 12:03 pm

car companies didn't just decide to spend millions on making cars safer with things like air bags and crumple zones and seat belts. That was all funded by the government as well as mandated.

starvingeyes · Post by **starvingeyes** » 6/5/2003, 12:25 pm

car companies, like volvo for instance, routinely design new and expensive saftey features for their vehicles without any legislation forcing them to do so.

consumers want a safe product. it's a big selling point.

Bandalero · Post by **Bandalero** » 6/5/2003, 3:30 pm

one car company out of how many auto makers? even government standards will not make it completely fail proof. i got an 85 GMC pick up that has exploding gas tanks upon impact. they met every standard that was put in front of them at the time.

what's gonna stop some shmo from ODing? that's one reason this should be illegal it's alot easier for you to OD on whatever then by drinking yourself to death.

starvingeyes · Post by **starvingeyes** » 6/5/2003, 4:56 pm

people overdose on drugs all the time in spite of the law. it has no effect on oding

Bandalero · Post by **Bandalero** » 6/5/2003, 5:04 pm

and that's what you want? people to over indulge legally so that they can sue a company over it's wares? that's crazy. remember, there's no such things as personal accountability now a days.

starvingeyes · Post by **starvingeyes** » 6/6/2003, 3:37 am

if there was no huge nanny state, i believe there would be such a thing as personal accountability.

Bandalero · Post by **Bandalero** » 6/6/2003, 11:07 am

personal accountability doesn't exist anymore because it's not profitable to be responsible for your actions anymore. McDonalds is reponsible for people being fat, the bartender is responsible for the drunkard who smashed into another car killing people, and the government will be responsible for some moron on methanphetamines (SP) and the crimes he commits.

superboots · Post by **superboots** » 6/6/2003, 11:12 am

Un Puño De Tierra wrote:personal accountability doesn't exist anymore because it's not profitable to be responsible for your actions anymore. McDonalds is reponsible for people being fat, the bartender is responsible for the drunkard who smashed into another car killing people, and the government will be responsible for some moron on methanphetamines (SP) and the crimes he commits.

well you did choose to eat at mcdonalds and get fat, you did choose to go and get drunk. people have free will