It seems like the drug lords in Mexico and the whole situation going on around the U.S-Mexico border has been a major topic in the news lately. In a way, I was surprised to hear Hillary Clinton say that the U.S. is shares half the blame in the situation. Then I started looking at who the major buyers of drugs are - Americans.

We've loved our drugs from alcohol, to marijuana, to coke, to harsher stuff for hundreds of years now. But, in light of how violent and dangerous the situation has become, is it time to make a major decisions one way or the other on this issue?

Mayors are having to go into hiding or quitting their jobs in fear of these drug-running thugs. There seems to have been more beheadings in Mexico in the last couple months than all of those combined in Iraq/Afghanistan since the war started. People don't even want to vacation there anymore. The drug lords are recruiting American teens to carry out hits on people. It just seems so much more out of control than we really ever thought it could be. Or, maybe it's always been like this and we're just now being exposed to the harsh reality of it.

While I am personally a proponent of legalizing marijuana, I know that legalizing it isn't going to stop the crime and the brutality that comes with the drug scene. At this point, I think there need to be deterents in place to seriously make people think twice before selling, buying, or possessing illegal drugs. Monetary fines aren't going to cut it, so I think insanely painful jail sentences should be imposed. I am talking about a minimum for 5 years in jail for any amount of drugs of any type that is classified as illegal for the first offense, regardles of who you are and what your previous police record contains...20 years for a second offense...and life for a third.

Harsh? You bet it is harsh. Unrealistic? Probably. But unless Americans start taking some responsibility in this shit and stop encouraging those asshats from running the border with their drugs and killing hundreds of innocent people on a weekly basis, there is no reason for them to stop. So lon as there is money to be made they are going to continue. If we impose exceptionally harsh jail times for even a first offense...I think people will pause before they do it and many will say, "Fuck this! It's not worth it!" I think five years in jail, or longer, is a huge deterent for a toke on a joint. And, yes, something like this would be very hard to enforce not to mention hard to sustain because so many people would be going to jail for a long time. But, that initial influx would quickly decline once all of the media agencies start reporting how little Johnny Smith or Suzie Jones is spending the better half of their high school or college days in jail because they wanted to smoke a bong.

Do we really NEED illegal drugs in our country? I think not. Are drugs fun and awesome? I am sure more than enough people on this board alone will say they are...but do those people realize they are directly contributing to the situation going on? I doubt it...and I bet the vast majority of them are apathetic to it because they aren't the ones being shot at by drug runners at the like.

So I ask you all this question and encourage your feedback - Is it time to legalize drugs like marijuana...or, it is time to impose insanely harsh penalties for all those who sell, buy, possess, or distribute illegal drugs?

I think Marijuana should be treated asa mix of Alcohol Laws, and Cig Taxes.

Like if you are driving under the influence of Mary Jane you get harsh penalties and pay out of the wazoo for it via taxes, would get the big tabacco companies a new crop to use instead of tobacco.

_________________
"Creating Havoc and Pie Since 2001!"
My Website: http://www.anthonyhays.com
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/cakvala

I really think legalizing marijuana would help very much.

I absolutely agree with Fribur. If a product is legal, even if it is taxed enourmously, people will be more inclined to purchase it than to risk possible jail sentences for going with the illegal alternative. If that were to occur, there would be less incentive to fight and kill over the ability to distribute marijuana, leaving us more resources to crack down on other, more dangerous, drugs.

Long-term I also believe that marijuana should be treated the same way as alcohol. But, short-term it just isn't feasible; what level of 'high' is too much to operate a vehicle? what age is the threshold age for marijuana use? there are a million questions that would need to be resolved before marijuana could be legalized which unfortunately does not help with the current situation.

That said, I've always believed that supply-side drug enforcement is an inefficient way to attack the problem. If there were room in our prisons, which there isn't, I would make posession & use of illegal drugs an offense that carries jailtime.

Easy, have zero tolerance on driving under the influence of Marijuana.

Remove the profit motive and the drug problem will dry up. You don't have to tax it or whatever, just give the shit away, whatever you want fine, here, have it. Come take a class on what this stuff does to you and take the funds that were being spent on law enforcement and put that in rehabilitation centers and within a few years the drug war will be over.

Who would push a product that you make no money selling? Why would pushers try to get new kids addicted to stuff they can't sell?

People are going to use, so remove the ability of the drugs to make money for the pushers, the gangs, the whatever, and you would be amazed at how crime drops.

Krby the only problem with that is, you'd have to criminalize SOME portion of it.

Driving while under all that free shit?

Neglect of children?

Is there a minimum age?

Assuming...purely for the sake of argument...that your suggestion is possible, here's where it fails.

Some drugs aren't made here. Cocaine being a prime example. So the US would still have to import it, along with heroin and many other drugs. The drug cartels would still be making their money, and that has a global impact. (Poppy fields fund more than poppy growers).

Second, while there's a part of me that doesn't give a damn if an adult wants to flush their life down the toilet (provided they don't harm anyone else along the way) ...there are many people who are incapable of making such a choice and have to be protected by society (children, teenagers (who's brains don't function like a rational adults, and lack impulse control), people who are ill, etc.).

Third, let me expound on 'people who are ill'. I have a painful chronic illness, and when the pain levels get pretty high, the vicodin I have does NOTHING for it. People have asked me (seriously) how I don't just gobble pills mindlessly. It's because the pain I take it for is more or less 'manageable'. I mean the vicodin doesn't stop me from hurting it makes me care less and enables me to get through it, and I'm rational enough to know the price for gobbling pills 'til I feel nothing, as nice as that may seem, I value my brains too much.

When the pain is on a 9-10 level I DO NOT GIVE A FUCK. There's only 2 reasons I don't down a bottle; I don't think it will work, and I can't physically do it I'm in so much pain I can barely walk with assistance. That's when we go to the ER and they give me morphine injections til it stops...or they put me on a drip and admit me 'til it is under control (because my heart rate and bp go through the damn roof with the pain too).

People self medicate NOW with illicit drugs for a variety of illnesses. And people are really, really bad at doing so. They get results, which is why they keep doing it, but it's far from ideal. You'd see a lot more of that if all illicit drugs were legal and free.

And finally here's why I'd never ever support such a thing...I've worked in drug counseling. There is nothing on this earth I've seen more depressing than someone who truly (and I mean *truly*) wanted to break free from a drug habit...and couldn't. Ask any smoker how hard it can be. Some drugs you can 'recover' from more easily than others. When I did this work, crack cocaine was the worst out there. Various forms of meth. may have replaced that today. Both have low recovery rates, and high rate of perm. damage to the brain and body.

Marijuana? Fuck yeah make that shit legal. Everything else? Oh fuck no. No no no no no.

Plus it wouldn't resolve the crime rate anyway. People on meth. can be batshit crazy and scary. Visit any Wal-Mart around 2am and walk the Aisles of the Damned for good examples.

_________________

Surprised to hear her say it was America's fault that American's are creating a black market need and criminals are filling that need? Really?

Its basic economics. Without a market no one would be fighting over who gets to sell it.

If it was legal to sell it then it wouldn't be worthwhile to kill people over who gets to sell it.

Hell if you legalize just marijuana that cuts like 60% of the drug lords profits. Then how are they going to be funding a huge war over who gets to sell the stuff that is still illegal while maintaining a profit?

Most of that sounds a lot like alcohol.

As for teenagers and people of bad judgement, they already get their hands on it and will continue to do so.

We'll have to import some, no doubt, but it will still put a serious dent as far as the more nefarious dealers and cartels are concerned.

One of the biggest upsides to me is that we'd have such a smaller prison population than we do now. Though I must say to me that's also a moral issue - people who have really done nothing wrong but are stuck in jail... haven't hurt anyone, nothing, but have simply taken a drug that they may or may not be capable of being responsible with.

There are some drugs out there that are nearly impossible to find people who can use them responsibly, though I think while some people are addicted without end in sight, a decent number are able to at least keep violent acts and driving under the influence down after taking them. The addiction problem is no more of a big deal than someone crazily addicted to alcohol.

Or just have someone take the drug under extreme supervision, and then tell me it can't be taken responsibly. It's always possible, it's just a question of how far you have to go to take something responsibly without hurting anyone else.

Curious... krby in your idea, who is supplying the free drugs? the government? Is this really krby pushing a huge expansion of the federal government? Who are you, and what did you do with the real krby?

If you legalize marijuna and imposed insane prison sentences for all of the other illegal drugs out there, would that work? I know a lot of marijuana comes across the Mexican border...but so do other drugs like coke.

Could decriminalizing weed and imposing severe sentences for all of the other illegal drugs be the answer...or, would it merely shift crime into another element?

You can't tax marijuana or regulate it.

I can grow pot in my living room. I can't reasonably grow a tobacco cigarette.

I think that is the main reason they won't legalize it. It is a profitable industry now. Legalize it and it ceases to be profitable to anybody.

_________________

That would cut the drug runners for weed...but what about the other drugs? Would imposing a severe jail penalty on all other illegal drugs, for all users, sellers, buyers, et al., even for first time folks getting busted, dissuade Americans from encouraging drug lords from seeking to profit on our soil?

The way I see it, if you make the punishment SO bad for something, as outrageous as it may be, I think non-stupid people would have the presence of mind to understand that the risk of 5+ years in jail is simply not worth the reward of a temporary high. While I see the jails getting packed right off the bat, I think once the word got out that harsh jail sentences are being imposed for everyone...even first time low-rent users...people would simply stick to drugs like booze and pot for their highs...or acquire legal narcs legally by some method so long as they had a prescription for it.

If it were legal to buy, it would still be a multi-billion dollar industry whose production is controlled by cartels and militias.

The amount of killing wouldn't change too much. Street gangs also aren't going to just buck up and decide they can't make money anymore. They'll focus on other crime to turn a profit.

This, "do super harsh penalities" idea is exactly why we have a death penalty, yet study after study shows it to not be a serious factor of deterence.



I don't see why not. You and I could grow tomatos in our back yard too, yet millions of tomatos are bought every year.

That last part, about making it unprofitable to anybody (if it was really true), is exactly why it SHOULD be legalized. Take away the profit motive, and the drug cartels cease to exist.

tomatoes are a pain in the ass to grow and keep alive.

marijuana .... isn't. they call it "weed" for a reason. It'll grow anywhere under just about any conditions

_________________

World of Warcraft: Kallaystra, Gweila, Steakumn, Tarathia [ Feathermoon/Horde ]

I will venture to say that most people who use illegal drugs do it for recreational purposes. I'm willing to bet the vast majority of them would not want to throw their entire life away on having a little high and fun, which subsequently would lower at least the recreational users' usage. That alone would make a pretty big dent in drugs being sold if most of the recreational users feel a drag off a joint, should they get caught, is not worth 5+ years of their life in jail.

Most people who commit crimes worthy of the death penalty, in my mind, don't really give a rats ass about their life or anyone else's. They don't care about spending their life in jail or dying...they're just fucked up, so the death penalty isn't necessarily a good deterrent. It is more a means to impose the ultimate punishment for the worst crimes.

I'm not sure you can really bring the death penalty as a deterrent into this argument when most of the people using recreational drugs are doing it for kicks.

Think about it...who aer some of the biggest marijuana users? I'd say teens to early 20-year olds. I'm sure there are lots of 30+ year olds using it to, but pot is a pretty common thing to use in high school and college. How do you think the nation's recreational drug users would react when they saw a white sweet-smiled 16-year old cheerleader chick thrown in jail for 5+ years becaue she got caught fucking around with an illegal substance? I think it would get as much airplay on Fox, MSNBC, and CNN as Lacy peterson did...poooooooor sweet and her-whole-life-ahead-of-her princess go to the pokey for trying pot. I am sure Geraldo would have a field day with this, saying how absurd it is...not that he is by any means a good role model against drugs. However, I am willing to bet a hell of a lot more parents would be getting involved with their kids and explaining to them, "Look...drugs jsut aren't bad for you, but you will rot your ass in jail for at least 5 years if you are caught using or possessing it. DON'T DO IT!"

Word would pass quickly from community to community, school to school, person to person...and I think anyone with half a brain would realize that law is law and that a harsh punishment is not going to be avoided because they had an urge to play with some drugs. I am willing to bet imposing sick jail terms for even first-time use would reduce usage and thus reduce the market.

Yes, the government would provide it. But the way I see it you'd be reducing government due to the overall reduction in police requirements. (eventual elimination of the DEA, freeing up billions that are spent on drug enforcement, etc)

Tarot, there would be the same or at least similar laws as for booze (age requirement, public intoxication, endangerment of others, etc)

The basis for what I am thinking is that if it is made legal to posses then the drug rate, after the initial spike, will drop dramatically driving the demand very low. I am sure that we have some very bright people in our government that can create a "greenhouse" that would produce some very fine poppy plants and the like.


This is why there would have to be some age controls and education involved in the "handing out of drugs". I know this isn't the perfect solution but people are not going to just stop doing this stuff.

I would want to re-purpose a great deal of the funds that were being used for fighting the drug war to helping these people.

It wouldn't stop that, but you have to admit that it would greatly reduce the petty crimes for people stealing so they can get money to fund their habit, I don't have the numbers but I think the differences between the crimes committed while people are on drugs vs the crimes committed to acquire drugs is big.

Again, this is not perfect. I think it would be a million times better than losing the drug war we are fighting and sinking billions of dollars in every year. Don't focus on the criminal, take as much of the criminal element out (by removing the profit) and then you focus on rehabilitation.

The two extremes here seem to be: "It would completely eliminate it!" and "It wouldn't make a smidgen of difference!". I tend to think the answer lies somewhere in the middle. And that's plenty good enough for me.

The big deal for me is that people wouldn't be thrown in prison for no reason, but I still think besides that incredible plus, it will also have some impact. That reason alone though is about 300 percent of all the reason I would need to want to see it legalized =) Heaven forbid people put stupid stuff in their bodies of their own will.

With regard to cartels running the show, I think there will still be a good chunk of business for them... but then you might also have companies springing out of nowhere gathering up resources from all manner of locations, as well as increasing their own production.

I think there's also somewhat of a factor of the "cool kids' club", whereby because it's illegal, rebellious kids have a natural tendency to try it. Keeping it out of sight and out of mind makes it appear to be the black market, niche product that it is, and that by itself can lure people in.

The killing and violence? Pretty damned hard to say if that will stop, but this is at least one less factor and resource that gives "street cred" to gangs that rely on it for their well-being. I'd guess that the last thing they want to see is more competition.

I never liked this line of thinking.

Having come from an environment and family where drug and alcohol use was extremely prevalent, I can safely say that when it comes to hard drugs (And even alcohol, for some people.) it's very rarely a case of just putting something in your own body. It's rare that it just affects YOU and you alone.

I won't say that it's a justification for any action, just pointing out that the line of thought is extremely flawed.

Besides holding politicians on their payroll, the cartels generally have a more capable military-wing than the countries in which they reside. It's not as simple as cutting them out, but to not do so would legitimize the front for guerilla outfits like FARC.

If that facet of their activities were legalized, they would still not behave like a regular business. They'd handle competitors in the same manner they are handling them now.

For it to be flawed, there would have to be no way one could take such drugs responsibly. It's rare, and still quite possible. Just because there are hordes of people who do it irresponsibly is not justification enough to outlaw something. At what percentage of people does it become ok?

There are innumerable things in society that a person can do to themselves that makes them have a huge negative impact on friends and family around them. Alcohol, smoking, and addictive gambling(really, addictive anything can have a large impact if severe enough) can be massive problems. They can also be mitigated against when living with someone(alcohol only in small amounts on certain days, smoking outside only, gambling responsibly, etc).

And, of course, if you're living alone that even further begs the question of: "Who gives a shit?". I mean, if someone is SO irresponsible that they'll get on neighbors nerves from taking the stuff, that's a problem that existed before the drug quite frankly. Personally I'd argue that anyone who takes drugs like those in the first place(weed included, IMHO) isn't exactly sound of mind, but that doesn't mean they can't be minimally responsible with it in a way that doesn't impact others.

I've always thought it was dumb for EVERYONE to pay the price because too many people decided to do something irresponsible with said action. I have no right to tell people what they can and can't put in their bodies so long as it is feasibly possible for them to take it without hurting other people. And that depends on many different things - the person's individual reaction to it, the people they live around, how much they take, how often they take it, how responsible that person is in general.

Those are factors I have no more intention of investigating every household for than I do to find out if every household is alcohol-abuse safe. Their freedom to take whatever the hell they want extends to the tip of my nose, and not less than that.

Your assertions are basically the equivalent of saying that a lot of people drink and drive without killing anyone, so it should be ok.

And like I said, I lived with these people, was raised around them for half my life. It's not exactly the same as smoking, drinking or even gambling. You can argue all day long about where you draw the lines or how safe this person or that person is, and you can be idealistic about it all day long, but the reality is quite different.

This isn't the kind of public policy that would be created based on statistics and percentages. It comes about when there's public outrage. That doesn't automatically invalidate its necessity.

Not really. It is more equivalent to "Lots of people are able to drink without getting behind the wheel, cause property damage, abuse their families, etc. There's no reason to send those people to jail."

_________________
Hope is the new black.

The reason I used drunk driving and not just drinking is that I think people grossly underestimate the effect that these drugs have on people. It's NOT like just getting drunk and passing out on the floor. There's a reason that hard drugs and crime are so closely linked, and it's not just because they're illegal.

Sure, let the cool kids have their pot. But when you start talking about people just using hard drugs like it's just no big deal and it's their body and all this...it just sounds silly to anyone that's ever actually been around it.

As far as I know, there is no real way to tell if someone is 'under the influence" of marijuana. This makes prosecuting DUI cases harder for weed because the only evidence they usually have is periphernalia/substance and possibly a test that reveals use in the past 15-20 days.

Hire a lawyer that doesn't suck and you can beat it.

You can still get picked up for reckless driving.

_________________
Hope is the new black.

A blood or urine test can tell if someone is under the influence of marijuana. The issue is that no concentration of the metabolite is established for DUI. The science is ahead of the law.

A couple of differences about drunk driving here. First, like Bearne said, it is one of many *specific* actions a person could potentially take while under the influence. Second, that action *in and of itself* is the action that leads to problems sheerly because of the effect it has on the human brain. Now, I'm sure certain drugs will almost directly cause bad human behaviour, but it's not quite to the same degree as a person drunk driving - who has DIRECTLY impaired his ability to actually control a car. And different people react differently to these drugs as well, especially when it comes to anecdotal cases where a few people became violent. There are very few drugs that *automatically* lead to that shit, for EVERY single person regardless of genetics and response, AND also in a solo/non-family environment when you take very little of said drug. Some come close to it.



It doesn't automatically invalidate its necessity, but I recall a pretty big outrage just prior to prohibition =) That's not really a tried and true justifiable method as far as I'm concerned, particularly when there are so many people that try all sorts of drugs relatively harmlessly.



Well, sure if you get MAD drunk you're just going to pass out. But different people REACT to alcohol differently. There are EXTREMELY, i mean fucking extremely violent alcoholics out there. There are also people that become very calm after drinking. Like drugs, it's not a situation of: "If you take X, you become violent".

Fribur: Pot could essentially be a house plant with an odor. Tomatoes are pretty hard to grow comparatively. It would be impossible to tax it if 100% legal. Imagine trying to tax dandelions.

_________________

Regardless of how easy it may or may not be, there would still be people too lazy to do it themselves.

Even if the market for it largely disappears, however, that still accomplishes our goal: curbing the violence of the drug cartels, at least over the sales of marijuana.

From what I've heard from certain people it's reaaaalllly fuckin easy. There are plenty of lazy people that use it as an easy source of income.

which goes back to my point, why would they grow it if there were no profit motive?

The same reason people have vegetable gardens in their backyard. Either a hobbyist interest, or for "subsistence"

_________________

World of Warcraft: Kallaystra, Gweila, Steakumn, Tarathia [ Feathermoon/Horde ]

good! This is bad why?

It's not, IMO. I'm not arguing for the good or bad side of legalizing marijuana. ;P

_________________

World of Warcraft: Kallaystra, Gweila, Steakumn, Tarathia [ Feathermoon/Horde ]

They make those 5 ft tall?

Look at all the dispensaries in california. The law allows the prescribed people to grow their own pot but apparently people would rather buy it from the dispensaries. I think the law even allows them to designate a caregiver that can grow it for them but they still buy it from a dispensary. I think that is more than enough evidence for the profitability of commercial production.

And yes pot can be grown like a house plant but i doubt it would be of acceptable quality. If it was legalized i don't think anyone would put up with bricked up mexican dirt weed quality.

I think a more accurate comparison might be to home brewed beer.

Sure, but there are plenty of people out there who can't even keep a house plant alive. Why go to the bother, if you can just walk to the corner store and pick up a carton of joints? The tax may encourage a fair amount of people to grow their own, but there will still be MORE than enough who don't want the hassle to make taxing it worth while.