The general decline in standards today

[CaramelSmoothie]

Communities that get taken over by drug use and crime have no one else but themselves to blame. They gave in and if it was a concerted outside effort, and I am not saying that it ever was, then they just played right into the hands of people using them.
Deviants will always be with us but we should NEVER let them become the norm or even close. They will drag society down with them. Ghettos are created as people who actually work and produce goods for a living run away for more normal surroundings and the cities like Detroit and Flint rot on the vine.

The people in those communities didn't bring the drugs into their own communities. I feel that a government that would do such a thing to undermine its own citizens is the scum of the Earth and everyone should be concerned. Remember, this is the same government that allowed the export of middle class jobs and the import of cheap labor to displace the middle class so don't you think for one minute that your neck will never be on the chopping block the same way inner city residents' are.

 

[CaramelSmoothie]

I`m not going to tell you about the role of the CIA in bringing drugs to America or what government officials protected the drug importers around Mena Arkansas because you wouldn`t believe me. But the information is not hard to find, not now that it`s too late to do anything about it.

The government is totally involved, I agree.

 

[BladeOfAnduril]

There is violence inherent in the current drug market. If it were legalized, the cartels would lose power. The price of the drugs would drop, which would go a long way toward negating the theft and violence related to users trying to get money for their next fix. When is the last time you heard about an alcoholic breaking into a house or mugging someone to get booze money? Its rare. Legal status allows it to enjoy the benefits of market competition between distillers, and distributors. This makes it available safely and at a lower cost. I see no reason why drug legalization wouldn't lead to a similar conclusion as the end of Prohibition did.

 

[LizzieMaine]

When is the last time you heard about an alcoholic breaking into a house or mugging someone to get booze money? Its rare.

Not around here it isn't. "Beer and cigarette" robberies of mom-and-pop grocery and convenience stores occur so often around here that it's become a cliche: some brain-dead goof breaks into a store and steals a suitcase of Bud and a carton of Marlboros, and leaves a trail of empty cans in the snow.

Proponents of legalization seem to assume it's just going to involve a lot of nice middle-class folks toking up while listening to old Steely Dan albums, but as far as I can see there'll be a lot more desperate unhappy people scraping for money they can't afford to spend on a vice that's just going to make them less employable and less functional in society. That doesn't seem like much of a way to solve the essential problem of drugs: legal or not, they mess people up.

 

[LocktownDog]

Not around here it isn't. "Beer and cigarette" robberies of mom-and-pop grocery and convenience stores occur so often around here that it's become a cliche: some brain-dead goof breaks into a store and steals a suitcase of Bud and a carton of Marlboros, and leaves a trail of empty cans in the snow.

Same here. Although we have our share of drug violence, convenience store robberies still greatly outnumber them. I wonder if it's a rural thing.

 

[LizzieMaine]

All I know is I see desperate-looking people scraping up every kind of change they can find -- pennies, grandpa's collection of Kennedy fifty-cent pieces, old Silver Certificates, you name it -- just to come up with eight bucks for a pack of cigarettes. Legalizing only means more money for Philip Morris, or whatever corporation comes to dominate that market, and more desperate people doing more desperate things to come up with the cash to buy the stuff.

 

[sheeplady]

Not around here it isn't. "Beer and cigarette" robberies of mom-and-pop grocery and convenience stores occur so often around here that it's become a cliche: some brain-dead goof breaks into a store and steals a suitcase of Bud and a carton of Marlboros, and leaves a trail of empty cans in the snow.

That's not even to mention the cigarette and booze running that goes into Canada (particularly former fishing towns in Newfoundland)... complete with "border control," guns, etc. Cigarettes and booze are both legal there, just more highly taxed.

 

[jamespowers]

The people in those communities didn't bring the drugs into their own communities. I feel that a government that would do such a thing to undermine its own citizens is the scum of the Earth and everyone should be concerned. Remember, this is the same government that allowed the export of middle class jobs and the import of cheap labor to displace the middle class so don't you think for one minute that your neck will never be on the chopping block the same way inner city residents' are.

There are pushers int he community and they do bring it into their community and sell it to the exact people they shouldn't---young people in their own communities.
First you would have to prove conclusively that the government is indeed involved in drug trafficing and even if you did; they did not put the dope in the dopehead's hand. Each individual chose to do something stupid. I hear a lot about non violent resistance but I don't see any resistance to drugs in those communities even if they were told the government wants to keep them down. They are responsible for their own plights not some far off government. Solutions begin one person at a time.
The government didn't export jobs or import cheap labor. That was the free market. Now if you say the government drove away those jobs with excessive regulation and taxation then you might have soemthing there.
The middle class will still be here tomorrow and into the future. How many there will be depends on fiscal policy and how many people are willing to work to get there.

 

[jamespowers]

That's not even to mention the cigarette and booze running that goes into Canada (particularly former fishing towns in Newfoundland)... complete with "border control," guns, etc. Cigarettes and booze are both legal there, just more highly taxed.

Or the cigarette running that comes here from South of the border involving either untaxed cigarettes or just plain fake brands brought into the country.
I won't even mention the Moonshiners that still exist in this country---we even have a TV show about them. lol lol

 

[LizzieMaine]

"Moonshine" is so plebian and passe. Call it "Artisanal Spirits."

 

[jamespowers]

"Moonshine" is so plebian and passe. Call it "Artisanal Spirits."

I noticed that with Tim and Tickle.

Then again, Junior Johnson has gone Legit:

 

[CaramelSmoothie]

There are pushers int he community and they do bring it into their community and sell it to the exact people they shouldn't---young people in their own communities.
First you would have to prove conclusively that the government is indeed involved in drug trafficing and even if you did; they did not put the dope in the dopehead's hand. Each individual chose to do something stupid. I hear a lot about non violent resistance but I don't see any resistance to drugs in those communities even if they were told the government wants to keep them down. They are responsible for their own plights not some far off government. Solutions begin one person at a time.
The government didn't export jobs or import cheap labor. That was the free market. Now if you say the government drove away those jobs with excessive regulation and taxation then you might have soemthing there.
The middle class will still be here tomorrow and into the future. How many there will be depends on fiscal policy and how many people are willing to work to get there.

From my research over the years, I have come to the conclusion that the government was involved in the drug trade. The SAME government that injected that SAME population with SYPHILLIS years before and allowed them, US CITIZENS, to die:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuskegee_syphilis_experiment


Now tell me why should I trust some scumbags like that? Those communities were disenfranchised for centuries and were just emerging from their disenfranchment so they did not have the stability, education and generational wealth that other communities had. The foundation of those communities were already shaky from years of being deprived of partaking in mainstream society. Drug use is rampant in professional circles but they have the resources (money and an educated citizenry) to lessen the impact on their communities. They or their flunkies would come to our neighborhoods to buy their drugs and go back to their mansions in the burbs, I saw that with my own two eyes. Anyway, these weren't communities full of doctors, lawyers and other professionals, rather, working class Joes like pullman porters, cooks, domestic workers and other blue collar jobs that got hit the hardest when the drugs were poured in. Also there was no way they could have foresaw the damage that this new drug that suddenly showed up in their communities would bring, nobody did. Now I know that no one forces anyone to do anything but it stands to reason that if I move to a town full of people who may not be in the best economic positions in life, and introduced substances such as PCP to them chances are I would be able to get enough people, who may be dealing with problems in their lives, to take the bait and become hooked.

The free market (business) and politicians are in bed together.

I am going to excuse myself from this conversation because I'm getting too upset and I don't want to say anything that would offend anybody since I actually like this board. So from this point we can agree to disagree.

 

[jamespowers]

From my research over the years, I have come to the conclusion that the government was involved in the drug trade. The SAME government that injected that SAME population with SYPHILLIS years before and allowed them, US CITIZENS, to die:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuskegee_syphilis_experiment


Now tell me why should I trust some scumbags like that? Those communities were disenfranchised for centuries and were just emerging from their disenfranchment so they did not have the stability, education and generational wealth that other communities had. The foundation of those communities were already shaky from years of being deprived of partaking in mainstream society. Drug use is rampant in professional circles but they have the resources (money and an educated citizenry) to lessen the impact on their communities. They or their flunkies would come to our neighborhoods to buy their drugs and go back to their mansions in the burbs, I saw that with my own two eyes. Anyway, these weren't communities full of doctors, lawyers and other professionals, rather, working class Joes like pullman porters, cooks, domestic workers and other blue collar jobs that got hit the hardest when the drugs were poured in. Also there was no way they could have foresaw the damage that this new drug that suddenly showed up in their communities would bring, nobody did. Now I know that no one forces anyone to do anything but it stands to reason that if I move to a town full of people who may not be in the best economic positions in life, and introduced substances such as PCP to them chances are I would be able to get enough people, who may be dealing with problems in their lives, to take the bait and become hooked.

The free market (business) and politicians are in bed together.

I am going to excuse myself from this conversation because I'm getting too upset and I don't want to say anything that would offend anybody since I actually like this board. So from this point we can agree to disagree.

I didn't say you should trust the government. I am the last person to defend government but I did say that if they can't keep drugs out of the country then how do you expect them to be involved in such a grand plot against the people. You think the same people that run the DMV could actually get a conspiracy down right?
However, there are citizens who were completely treated poorly by the government. Italian, German and Japanese people during WWII is also another example.
Drugs are still a choice. You can walk away and choose not to use them. No one forces you to use them.
I doubt there are sectors of the government and private industry that are in bed together. I am sure gun manufacturers aren't. Neither are coal and gas companies. These are just a few that are completely at odds at this moment.
I will agree to disagree. Makes sense. Opinions are like noses---everyone has one.

 

[Stanley Doble]

Let's also dispose of the myth that drug use is voluntary. There is an old principle in law that everyone is responsible for their own behavior unless they are incapable due to extreme youth, or are mentally incapacitated by nature or by some injury or disease, or by alcohol or drugs.

We recognize that someone under the influence of drugs or alcohol may not be mentally competent so why pretend they are capable of making rational decisions?

You don't have to force people to use drugs any more than you have to force people to eat junk food. Just make the stuff available, human nature will do the rest. Soon you will have an insatiable, or even acute need for drugs, just like putting a fast food restaurant on every corner leads to an epidemic of obesity.

 

[Stanley Doble]

If you want to know what kind of drugs will be flooding into the US next year ask what country the CIA is involved with this year, and what kind of drugs they grow or make in that country. This has been the infallible rule since WW2.

Laws are for the little people. If you have the right connections you have nothing to worry about.

And no, their conspiracies are hardly air tight. The truth has a way of coming out, after it is too late to do anything about it. Then it's old news on the back page of the paper, or on some "nut" web site where it doesn't matter.

 

[CaramelSmoothie]

Not around here it isn't. "Beer and cigarette" robberies of mom-and-pop grocery and convenience stores occur so often around here that it's become a cliche: some brain-dead goof breaks into a store and steals a suitcase of Bud and a carton of Marlboros, and leaves a trail of empty cans in the snow.

Proponents of legalization seem to assume it's just going to involve a lot of nice middle-class folks toking up while listening to old Steely Dan albums, but as far as I can see there'll be a lot more desperate unhappy people scraping for money they can't afford to spend on a vice that's just going to make them less employable and less functional in society. That doesn't seem like much of a way to solve the essential problem of drugs: legal or not, they mess people up.

The high crime rates that inner cities are experiencing now are NOT fueled by "beer and cigarettes", it's fueled by disputes over drug transactions, drug turf or anything drug related. Ask any big city cop and they will tell you the same.

If you want to know what kind of drugs will be flooding into the US next year ask what country the CIA is involved with this year, and what kind of drugs they grow or make in that country. This has been the infallible rule since WW2.

Laws are for the little people. If you have the right connections you have nothing to worry about.

And no, their conspiracies are hardly air tight. The truth has a way of coming out, after it is too late to do anything about it. Then it's old news on the back page of the paper, or on some "nut" web site where it doesn't matter.

If I were you I wouldn't even bother, many people just don't understand how dirty the government's hands are when it comes to this.

 

[LizzieMaine]

The high crime rates that inner cities are experiencing now are NOT fueled by "beer and cigarettes", it's fueled by disputes over drug transactions, drug turf or anything drug related. Ask any big city cop and they will tell you the same.

I didn't say they were -- I was responding there to a comment from a poster who suggested that it was rare for alcoholics to rob and steal to get their booze, which it certainly is not.

My point is that legal drugs won't mean people aren't going to resort to crime to get at them -- if the stuff is out there, and taxed, it's going to be expensive, and that won't stop Joe Addict from getting his fix thru criminal means, just as the goons and screwups around my part of town would rather steal their beer and cigs than come by them honestly. And it'll end up enriching the Philip Morrises and the R. J. Reynoldses of the world, or whatever other corporate gangsters get control of the market -- and organizations like that have been cheerfully and viciously exploiting the poor and dispossessed for the better part of the past century. These are the people, after all, who smile their weasel smiles, and tell you "noooooooo, our product won't kill you. Honest." Or, the alternative is to have them sold and distributed by a government agency, which would seem to put things right back where they started.

No matter who's involved in distribution, the opportunities for graft, corruption, tax evasion, and black marketeering will be irresistible to the type of opportunistic parasites who don't give a damn about their communities or the welfare of the people in them. If it's dollars in their pocket they'll sell their own mother's skin -- and these are the people who, you can be sure, would be at the top of the Legalized Drug business, the same type of energetic sales representatives who used to drive around poor neighborhoods handing out free cigarettes to the kiddies.

What would I like to see happen to the kingpins of the drug trade? Well, they had the right idea with the Nuremburg war criminals.

 

[LizzieMaine]

Meanwhile, right down the street from me, the man responsible for over a million dollars in "bath salts" nabbed this week.

Degenerates gonna degenerate.

 

[jamespowers]

Let's also dispose of the myth that drug use is voluntary. There is an old principle in law that everyone is responsible for their own behavior unless they are incapable due to extreme youth, or are mentally incapacitated by nature or by some injury or disease, or by alcohol or drugs.

We recognize that someone under the influence of drugs or alcohol may not be mentally competent so why pretend they are capable of making rational decisions?

You don't have to force people to use drugs any more than you have to force people to eat junk food. Just make the stuff available, human nature will do the rest. Soon you will have an insatiable, or even acute need for drugs, just like putting a fast food restaurant on every corner leads to an epidemic of obesity.

You get into drug voluntarily. No one sneaks up on you and injects you with dope. Seagrams ain't sneaking up on your and forcing their product down your throat. Once you get addicted then it takes willpower to get rid of them addiction. That is a completely different situation.
So human nature means people are too stupid to walk around with money in their pockets. They are morons and you can sell them anything. They have no willpower, free will or ability to think for themselves. Heck they would drown if the government didn't tell them not to look up when it rains.
Seriously? We have fast food restaurants all around here and I hardly ever go in. Once in a while is fine. It is called will power and realizing that something is not going to be good for you if you eat it everyday. You do have fools who are incapable of making rational decisions though. To make the situation worse by legalizing something that will mentally impare people permanenetly is far worse than opening up a bunch of fast food restaurants.

 

[jamespowers]

Meanwhile, right down the street from me, the man responsible for over a million dollars in "bath salts" nabbed this week.

Degenerates gonna degenerate.

Gee, he looks like a fine upstanding citizen. :rofl: