Who supports the War on Drugs?

Seeing as this is RIU I know none of you support marijuana being illegal, except for the greedy growers who do it for their own financial interest. My question is how many of you support other drugs being illegal. If so why do you support it?

"drugs" are illegal because they come from the earth and companies cant patent nature to make money on it. i dont support them being illegal either because it sets up a market for it to thrive in and sometimes when you tell someone they cant do something it makes them want to do it more. we need education, not enforcement

blazin256 said:

"drugs" are illegal because they come from the earth and companies cant patent nature to make money on it. i dont support them being illegal either because it sets up a market for it to thrive in and sometimes when you tell someone they cant do something it makes them want to do it more. we need education, not enforcement

Click to expand...

um...a lot of drugs dont come from the earth

i'll tell you who supports the war on drugs:

the white, christian base of the Tea Party Movement.



the war on drugs shouldn't end. it should be modified. most of the DEA's policing powers should be removed, and they should be relegated to walking dogs inside airports and boat yards. they should not have the power to arrest people, only detain them until the local PD shows up, conduct in-depth investigations with wire-taps, or own assault rifles. They should just be men, walking around with dogs to catch bad guys when they can. Their primary purpose should be to actively engage the public on important drug issues through education. not just mind-altering drugs, but ALL DRUGS, prescription and all. enforcement would fall to the state-run drug squads, which would get their budgets allocated depending on the REDUCTION of drug usage in the population. no reduction, budget cuts..... this would cause drug squads to look for methods to curb drug use, not ways to put people in jail, like they do now.

penalties for selling heroin, crack cocaine, and crystal meth should be stiffened. hefty fines (1,500 USD per gram in my opinion), seizure of property, and a naming as a 'drug offender' similar to 'sex offender' for life. I also condone mandatory minimums for the manufacture or possesion with intent to sell of crack cocaine and crystal meth, no questions asked. If they catch you selling, or making crack or meth, mandatory 25 year minimum sentence, no questions asked. Life if you're caught giving it to a minor, or in a school zone. That will make the price and rarity of those drugs such that nobody will want to use it.

this is just for the harder of the hard drugs, stuff like extasy, Ketamine, LSD, mescaline, etc. should not be considered one of these.

get what I'm saying??

The issue of banning drugs should not be in the governments hands.. The government is to protect us from each other and outside forces, not to protect me from myself. when they start to try and influence what i do by myself in my home then it becomes a moral issue, and they government should have no say in moral issues, that is the peoples responsibility.

NO DRUG should be outlawed by the government.

also just to let you know i dont do any other drugs..just smoke the green

justperk said:

um...a lot of drugs dont come from the earth

Click to expand...

no just the ILLEGAL ones. cocaine/crack from the cocoa PLANT. heroine from the POPPY PLANT. MUSHROOMS. lsd derived from fungus on rye grass. ketamine which is a cactus.

I would certainly end the war on drugs as we know it. You can't make things like meth and heroin legal because they kill people, but as soon as a person begins using drugs like these they are in need of medical care. Therefore, I would propose that when a guy is arrested and found in possession of crack, he goes straight to the local hospital psych ward or other facility and is detoxed by doctors.

In fact, if we assume the obvious - that drug addicts are by definition in need of medical care, it is criminal to not produce that care. I'm sure if a diabetic went into insulin shock and crashed into a tree, they would take the guy to the hospital, not to jail. The same is true of a guy hooked on heroin.

The practice of treating addiction as a law enforcement issue rather than a medical one is downright insane.

RickWhite said:

I would certainly end the war on drugs as we know it. You can't make things like meth and heroin legal because they kill people, .

Click to expand...

but how can you say that when cigarettes, alcohol and prescription drugs kill people everyday and cause addictions, but people sell it and the government taxes it..

because those are accepted vices that bring in the bucks. and its those companies that want to keep the illegal drugs illegal. esp cannabis. how many crack/heroine addicts are in amsterdam?

why should it be illegal to partake of any substance? the enlightened individual makes his choices and is willing to endure the consequences of his actions. if those choices do not affect the world around him, there is no reason for the law to step in screw up a perfectly good buzz. we always hear about the lives ruined by drug abuse, the families torn apart, etc, etc., etc..... what of all those occasional users who just want to enjoy every facet of life? we force them to become criminals, the first step on a road that can only lead nowhere. we force them to deal with violence because that is an integral part of any black market. we pass laws designed around the worst case scenario and, by doing so, eliminate the freedom to choose. we can say that there are people who just can't handle drugs, but those will become alcoholics and chain smokers anyway. there are millions of people out there with peanut allergies, but we don't go around outlawing peanuts. we can say it is all to protect our children from things they aren't yet equipped to handle, but there are better ways to go about that than an absolute prohibition. we know that a seven year old behind the wheel of daddy's chevy is a recipe for disaster, but driving isn't against the law. these prohibitions aren't a matter of public safety, they are all about the control of the population by those in power. these laws always seem to start with a public outcry from some batch of do-gooding busy bodies, they become a popular movement drummed up by the ignorant mob and end up as legislation for the sake of saving some political animal's career. individual choice always takes a back seat to political ambition and the ignorance of the masses.

undertheice said:

why should it be illegal to partake of any substance? the enlightened individual makes his choices and is willing to endure the consequences of his actions. if those choices do not affect the world around him, there is no reason for the law to step in screw up a perfectly good buzz. we always hear about the lives ruined by drug abuse, the families torn apart, etc, etc., etc..... what of all those occasional users who just want to enjoy every facet of life? we force them to become criminals, the first step on a road that can only lead nowhere. we force them to deal with violence because that is an integral part of any black market. we pass laws designed around the worst case scenario and, by doing so, eliminate the freedom to choose. we can say that there are people who just can't handle drugs, but those will become alcoholics and chain smokers anyway. there are millions of people out there with peanut allergies, but we don't go around outlawing peanuts. we can say it is all to protect our children from things they aren't yet equipped to handle, but there are better ways to go about that than an absolute prohibition. we know that a seven year old behind the wheel of daddy's chevy is a recipe for disaster, but driving isn't against the law. these prohibitions aren't a matter of public safety, they are all about the control of the population by those in power. these laws always seem to start with a public outcry from some batch of do-gooding busy bodies, they become a popular movement drummed up by the ignorant mob and end up as legislation for the sake of saving some political animal's career. individual choice always takes a back seat to political ambition and the ignorance of the masses.

Click to expand...

you can't use children in this example. a child doesn't know what anaphalaxis is, so he/she shouldn't be exposed to it. a child can't drive a car because his brain isn't fully developed and doesn't have the same ability to tell speed/time as a 16 year old can. that's why you drive at 15-16, not at 12. it isn't the child's inability to operate the vehicle, they can learn, it's they don't really understand what going too fast is.

other than that crack is whack. and crystal meth is just nasty. why would staying up for 3 days straight be cool?????????????????????????????????????

redivider said:

penalties for selling heroin, crack cocaine, and crystal meth should be stiffened. hefty fines (1,500 USD per gram in my opinion), seizure of property, and a naming as a 'drug offender' similar to 'sex offender' for life. I also condone mandatory minimums for the manufacture or possesion with intent to sell of crack cocaine and crystal meth, no questions asked. If they catch you selling, or making crack or meth, mandatory 25 year minimum sentence, no questions asked. Life if you're caught giving it to a minor, or in a school zone. That will make the price and rarity of those drugs such that nobody will want to use it.

this is just for the harder of the hard drugs, stuff like extasy, Ketamine, LSD, mescaline, etc. should not be considered one of these.

get what I'm saying??

Click to expand...

Why should people be arrested for selling a product to someone who wants it? Shouldn't people be able to put into their bodies whatever they want? Your belief in stiffer penalties show you no nothing about public policy regarding crime. While you think it sounds like a good idea, in practice it causes all kinds of problems. If someone is going to jail for 25 years for selling crack or life in a school zone, whats going to stop them from just killing police officers. They could either give up and get a mandatory 25 years or kill a cop, flee and take their chances of getting caught again. And you say that this will change price and rarity of drugs so nobody will want them. This is simply not true. There are countries that do this, and even give death sentences for drug dealing, yet this does little to deter drug use. Morality can not be legislated. when politicians try it only leads to violent black markets.

RickWhite said:

I would certainly end the war on drugs as we know it. You can't make things like meth and heroin legal because they kill people, but as soon as a person begins using drugs like these they are in need of medical care. Therefore, I would propose that when a guy is arrested and found in possession of crack, he goes straight to the local hospital psych ward or other facility and is detoxed by doctors.

In fact, if we assume the obvious - that drug addicts are by definition in need of medical care, it is criminal to not produce that care. I'm sure if a diabetic went into insulin shock and crashed into a tree, they would take the guy to the hospital, not to jail. The same is true of a guy hooked on heroin.

The practice of treating addiction as a law enforcement issue rather than a medical one is downright insane.

Click to expand...

So you are a fascist who doesnt believe people should be able to put into their body whatever they want. Alcohol kills people, like meth and heroin, yet thats legal. Funny thing is most people who die from illegal drugs are do to accidental overdose due to drugs of unknown purity. So if drugs were legal most of these deaths would not occur. I also think its funny you assume that anyone who uses these drugs is in need of medical care. Heroin is said to be the most addictive illegal drug. It has an addiction rate of about 33%. Thats means 67% of people who use it never become addicted to it. The dependence rate for cocaine is only about 17%. The majority of drug users don't need any medical help. If someone does than they should seek it but the government has no right to tell people what they can or cannot put into their body, or forcing people into treatment "for their own good."

Alias please?

passthedutchfo19 said:

Why should people be arrested for selling a product to someone who wants it? Shouldn't people be able to put into their bodies whatever they want? Your belief in stiffer penalties show you no nothing about public policy regarding crime. While you think it sounds like a good idea, in practice it causes all kinds of problems. If someone is going to jail for 25 years for selling crack or life in a school zone, whats going to stop them from just killing police officers. They could either give up and get a mandatory 25 years or kill a cop, flee and take their chances of getting caught again. And you say that this will change price and rarity of drugs so nobody will want them. This is simply not true. There are countries that do this, and even give death sentences for drug dealing, yet this does little to deter drug use. Morality can not be legislated. when politicians try it only leads to violent black markets.

Click to expand...

these substances aren't needed in modern society. the current method of controlling their supply isn't working. if we're gonna fight these drugs, we gotta get serious.

mothers will let their kids starve just to get some crack.

human trafficers get people hooked on heroin as a guarantee they won't run.

the fumes created from producing crystal meth can kill unknowing humans 500 yards away.

list goes on and on.

redivider said:

these substances aren't needed in modern society.
mothers will let their kids starve just to get some crack.
human traffickers get people hooked on heroin as a guarantee they won't run.
the fumes created from producing crystal meth can kill unknowing humans 500 yards away.
list goes on and on.

Click to expand...

so we are to legislate based on the worst case scenario? there are a lot of things we don't need in modern society, this doesn't mean that anyone has the right to outlaw them.

This thread, like most in this forum is becoming silly. I honestly wonder, why people can't seem to look at things from an objective point of view and with a cool head.

How does one even begin to compare the dangers associated with alcohol to those associated with a crystal meth addiction? How many women prostitute their 9 year old daughter for a shot of Jack?

The logic behind such comparisons works like this:

You take issue A (alcohol use) and you take it to the worst possible extreme.
Then, you take issue B (meth use) and you look at the most benign scenario imaginable.
You claim that in both cases, your examples are representative of the norm (instead of polar extremes) and then make a false comparison between the two. This is the same technique Padawan and those like him use with regard to religion. It is a way of drawing a false comparison between two things that are not comparable.

I am all for individual liberty, but there are certain substances that by their nature make the user a danger to us all. Antibiotics are actually a perfect example and they don't get you high. What misuse does is creates antibiotic resistant strains of pathogens that could cause a full blow epidemic.

No, when it comes to hard core addictive drugs we have to see them for what they are. And people who are addicts and not just experimenters are easy to spot and they need medical help not just for their own sake but for everyones. Where I will agree, is that incarceration is not the answer. Education and treatment is.

Heh... Rick... you are a smart dude...no doubt.

But realize...that weed does drop the IQ a bit .... and many can't afford the drop.

This thread was loaded from the start. he was just waiting for someone to spring the snare.

But instead of a rabbit.... he encountered a bear. Uhhh...lunchmeat.

Hey...what's for dinner? (shamelessly plugging my thread)

i didn't recommend incarceration if you're using. if you're caught with a few grams for yourself then you get a HEFTY ticket, that gets tied to your social security number, so you can't avoid it. you have some of that shit on you? you're going to pay. community service in lieu of the fine would be a good idea too.

i say incarcerate if you're selling or making crack or crystal meth.

right now, this little game of putting people in jail for a few months and letting them out again isn't working. the supply is as steady as ever. and the supposed war on drugs has raged on for 20+ years, the spending on it has increased almost exponentially, and no dent has been made in drug use. the only favorable statistic that the DEA can draw is that more people are checking themselves into rehab to treat addiction. which is one of the choices when going up to the judge, go to jail, or go to rehab...... it's bullshit......

don't try to look at the demand as the problem. the drug war has long focused on users as being bad guys, with amazing results.

everybody has problems, everybody wants to get away.

but we need to get this 'drug war' under control. too much TAXPAYER MONEY IS BEING WASTED, too many kids are being locked up, too many people are dying, our neighbor mexico is being torn to shreds.

not long ago a group of gunmen went into a town near Juarez (close to El Paso TX, literally a hop over the river)to scare off the police and military who were raiding their shipments. they killed 167 people. and they died because of this bullshit drug war.

the supply has to be attacked and subdued.

the US brings other nations to it's knees, it's time to REALLY deal with this problem.

grass is god brown an white an blue are doo