• Obama: Drug legalization not answer to cartels
    140 replies, posted
I like how this forum is usually 100% pro-legalization but when obama says it isn't the way to go everyone is like "no master, of course not!".
[QUOTE=Bredirish123;35570990]Of course it wouldn't solve the problems. In fact, that argument has been run so far into the ground that those who do support legalization rarely use it. (Unless you're an idiot) The Cartels already have such a strong influence that knocking out one source of income will only strengthen their other endeavors. It may sound radical and I know a lot of you would disagree; but I feel the only way to stop the cartels (At least the Mexico based ones) is by use of special military forces. Mexico's law enforcement isn't going to do the job, and even if they tried it wouldn't even make a dent.[/QUOTE]Last time a special force was set against em they set up their own shop and called themselves the Zetas.
To be honest the whole "legalise drugs and cut the cartels income" argument shouldn't even be getting used cause drugs should be legal because it's a personal freedom that people should have, it's frankly degrading to tell people what they can and cannot do with their own bodies and the fact that legalisation is coming closer primarily because the Cartels are using them as a form of income is just sad. Besides you wouldn't have had this problem if they were legalised and controlled in the first place :smug:
[QUOTE=Cheezy;35572509]I like how this forum is usually 100% pro-legalization but when obama says it isn't the way to go everyone is like "no master, of course not!".[/QUOTE] Facepunch is not a hivemind.
[QUOTE=Pierrewithahat;35572408]Man you are a special kind of special, you're the kind of special people tell tales of.[/QUOTE] Master debater right here, folks
[QUOTE=Cheezy;35572509]I like how this forum is usually 100% pro-legalization but when obama says it isn't the way to go everyone is like "no master, of course not!".[/QUOTE] you're surprised? facepunch is just a different flock of sheeple
[QUOTE=Cheezy;35572509]I like how this forum is usually 100% pro-legalization but when obama says it isn't the way to go everyone is like "no master, of course not!".[/QUOTE] Obama got good public rep by acting all cool where he's the same as others behind the scenes. Only shows how gaining public rep is very important.
[QUOTE=Greenen72;35572535]Master debater right here, folks[/QUOTE] you've contributed nothing to the thread but your own completely wrong interpretations of what others have said. you have no credibility, at all [editline]14th April 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Pierrewithahat;35572530]To be honest the whole "legalise drugs and cut the cartels income" argument shouldn't even be getting used cause drugs should be legal because it's a personal freedom that people should have, it's frankly degrading to tell people what they can and cannot do with their own bodies and the fact that legalisation is coming closer primarily because the Cartels are using them as a form of income is just sad.[/QUOTE] it's a sad truth, but it [I]would[/I] be killing two birds with one stone.
[QUOTE=Pierrewithahat;35572530]To be honest the whole "legalise drugs and cut the cartels income" argument shouldn't even be getting used cause drugs should be legal because it's a personal freedom that people should have, it's frankly degrading to tell people what they can and cannot do with their own bodies and the fact that legalisation is coming closer primarily because the Cartels are using them as a form of income is just sad. Besides you wouldn't have had this problem if they were legalised and controlled in the first place :smug:[/QUOTE] Yeah, let the guy who was curious about an addictive and dangerous substance permanently fuck up his life because he could get his hands on it [editline]14th April 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Furioso;35572549]you've contributed nothing to the thread but your own completely wrong interpretations of what others have said. you have no credibility, at all[/QUOTE] as far as I remember, I've only really requested the information of the income of cartels from pot versus other drugs, but thanks for the personal insult and boxes instead of arguments :-)
[QUOTE=Greenen72;35572535]Master debater right here, folks[/QUOTE] Allow me to post the very first paragraph for you, and we'll see if you can decipher my point from context like a big boy okay? [quote]Joaquin "El Chapo" Guzman Loera reported head of the Sinaloa cartel in Mexico, ranked 701st on Forbes' yearly report of the wealthiest men alive, and worth an estimated $1 billion, today officially thanked United States politicians for making sure that drugs remain illegal. According to one of his closest confidants, he said, "I couldn't have gotten so stinking rich without George Bush, George Bush Jr., Ronald Reagan, even El Presidente Obama, none of them have the cajones to stand up to all the big money that wants to keep this stuff illegal. From the bottom of my heart, I want to say, Gracias amigos, I owe my whole empire to you."[/quote]
[QUOTE=Pierrewithahat;35572634]Allow me to post the very first paragraph for you, and we'll see if you can decipher my point from context like a big boy okay?[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Greenen72;35572610]income of cartels from pot versus other drugs[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Greenen72;35572610]Yeah, let the guy who was curious about an addictive and dangerous substance permanently fuck up his life because he could get his hands on it [editline]14th April 2012[/editline] as far as I remember, I've only really requested the information of the income of cartels from pot versus other drugs, but thanks for the personal insult and boxes instead of arguments :-)[/QUOTE] Have you read any of my posts, even the ones to you, before you went full mongo? I said that they should under lock and key at all times, and anyone who wants access to the drugs should have to go through a battery of tests to determine how susceptible they are to addiction and majorly detrimental effects of the drug they seek. Of course rehabilitation would be on offer for anyone who felt they had any issues with the drug and support would be there at all times. [editline]14th April 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Greenen72;35572665][/QUOTE] Irrelevant because frankly there should be no distinction made between weed and other drugs, since they're you know, all drugs.
[QUOTE=Pierrewithahat;35572681]Have you read any of my posts, even the ones to you, before you went full mongo? I said that they should under lock and key at all times, and anyone who wants access to the drugs should have to go through a battery of tests to determine how susceptible they are to addiction and majorly detrimental effects of the drug they seek. Of course rehabilitation would be on offer for anyone who felt they had any issues with the drug and support would be there at all times. [editline]14th April 2012[/editline] Irrelevant because frankly there should be no distinction made between weed and other drugs, since they're you know, all drugs.[/QUOTE] well, from the fact that he keeps bringing up arguments that have already been argued, proven or disproven in the first two pages, I think he's just too stubborn to completely read the thread
I hope for legalization in my country, been the one that is wanting to push the others. I hope our president doesnt back down just because of the USA's pressure. Its a step in the right direction, since none of the solutions the US have presented are working and they wont work in our current situation. I dont even do drugs but the pros of the legalization are so much better than the cons, I dont see why we shouldnt do it.
By this logic we should have a battery of tests to determine how susceptible people are to alcohol abuse. That's not a solution. A solution is risk reduction (for example, free rooms for people to be in and observed, safe needles and education of risks and general things to avoid), and destigmatizing drug addiction. Yes, people are going to do drugs, and addiction to them is awful, but making people feel bad about it just reduces the chances that people admit they have a problem and seek treatment.
[QUOTE=Hunt3r.j2;35572778]By this logic we should have a battery of tests to determine how susceptible people are to alcohol abuse. That's not a solution. A solution is risk reduction (for example, free rooms for people to be in and observed, safe needles and education of risks and general things to avoid), and destigmatizing drug addiction. Yes, people are going to do drugs, and addiction to them is awful, but making people feel bad about it just reduces the chances that people admit they have a problem and seek treatment.[/QUOTE] There's a big difference between the effects in the drugs though, hard drugs can have a massive impact on someone mentally and it's just not a good idea to give someone hard drugs and go "here's a bed, here's your drugs now go bananas" I think there should be a fair few checks and a sort of license which can be updated for each drug someone is cleared to take, but that's just my opinion.
[QUOTE=Pierrewithahat;35572681]Have you read any of my posts, even the ones to you, before you went full mongo? I said that they should under lock and key at all times, and anyone who wants access to the drugs should have to go through a battery of tests to determine how susceptible they are to addiction and majorly detrimental effects of the drug they seek. Of course rehabilitation would be on offer for anyone who felt they had any issues with the drug and support would be there at all times. [editline]14th April 2012[/editline] Irrelevant because frankly there should be no distinction made between weed and other drugs, since they're you know, all drugs.[/QUOTE] So you're saying that we should legalize everything because it would stop people from funding the illegal entities like cartels by buying the drugs from US sources, but then cut off the supply to anyone who wanted these drugs based on their negative side effects and addictiveness? Unless I'm missing something, you're basically saying they should be illegal
[QUOTE=Pierrewithahat;35572839]There's a big difference between the effects in the drugs though, hard drugs can have a massive impact on someone mentally and it's just not a good idea to give someone hard drugs and go "here's a bed, here's your drugs now go bananas" I think there should be a fair few checks and a sort of license which can be updated for each drug someone is cleared to take, but that's just my opinion.[/QUOTE] People who want to take drugs are going to take drugs. You cannot change people. I'm not saying free drugs, of course they have to pay for their habit, but there should be emphasis on trying to ensure that even if they are addicted, they don't lose their arm to infection or get AIDS from a needle or some shit like that. After that, the goal is to try and make it so that people with drug addictions get treatment. Ultimately, once again, you can't force people to do it, but you want to ensure that people don't feel as if they'll be looked down upon for being an addict. It's an unfortunate fact of life that people will take drugs because they want to get the high it produces. People can get addicted to it. Trying to restrict access does nothing when they are still in the mindset of being addicted to it, and usually makes the problem worse. If restricting access is such a good idea, then why has the war on drugs failed?
I somewhat disagree. Cannabis should be legalized as well as psychedelic mushrooms. Cigarettes and tobacco should be illegalized. That's just my two cents.
[QUOTE=borisvdb;35573020]I somewhat disagree. Cannabis should be legalized as well as psychedelic mushrooms. Cigarettes and tobacco should be illegalized. That's just my two cents.[/QUOTE] I can understand banning cigarettes, but why tobacco in general?
[QUOTE=borisvdb;35573020]I somewhat disagree. Cannabis should be legalized as well as psychedelic mushrooms. Cigarettes and tobacco should be illegalized. That's just my two cents.[/QUOTE] Cigarettes are dying out to some extent, it's negative health effects are widely known and there are treatment options. Addictions are hell to break though.
[QUOTE=Furioso;35570962]oh, you mean the solution that has obviously been working for the past thirty odd years or so brilliant, really rate dumb if you honestly think that prohibition doesn't foster organized crime, fearmongering, and unjustifiable loss of human life[/QUOTE] i'd rather the knowledge that my son is breaking the law and not acting within it when buying drugs that will cause a life-threatening addiction(aka heroin, crack, meth) thanks
[QUOTE=Furioso;35572431]the cessation of prohibition is what paved the way to things likeRICO.[/QUOTE] hehe, nope. you don't seem to understand that the cosa nostra INCREASED in power after prohibition. it may have impacted them for a year or two but they got right back on their feet and made money through other illicit means which proved to be more profitable. (racketering, hijacking, prostitution, gambling) to put it in perspective, the cosa nosta tripled in size from 1933 to 1950. again, the only thing that hurt the mafia was RICO, ending the prohibition was a pin-prick, and they still exist btw. read five families by selwyn raab, good unbiased knowledge of the mafia
[QUOTE=Terminutter;35571422]A massive swoop to their finances only works when they are starting up. The largest cartels are currently sitting on assloads of cash and military grade hardware. If you legalise it, you've introduced competition, and the cartel frankly doesn't care if it's legal competition or a rival cartel - they'll declare war on the competition (legal businesses) and will be more than able to kill hundreds in bombings and attacks on legal retailers.[/QUOTE] At that point it's an act of war. No matter how you look at it, no cartel can emerge victorious in a battle against the NRF.
Legalising them would be a step in the right direction but the cartels would still exist and need to be dealt with
[QUOTE=Furioso;35572220]fucking wisdom.[/QUOTE] Except Organised Crime is different to normal crime in that it has a survival instinct and won't just die because you cut off one of it's big income supplies. Cut off their drug money, they will look for it elsewhere. It happened with prohibition gangsters, it'll happen with the Cartels.
[QUOTE=Furioso;35571055]we've already done this we've been training Mexico's special forces for years, and it's been demonstrably proven that a frightening percentage of Mexican soldiers end up getting recruited by the cartels themselves because they get offered much higher wages than the government offers so now the cartels have paramilitary forces in their ranks. The cartels aren't just gangs like everyone seems to think, they're quite literally small armies[/QUOTE] They're probably trained better than the Taliban are. Taliban are just more dangerous because of their willingness to be martyrs and using bombs and IEDs all the time.
[QUOTE=Furioso;35571083]yup. the reason why we haven't heard anything about big chicago mobsters since the 30s is simply because prohibition ended. we should at least legalize cannabis and hemp products, and have the government regulate it... who's going to buy from cartels when they can buy it legally from the government? especially if it's offered at prices that undercut the cartels'. obviously, marijuana isn't their only source of income, but it is one of their biggest ones, and it would severely weaken the cartels' power the new, flourishing cannabis and hemp industries would be an enormous contribution to the economy, along with the billions in tax revenue the government would be raking in solve the defecit with weed[/QUOTE] very well put but it needs to be privatized. look at california and colorado. the legal "medicinal" marijuana business can provide a huge economic boost to communities and normal otherwise law abiding citizens. [editline]14th April 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Sir Whoopsalot;35572406]Of course it isn't gonna work, cartels will just get their money from other places. It's not like they're short on sources.[/QUOTE] what a terrible attitude. "welp if we cure cancer people are just going to die from other diseases." well uhh let's just not try to solve anything and continue pouring money into institutionalizing our citizens and this war on drugs
If we legalise drugs, people will be too high to commit crime.
[QUOTE=Greenen72;35572610]Yeah, let the guy who was curious about an addictive and dangerous substance permanently fuck up his life because he could get his hands on it [/QUOTE] He can get it easily anyway, it would be safer it was made by regulated sources. Ie if heroin was legal there would be almost 0 bad long term effects if someone quit.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.