Reply With Quote
they need to stop farmers that they have growing crops. they should create new industries like industrial hemp so the farmers can utilize their pot growing skills into something legal, productive and financially beneficial.
the problem is the not the cartels, if you wanna stop the cartels? you must stop the corruption for top to bottom in all govt agencies....look the politicians are scared, the cops aint doing ....if they want something done, they must either stand up or look for international support....
they need to stop farmers that they have growing crops. they should create new industries like industrial hemp so the farmers can utilize their pot growing skills into something legal, productive and financially beneficial.
That's really dumb...
Legalize it and I'll put those little Mexican farmers out of business.
And how do we do that? More eggs and skillets for more this is your brain on drugs commercials?
Good point.
What Leemajors said is a good point, but I was actually just thinking that the fast way would be killing all the users.And how do we do that?
More seriously, a much better but also slower way would be to teach people how to work with whatever issues they have, because of which they are using drugs, without the drugs and consequently the demand would more or less disappear.
Because making them legal would just reduce the illegal suply, but not the use of drugs.
But in any case, neither will ever happen because it just isn't in the interest of the powers that be.
Sorry, but I don't understand this at all. (remember I'm not from the US)More eggs and skillets for more this is your brain on drugs commercials?
Also don't know what skillets are.
I kick up my feet and begin to watch tv, cuz now I got other people working for me, I got a 65 inch color tv you know, and after a while I hear just say no, or, the other commercial i love- the one where they say this is yor brain on drugs, I pick up my remote control and just turn, cuz with that bull I'm not concerned
http://www.nytimes.com/books/98/03/0...dal-drugs.html
September 26, 1970
Drugs: Case for Legalizing Marijuana By GORE VIDAL
In the Long Run It Would Save Lives And End Hypocrisy
t is possible to stop most drug addiction in the United States within a very short time. Simply make all drugs available and sell them at cost. Label each drug with a precise description of what effect--good and bad--the drug will have on whoever takes it. This will require heroic honesty. Don't say that marijuana is addictive or dangerous when it is neither, as millions of people know--unlike "speed," which kills most unpleasantly, or heroin, which is addictive and difficult to kick.
For the record, I have tried--once--almost every drug and liked none, disproving the popular Fu Manchu theory that a single whiff of opium will enslave the mind. Nevertheless many drugs are bad for certain people to take and they should be told about them in a sensible way.
Along with exhortation and warning, it might be good for our citizens to recall (or learn for the first time) that the United States was the creation of men who believed that each man has the right to do what he wants with his own life as long as he does not interfere with his neighbor's pursuit of happiness (that his neighbor's idea of happiness is persecuting others does confuse matters a bit).
This is a startling notion to the current generation of Americans who reflect on our system of public education which has made the Bill of Rights, literally, unacceptable to a majority of high school graduates (see the annual Purdue reports) who now form the "silent majority"--a phrase which that underestimated wit Richard Nixon took from Homer who used it to describe the dead.
Now one can hear the warning rumble begin: if everyone is allowed to take drugs everyone will and the GNP will decrease, the Commies will stop us from making everyone free, and we shall end up a race of Zombies, passively murmuring "groovie" to one another. Alarming thought. Yet it seems most unlikely that any reasonably sane person will become a drug addict if he knows in advance what addiction is going to be like.
Is everyone reasonably sane? No. Some people will always become drug addicts just as some people will always become alcoholics, and it is just too bad. Every man, however, has the power (and should have the right) to kill himself if he chooses. But since most men don't, they won't be mainliners either. Nevertheless, forbidding people things they like or think they might enjoy only makes them want those things all the more. This psychological insight is, for some mysterious reason, perennially denied our governors.
It is a lucky thing for the American moralist that our country has always existed in a kind of time-vacuum: we have no public memory of anything that happened before last Tuesday. No one in Washington today recalls what happened during the years alcohol was forbidden to the people by a Congress that thought it had a divine mission to stamp out Demon Rum and so launched the greatest crime wave in the country's history, caused thousands of deaths from bad alcohol, and created a general (and persisting) contempt for the laws of the United States.
The same thing is happening today. But the government has learned nothing from past attempts at prohibition, not to mention repression.
Last year when the supply of Mexican marijuana was slightly curtailed by the Feds, the pushers got the kids hooked on heroin and deaths increased dramatically, particularly in New York. Whose fault? Evil men like the Mafiosi? Permissive Dr. Spock? Wild-eyed Dr. Leary? No.
The Government of the United States was responsible for those deaths. The bureaucratic machine has a vested interest in playing cops and robbers. Both the Bureau of Narcotics and the Mafia want strong laws against the sale and use of drugs because if drugs are sold at cost there would be no money in it for anyone.
If there was no money in it for the Mafia, there would be no friendly playground pushers, and addicts would not commit crimes to pay for the next fix. Finally, if there was no money in it, the Bureau of Narcotics would wither away, something they're not about to do without a struggle.
Will anything sensible be done? Of course not. The American people are as devoted to the idea of sin and its punishment as they are to making money--and fighting drugs is nearly as big a business as pushing them. Since the combination of sin and money is irresistible (particularly to the professional politician), the situation will only grow worse.
???
NAFTA is already flooding Mexican agriculture with non-tariff American crops. why not grow something that incredibly versatile (including for alternative fuel) that the US couldn't legally compete with. thats what Canada's doing.
http://www.agmrc.org/commodities__pr...mp_profile.cfm
$200-250 net profit per acre. uruguay most recently started an industry there.
if you going to legalize the growing of pot
then i suggest the govt to stop subsidizing primary producers who went from organic to pot growers....oh and put a fix price on that where it undercuts the compe ion
No apology necessary. I didn't notice you weren't from the U.S. and therefore would not have gotten the analogy. Skillet = frying pan. The reference was to a television commercial from several years ago where a guy would hold up an egg and say "this is your brain", then he'd crack it and let it start cooking in the frying pan and say "this is your brain on drugs" which was supposed to scare people into not doing drugs. The point behind the analogy being that we've been trying to curb demand in this country for decades and it doesn't appear to be working.
Legalizing marijuana would be a very adult, serious act by Congress to solve a huge national problem.
There aren't any serious adults left in Congress, so huge national problems are not addressed, never mind solved.
Uh, hundreds of thousands of "demand" customers are already in jail. That didn't work either. The users are like the drug lords: take some out of circulation, and more just pop up like magic.
Do you have any idea what the per acre profit for ganja is? I'm not sure, but I'll bet it's a of a lot higher than $250. People won't just voluntarily switch from dope to hemp. You have to knock out the black market profit margin. Then, maybe they grow hemp.
Pretty naive. People have ty lives, bad jobs, loveless marriages. It would be nice if we could all sit around and sing Kumbaya, but life isn't like that. Some times, you just need a buzz.
Ah, thank you. Yes this kind of thing won't work. It's not a good method to constantly remind people of the thing you want them to quit.
Putting them in jail isn't reducing the demand IMO. One reason is that probably drugs are still possible to get in jail, and the other than being in jail isn't very good for rehabilitation. Get in, get out the same or worse isn't helpful.
Yes, that's why they should be taught to work with their issues. The problem isn't in the drugs or the drug lords. People/society is where the problem is, which is another reason why simply putting people in jail won't help.The users are like the drug lords: take some out of circulation, and more just pop up like magic.
Why is it naive?Pretty naive. People have ty lives, bad jobs, loveless marriages. It would be nice if we could all sit around and sing Kumbaya, but life isn't like that. Some times, you just need a buzz.
It's true what you say, but that doesn't mean they have to do drugs. ty stuff happens to me sometimes, and even more ty stuff sometimes happens to some people I know, but we're not using drugs because of it (ok, some smoke pot occasionally, but it's not because of problems and I think they'd be just fine without it).
At the very least, decriminalizing drugs makes a shocking amount of sense. You won't create a black market fueled by violent crime, you won't imprison non-violent offenders to be beaten and raped in prison for what, at it's worst, amounts to a medical condition, you won't let political agenda and poor science guide scheduling policy, you won't ruin lives or tear apart families, you won't send mixed messages by leaving two of the most dangerous drugs heavily advertised and widely available, and it'd be one more right we could reclaim. Legalizing it would make ultimate sense as a source of tax revenue. But, there's just too much money to be made in keeping certain drugs illegal. The CIA are the biggest drug runners in the world, and there's no way they're losing claim to their paperless trail of guns, drugs and money.
Sadly, it probably costs less money to just let people take drugs and die than it does to put 100 million idiots through rehab and psyche analysis.
Drug education is already a part of public school curriculum, plus schools have counselors on hand. It hasn't curbed usage any.
About legalization. It sounds great in theory but there's still a problem.
Hard drugs. They'll never be decriminalized and drug cartels will still be killing over heroin and crap. If some poisoned lettuce makes a thousand people sick there is an uproar. Imagine FDA approved crack and heroin on the shelves killing people. It'll never fly with the public. Organized crime isn't going to go away any time soon, regardless of the solution proposed.
The root of the problem are poor minorities in the states who compose almost all the drug users. They get a garbage education and garbage parents and do drugs early and often. The kids are also vulnerable to violent crime and gang recruitment.
They are the ignored problem in America. The giant elephant. No one seems to care about fixing education though, so the vicious cycle will continue.
The nature of politics in the United States is one of fear. Whenever it comes to tackling a problem as big as education there are always compromises and no perfect plan and one side will always exploit those imperfections for political gain even if the plan would help as a whole.
This is the singular reason why we can't fix anything in this country that is actually worth fixing. We're a very short sighted society.
Laredo news is reporting that the Zeta's have pulled out of Reynosa and are falling back to Nuevo Laredo and bringing in 700 reinforcements. This is about to get very interesting.
Tobacco and alcohol?
The valley will probably get a bit quieter now, but N Laredo is about to turn into iraq.
BTW, the lessons we should have learned about fighting insurgents on their terrain in Iraq with gunships and such should apply to the idea of heavy US involvement militarily in northern Mexico. Only this time the "insurgents" won't have an ocean between them and attacking, kidnapping, killing Americans.
if Bush was still in office I bet the nookyooler option would be on the table
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
