Why the "War On Drugs" is so successful.

[mdwest]

As to where did the preemptive come from:

Again.. if I am understanding you correctly.. what you are saying is you would prefer to go on any let the crime be committed, and then deal with the aftermath.. even if that crime is being commited against you.

that is me asking a question of you.. that is not me saying we should be the thought police.. completely different situation, that has been expressed in much greater detail in other posts throughout this thread...
 

It is also a crime to operate a motor vehicle while under the influence of drugs or alcohol..

So we agree we have laws to cover this problems already.
 
We do.. the disagreement however is you have been talking about legalization of ALL drugs.. this has nothing to do with that at all.. unless you also believe that any criminal acts commited while under the influence of drugs should be separated as well (the drugs should have nothing to do with it.. the act itself and the punishment assigned is severe enough).. that would be a completely different debate as some states combine the crimes and/or tack on additional punishment for drug involvement, while others do not..
 

In many states it is an additional charge to commit a crime while under the influence of drugs...

If the people want this then good for them. Those using drugs and committing crimes in that state should do the time.

These are all STATE level offenses.. NOT Federal offenses...

As they should be.
 
Agreed.. I think we see eye to eye on this point.. The fed gov is too big and gets far too involved in state level issues.. no argument there at all.. the states have laws that cover everything from murder to leaving trash in your front yard and the fed gov doesnt bother with those crimes.. so why should they be so heavily involved with narcotics?... we probably have similar opinions here... (although I think they could have a productive role in the information sharing business regarding interstate level crime.. but think they should not be conducting the investigations or arrests of individuals.. that is a decision and a job for the state..)

Now that we have both established and agreed that crimes committed while using drugs are covered under current criminal laws why is it that we need prohibition on drugs?

 

because meth cooks harm everyone around them when they cook.. when making meth (even small amounts for personal use) via the "nazi" method fumes are created that can cause severe brain damage and/or death.. when cooking via the "p2p" method fires and explosions are a severe risk.. other peoples rights are trampled on by meth when they cook..
 
because 17% of our state pen population openly admit (thats one out of every 6 prisoners) that the only reason they were committing their felony crimes (we arent talking misdemeanors) was because they needed to fuel their drug habit..
 
because people under the influence of heavy drugs infringe on the publics right to safety when they walk out the door.. they are unable to control their actions, unable to safety operate their vehicles, unable to make sound decisions, etc...
 
and the list goes on and on and on...
 
 
look at it from this perspective..
 
why do we have speed limits? why cant you drive 60 MPH through a school zone at 3PM?
 
If you havent run over someones kid, its a victimless crime right?
 
wrong..
 
you have victimized the entire population in that area.. you have infringed on the rights of everyone crossing the street, walking down the sidewalk, or even sitting in their house looking for their kid to come home.. you have put people in danger through your reckless act... it doesnt matter if you actually run over anyone or not.. the law was put into place to attempt to prevent (preventive..not preemtive) what we know is going to happen if the law was not there..
 
end sum is we know certain people arent going to be responsible unless you let them know you are going to hold them accountable.. so preventitive maintenance is done to discourage recklessness/negligence that effects others..
 
 
 
it is important that we make two distinct separations here as well.. I am talking about "hard" drugs.. meth, coke, PCP (showing my age with that one), acid, oxy, etc.. only.... drugs that even taken in small amounts effect the ability to have cognitive thought substantially..
 
I think you are talking about ALL drugs which would make marijuana and hash inclusive with all of the above..
 
my belief is weed should = booze.. same laws.. same punishment.. etc.. I even think it would be a good idea to dual license liquor stores and make that the place you obtain it.. (theyre already set up to deal with the additional taxes, already in the habit of ID'ing minors, etc..etc..)..
 
wanna drink a six pack of beer and watch the game with you buddies.. cool.. get drunk and cheer on the packers!...
 
wanna drive home afterwards instead of being responsible and having your sober friend drive you home.. not cool.. you just infringed on my rights.. go to jail.. for a long time.. loose your license for a long time.. pay thousands of dollars in fines.. (doesnt matter if you have a wreck or not)..
 
wanna go to a "coffee shop" and smoke a doobie with a couple of friends and listen to some old hendrix CD.. totally cool with that.. get high! enjoy the tunes.. not a problem..
 
wanna drive home afterwards instead of being responsible.. go to jail.. loose your license.. pay thousands of dollars in fines.. (doesnt matter if you have a wreck or not...)

wanna get drunk at a sports bar with your buddies after work.. cool!... have fun...
 
wanna get drunk and go walking down the street acting like an idiot, falling out in the road, sleeping on the sidewalk, or harassing the general public.. not cool.. you are now infringing on the rights of other.. public intoxication charge.. go to jail..
 
wanna get stoned and do the same thig as the drunk? same punishment..
 
 
 
hard drugs are a completely different story.. (a debate we can continue to have if you disagree...)....
 
 
the other separation is we are not talking about your home either.. as stated before, I could care less what someone does in their home.. In fact this is where I think the federal government should be actually stepping in and protecting people (enforcing the 4th ammendment more instead of letting it slip further and further away)..
 
In the hypothetical world where you can buy a bag of weed at the local liquor store, if you choose to sit on your couch and play xbox all day, while smoking fatties and not care about anything else in the world except how youre going to find another bag of doritoes... Im cool with it.. you arent harming anyone other than yourself (and even that is questionable.. and isnt really easy to define).. stoners typically arent violent.. and generally dont cause problems to the general public when in the privacy of a home.. (unlike users of harder drugs can be and often are)..
 

Here is a sincere question for you.. as I am trying to understand not only your perspective, but also understanding your actual knowledge and understanding of the drug culture.. I wont ask about your personal use.. that really doesnt matter at all.. but I am curious to know how many people you know and/or deal with on a common basis that are regular users of illegal narcortics other than marijuana.. we can be talking white collar middle class users of powder coke or illegal prescriptions.. or blue collar users of meth.. or no collar users of crack... doesnt matter.. how much insight do you have in what really goes on in their homes (how their family members are effected (or not), what really goes on in their neighborhoods (how their neighbors are effected (or not), what really goes on in their schools, their churches, their grocery stores, and their public parks, etc..etc..
 
the impression I get is you believe that someone smoking meth only hurts himself.. as long as he is sitting on the couch at his house.. and therefore no one should care.. if he wants to melt his own teeth, fry his brain, and waste away.. that this is his business, and no one elses..
 
here is my perspective (granted.. its the perspective of a former cop.. so it is possibly a little jaded)..
 
I have known thousands of drug abusers (I worked in a major metro area in the south east.. at two different departments) in both my working life and my private life (remember, we arent talking weed here.. we are talking harder substances).. Of them all, I have known two people that most would define as "productive" members of society.. they held jobs, were married, had decent homes that were well kept, one was reasonably educated, neither had criminal records, etc..etc..etc..
 
All the rest were drains on society.. most had lengthy criminal histories (both drug and non drug related), many had severe family abuse problems (were abusing their children, spouses, etc..), most either were incapable of working, worked very little, or refused to work (and on welfare and other social programs to sustain life), etc..etc..
 
I'm pretty sure there is a connection there... (again, not talking about weed smokers)...
 
 
FWIW, Im packing up and headed to the woods in a couple of hours... hoping to kill a couple of hogs over a 4 day weekend... I wont be back on the board until late monday night or tuesday morning most likely as internet access is limited (and I really would rather be looking for pigs than typing..).. If I dont respond for a few days, Im not avoiding the conversation.. Im just sitting under a tree somewhere..
 

 
 

[magooch]

For those of you who believe you should be free to do as you please in the privacy of your own home; what about rape, murder, child abuse, plotting to blow up a bridge, or rob a bank, conduct child porn on your computer, etc, etc., etc.  Nothing is as simple as you might like it to be.
 
Note that plotting to do a crime is a crime in many cases; it's called conspiracy.  Would you consider that preemptive?

[nw_hunter]

For those of you who believe you should be free to do as you please in the privacy of your own home; what about rape, murder, child abuse, plotting to blow up a bridge, or rob a bank, conduct child porn on your computer, etc, etc., etc.  Nothing is as simple as you might like it to be.
 
Note that plotting to do a crime is a crime in many cases; it's called conspiracy.  Would you consider that preemptive?

Rape, murder, child abuse, would be involving someone else..........Not something you do to yourself.As far as plotting to do something! Unless you carry it out, no crime is committed. A conspiracy would involve more than one again. What point are we making here?

[NWBear]

Since I brought it up; preemption is simple, it it is the prohibition of an activity because it MIGHT cause another crime to be committed.  Drug use might cause you to commit a crime, therefore it should be prohibited = preemption.  Making liquor illegal because you might drive drunk would be preemption.  Preemption simply means dealing with the consequences before it happens.  Such as "drugs cause criminal behavior, therfore ban them up front rather than wait for the consequences and deal with that."  I guess I got excited when we talk of keeping (war on drugs) and increasing preemption (even though many examples were correctly pointed out that I had not considered, speed limits etc.)   However I think preemption must be limited to only those cases where the activity is a CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER.  Such as speeding in inappropriate areas, creating a toxic environment for others (cooking crack).  I can't see where we have succeded in reducing "clear and present danger" with the war on drugs anymore than we did with prohibition.  Use drugs fine, commit crimes WHILE USING DRUGS, just like alcohol or gun use in a crime - Penalty goes way up!  I don't use and haven't in over 30 years, so I don't have a dog in the fight for use.  However, I do think we can approach this smarter - the present track is clearly not working.  I am VERY committed to the preservation of whatever personal liberties we still have.
Thanks for the lively discussion.
 
On conspirasy, it IS a crime to conspire to commit certain crimes, murder comes to mind.  However, this is another place I think we go too far.  Talk all you want - no crime - take action pay the consequences.  I personally don't think conspirasy should be a crime except after the crime is attemped or completed, then added to the other charge.  I believe in some countries this is the case.

[Matt]

I guess I still do not understand the confusion.
The United States of America is a "Constitutional Republic" and our CONSTITUTION restricts our federal government in what it cant do.
It can't Violate our Liberties, telling me what I can and can not put into MY BODY IS A VIOLATION of MY PERSONAL LIBERTIES. ( agree / disagree )


Mandating or making laws which make it a crime for me to do drugs is Constitutionally no different than mandating or making laws that say I can not drink Dr Pepper ( which they are working on )
Again if states want it illegal then let the people vote on it and decide.
If they want tougher laws for those who commit crimes while using drugs then let the people vote on it and decide.
If they want all drugs to be legal then let the people vote on it and decide.
If you do not then you are violating the rules set by our founders.
If you feel you need a nanny state then pick one and turn it into it but leave the other 49 to do as those there vote.
I understand that we are the United States of America but each state is still sovereign and the people in that state have the right to vote on issues that affect them and should be free from Federal rule over issues that were never left to the federal government for oversight.
Matt

[Doublebass73]

Yeah, that's the answer to America's drug problem - Bigger government and Trillions more taxpayer dollars spent!

maybe I missed something....
 
who said anything about bigger government and trillions more dollars spent? where did that come in?

You said that your solution to our drug problem is to remove the demand. The only way to remove the demand is to lock up all the users, otherwise they will always find a way to get high. From the data that I could find the estimated amount of regular drug users in the United States is between 13 - 20 million people.

To remove the demand you would have to incarcerate 13 million people minimum. I'd love to hear your explanation on how we accomplish this without growing the government and spending Trillions of dollars.

[mdwest]

Typing this on an iPhone so the response has to be short...

Go back and re-read previous posts.. Incarceration is one factor in a complex formula.. Making federal involvement smaller, getting people to start taking responsibility for raising their own children and instilling a value system that resembles responsible adulthood is another piece (even less govt involvement), education, community involvement, and a return to a public system that doesn't support you through welfare, free hospital care, food, etc if you choose to be a drug user and fry your mind (even less government), a reduction in the stupid spending associated with the prison system (even less government), etc, etc, etc...

Add all this to a complete revamp of our prison system where people know that they are actually going to be held accountable for their crimes.. A system where 20 years really means 20 years.. One where people actually fear prison rather than laugh at it...

And you'll have less people going to the pen...

[magooch]

I prefer the "one strike and you're out" concept.  You rob, rape, murder, sell illegal drugs, use illegal drugs, get caught driving intoxicated on drugs, or alcohol, you're done.

[bilmac]

While I advocate locking up users, which would cause a massive increase in the prison system, I realize that prisons are the place where petty criminals go to get a degree in criminal behavior. There has to be better ways to punish. Maybe better separation where the first timers and stupid are segregated from the lifers.

Actually I think the Chinese have a better system, Caneing would seem to be an ideal punishment for petty criminals to me, not a mere slap like dad should have been doing when the kids were growing up, but a real severe beating. Get em punished and then out working again instead of getting in the habit of not working.

[Doublebass73]

Go back and re-read previous posts.. Incarceration is one factor in a complex formula.. Making federal involvement smaller, getting people to start taking responsibility for raising their own children and instilling a value system that resembles responsible adulthood is another piece (even less govt involvement), education, community involvement, and a return to a public system that doesn't support you through welfare, free hospital care, food, etc if you choose to be a drug user and fry your mind (even less government), a reduction in the stupid spending associated with the prison system (even less government), etc, etc, etc...

All great ideas that would solve more problems than just the drug problem. The only way this could happen is to elect small government, libertarian minded conservatives at all levels of government. A major undertaking not likely to happen overnight but we can always hope.

Add all this to a complete revamp of our prison system where people know that they are actually going to be held accountable for their crimes.. A system where 20 years really means 20 years.. One where people actually fear prison rather than laugh at it...

This is where the money comes in, the cost to house prisoners for that period of time is staggering, in order to make a significant dent with this method it's going to cost us Trillions.

And you'll have less people going to the pen...

[45-70.gov]

For those of you who believe you should be free to do as you please in the privacy of your own home; what about rape, murder, child abuse, plotting to blow up a bridge, or rob a bank, conduct child porn on your computer, etc, etc., etc.  Nothing is as simple as you might like it to be.
 
Note that plotting to do a crime is a crime in many cases; it's called conspiracy.  Would you consider that preemptive?

Rape, murder, child abuse, would be involving someone else..........Not something you do to yourself.As far as plotting to do something! Unless you carry it out, no crime is committed. A conspiracy would involve more than one again. What point are we making here?

some here beleive in freedom others   don't

[nw_hunter]

10 Ways the War on Drugs has been an Immense Success.
 
 
http://www.activistpost.com/2011/12/10-ways-war-on-drugs-is-wild-success.html
 
 
 
fyi....TM7
.

Good read! I see no one has tried to pick this one apart...............YET!

[yellowtail3]

IT WAS an excellent read, and spot-on... it's about who makes bank NOW.

[SHOOTALL]

In less than 5 years we defeated two of the strongest armies in the world . The war covered the entire world or most of it. It was WW2. Some time after that war became profit to some and our economy got based on it. We have been fighting the war on drugs for years , who got rich ? Viet Nam a country smaller than some of our states , we had war there for 10   years who got rich ? We are fighting in two small countries now one for 10 years who got rich ?
We never win a war even though we never lose a battle ,
 
After WW2 many of the companies who made the war material went out of business or suffered through bankruptcy. No one made a profit on war , how did this change come about ?

[mdwest]

 
After WW2 many of the companies who made the war material went out of business or suffered through bankruptcy. No one made a profit on war , how did this change come about ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshall_Plan
 
The Marshall Plan...
 
when the US decided that we no longer wanted to play by the "to the victor goes the spoils" rules of warfare.. and instead decided that when we go to war we want to spend billions of dollars taking you out.. and then spend billions of dollars rebuilding you when its over with..
 
Its no longer politically correct to pay for your war by taking the "riches" of your enemies at the end of the conflict (as it was for thousands of years prior to this..)..
 
 

[mdwest]

All great ideas that would solve more problems than just the drug problem. The only way this could happen is to elect small government, libertarian minded conservatives at all levels of government. A major undertaking not likely to happen overnight but we can always hope.

I agree...
 
I dont think we could do it in less than 20 years.. even with the right elected officials and a willingness of both the people and the government to move forward.. Its nothing we could do overnight.. but, like the economy, its something that we are going to have to deal with sooner or later.. or its going to blow up in our faces.. we can deal with some pain now.. or we can deal with a lot of pain later..
 
 
 
 

[blind ear]

Siemmens, Timken, Diamler, Nippon and others are still around today after being enemies of the Allies  in WWII. They just had to comingle investments correctly. ear

[SHOOTALL]

Winchester isn't .......

[blind ear]

Winchester isn't .......

Winchester quit makeing the guns that the military wanted and the public had better more ecconomical faster functioning arms from other companies.           ear