1. Welcome! Please take a few seconds to create your free account to post threads, make some friends, remove a few ads while surfing and much more. ClutchFans has been bringing fans together to talk Houston Sports since 1996. Join us!

  2. Live Rockets Discussion
    Jalen Green looks like a legit star, Amen Thompson is shining and the Rockets have found something without Alperen Sengun. Clutch is talking about the 10-game winning streak at 11:00am as we talk Rockets live!

    Talking Rockets - LIVE!

War on drugs, are we looking at incorrectly?

Discussion in 'BBS Hangout: Debate & Discussion' started by bongman, Feb 8, 2015.

  1. GladiatoRowdy

    GladiatoRowdy Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2002
    Messages:
    16,596
    Likes Received:
    494
    Drugs are in abundance everywhere in America. There is no evidence that people who live in "poor minority communities" use drugs at a higher rate. They are incarcerated at a higher rate as a result of their poverty, which generally makes them unable to afford good legal representation.
     
  2. Remii

    Remii Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2013
    Messages:
    7,622
    Likes Received:
    106
    I've never said they use drugs at a higher rate. I said there's an abundance of drugs in their communities. And yes, although drugs are everywhere... They are easier to obtain in poor communities. Everyone who buys drugs in poor communities aren't actually from those communities. Any 'corner boy' will tell you much of his sales are to people who don't live in his neighborhood.

    As far as the regulations of hard drugs... I believe we're far off from that and I don't think that can be done until something is done about the drug cartels.
     
  3. GladiatoRowdy

    GladiatoRowdy Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2002
    Messages:
    16,596
    Likes Received:
    494
    I'll grant you that there are some drugs (meth and crack would be the most prevalent) which are more often sold on street corners in poor neighborhoods. However, you're kidding yourself if you think that those same drugs aren't being sold in wealthier neighborhoods, the big difference is that in wealthier neighborhoods, the sales go on behind closed doors.

    I agree that we're far off. However, we could deal a death blow to the cartels with one swoop of a President's pen. The Mafia was severely reduced in size and influence after alcohol prohibition ended and the same thing would happen with an end to prohibition of hard drugs. Some of the people who currently work for the cartels may very well be involved, but with a regulated market, the violence and extrajudicial activity would be minimized as both users and sellers would be able to rely on the justice system for redress of grievances.

    When was the last time you heard about a gangland style killing which was the result of the alcohol trade?
     
  4. MoonDogg

    MoonDogg Member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 1999
    Messages:
    5,167
    Likes Received:
    495
  5. Remii

    Remii Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2013
    Messages:
    7,622
    Likes Received:
    106
    I'm not sure you can put alcohol in the same category with drugs like meth and crack... If the government regulated meth and crack... The cartels can just sale it for a cheaper price. They may not even have to change their price at all because the regulated drugs would be more expensive... Just like with mar1juana in the states were it is legal. But those states can still make money off of mar1juana because there are a wide range of people who regularly indulge in it. With hard drugs the cartels and other illegal distributors would still have a huge customer base with middle-class and lower income individuals and that's where they make a majority of their money off of drugs anyway.

    So I do not believe simply regulating hard drugs would deal a death blow to the cartels...
     
  6. GladiatoRowdy

    GladiatoRowdy Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2002
    Messages:
    16,596
    Likes Received:
    494
    Of course not, they are different. These two drugs have a higher potential for physical dependence, but similar potential for mental dependence and abuse. I wouldn't treat cocaine and amphetamines the same way as I would alcohol, were it up to me entirely, the age of consent for these two would be higher and there would be more stringent controls on the amounts accepted for personal use.

    What I would advocate is for the government to regulate the sale of cocaine (the precursor for crack) and amphetamines (an analogue of meth). If the general public were able to acquire safer forms of these drugs than the street drugs currently so common, the market for the more dangerous forms of the drugs would be minimized, skewing the risk/reward ratio except for people who are actually addicts.

    The mafia could have chosen to sell their alcohol products for a lower price, but they didn't because the risk/reward ratio wasn't such that it made sense for them to risk incarceration for the relative pittance of saving the amount that was added in taxes. The cartels would be more likely to retool and begin selling to the legitimate business people who would be licensed to sell these drugs.

    From what I understand (and there hasn't been much actual data as a result of the relative infancy of the new laws), the illegal trade in these states has dried up almost completely, with the exception of "dirt weed," or low-cost, low quality product. I hear that you can still get that level of product on the black market because it just isn't profitable enough to sell in a retail establishment. I suspect that eventually, people who want to smoke that level of product will probably begin growing it themselves, mostly for their own consumption, as we see with moonshine in the alcohol market.

    Not only who regularly indulge, but prefer to purchase a regulated product from a legitimate business person. The VAST majority of people won't take the time and trouble to seek out a black market supplier simply to save 30% (the tax rate in Colorado) on their purchase.

    Except that the recreational customer base would prefer to purchase from a store, rather than a drug dealer. The cartel's customer base would be addicts, people who actually want crack or meth as opposed to somewhat less addictive forms of these drugs. When cocaine was legal to purchase over the counter in this country, the most common forms of ingestion were in drink mixtures (Coca-Cola owes its name to the coca leaf, from which cocaine is produced, and a wine mixture called Vin Mariani was nearly as popular, in large part because the mixed form of the drug could be transported overseas while coca leaf would rot before making it to Europe) and pharmaceutical grade amphetamines are safe enough that we give them to Air Force pilots regularly. The people who would seek out harder forms of the drugs are addicts and the strategy for dealing with addicts would be very different if we treated them as sick people instead of criminals.

    I do, but that's just based on what has happened before and a logical extension to the drugs being prohibited today.
     
  7. DonnyMost

    DonnyMost not wrong
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2003
    Messages:
    47,267
    Likes Received:
    16,710
  8. GladiatoRowdy

    GladiatoRowdy Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2002
    Messages:
    16,596
    Likes Received:
    494
  9. Remii

    Remii Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2013
    Messages:
    7,622
    Likes Received:
    106
    Do we know the price mark up on alcohol once it was legalized...??? In Colorado an ounce of mar1juana is around $400 legally (depending on where you go) and anywhere from $200-$280 an ounce on the black market. The legal prices should eventually drop though. But the cartels retooling and selling to legitimate businesses is still a bad thing. It still gives them money to help with human trafficking and to give to terrorist organizations.

    Because cocaine is expensive already... Crack probably isn't going anywhere. So as long as there is cocaine there will probably always be crack.



    30% is a lot dude and many people try to save a dollar anyway they can.


    That's still a 'HUGE' market... But I do agree with your opinion on how addicts should be treated which is something that should be done immediately.

    I'm not necessarily for regulating hard drugs. But maybe what you speak of can work. Just have to see he it goes with mar1juana first.
     
  10. Remii

    Remii Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2013
    Messages:
    7,622
    Likes Received:
    106
    The black market in Colorado is alive and well... But that could change eventually.
    http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/04/04/colo-pot-black-market/7292263/
     
  11. GladiatoRowdy

    GladiatoRowdy Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2002
    Messages:
    16,596
    Likes Received:
    494
    All of the claims of a thriving black market come from the same police officer. Forgive me if I don't trust the people who were at least partly responsible for mar1juana being illegal for nearly a century to tell me the whole truth regarding drugs.

    However I agree that, given the infancy of the law, that the market is and will be in flux for some time yet. Too early to tell what the long term ramifications are.
     
  12. GladiatoRowdy

    GladiatoRowdy Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2002
    Messages:
    16,596
    Likes Received:
    494
    What I'm talking about would make the cartels (or whoever stepped up to supply legitimate businesses) legitimate. There is certainly a possibility that they would continue on with the illegal arms of their businesses, but bringing all drugs into the realm of legitimacy will eliminate their need for extrajudicial activity. If they can have their contracts enforced in a court of law, they don't need to enforce them with violence, just the same way it happened after alcohol prohibition ended.

    Yes, there will always be a small number of users that want the enhanced high that smoking cocaine gives you. However, if we regulated sales of cocaine to drink mixtures, the vast majority of those who wanted to consume cocaine would be able to do so without resorting to ingestion methods which are inherently dangerous and carry increased risks of overdose.

    Certainly, there are moonshiners who distill their own spirits for various reasons, cheap hooch being but one. However, regulating the market makes for a safer experience for the VAST majority of users.

    I think it is a much smaller market than you think it is. People who choose to ingest meth start with it because they want an upper. If relatively safe amphetamine products were available at a store for those people, the vast majority would choose that form rather than the more addictive, more dangerous product. People who get hooked and whose bodies begin to need a more powerful ingestion method might move on to shooting or snorting or smoking, but the vast majority of those who want/need a more powerful stimulant than caffeine would have a product that would have a lower potential for abuse.

    Yep, I agree.
     
  13. Faust

    Faust Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2012
    Messages:
    514
    Likes Received:
    33
    the war on drugs is another one of the many lies i was told when i was a kid. i know better now. where im from, it has destroyed our town literally and figuratively. people get arrested, get drugs on their records, can't get no job, depressed because they are unemployed or making $hit for money, and they use or deal. one of my best friends nearly burned himself cooking meth.

    all y'all need to watch pbs frontline and the last white hope if you want to learn more about the lies.
     
  14. GladiatoRowdy

    GladiatoRowdy Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2002
    Messages:
    16,596
    Likes Received:
    494
    Hell must have frozen over, I actually agree with faust.

    :eek:
     
  15. bongman

    bongman Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2002
    Messages:
    4,213
    Likes Received:
    1,411
    I can only speak for California. When cannabis was first legalized as prescription, the going rate was $80-100 an eight of an ounce (top shelf) on distribution centers. Today, the same quality can be bought for as low as $35 an eight (same store)

    It's all about supply and demand. The more growers you have, the more supply there is on the market, hence the price will be lower. Since it is legalized for recreational use in CO, the prices should be lower than california.
     
  16. Kojirou

    Kojirou Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2009
    Messages:
    6,180
    Likes Received:
    281
    The idea that Prohibition was an unmitigated disaster and thus the corollary that you can only stop drugs by legalizing/regulating them are both incorrect. Look at how tobacco smoking is today anathema. Heck, take a look at how Mao crushed opium in China ( the one good thing his regime accomplished).

    People love to bring up the example of Al Capone, but the homicide rate during the 1920s actually did not increase, while deaths by cirrhosis were slashed by almost two-thirds. And this was with the fact that Prohibition was a very poor way to ban alcohol and alcohol has a cultural history which cocaine and mar1juana do not, and it was very badly enforced.

    Does this mean Prohibition was a good idea? No. But there are a lot of actual things which can be taken away from Prohibition that we can learn from to stamp out drug abuse ( for example: using drugs should probably be decriminalized and have rehab, but the punishments for selling drug should if anything be even harsher than they are today) beyond "lol Prohibition bad legalize everything."
     
  17. cml750

    cml750 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2002
    Messages:
    5,836
    Likes Received:
    3,423
    Hmmm, I wonder what the stance of a person who goes by "bongman" on the war on drugs would be?;)
     
  18. Faust

    Faust Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2012
    Messages:
    514
    Likes Received:
    33
    why do you want to stamp out drug use? what business is it of yours what someone else puts into their body? those who want to dope will dope. the idea that mao's use of violence and oppression shows prohibition can be useful is incorrect.

    what portgual did is right by decriminalizing everything like lsd or ex. use rates didn't climb they actually dropped since drugs weren't that big of a deal. lives are harmed by using some stuff but more lives are harmed and more money wasted trying to jail people and going after dealers.
     
  19. Buck Turgidson

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2002
    Messages:
    84,927
    Likes Received:
    83,114
    That's an awesome response to a question I didn't ask.

    I was strictly referring to the opinion that these poor redneck podunk country law enforcement agencies LOOOOVE the War on Drugs because it gives them all the monies.

    <iframe width="420" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/YWMhrGf2ylw" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
     
  20. VooDooPope

    VooDooPope Love > Hate
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 1999
    Messages:
    9,117
    Likes Received:
    4,513
    Great song. Great band. Great point. Well played sir.

    The war on drugs needs to end, finding a reasonable and viable solution, then getting the laws passed with the big pharma, prison for profit and para military police state money against it is a huge issue.
     

Share This Page

  • About ClutchFans

    Since 1996, ClutchFans has been loud and proud covering the Houston Rockets, helping set an industry standard for team fan sites. The forums have been a home for Houston sports fans as well as basketball fanatics around the globe.

  • Support ClutchFans!

    If you find that ClutchFans is a valuable resource for you, please consider becoming a Supporting Member. Supporting Members can upload photos and attachments directly to their posts, customize their user title and more. Gold Supporters see zero ads!


    Upgrade Now