[Freakinoldguy]

Curtman Curtman:

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

andyt andyt:

Nobody I know is claiming certainty - it's only you and OTI et al that claim others are claiming certainty.

Your boy Curtman does all the time, he even did so in this post.

Didn't have to look far to find an example of that.

$1:

"We see the hypocrisy of the American policy toward Latin America," said Julio Calzada, drug czar in Uruguay, which is expected to become the first country in the world to license and enforce rules for the production, distribution and sale of marijuana for adult consumers.

"We have thousands of deaths, simply a product of prohibition. And here you have a very regulated market, marijuana that is produced in a controlled fashion. That is where we are going."

Calzada and the other dignitaries toured marijuana dispensaries and growing sites. They also huddled with Colorado officials to learn about how the drug is taxed and sold.

The certainty is that there is better ways of dealing with addiction than what we are doing now, and what we are doing now is fuelling organized crime.

Now that statement make infinitely more sense than claiming that legalizing drugs will eliminate organized crime and street gangs and for the record yes we need to change the way we do business because as it has been pointed out, it isn't working when it comes to drugs and is costing us to much money for a revolving door strategy with no closure for us or the addicts.

Some people think we'll see a decline in gangs and organized crime by legalizing pot. Maybe or maybe not and I wonder how true this statement will be proven.

$1:

.”8 Susan Neiberg Terkel echoes these sentiments by saying that legalizing drugs “cannot change human nature. It cannot improve the social conditions that compel people to engage in crime, nor can it stop people from using drugs as an excuse to be violent.”.

She could be 100% wrong and hopefully she is but, either way our Governments, police departments and ordinary citizens should take the time to watch what happens in the States that are about to legalize marijuana so we can make informed decisions without the necessity for the virulent rhetoric from both sides to get their message out.

[andyt]

You're still missing the point. Of course there will still be crime. Of course people will still be violent. Legalizing drugs has a good chance of reducing the crime and violence around drug dealing. The spectacular murders we get, such as the Surrey six, for instance. Money laundering. etc.

But we'll get people killing each other. The booze fuelled shooting in Vancouver that escalated from an exchange of words, say. The fights on the Granville strip on a Friday night. The rapes at UBC. On and on. Legalizing drugs won't do a thing there.

So what you and this woman can't seem to be able to do is see the trees for the forest. You're lumping all crime and violence in together, and are knocking down the strawman that legalization won't reduce crime/violence that has nothing to do with illegal drug sales.

As for drug fuelled violence, that won't change, since booze pretty well has that field to itself. Just don't hear about some guy hopped up on pot wreaking havoc.


If done right, legalization of pot could drastically reduce crime and violence associated with the illegal selling of it. As for legalizing other drugs, that's not really on the radar at the moment, and would look quite different. Heroin say, wouldn't just be sold at the liquor store. So there'd probably be a continued black market for it. Just that legal, regulated heroin could help some addicts live better lives and make the focus more of a medical one than a criminal one. But there's no perfect solution, people will always want to get high. Look at the drug warriors on this forum that brag about how they like to get shitfaced on booze, for instance.

[Freakinoldguy]

andyt andyt:

You're still missing the point. Of course there will still be crime. Of course people will still be violent. Legalizing drugs has a good chance of reducing the crime and violence around drug dealing. The spectacular murders we get, such as the Surrey six, for instance. Money laundering. etc.

But we'll get people killing each other. The booze fuelled shooting in Vancouver that escalated from an exchange of words, say. The fights on the Granville strip on a Friday night. The rapes at UBC. On and on. Legalizing drugs won't do a thing there.

So what you and this woman can't seem to be able to do is see the trees for the forest. You're lumping all crime and violence in together, and are knocking down the strawman that legalization won't reduce crime/violence that has nothing to do with illegal drug sales.

As for drug fuelled violence, that won't change, since booze pretty well has that field to itself. Just don't hear about some guy hopped up on pot wreaking havoc.


If done right, legalization of pot could drastically reduce crime and violence associated with the illegal selling of it. As for legalizing other drugs, that's not really on the radar at the moment, and would look quite different. Heroin say, wouldn't just be sold at the liquor store. So there'd probably be a continued black market for it. Just that legal, regulated heroin could help some addicts live better lives and make the focus more of a medical one than a criminal one. But there's no perfect solution, people will always want to get high. Look at the drug warriors on this forum that brag about how they like to get shitfaced on booze, for instance.

Missing the point? Some people keep claiming that the legalization of marijuana will eliminate or at the very least drastically reduce gangs and organized crime. So allow me to pose to you. How do they know that their theory is anymore correct than the one posed by Ms Terkel on the Police Chief Magazine?

[Curtman]

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

How do they know that their theory is anymore correct than the one posed by Ms Terkel on the Police Chief Magazine?

We saw it happen when Alcohol prohibition was repealed.

[Freakinoldguy]

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

NO ONE not even the Pro or anti legalization people, can say for certain what will happen in they legalize drugs or even marijuana.

Maybe in the US but Portugal has had de facto legalization of drugs for over a decade now.
Deaths from accidental overdoses have dropped by 50%. Overall drug use actually decreased. Even alcohol related incidents have decreased, somewhat.
That's not to say that drug related crimes have been completely eliminated as a result, but the results have been more than positive enough to not warrant going back to prohibition.

Is this the article you're referring to?

http://www.scientificamerican.com/artic ... nalization

$1:

Peter Reuter, a criminologist at the University of Maryland, College Park, says he's skeptical decriminalization was the sole reason drug use slid in Portugal, noting that another factor, especially among teens, was a global decline in marijuana use. By the same token, he notes that critics were wrong in their warnings that decriminalizing drugs would make Lisbon a drug mecca.

"Drug decriminalization did reach its primary goal in Portugal," of reducing the health consequences of drug use, he says, "and did not lead to Lisbon becoming a drug tourist destination."

Edited because I misread a statement?

[Freakinoldguy]

Curtman Curtman:

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

How do they know that their theory is anymore correct than the one posed by Ms Terkel on the Police Chief Magazine?

We saw it happen when Alcohol prohibition was repealed.

How's that theory working for cigarettes?

[Curtman]

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

Curtman Curtman:

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

How do they know that their theory is anymore correct than the one posed by Ms Terkel on the Police Chief Magazine?

We saw it happen when Alcohol prohibition was repealed.

How's that theory working for cigarettes?

Great. With regulation we've driven smoking rates down from 50% to 10% of the population.

[andyt]

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

Curtman Curtman:

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

How do they know that their theory is anymore correct than the one posed by Ms Terkel on the Police Chief Magazine?

We saw it happen when Alcohol prohibition was repealed.

How's that theory working for cigarettes?

Very well. If cigs were illegal, all cig dealing would be done by gangs/criminals. Instead the vast majority of sales are thru a legal network with taxes going to the govt.

[andyt]

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

Some people keep claiming that the legalization of marijuana will eliminate or at the very least drastically reduce gangs and organized crime. So allow me to pose to you. How do they know that their theory is anymore correct than the one posed by Ms Terkel on the Police Chief Magazine?

Well, let's try it and see. Drug business in BC alone is at least 2 billion, with some estimates up to 7 bil. Take just half of that away from gangs because of legalization (I think it would be substantially more than half) that's quite a cut in profits to the gangs, and that also means less pot to trade for cocaine and guns in the US the way they do now.

[OnTheIce]

Curtman Curtman:

The certainty is that there is better ways of dealing with addiction than what we are doing now, and what we are doing now is fuelling organized crime.

The only certaintly here is that you're a shitty spokesperson for this topic and have no credibility. Beyond that, everything else is just made up....especially if it comes from you.

Good to know that legalization will be the saviour for addicts all over the place. It worked so well for booze.

[andyt]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

Curtman Curtman:

Good to know that legalization will be the saviour for addicts all over the place. It worked so well for booze.

Certainly better than the alternative. Allows for applying a medical model to alcohol addiction without putting people in jail for being addicted, nor spending a fortune to go after the people selling the stuff. Also allows, for instance, the "wet" residences that house hardcore booze addicts and dispense regulated amounts of alcohol. Better health outcomes, less involvement with the justice system, better lives for the addicts vs the alternative on the street, drinking Listerine or what have you. Legalization drastically limits the involvement of criminals with booze production and selling, limits establishment of the illegal distribution networks, then regulation limits access to some degree for legal use, so that overall use is reduced. It's a balancing act, far better than overkill on either side.

[Lemmy]

You're wasting your keystrokes, andy. OTI was indoctrinated in the 1980s. His "Just say no", "This is your brain on drugs", refer madness mentality isn't going away, ever, no matter what evidence, research or logic is presented to him.

[andyt]

Oh, I know. For some reason this topic is like picking at a scab for me - seems so obvious we need to try something else. I don't really give a shit, haven't done any proscribed drugs since I don't know when, havent' even had a drink for ages. It's no biggie to me except for all the misery the current system causes, some of which I think could be alleviated. We'll always have people doing drugs (incl alcohol), we'll always have some people harm themselves and others doing so. Question is, what's the best way to minimize harm we can come up with.

[Freakinoldguy]

Curtman Curtman:

How's that theory working for cigarettes?

Great. With regulation we've driven smoking rates down from 50% to 10% of the population.[/quote]



The illegal cigarette industry is just a myth? And here I thought it was education, cost and scare tactics that got people off cigarettes.

Well if they ever do legalize marijuana I guess they can make the price outrageous just like they do for cigarettes which will make people quit.

But, I'd bet that if they do to marijuana what they did to smokes, people using won't pay those prices anymore than cigarette smokers would, especially if they could get their smokes or marijuana illegally and a half the cost.

The only way the Gov't won't enact the same rules and regulations for marijuana that they do for cigarettes is if you people can convince them it's good for you or at the least harmless and all I can say is good luck with that one.

[Public_Domain]