War on Drugs has Failed... and in Other News the Sky is Blue

[Fragony]

That makes no sense.

Why in the world would you have a gang and go out killing people when you could just grow your own weed legally?

CR

Because you can't compete with the kartels, Mexico can't even fight them military do you think they will accept the loss of their greatest market. If you grow it yourself the people doing it are going to be at the receiving end of an electrical buzzsaw very soon, you will import all the horror the kartels have to offer, everyone affiliated with destroying their profits will be a target, better get used to whole family's being killed like in Mexico you will really be at war

[Viking]

Also, alcohol, a terrible, terrible drug is abused, has done more to bring people together than anything other human invention until the internet. Fact.

I think you are forgetting wars.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Because you can't compete with the kartels, Mexico can't even fight them military do you think they will accept the loss of their greatest market. If you grow it yourself the people doing it are going to be at the receiving end of an electrical buzzsaw very soon, you will import all the horror the kartels have to offer, everyone affiliated with destroying their profits will be a target, better get used to whole family's being killed like in Mexico you will really be at war

Except if drugs were legalized it really wouldn't be average people growing and selling on their own, it would be corporations. You telling me that the cartels are going to start blowing up Philip Morris's weed division headquarters?

If drugs are legalized, than you have more players getting involved than just the cartels and the cartels can't kick them all out through violence. Every consequence that you list is thus invalid.

[a completely inoffensive name]

I think you are forgetting wars.

Nah, wars are cheap paint jobs that don't actually unify. Alcohol brings families together, it loosen lips and legs and it allows people share and build relationships that last for a lifetime. Wars are temporary collaborations that actually do the exact opposite, they destroy and destroy until there is nothing left to destroy but the collaboration itself.

[Fragony]

Except if drugs were legalized it really wouldn't be average people growing and selling on their own, it would be corporations. You telling me that the cartels are going to start blowing up Philip Morris's weed division headquarters?

Yeah they are really going to do that and what can you do about it call the police, and if that don't scares you of enough you will find a video of Phillip Morris family being decapitated with an electrical saw (it's slow) on lifeleak. You are outgunned in every way you are not prepared for this kind of terror.

Is there an SA here to tell the Disneyland neighbours how things work

[a completely inoffensive name]

Yeah they are really going to do that and what can you do about it call the police, and if that don't scares you of enough you will find a video of Phillip Morris family being decapitated with an electrical saw (it's slow) on lifeleak. You are outgunned in every way you are not prepared for this kind of terror.

Is there an SA here to tell the Disneyland neighbours how things work

Idk what to say except I disagree. I think that the US isn't Mexico and I don't think that a company will be completely bombed under the radar of the FBI. I also think that even if they do, it won't matter. Phillip Morris will still be pushing the product, the US citizen will buy from the "friendlier and safer" source and the cartels will die off anyway.

Also, if the cartels attack us, all it will do is piss off the American public, not scare them. American's are not going to reverse their law because of them "Hispanic terrorists", we will just give more money to the border guard and TSA.

[Fragony]

Idk what to say except I disagree. I think that the US isn't Mexico and I don't think that a company will be completely bombed under the radar of the FBI. I also think that even if they do, it won't matter. Phillip Morris will still be pushing the product, the US citizen will buy from the "friendlier and safer" source and the cartels will die off anyway.

Also, if the cartels attack us, all it will do is piss off the American public, not scare them. American's are not going to reverse their law because of them "Hispanic terrorists", we will just give more money to the border guard and TSA.

I am sure they are very intimidated by pissed of Americans, surely more than they are by Mexico's own military. Do you want private security having to carry anti-tank weapons? You probably think gated communities are bad, mentally add some watchtowers and barracks around your hycienta. You really can't beat them why make a minor problem a huge one,

[a completely inoffensive name]

I am sure they are very intimidated by pissed of Americans, surely more than they are by Mexico's own military. Do you want private security having to carry anti-tank weapons? You probably think gated communities are bad, mentally add some watchtowers and barracks around your hycienta. You really can't beat them why make a minor problem a huge one,

Question. If Phillip Morris starts competing in the drug business and they start spamming advertisements and everything else a company does to get as many consumers as possible, they will most likely be taking away all the business from the cartels as US citizens give their money to Phillip Morris and not the cartels.

So how will the cartels roll in with tanks and bomb Phillip Morris when they won't have any money coming in anymore? Do you think that given the choice between a 7/11 or a drug dealer that a person will willingly decide to buy from a cartel drug dealer instead of the bright, clean, regulated 7/11?

[Fragony]

Question. If Phillip Morris starts competing in the drug business and they start spamming advertisements and everything else a company does to get as many consumers as possible, they will most likely be taking away all the business from the cartels as US citizens give their money to Phillip Morris and not the cartels.

So how will the cartels roll in with tanks and bomb Phillip Morris when they won't have any money coming in anymore? Do you think that given the choice between a 7/11 or a drug dealer that a person will willingly decide to buy from a cartel drug dealer instead of the bright, clean, regulated 7/11?

Not tanks, armoured vehicles with shooting holes, police don't stand a chance unless they bring anti-armour. You are rationalising from a reality where these kartels don't exist but they just do, there won't be any legal source to buy from they will be burned down long before

[a completely inoffensive name]

Not tanks, armoured vehicles with shooting holes, police don't stand a chance unless they bring anti-armour. You are rationalising from a reality where these kartels don't exist but they just do, there won't be any legal source to buy from they will be burned down long before

The cartel's won't be able to roam into America and burn down every convenience store that sells pot.

Medical pot dispensaries have been for the most part been where a lot of Californian's get pot for recreational use. There are 100's of them in LA alone. Not one has been burned down. Your statements as to what will happen are just not realistic.

[TheLastDays]

And you don't think that a company like Philipp Morris has the funds to pay their own private security force that is armed with anti armour weapons to protect their property? I think they do and, unlike the cartels who are hated, they will have everyone on their side as they are just defending, which means, people will still buy from Philipp Morris and the cartels will eventually, maybe after doing some damage, die out because after all they are not terrorists who fight for an ideal. Their "soldiers" aren't on a holy war, they are mercenaries and when mercenaries don't get paid, what do they do?

[Fragony]

And you don't think that a company like Philipp Morris has the funds to pay their own private security force that is armed with anti armour weapons to protect their property? I think they do and, unlike the cartels who are hated, they will have everyone on their side as they are just defending, which means, people will still buy from Philipp Morris and the cartels will eventually, maybe after doing some damage, die out because after all they are not terrorists who fight for an ideal. Their "soldiers" aren't on a holy war, they are mercenaries and when mercenaries don't get paid, what do they do?

Sure, but is it worth the trouble. Surely you can equip private security with big guns, but you can also just don't make it necesary. If you just stop trouble over what's small you don't have to deal with what's big, just stop locking up users presto

[a completely inoffensive name]

Sure, but is it worth the trouble. Surely you can equip private security with big guns, but you can also just don't make it necesary. If you just stop trouble over what's small you don't have to deal with what's big, just stop locking up users presto

So the options are:

A) Legalize drugs, take a few years of cartel retaliation, then enjoy their demise and bask in the extra freedom and safety the world now has.
or
B) Don't legalize drugs. Make sure they don't attack us but just keep to themselves killing people in Mexico and have our treasury depleted fighting them until the end of time.

And you think B is the best choice?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Sure, but is it worth the trouble. Surely you can equip private security with big guns, but you can also just don't make it necesary. If you just stop trouble over what's small you don't have to deal with what's big, just stop locking up users presto

I still find this extraordinary as a debate.

"Hard" druges, like Cocaine and Heroin are heinous in their effect on people, Meth and Acid rot your insides, LCD actually simulates shitzophrenia, and Hash has all the downsides of tobacoo with the added bonus that even moderate indulgence seriously bluntes your intellect and can cause mental health problems as well as memory problems if you take it when you're young.

[Fragony]

So the options are:

A) Legalize drugs, take a few years of cartel retaliation, then enjoy their demise and bask in the extra freedom and safety the world now has.
or
B) Don't legalize drugs. Make sure they don't attack us but just keep to themselves killing people in Mexico and have our treasury depleted fighting them until the end of time.

And you think B is the best choice?

Well yeah, B absolutely, as they won't just vanish anyway. You lost this decades ago you can't just undo that.

[Viking]

Alcohol brings families together

Quite the opposite..

it allows people share and build relationships that last for a lifetime.

No, it is the human nature that allows that.

Wars are temporary collaborations that actually do the exact opposite, they destroy and destroy until there is nothing left to destroy but the collaboration itself.

They are temporary, but they can make a big lasting difference. They could remove centuries old rivalry in a nation/area and replace it with a co-operative and more united future.

[Fragony]

I still find this extraordinary as a debate.

"Hard" druges, like Cocaine and Heroin are heinous in their effect on people, Meth and Acid rot your insides, LCD actually simulates shitzophrenia, and Hash has all the downsides of tobacoo with the added bonus that even moderate indulgence seriously bluntes your intellect and can cause mental health problems as well as memory problems if you take it when you're young.

Not my planet I just live on it

[a completely inoffensive name]

Quite the opposite..

I guess it depends on the family. My family always has a fun time when my grandma, aunt and other elder relatives break out the wine and start reminiscing about embarrassing/awesome stories during Thanksgiving/Easter/Christmas/any other holiday they come over.

No, it is the human nature that allows that.

Not really. Alcohol is a social lubricant. If people didn't need it, they wouldn't do it. You can make more friends in uni by going to parties frequently than any other way. Those that are already friendly become even more friendly and those that are more introverted like me, become more social after a few. You seem to be making the claim that alcohol is not needed to become social and network and yet it is used so much exactly for that purpose.

They are temporary, but they can make a big lasting difference. They could remove centuries old rivalry in a nation/area and replace it with a co-operative and more united future.

If one side completely wipes out the other, then yes. France/England didn't get along because they finally reached a certain threshold of wars. Free market and financial dependence created peace. What instance has there been where both sides suddenly became best friends after killing each other?

[a completely inoffensive name]

Well yeah, B absolutely, as they won't just vanish anyway. You lost this decades ago you can't just undo that.

Why would they not go away? They have no more money. Where is their power? Power doesn't just come from nowhere. Just because they are here does not mean they will always be here. Your logic is flawed.

[Shibumi]

Wait, Fragony is suggesting that if we legalize weed in Sweden (or where ever) we will have heavily armed cartel mercs in APCs on a rampage all over the rural areas.

Somehow I am ready to go out on a limb here and take the chance.

I think the real question of this thread is what Fragony is taking, and how we can get a hold of it.

[Fragony]

Why would they not go away? They have no more money. Where is their power? Power doesn't just come from nowhere. Just because they are here does not mean they will always be here. Your logic is flawed.

They will not go away because they can outfund everything you throw at them 10:1 it's of no use

[a completely inoffensive name]

They will not go away because they can outfund everything you throw at them 10:1 it's of no use

They won't have money if no one is buying drugs from them. This is the key point here.

[Shibumi]

They won't have money if no one is buying drugs from them. This is the key point here.

No, the key point is the cartels ability to, with military means, crack down on western nation states.

Sure, they have B-countries such as Mexico and Brazil in their grasp (but only because it is still illegal there, and the countries are B-countries anyway). To think the drug cartels could stand up to a A-nation is a joke though. Sure they can get their hands in as long as it is illegal, but legalize and you would have half-empty-glasses of mercs against the industrialized western worlds army.

[Fragony]

Wait, Fragony is suggesting that if we legalize weed in Sweden (or where ever) we will have heavily armed cartel mercs in APCs on a rampage all over the rural areas.

Somehow I am ready to go out on a limb here and take the chance.

I think the real question of this thread is what Fragony is taking, and how we can get a hold of it.

Don't tallk as if I'm arent here, you don't have to adress me by proxy. Sweden isn't America they don't have a huge border with Mexico for example, they just don't because Sweden is on the other side of planet earth. It is, check your map I'm not making it up

[TheLastDays]

Somehow I don't get what you're saying there...
Their power comes from their money, take their money and they have no power at all. They can hide in countries like Mexico and there it's freakin hard to get them because you practically have to invade against a Guerilla force and in a defensive war Guerilla tactics are very effective.

If they want to attack Philipp Morris they'd basically have to invade the US and that's a whole other story...

Also

"Hard" druges, like Cocaine and Heroin are heinous in their effect on people, Meth and Acid rot your insides, LCD actually simulates shitzophrenia, and Hash has all the downsides of tobacoo with the added bonus that even moderate indulgence seriously bluntes your intellect and can cause mental health problems as well as memory problems if you take it when you're young.

I totally agree, I was just taking my point on the discussion that was going on. If you ask me you can't go ahead and give these things to people at all but the problem is, they are getting the stuff anyway, so you have to ask yourself how you can minimize the negative side effects for the part of society that doesn't take drugs

[Viking]

I guess it depends on the family. My family always has a fun time when my grandma, aunt and other elder relatives break out the wine and start reminiscing about embarrassing/awesome stories during Thanksgiving/Easter/Christmas/any other holiday they come over.

Alcohol causes divorces, it causes troubles because parents can turn into alcholics (common story) and because little kids may have to put up with drunk parents from time to time (a frightening experience for them). As for the 'bringing together' bit, I've already dealt with it - but I'll reiterate it below.

Not really. Alcohol is a social lubricant. If people didn't need it, they wouldn't do it. You can make more friends in uni by going to parties frequently than any other way. Those that are already friendly become even more friendly and those that are more introverted like me, become more social after a few. You seem to be making the claim that alcohol is not needed to become social and network and yet it is used so much exactly for that purpose.

Yes really! Some animals are social and can form bonds that last their entire lives (e.g. humans), other animals not so social creatures that primarily meet during the mating season (e.g. tigers). Alchol does not change this the slightest - once the intoxication wears off, humans are pysically back to where they were before.

"If people didn't need it, they wouldn't do it" is a terrible logical fallacy. People do not need the alcohol for socialisation, it only happens to be used for this purpose. It makes a difference, but not necessarily a positive one. In the larger picture, the sum will be negative: people will always bond, meet new people and enjoy themselves, but it takes alcohol for alchol induced fights, adultery, DWI and so on.

If one side completely wipes out the other, then yes. France/England didn't get along because they finally reached a certain threshold of wars. Free market and financial dependence created peace. What instance has there been where both sides suddenly became best friends after killing each other?

It does not have bring all of mankind together, but that was not the topic. Despite that, look what WWII did the to relationship Germany had with the rest of Europe - from being bad guys during Hitler's reign (considering the time before the outbreak of the war) to a respected member of the continent. So yes, wars can actually "unite" all of mankind (or less ambitious: the two sides in a conflict), given the right circumanstances.

[Fragony]

No, the key point is the cartels ability to, with military means, crack down on western nation states.

Sure, they have B-countries such as Mexico and Brazil in their grasp (but only because it is still illegal there, and the countries are B-countries anyway). To think the drug cartels could stand up to a A-nation is a joke though. Sure they can get their hands in as long as it is illegal, but legalize and you would have half-empty-glasses of mercs against the industrialized western worlds army.

Gawd at least someone gets it even if it is Shimubi. It is really war mia mucasa when you try all that, in the most literal way. Everytng is fine like it is

[a completely inoffensive name]

Everyone should stop abusing caffeine. And sugar. And salt.

All these compounds are dangerous and can kill you in high enough doses. If we really want our society to survive, we must live like the Mormon's and Jehovah Witnesses and get rid of any chemical that alters our body's chemistry in some way.

[TheLastDays]

Everyone should stop abusing caffeine. And sugar. And salt.

Maybe you're right ;)

Andy, Fragony, if you read closely Shobumi was making a point against your argument, not for it...

[a completely inoffensive name]

Alcohol causes divorces, it causes troubles because parents can turn into alcholics (common story) and because little kids may have to put up with drunk parents from time to time (a frightening experience for them). As for the 'bringing together' bit, I've already dealt with it - but I'll reiterate it below.

This is why I took back my original statement saying I guess it depends on the family. Don't try to portray me as defending alcoholism.

Yes really! Some animals are social and can form bonds that last their entire lives (e.g. humans), other animals not so social creatures that primarily meet during the mating season (e.g. tigers). Alchol does not change this the slightest - once the intoxication wears off, humans are pysically back to where they were before.

But the interaction is not purely a physical one. The alcohol has created a bond between people that otherwise would not have formed. I'm not denying that people love to talk to other people, I am just saying that alcohol has helped that process more than anything else.

"If people didn't need it, they wouldn't do it" is a terrible logical fallacy. People do not need the alcohol for socialisation, it only happens to be used for this purpose. It makes a difference, but not necessarily a positive one. In the larger picture, the sum will be negative: people will always bond, meet new people and enjoy themselves, but it takes alcohol for alchol induced fights, adultery, DWI and so on.

I hate most people. I need some alcohol in me before I start talking with idiots from the local kegger. Yes, humans are social, but alcohol amplifies it to a new level. Yes, you can make friends without alcohol, but you can make more, in an easier fashion when you do indulge in it with others. Some people do need to relax a bit before they cozy up with anyone. I am one of them.

It does not have bring all of mankind together, but that was not the topic. Despite that, look what WWII did the to relationship Germany had with the rest of Europe - from being bad guys during Hitler's reign (considering the time before the outbreak of the war) to a respected member of the continent. So yes, wars can actually "unite" all of mankind (or less ambitious: the two sides in a conflict), given the right circumanstances.

Respected? Forgive me, but from what I have read in this very forum, the idea of a unified Europe or any sort of co-dependence between European nations is very much not liked by more than a few Europeans. Does Greece respect Germany when they want bailouts without cutting back fiscally? Does the UK respect Germany when many UK citizens don't want to dive in and become part of the Euro/EU fold?

Nation's now respect Germany? Didn't wikileaks reveal that the US killed a German citizen by accident in a counter-terrorist operation and then told the German government to keep it under wraps?

No, wars don't lead to any meaningful "peace". When wars are done, everyone holds hands to remember those that have died, then go about being nations again. WW2 simply shifted the power structure away from Germany towards other nations, and thus the super powers treated Germany less as a threat and more as a pawn. This isn't respect.

EDIT: The more I read your responses, the more I think they mean nothing. You list the consequences of alcohol abuse and then are asserting that that applies to a majority of households. This isn't true. Alcohol use is extremely high, almost everyone drinks alcohol at least on holiday's, and if the situation was even 15% what you put it as, then the reality would be much different than it is today.

Basically I have said this:
"Alcohol brings more people together than anything else."

You reply with this:
"But it also brings people apart."

That does not negate my statement.