how to win the war on drugs...

def

to fight fire with fire with will ony burn the house down, that is to say if you use conventional methods of warfare to fight a unconvetional war you are bound for failure
the "war on drugs" is a war on supply and demand , each must be tackled with a seperate battle plan , on supply economic warefare must be waged and on demand psycological warfare must be used.

the suppy only exists because there is a demand ,this is the root cause of its existance ,even those who studied economics for the first class in secondary school and then changed subject ,should have been explained this .
as it is the most basic economic principle , and the reason most economists are displeased or disagree with the currently employed methods of takling this economic problem(drug use and supply).

to use economic war fare is to "steal" supply ,by either nationalisation(government controled distribution) or regulation/legalisation (regulated free market), the method applied should be carefully considerd,
take for example the method of nationalisation of the opiate "market" created in england by the second world war, if they had denyed the addicted returning troops morphine or any treatment it would have created
a sizeable black market ,however they did not and as a result the useage rates steadily dropped, the same method (of nationalisation )could be applied to irelands modernday heroin problem, stripping supply of demand ,fully ,
not just partially, by providing either opiates for the pennys it is truely worth or a more suitable substitute for example cannabis sativa indica which with high levels of CBD to THC reducing or preventing psychosis(cravings and so on) associated with
heroin withdrawl,and also offering those ,who so choose, abstinance based treatment.

when takling demand psycological warefare/tactics must be utilised ,more over create the illusion of choice (like in an election),and offer the safer "softer" drugs ,by introducing a free but highly regulated market system take for example cannabis ,"magic" mushrooms ,MDMA ,and certain stimulents
the prohibition of these(and all drugs) creates health problems which otherwise would not exist ,transient psychosis from cannabis is caused by a lack of choice in the market ,the association of high quality and high strength, when cannabis is bred for high THC percenage it is done so at the expence of CBD , if cannabis was properly regulated then consumers would be aware of the cannabinoid profile of a particular crop of a particular strain, they could choose to consume it or not ,most people i feel would choose not to consume such high strength herb regularly if they were made fully aware of the possible consequences ,
other negative effects would also be reduced for instance an age limit would prevent heavy useage amongst the most vunerable, which leads to a retardation of growth in the fronal lobe and over use of the CB 1 and 2,cannabinoid recepters affecting future/current metabilisim and immune system development,

with mushrooms it reduces the chance of picking and eating poisonus strains ,which can kill, however like cannabis psyclobe containing mushrooms do not kill however much is consumed and if used in a positive social setting rarely have negitive consequences ,and again prohibition causes psycological problems which
would otherwise not exist ,when on any hallucinagenic the mind is vunerable ,if for example you consider yourself or are given a vague impression you are considerd an outcast ,unloved ,unwanted within a very short period of time can become suicidal,leaping to your death ,unless someone proclaims they can fly or displayed a lack of understanding with regard to the laws of areodynamics this should be assumed ,

it could be said prohibition validates paranoia ,for are there not people "after" you ,or that consider you sub-human?

with MDMA (extacy)and stimulants such as "speed" or synthetic cocaine ,warnings and better purity and in some cases research would drasticly reduce health consequences.

if their was this choice or "illusion" of choice would their be a demand for poor quality black market produce? would there exist a demand to generate supply?

also consider the special qualitys of the irish drug market ,drug use is excepted (alcohol) even glamorised, all (most)illegal drugs are sourced from outside the country meaning the vast majority of cash involved leaves the country,(street dealers make pennys by comparison)
the newly created or accepted markets would generate ligitimate employment ,reducing dole lines and so on,generating taxes and reduce costs of healthcare due to lack of (wanted and required) information and poor purity ,aswell as eliminateing the costly tactics of "regulation" used currently by the gardai making their job safer and reducing the friction/aggrivation this "style" may cause in society tward them, creating a greater and wider respect for the law

would this not be far safer,cheaper and more humane?

please the idea is fresh and i am weary of war ,can anyone on anyside of the trenches voice their opinion on my notion of peace?

i am fully prepared to admit defeat if you can convince me....

genericguy

you lost me at hello.

Menengroth™

Wall of text scores a critical hit and hits you for 1048 damage.

RoadKillTs

Way to long. I just read the title.
Can someone do me a summary? Cheers.

Jagera

RoadKillTs wrote: »

Way to long. I just read the title.
Can someone do me a summary? Cheers.

ok - drugs are bad m'kay

bluto63

I saw something about stealing economics in there, so I'm assuming this is the long winded way of saying 'let's legalise drugs' am I right?

RobbieTheRobber

RoadKillTs wrote: »

Way to long. I just read the title.
Can someone do me a summary? Cheers.

Summary is: body op's text most likely taken from somewhere else, words such as high-school changed to secondary school to make it seem written in an irish context, which it most certainly is not because war on drugs is an americanism, and to sum up the rest of the piece, crap, crap crap, more crap and finally a crap finish.

jd007

Is this world war 3? Whats happening? i'm confused!

DazMarz

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

Summary is: body op's text most likely taken from somewhere else, words such as high-school changed to secondary school to make it seem written in an irish context, which it most certainly is not because war on drugs is an americanism, and to sum up the rest of the piece, crap, crap crap, more crap and finally a crap finish.

Yep, that's a fairly good sum up.

Although the point on drugs being a supply/demand market is spot on, but the piece is mostly utter rubbish.

Buford T Justice

tl;dr

Jaysis. this is AH FFS! Waaaaaaayyyyyyy yoo long.....

Can you bulllet it to prevent boredom?

mailforkev

Omar comin' y'all.

:rolleyes:

Buford T Justice

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

Summary is: body op's text most likely taken from somewhere else, words such as high-school changed to secondary school to make it seem written in an irish context, which it most certainly is not because war on drugs is an americanism, and to sum up the rest of the piece, crap, crap crap, more crap and finally a crap finish.

Well the, with that

Drugs are bad
/thread

xzanti

tldr

AnonoBoy

So you're saying we should seize control of the world's cocaine supply by invading Columbia?

biko

OP - Read but not understood.

Overheal

Even I couldn't be bothered reading this.

Prof.Badass

That's not winning the war on drugs. That's giving up on it, which incidentally is the right thing to do.

I remember reading a story about gardaí taking bribes from some gang or other. The war on drugs is unwinnable.

TPD

If you're doing a project on drugs, it helps if your writing style doesn't make you appear high.

Dempsey

As long as there is a demand, there will be someone trying to supply. Not a chance of stopping people wanting to smoke, drink, take legal highs/illegal highs etc.

It would be best to educate people on the effects of all recreational drugs

def

Magnus wrote: »

OP - Read but not understood.

magnus?... go,going,gone...sold.. read it,think about it and then read it over ,

to think of the prohibition as a war , allows for a better veiw point , have you ever seen black hawk down , the somalian warlord who used hunger as a weapon ,this is unconventional warfare

china today seems to be waging an economic war on america sucking vast amounts of cash out of the country ,and destroying production ,this is true warfare modern ,effective , break the peoples spirit ,not just american style "show biz" war, with expensive toys

thinking with this frame of mind and imagining prohibition as a war allows for a better understanding of it ,moreover ,why it is how it is , two sides each seeing victory or defeat as the outcome ,instead of what it should be a sensible comprimise ,an excersize in risk management ,like all problems people can have ,a comprimise is needed to solve it,

you'll notice some people definatly understand but refuse to except because the notion of "peace talks" or a "treaty" is unexceptable total victory or nothing, i suspect they refuse to accept some sub human cannabis user could come up with a workable plan to modern societys biggist problem ,sittin around not getting paid to do it

you'll also notice the shoot the messanger "you didnt write this" , the- i cant even comprehend so ill attack the guy whos talking , instead of trying to understand the words or ideas hes suggesting ,mentality ....

which is a sure sign of defeat or surrender ... from someone who has their opinions spoonfed to them ,

def

jd007 wrote: »

Is this world war 3? Whats happening? i'm confused!

yes except no one is neutral,and the nazis are winning

def

AnonoBoy wrote: »

So you're saying we should seize control of the world's cocaine supply by invading Columbia?

this is unnessecary ,if the stigma with "legal highs" was nulled big pharma would pump out different safer ,synthetic versions ,,with cherry flavour etc

def

The Perfect Drug wrote: »

If you're doing a project on drugs, it helps if your writing style doesn't make you appear high.

sorry if it may appear that way but its hard for me to explain myself sometimes ,especially if i have to put it into text , plus my spelling has never been very good (like yerman with the e=mc2 for example)

def

Dempsey wrote: »

As long as there is a demand, there will be someone trying to supply. Not a chance of stopping people wanting to smoke, drink, take legal highs/illegal highs etc.

It would be best to educate people on the effects of all recreational drugs

and if you offer a limited suppy of the safer ones , there should be no demand for others , and clinics to "steal" the suppy of harder ones when needed

raptorman

Firstly I dont agree with drugs being illegal. People should be allowed to take whatever they want.

My solution to the drugs problem is two fold. The supply and demand must both be targeted.
People could be randomly tested for drugs and if tests come back positive jailed for a week and their name put on a website with lists of offenders.
This could start of by profiling the most likely users i.e. 20 to 30 year olds and start tests in that age bracket.

Then start eliminating the supply. Use Garda intellegence and the Ranger Wing from the Army to start a real war on drugs. I'm sure the Gardai could name the top 10 to 20 people involved in the drug trade in Ireland. Use those names to get more names and start removing the supply.

An extreme solution but one that might work. If people are shocked and complain about human rights etc then dont complain about the drug "problem".

My name is URL

If there was no war on drugs here then the innocent people laying down their lives to save others in places like South America are doing it in vain

If it was legit companies supplying drugs to the world, a war wouldn't be needed

but it's Cartels, that kill tens of thousands of people per year that are in control atm. Why should there be no war on them?

def

raptorman wrote: »

Firstly I dont agree with drugs being illegal. People should be allowed to take whatever they want.

My solution to the drugs problem is two fold. The supply and demand must both be targeted.
People could be randomly tested for drugs and if tests come back positive jailed for a week and their name put on a website with lists of offenders.
This could start of by profiling the most likely users i.e. 20 to 30 year olds and start tests in that age bracket.

Then start eliminating the supply. Use Garda intellegence and the Ranger Wing from the Army to start a real war on drugs. I'm sure the Gardai could name the top 10 to 20 people involved in the drug trade in Ireland. Use those names to get more names and start removing the supply.

An extreme solution but one that might work. If people are shocked and complain about human rights etc then dont complain about the drug "problem".

or you could give the dealth penalty for possession /dealing,chop off a finger , send us to proper "work" camps , this is fully going with the current irish way , if your going to do any thing go all the way saudi style (alcohol),
this might work but its very expencive and quickly puts us back in the dark ages ,then whos next jews?africans?muslims? prodestants?travelers? homosexuals?

what other life choices do you not approve of? id really like to know.. so i can warn them,and tell god who he should be expecting up next in large numbers.... honestly can you not see the comparison....the "war on drugs " only started after the second big war ,who do you think gave hitler the money to "campaign" do you think it would be hard to convince the world another type of person is sub human ,worthless and "camp" material, then start making more money of the process except on a global scale

drug dealers are created by laws ,bad laws ,dont let the idea of them cloud your judgement ,if you are not treated humanely why should you be expected to behave humanely?

Mike 1972

vinylmesh wrote: »

That's not winning the war on drugs. That's giving up on it, .

Perhaps the OP was speaking from the perspective of the inevitable victor of the "war on drugs"

I.E. Drugs

Rented Mule

Mike 1972 wrote: »

Perhaps the OP was speaking from the perspective of the inevitable victor of the "war on drugs"

I.E. Drugs

Would 'drugs' be the winner or would it be the individuals right to chose be the winner ?

def

vinylmesh wrote: »

That's not winning the war on drugs. That's giving up on it, which incidentally is the right thing to do.

I remember reading a story about gardaí taking bribes from some gang or other. The war on drugs is unwinnable.

i chose the title "how to win the war on drugs" very carefully ,, winning ,,a very powerful idea ,espeacially when its in a group/herd
it forces people to deal with certain aspects of why they think a certain way or at least realise they are thinking a certain way ,, hopefully forcing them to re-evaluate their opinions , or giving valid reasons as to why they hold the opinions they do

def

check out my other treads if you think there is at least some merit in my theroy/treaty

jd007

def wrote: »

yes except no one is neutral,and the nazis are winning

Nazi's are fighting drugs?

strobe

def wrote: »

check out my other treads if you think there is at least some merit in my theroy/treaty

I think there might be some merit in your theory but I'd imagine I feel the same about having you arguing my side of the debate as the Christians on this site felt about having Estebancambias putting himself out there as the spokesman for thier side of things against the atheists. Your just not very good at it, but fair play for having a go.

artielange

Is it possible that the war has gone Guerrilla?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/6207655.stm

I heard in Vietnam Special Forces would sneak in and replace an enemies ammunition with "faulty ammo" to give the user a headache and hurt overall moral

I wonder what these scientists could have invented instead of...


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/6207655.stm


Must be some money to be made on both side's of the "war"

Interesting in the article steet price halved/seizures at airports up?

def

strobe wrote: »

I think there might be some merit in your theory but I'd imagine I feel the same about having you arguing my side of the debate as the Christians on this site felt about having Estebancambias putting himself out there as the spokesman for thier side of things against the atheists. Your just not very good at it, but fair play for having a go.

speaking no problem ,its the fe*kin typing that i cant do, i have convinced total foaming at the mouth drug warriors(prohibitionists) over to the good guys side (anti prohibition , concerned parents against prohibition etc) , most of them are just misinformed ,its the ones on the power trip ye got to watch out for (grannie kenny style people) ,ask the right questions and they cop on pretty quick, point out the provable nonsence half the work is done ,you should all be thankfull for people like grannie kenny ,have you seen her website? ALL complete hate ,based on tabacco science and things she made up, the women is obviously very emotionally comprimised by the cannabis topic , and the whole we gotta win or the worlds over ,

shes suspect no.1 for who would you bribe if you were a multi million euro international heroin dealer ?, EURAD yea ,ive emailed them and her (more than once)looking for their funders but they never e-mail back....:eek:
couldnt find it any where else ....:eek:
wait didnt alcohol prohibition create mass corruption?

walshb

How to deal with drugs and gangs who peddle in drugs? Gun, bullet, head!

def

artielange wrote: »

Must be some money to be made on both side's of the "war"

Interesting in the article steet price halved/seizures at airports up?

someone new could write a bigger cheque ,,

getting off topic ,

does anyone understand and disprove of my proposal , who can explain why they think it would not...

-reduce/eliminate acess to children
-reduce usage rates
-reduce health problems
-generate lots of money/jobs
-improve general public health
-improve society in general/ peoples attitude tward one another

and as for the reasons they were made illegal...how would it not....
-reduce public immorality
-reduce public disorder

i dont want yes/no answers , and if you cant prove me wrong ireland will be like this very soon ,very very soon

Buford T Justice

def wrote: »

someone new could write a bigger cheque ,,

getting off topic ,

does anyone understand and disprove of my proposal , who can explain why they think it would not...

Like has been said many times.......

tldr. Posts are way too long for AH. If you want a serious debate try another forum and not here

i dont want yes/no answers , and if you cant prove me wrong ireland will be like this very soon ,very very soon

And how exactly can failing to dis-prove your theory lead to such a cataclysmic change in our society?

rovert

def is the new Drug Czar.

Didnt read any of it obviously.

dr.fuzzenstein

We do what the americans do:
Take all the drug users and all the drug dealers and lock them up together.
Yeah, that'll teach 'em!

def

Fingers McGee wrote: »

And how exactly can failing to dis-prove your theory lead to such a cataclysmic change in our society?

it seems you will see soon enough ,i wouldnt really say ending ,the supply of new heroin users, gang members ,corrupt polititions , stopping underage drug use of any drug, making the gardai's job safer, saving lots of money in taxes spent ,keeping lots more in the country (on drugs imported),and generating more tax takings, improving the general health of drug users and making ireland the most civilised nation in the world today could be considerd "cataclysmic"

preventing under age drug use is very simple in a regulated market if a pub/cafe/club sells drugs (inc alcohol and tabacco) to a minor ,the place gets shut down or never allowed sell the produce involved again,the owner and person behind the counter is fined by the state and can be sued by the parents of the child for max 1 million euro ,, very quickly no one would risk selling anything to anyone with out ID,, every premises must have cameras at the entrence and counter , i think minors (16) should be able to buy beer and weak cannabis to be consumed on the premises in limited quantitys,nothing else ,this would get them off the streets , they couldnt afford to drink/smoke every day ,,and before anyone says anything if you dont want your kid drinking or smoking pot thats your parental disition not the states ,just dont give them money try to talk to them

if you dont want them out robbing cars and burning stuff for fun what do you want done to prevent it? cause once its done its done, young teens could be going sitting around playing pool ,cards whatever maybe they have money for a pint or a joint ,they act the bol**cks they get told to leave maybe barred ,they know just aswell as you the courts will let them walk 90/100 times ,and thats just when they get caught ,this is more reason to behave than any empty gardai station ,setting all teens off to a better start than the current system of slap on the wrist ,go around the corner ,continue

rovert

def wrote: »

it seems you will see soon enough ,i wouldnt really say ending ,the supply of new heroin users, gang members ,corrupt polititions , stopping underage drug use of any drug, making the gardai's job safer, saving lots of money in taxes spent ,keeping lots more in the country (on drugs imported),and generating more tax takings, improving the general health of drug users and making ireland the most civilised nation in the world today could be considerd "cataclysmic"

preventing under age drug use is very simple in a regulated market if a pub/cafe/club sells drugs (inc alcohol and tabacco) to a minor ,the place gets shut down or never allowed sell the produce involved again,the owner and person behind the counter is fined by the state and can be sued by the parents of the child for max 1 million euro ,, very quickly no one would risk selling anything to anyone with out ID,, every premises must have cameras at the entrence and counter , i think minors (16) should be able to buy beer and weak cannabis to be consumed on the premises in limited quantitys,nothing else ,this would get them off the streets , they couldnt afford to drink/smoke every day ,,and before anyone says anything if you dont want your kid drinking or smoking pot thats your parental disition not the states ,just dont give them money try to talk to them

if you dont want them out robbing cars and burning stuff for fun what do you want done to prevent it? cause once its done its done, young teens could be going sitting around playing pool ,cards whatever maybe they have money for a pint or a joint ,they act the bol**cks they get told to leave maybe barred ,they know just aswell as you the courts will let them walk 90/100 times ,and thats just when they get caught ,this is more reason to behave than any empty gardai station ,setting all teens off to a better start than the current system of slap on the wrist ,go around the corner ,continue

Is your full stop button broken?

def

rovert wrote: »

Is your full stop button broken?

naw, i dont do full stops, it never ends ,i just take breif pauses

Terry

Quick solution.
Have everyone on the dole take a drug test when they sign on.
If they fail the test, then they don't get any dole.

Rabble rabble rabble.

Ok. Drug tests for all.
Drugs are illegal. By taking drugs, you are breaking the law.
Stop whining like little bitches when you get done for holding a ten spot. You knew the risks.


More rabble.

Move to The Netherlands then.

More Rabble.

I stopped caring after the Netherlands bit.

def

Terry wrote: »

Quick solution.
Have everyone on the dole take a drug test when they sign on.
If they fail the test, then they don't get any dole.

Rabble rabble rabble.

Ok. Drug tests for all.
Drugs are illegal. By taking drugs, you are breaking the law.
Stop whining like little bitches when you get done for holding a ten spot. You knew the risks.


More rabble.

Move to The Netherlands then.

More Rabble.

I stopped caring after the Netherlands bit.

this is beautiful ,not this post exactly ,but the fact that on a debating website ,im sure is full of pro-prohibitionists ,no one can come up with an even semi valid arguement for why any drug should be illegal ,let alone cannabis

do you know what this means?


when up against someone who knows pretty much every possible arguement for ,or against prohibition it cant be done, their are no valid arguements ,every arguement for prohibition is infact an arguement against it with a bit of a spin, because its one of the stupidist most repulsive ,inhumane ideas man kind has ever had , it was created to attack african americans and mexicans ,by alcohol prohibitionists who were bored with no one to arrest and call sub human in public,the only reason it got any support is the tabloids ,and the only reason its still going on is the tabloids,and you cant base a defence with tabloid scare storys ,

come on this is a debate website ,, no one have anything at all?

first thing that pops into your head ,anything

for example (cannabis)-lots more people would do drugs (the worst arguement )

do you have even the slightist notion of how many people smoke pot now? have you ever even looked at statistics? an age demograph?who would take up smoking pot solely because its legal? you?no ? then why do you assume anyone else will?
it seems 1 in 4 people under 40 have done so or do smoke it, this is a minimum estimate ,at least 1% of the global population do ,did you know the number of users has steadily increased since it was made illegal in ireland? do you know why ? because it has no age limit, "warning" children about it is really just advertising , let me see.... a negitive effect of using cannabis... "its a gate way drug"*,a cough ? living longer meaning more of a strain on our global resources? oh yes, people who smoke cannabis tend to live longer! this ones got to be dangerous ,

lets let the percentage of using children steadily climb , because if we legalised it(put an age limit on it) more people would start using it ,do you see the contradiction?

*the gate way theroy ...there are several gate way effects, no gate way drugs ,there has actually been studies done trying to find a change in the brain that makes people more likely to do other drugs once someone has smoked the ganja ,i find the idea of someone paying for those studies hilarious, guess what there is no change ,the vast majority of cannabis users never do other illegal drugs,

gateway effect 1 , polydrug dealers offer other drugs (most drug dealers are cannabis dealers ,most of whom only sell cannabis) , one could assume cannabis is a fish hook so the other more profitable drugs can be offered to cannabis users on a regular basis(fishing with the hook), also (mostly) non cannabis dealers go to pubs to "fish" for customers with "club" drugs

gateway effect 2, lying to the teen makes you an untrustworthy source of information almost provoking them to try the next safest extacy or mushrooms which ever is available (most likely the former ,for urban dwellers)

gateway effect 3, when a law is obviously based in prejudice its encurs disrespect for all laws ,provoking public disorder

gateway effect 4, when a person cannabis user or not (of certain classes mainly) is constantly stopped and searched for cannabis(wheres the hash lads?) ,this prevokes disrespect for all gardai

gateway effect 5,drinking cow milk ,every drug user who has ever lived ,in ireland anyway, most illegal drug users worldwide ,has drank cows milk theres got to be a connection ,im just not seeing it ,ban the stuff

all these gateway effects are either for other drugs or worse ,actual public disorder,

the next most hilarious arguement is cannabis has negative health consequences....no smoking and prohibition have negative health consequences .. certain medical conditions can combine very negatively with cannabis for instance if your blood does not clott well when wounded cannabis could keep blood flowing out(it thins the blood) but this exact property could be used positively in a different senario,but healthy adults dont suffer many negative consequences healthwise coughing and so on,
but thats just prevoked lung cleaning

cannabis is completely non toxic to humans ,

prove me wrong

questioner

cannabis is illegal because it would be impossible to tax. imagine trying to get a p60 from johnny bongo.

Mike 1972

questioner wrote: »

cannabis is illegal because it would be impossible to tax.

"Coffeeshops" in the Netherlands pay tax do they not ?

Of course a minority of people could evade the tax by growing their own (Just like home brewers do now) but for most people its not worth the hasstle.

Even now despite the risks arising from illegality/criminality and quality/contamination issues most users buy from dealers rather than growing their own (also illegal but argubly safer if done discreetly in small quantities)

Terry wrote: »

Drug tests for all.

Drug testing is notoriously unreliable (prone to both false negative and false positive test results) and actually incentivises users to move onto harder drugs.

Terry wrote: »

Have everyone on the dole take a drug test when they sign on. If they fail the test, then they don't get any dole.

Why ?

dr.fuzzenstein

Terry wrote: »

Quick solution.
Have everyone on the dole take a drug test when they sign on.
If they fail the test, then they don't get any dole.

Rabble rabble rabble.

Ok. Drug tests for all.
Drugs are illegal. By taking drugs, you are breaking the law.
Stop whining like little bitches when you get done for holding a ten spot. You knew the risks.


More rabble.

Move to The Netherlands then.

More Rabble.

I stopped caring after the Netherlands bit.

There's always one with the "just check everyone in the country every hour on the hour" idea.
The problem is that even in Ireland you'd need a police force of several hundred thousand, because every single person would have to be constantly monitored.
That would cost billions, therefore be completely unaffordable, impractical, unworkable, cause the country to grind to a halt and end up with several thousand people in jail for the possession of a single spliff.
Also, a society under constant lockdown and surveillance cannot function.
Therefore you will always have crime (of any sort), society just isn't perfect and you cannot force it to be so.
It's human nature to want to taste the forbidden fruit, it's always going to happen and any pragmatic government will see that.
You can limit crime, but never eradicate it.
The whole totalitarian rhetoric is always popular with a certain segment of the populus, but in the end it's just verbal masturbation.

cock robin

Jaysus def I smoke the odd cone cos I enjoy it. But WTF are you banging on about. Too much needless, pointless, baseless and worthless information for any one to take in.

def

cock robin wrote: »

Jaysus def I smoke the odd cone cos I enjoy it. But WTF are you banging on about. Too much needless, pointless, baseless and worthless information for any one to take in.

"The casm that is my mind." (chasm)i think you have explained yourself with this alone cock, it could be a bit late but you do know theres opium in most soapbar, and unlike cannabis it kills brain cells ,and when you smoke a "cone" you lose more than you gain ,

baseless? wothless?now i dont think you smoke the good herb at all,did some of my posts hit a soft spot ? go wax your car and ask for longer/shorter days , maybe a million euro for every one in the country ,come on man think before you post or start a thread

if you dont have anything nice to say ...and the other less popular if you dont understand what the other people are saying keep your mouth closed and you could learn a thing or two

def

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Therefore you will always have crime (of any sort), society just isn't perfect and you cannot force it to be so.
It's human nature to want to taste the forbidden fruit, it's always going to happen and any pragmatic government will see that.
You can limit crime, but never eradicate it.
The whole totalitarian rhetoric is always popular with a certain segment of the populus, but in the end it's just verbal masturbation.

crime is a symptom of a problem not a problem in its self, im not talking about driving on the moblie , but real crime ,public disorder kinda crime, id say every gang member and junkie has been bred by a broken system ,they are symtoms of a sickness in society , prohibition doesnt help but its not the sole problem ,fixing its a start and it will help changing this general lack of love in society

ironicaly its normaly the people who belive in "love your neighbour" that propose locking up everyone who thinks or acts differently to them