A Mexico City Center - 35 bodies dumped from trucks

Guy:Incognito · 21-09-2011 07:00PM

Chuck Stone wrote: »

WTF type of argument is this to put forward?

How about we don't criminalise people who mean no harm to anyone (people who choose to take drugs) in the first place?

The only people winning from the prohibition of drugs are the often unsavoury characters who sell it and those employed by the state in their futile but profitable attempt to stop drug taking.

Lets take Dublin city centre as an example. All the roaming people that are making their life choices and choosing to do drugs have no impact on the rest of the population and doing no harm?

and of course when you legalise and tax drugs all the former drug dealers will just happily pack up shop and go find a proper job. Theres no way they will illegally source drugs and undercut legitimate seller?

Coriolanus · 21-09-2011 07:03PM

Biggins wrote: »

Its very sad. I think now over 15,000 people (that we know of so far) have been killed in this drug war - and there is no end in sight.
Its unreal! It leaves me speechless when I read about such things still able to go on.

60k

And to another poster, its not weed, its coke that's fueling it. The yanks actually have had some success with closing the Caribbean routes, so Mexico became the avenue of choice into the continental us.

ILikeBananas · 21-09-2011 07:10PM

If anyone is really serious about cleaning up Mexico then all they have to do is follow the money trail. That's not being done as I suspect too many people in very high positions are complicit in what is going on there.

Chuck Stone · 21-09-2011 07:32PM

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Lets take Dublin city centre as an example. All the roaming people that are making their life choices and choosing to do drugs have no impact on the rest of the population and doing no harm?

You're talking about drug abusers rather than drug consumers. Of course drug abuse is a problem but is throwing people in prison and landing them with a criminal record a good idea?

I believe that if we spent a fraction of the money we spent on policing and criminalising people in the courts on harm prevention and addiction services we'd see a reduction in drug abuse.

and of course when you legalise and tax drugs all the former drug dealers will just happily pack up shop and go find a proper job. Theres no way they will illegally source drugs and undercut legitimate seller?

This is all muddled up ^^ and doesn't make sense. If drugs were legalised there would be no 'illegal source' there would be good providers and bad providers.

When was the last time you were offered illegal alcohol on the street by dodgey characters brewing cider in the shed?

Guy:Incognito · 21-09-2011 07:36PM

Chuck Stone wrote: »

When was the last time you were offered illegal alcohol on the street by dodgey characters brewing cider in the shed?

Probably aroung the last time alcohol was completely illegal and there was a huge worldwide network of underground producers, kingpins, smugglers, dealers etc.

Your not compareing like with like.

Chuck Stone wrote: »

You're talking about drug abusers rather than drug consumers. Of course drug abuse is a problem but is throwing people in prison and landing them with a criminal record a good idea?

So do people only go from consumer to abuser because the drugs are illegal?
why will that change if drugs are suddenly freely available?

Nodin · 21-09-2011 07:50PM

It's like colombia in the 80's/early 90's. Even if they solve it there, it'll only move.

MagicSean · 21-09-2011 07:56PM

builttospill wrote: »

It will end when governments have a reality check and legalise drugs.

That's just stupid. How exactly will it end? Will drugs start falling from the sky and people won't need foreign suppliers anymore?

Chuck Stone · 21-09-2011 07:57PM

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Probably aroung the last time alcohol was completely illegal

Has alcohol ever been completely illegal globally? When it was illegal in the US it wasn't in Canada and that's where most of it was being imported from. People weren't selling dodgey alcohol out of their sheds en masse.

So do people only go from consumer to abuser because the drugs are illegal?

No

. There are plenty of people who abuse alcohol and prescription meds. Drug absue happens regardless of illegality.

In fact there's a study from Portugal which shows a reduction in the use of marijhuana in young people since it was decriminalised.

why will that change if drugs are suddenly freely available?

Drugs are pretty much freely available as it is. What would change is that people who are abusers would be treated as addicts rather than criminals.

That would mean a hell of a lot less money being spent on policing, the courts, and prisons (and those bright people in the enforcement and legal apparatus of the state know this only too well).

Spend a fraction of the damn money criminalising people on tackling addiction and abuse and I reckon drug addiction would reduce considerably.

Chuck Stone · 21-09-2011 08:07PM

Nodin wrote: »

It's like colombia in the 80's/early 90's. Even if they solve it there, it'll only move.

I presume you mean suppress when you say 'solve'.

That's another reason why prohibition is a farce.

Yakult · 21-09-2011 08:20PM

Seachmall wrote: »

Shocking stuff, and mostly funded by that crazy drug weed.

Weed isn't crazy, the world is.

Chuck Stone · 21-09-2011 08:22PM

Seanbeag1 wrote: »

That's just stupid.

No it's not. Spending billions on fighting a losing battle is stupid. Locking millions of people up for taking and selling drugs is stupid. Wasting taxpayers money on the whims of those who like to engage in lofty prosyletizing about lifestyle chioces is stupid.

How exactly will it end? Will drugs start falling from the sky and people won't need foreign suppliers anymore?

Why can't drugs be supplied by farmers just like coffee, tea and tobacco is? Why can't drugs be distributed by traditional methods just like fruit and veg and beer from overseas and at home?

Why can't you go into a cafe and buy drugs like you can drink?

Because it's ILLEGAL that's why.

Is this really so hard for you to digest?

Seachmall · 21-09-2011 08:25PM

Nevore wrote: »

And to another poster, its not weed, its coke that's fueling it.

Mexico is one of the largest producers of weed in the world and about 1/2 of the cartel money comes from exporting it. Source

And regarding legalizing: Numerous commissions have concluded that legalization is the only step left and would be more effective then current efforts to crush the cartels (as well as having other economic and health benefits) Source Another

Logical Fallacy · 21-09-2011 08:26PM

Seanbeag1 wrote: »

That's just stupid. How exactly will it end? Will drugs start falling from the sky and people won't need foreign suppliers anymore?

Ireland has a long history of agriculture, over the last couple of decades very specifically in the growth of mushrooms for sale in supermarkets at home, in the UK and all across Europe.

With the exception of adding some lights they are pretty much perfect for growing weed.

It doesn't need to fall from the sky as we could very quickly be providing a local supply.

V_Moth · 21-09-2011 08:36PM

It is utterly shocking what is happening in Mexico. To anybody interested in the subject of Mexicos drug war, I would recommend this book - Amexica by Ed Vuliamy. Should be in the local library

Seachmall · 21-09-2011 08:36PM

Logical Fallacy wrote: »

With the exception of adding some lights they are pretty much perfect for growing weed.

Indicas can be grown in the Irish outdoors with little caretaking and while the yield won't be as good as an indoor grow op it'd be enough for personal use for the occasional smoker.

Chuck Stone · 21-09-2011 08:39PM

Logical Fallacy wrote: »

Ireland has a long history of agriculture, over the last couple of decades very specifically in the growth of mushrooms for sale in supermarkets at home, in the UK and all across Europe.

With the exception of adding some lights they are pretty much perfect for growing weed.

It doesn't need to fall from the sky as we could very quickly be providing a local supply.

Good point.

I'd be wary of unilateral moves by any state to legalise because of drug tourism. I think it should be done on a grand scale.

Can you imagine Jooooeee Duffaaayyyyyyyyy if there were plane loads of hippies coming to Ireland for drug holidays?

Ah Jesus Joe 'tis turrible Joe, big red eyes on him and a bag full of funsize mars bars Joe.

Logical Fallacy · 21-09-2011 08:41PM

Seachmall wrote: »

Indicas can be grown in the Irish outdoors with little caretaking and while the yield won't be as good as an indoor grow op it'd be enough for personal use for the occasional smoker.

Yep, Indica's are tough alright. I would reckon from a security point of view they would most likely go with indoor Sativa growth to cut down on theft and the like.

Well, i would anyways.

Drug Tourism would be easy enough to deal with as well. Just have Dispensaries with no cafe and an ID card that is needed in order to purchase. A decent electronic database to limit the volume sold to one specific customer so they cannot simply go from dispensary to dispensary buying loads. A limit on how much you can pick up a week shouldn't be an issue.

Seachmall · 21-09-2011 08:43PM

Chuck Stone wrote: »

I'd be wary of unilateral moves by any state to legalise because of drug tourism. I think it should be done on a grand scale.

I believe European law states that for any EU country to legalise all EU countries must legalise so should it ever be legalised we wouldn't have that issue.

Logical Fallacy wrote:

Just have Dispensaries with no cafe and an ID card that is needed in order to purchase. A decent electronic database to limit the volume sold to one specific customer so they cannot simply go from dispensary to dispensary buying loads.

That's what Holland is doing by the end of the year. You can only buy from private clubs and to join a private club you must be a citizen, they're getting rid of the Drug Tourism.

Chuck Stone · 21-09-2011 08:56PM

Logical Fallacy wrote: »

Drug Tourism would be easy enough to deal with as well. Just have Dispensaries with no cafe and an ID card that is needed in order to purchase. A decent electronic database to limit the volume sold to one specific customer so they cannot simply go from dispensary to dispensary buying loads. A limit on how much you can pick up a week shouldn't be an issue.

I'd be sceptical of putting energy and resources into controlling distribution. Also restricting weed sales would be an exercise in futility because people would be growing it in their back gardens in little poly tunnels and the like.

I think it would be better if resources were used to educate young people about the harm drugs can do and addiction services for abusers.

ilikepears · 21-09-2011 08:58PM

Seachmall wrote: »

Mexico is one of the largest producers of weed in the world and about 1/2 of the cartel money comes from exporting it. Source

And regarding legalizing: Numerous commissions have concluded that legalization is the only step left and would be more effective then current efforts to crush the cartels (as well as having other economic and health benefits) Source Another

Mexican lawmakers have said the U.S. holds some responsibility for the bloodshed because demand for narcotics has made the cartels powerful.
Quote from the second source

I think this shows how selfish people who are using drugs are. I know the article is referring to the US but it can also apply to Irish people. People just dont care how their drug use affects innocent people. I understand if you truly believe that drugs should be made legal. However I dont think anybody who sources drugs through drug cartels has a leg to stand on. Morally how can they do it? Even in the last page of this thread even through its about innocent people being murdered in Mexico they are talking about how it could be grown in Ireland, not a word about the poor victims.

Chuck Stone · 21-09-2011 09:13PM

ilikepears wrote: »

I think this shows how selfish people who are using drugs are.

Selfish?. Because drugs are illegal they have no choice but to get them off unsavoury types.

People just dont care how their drug use affects innocent people.

People don't care how laws can be immoral and cause so much suffering in the world.

I understand if you truly believe that drugs should be made legal.

I don't think you do judging by your stance on the matter.

However I dont think anybody who sources drugs through drug cartels has a leg to stand on.

There is no other way other than growing your own which is a protracted risk. Again - look at the stupid laws.

Morally how can they do it?

Morally, is it right that people are criminalised for taking drugs? It certainly isn't. Do you think it's okay for people to be kidnapped, removed from their families and locked in institutions for long periods with real criminals because they want to take drugs?

No.

It's drug laws and people who support them who have questionable morals not those who want to take drugs and would much rather buy them in a cafe or chemist.

Seachmall · 21-09-2011 09:23PM

ilikepears wrote: »

Morally how can they do it?

"One has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws." - MLK

I get your point and agree to some extent but I think a portion of responsibility has to be placed on the lawmakers. People are going to smoke weed, that should be obvious, how they go about getting that weed is in the hands of the lawmakers. A realistic, practical and most importantly an objective approach needs to be taken and lawmakers aren't moving in that direction. Fear, bias and ignorance is preventing them from even looking at other possibilities.

I'm not excusing purchasing drugs off criminals but ultimately the vast majority of responsibility falls on the criminal and then drips onto both end user and lawmaker.

Coriolanus · 21-09-2011 09:58PM

Seachmall wrote: »

Mexico is one of the largest producers of weed in the world and about 1/2 of the cartel money comes from exporting it. Source

It used to be 2/2. The connection between the constriction of the Caribbean trafficing and the rise of violence in Mexico is pretty clear cut. I'm not saying weed isn't part of it, but they've been exporting weed for decades with a relatively, compared to these days at least, small level of violence.

Guy:Incognito · 21-09-2011 10:04PM

So now we're on to how immoral it is for governments not to legalise Cocaine and Heroin. Brilliant. :rolleyes:

Seachmall · 21-09-2011 10:08PM

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

So now we're on to how immoral it is for governments not to legalise Cocaine and Heroin. Brilliant. :rolleyes:

No, how immoral it is to for democratic leaders to ignore studies and dictate laws, or more specifically drug laws in this case, using their own bias and ignorance.

Mary Harney once stated that she'd never consider legalizing cannabis for medical use despite the overwhelming number of studies suggesting it's benefits (as well as real life comparisons around the world). She wouldn't even consider it. That is ignorance at it's best.

Studies and commissions have predominantly come to similar conclusions: the decriminalization or legalization is a realistic approach and worth looking into further but of course politicians are afraid to show any weakness when it comes to the enforcement of drugs.

Too much PR in politics.

Coriolanus · 21-09-2011 10:15PM

Anyway, the failure of prohibition is pretty clear cut.

Lets take, for example, that most loathed of drugs, heroin. It was only banned in the west in the fifties and sixties, in a US driven push through the UN. Now, we happen to have usage statistics for before prohibition, which are pretty reliable and for after, which are, well, more troublesome but probably err on the side of conservatism rather than inflation.
In every country that bowed to the pressure from the US, usage of heroin went up.
Australia for example, used about 5kg per million pop. prior to prohibiton. Mostly for medical usage, pain relief and for the treatment of addicts a lot of whom were professionals, psychiatrists etc. The numbers of actual registered addicts, who could simply walk in and pick up their script, was in the low thousands/tens of.

By the end of the nineties, 350kg of heroin was being consumed per million head/pop in Australia.

This is mirrored pretty much uniformly across western countries that followed the US' path.

Now, do I think heroin is something you should be able to pick up along with a six pack of beer? Of course not. However heroin can be produced for pennies per kg. If it were legalized for medical use, including the treatment of addicts, the government could supply pure uncut heroin at a price that the drug gangs could not even hope to compete with. Paying mules, bribing customs officials, buying boats, laundering money and so on are damn expensive. The real price of drugs would be far lower without the aboce.

Seachmall · 21-09-2011 10:28PM

Nevore wrote: »

Anyway, the failure of prohibition is pretty clear cut.

Lets take, for example, that most loathed of drugs, heroin. It was only banned in the west in the fifties and sixties, in a US driven push through the UN. Now, we happen to have usage statistics for before prohibition, which are pretty reliable and for after, which are, well, more troublesome but probably err on the side of conservatism rather than inflation.
In every country that bowed to the pressure from the US, usage of heroin went up.
Australia for example, used about 5kg per million pop. prior to prohibiton. Mostly for medical usage, pain relief and for the treatment of addicts a lot of whom were professionals, psychiatrists etc. The numbers of actual registered addicts, who could simply walk in and pick up their script, was in the low thousands/tens of.

By the end of the nineties, 350kg of heroin was being consumed per million head/pop in Australia.

This is mirrored pretty much uniformly across western countries that followed the US' path.

Now, do I think heroin is something you should be able to pick up along with a six pack of beer? Of course not. However heroin can be produced for pennies per kg. If it were legalized for medical use, including the treatment of addicts, the government could supply pure uncut heroin at a price that the drug gangs could not even hope to compete with. Paying mules, bribing customs officials, buying boats, laundering money and so on are damn expensive. The real price of drugs would be far lower without the aboce.

Just as an example in Canada they provided addicts with heroin and allowed them to inject in a supervised environment. This reduced the number of needles in the street, reduced crime and reduced the number of ODs and had no negative effects. They're even considering opening more permanent clinics.

Similar clinics are open in Holland with similar effects.

It seems counter-intuitive but the thing to remember is traditional "common sense" does not make for good drug policy without supporting evidence. It's all about objective analysis, and more often than not you'll be surprised at the results.

Guy:Incognito · 21-09-2011 11:07PM

Seachmall wrote: »

Just as an example in Canada they provided addicts with heroin and allowed them to inject in a supervised environment. This reduced the number of needles in the street, reduced crime and reduced the number of ODs and had no negative effects. They're even considering opening more permanent clinics.

Similar clinics are open in Holland with similar effects.

It seems counter-intuitive but the thing to remember is traditional "common sense" does not make for good drug policy without supporting evidence. It's all about objective analysis, and more often than not you'll be surprised at the results.

Give Heroin addicts free heroin and somewhere to do it and the cases of people doing heroin on the streets and robbing to fund heroin addiction drops? Yes I can see why an $8.1m study was needed to prove that one.

Logical Fallacy · 21-09-2011 11:11PM

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Give Heroin addicts free heroin and somewhere to do it and the cases of people doing heroin on the streets and robbing to fund heroin addiction drops? Yes I can see why an $8.1m study was needed to prove that one.

Completely OT but every time i see your user name i remember that bit from the Simpsons and i do actually have a chuckle.

Seachmall · 21-09-2011 11:11PM

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Give Heroin addicts free heroin and somewhere to do it and the cases of people doing heroin on the streets and robbing to fund heroin addiction drops? Yes I can see why an $8.1m study was needed to prove that one.

Provide addicts with drugs and the streets become cleaner and safer. Almost the exact opposite of what anti-legalization proponents argue.

A Mexico City Center - 35 bodies dumped from trucks

Comments