Effects of decriminalizing drugs. - Page 9 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

Air&Road · #**121** 12-20-2013, 10:44 AM

[QUOTE=link;3257720]You may be right. He may be a patriarch of his family. I have no knowledge of that. But he is not a patriarch of this group and due to that I maintain that the goal is all about attention seeking.

It amounts to a merry-go-round. He states the same things over and over, and refuses to acknowledge proven solutions, and gets all the attention he wants for his efforts. The only type of world view that feeds is very needy and sad one. Not that that world view is unusual or anything...[/QUOTE]

You enjoy contradicting yourself do you?

So I don't have unusual views, but my sticking to them makes me a sicky?

Yeah, whatever you say.

link · #**122** 12-20-2013, 10:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spdrun

Or just spread the word that jury nullification is a civil right. It only takes 1/12 jurors to hang a jury. That's 8% of the population. If it's done consistently, and prosecutors realize that there's a good chance of a hung jury every time they bring a non-violent drug crime to trial, they'll start not bothering. If 10-15% of the public nullify, they'd have to try every non-violent drug crime multiple times on average to win a conviction. If defendants start realizing that they're difficult to convict, they'll start opting for a jury rather than a plea.

Hit the swine where it hurts: their pocketbooks. Right now, the "war on drugs" is a profit center. Remove the ability to profit and its reason for being ceases to exist.

I agree that the war on drugs is a profit center. But it won’t be solved by jury nullification. It will be solved by local .gov who seeks alternate goals.

Also, there are absolutely behaviors that may be used by anyone who gets loaded that are very bad for society and these include in part, driving, working with potentially dangerous machinery, and even providing an influence to young people to do the same kinds of things, as just a few examples. Behaviors such as these often lead to very bad results....

MTI · #**123** 12-20-2013, 10:49 AM

NJ's experience with drug courts touted by Gov. Christie/

Drug courts surfaced in New Jersey in 1996 and have since expanded to all 21 counties. Only 8 percent of graduates have been convicted of another crime in the state since 2002, according to the Administrative Office of the Courts, which runs the drug court program.

The recidivism rate for those who leave prison is 43 percent, according to Department of Corrections data.

While estimates vary, Christie said incarcerating a single person costs $49,000 annually, compared with about $25,000 for a drug court participant.

Fiscal conservatives and social issue liberals have a place to intersect!

Air&Road · #**124** 12-20-2013, 10:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JB3

More BS. You pompously profess to care about the addicted and their families, yet you don't GAS about this method of treating addicts vs punishing them.

That should dovetail nicely with actually working to reduce the problem and get these people back out into the world and off the public dole of costly repeated crime and incarceration, thusly saving public money, helping rather than punishing, and reducing the total number of addicts.

Its a win win scenario if there ever was one, and if you thought about it for a minute, you'd find the idea matches your endlessly repeated personal values.

Not saying it would automatically work in the US, but the idea clearly works in Portugal and has merit, and there is no reason why any part of it should be against your "beliefs" you claim to possess.

The hypocrisy of your position is a lot more staggering than the article, but as usual, not a surprise.

Your classy position on things is quite impressive.

You can use whatever drug rehab or any other form of treatment you like. When you do anything besides making drug use HIGHLY ILLEGAL, you are encouraging further decadence. If there's no price to be paid for bad bahavior, you will encourage bad behavior.

Not to mention that earlier in the thread the data in the article and paper was under question.

Air&Road · #**125** 12-20-2013, 10:52 AM

[QUOTE=link;3257726]I agree that the war on drugs is a profit center. But it won’t be solved by jury nullification. It will be solved by local .gov who seeks alternate goals.

Also, there are absolutely behaviors that may be used by anyone who gets loaded that are very bad for society and these include in part, driving, working with potentially dangerous machinery, and even providing an influence to young people to do the same kinds of things, as just a few examples. Behaviors such as these often lead to very bad results....[/QUOTE]

We agree! Scary huh?

link · #**126** 12-20-2013, 10:53 AM

[QUOTE=Air&Road;3257724]

Quote:

Originally Posted by link

You may be right. He may be a patriarch of his family. I have no knowledge of that. But he is not a patriarch of this group and due to that I maintain that the goal is all about attention seeking.

It amounts to a merry-go-round. He states the same things over and over, and refuses to acknowledge proven solutions, and gets all the attention he wants for his efforts. The only type of world view that feeds is very needy and sad one. Not that that world view is unusual or anything...[/QUOTE]

You enjoy contradicting yourself do you?

So I don't have unusual views, but my sticking to them makes me a sicky?

Yeah, whatever you say.

Actually thre is no contradiction at all. BTW, you make my point by demonstrating there is at least a partially rational mind in there, when it serves your goals.

Of course it is not unusual to have attention seeking behaviors on a forum. We all do that; otherwise why post? The distinctive feature of some, ahem, is to refuse to acknowledge facts purely for a goal of seeking attention. That's the sad part....

SwampYankee · #**127** 12-20-2013, 10:54 AM

Decriminalization=Treatment=Druggy no longer a druggy.
Criminalization=Incarceration=Druggy is still a druggy and learns new stuff in prison.

It's still illegal. Druggy still has to deal with repercussions.

One repercussion helps them quit using drugs and gives the potential to become a functional and productive member of society. The other does nothing to break the cycle and may encourage worse behavior upon release, and they will be released.

One sure sounds better for society than the other.

kerry · #**128** 12-20-2013, 11:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by link

. He states the same things over and over, and refuses to acknowledge proven solutions, and gets all the attention he wants for his efforts. The only type of world view that feeds is very needy and sad one. Not that that world view is unusual or anything...

It is attention getting but I don't think that's it's conscious or unconscious motivation. I also agree with JB3 that Larry doesn't actually care about addicts, their families and the effects on society. I think there's only one thing that Larry cares about--compulsory obedience. It's the central moral system of patriarchy and is evidenced in the great monotheisms of patriarchy. Obey or be crushed. These aren't actually moral systems, they're power systems and what they serve to produce is centralized patriarchal power. The patriarch justifies his power by claiming to obey the ultimate invisible patriarch, conferring the authority necessary for social control. So, I'd say Larry is not seeking attention but power. It just appears as attention seeking in the forum.

JB3 · #**129** 12-20-2013, 11:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Air&Road

Your classy position on things is quite impressive.

You can use whatever drug rehab or any other form of treatment you like. When you do anything besides making drug use HIGHLY ILLEGAL, you are encouraging further decadence. If there's no price to be paid for bad bahavior, you will encourage bad behavior.

Not to mention that earlier in the thread the data in the article and paper was under question.

I said I would stop beating this dead horse, but one more time.

The problem here is you seem to confuse addiction with a premeditated choice to pursue "decadence" as you call it. Lets say for example you were on hard drugs and heavily addicted, (not something stupid, like marijuana), from your viewpoint, you seem to think if you became aware that its highly illegal, you would stop using it, as there would be a price to be paid for bad behavior that you would be able to rationally consider. IE- Jailtime.

This point of view ignores both the fact that most drug use IS highly illegal already, and people break the law anyway, AND ignores the nature of addiction in the first place. Addiction is not rational, someone strung out on PCP will not rationally be considering the damage to their hand when they smash out a windshield with it, let alone care about jailtime during the high.

If you don't understand and don't care to educate yourself on some pretty cast iron facts related to drug addiction or use that are in the public domain, then theres not much to say. Other people will have to muddle along trying to actually discuss real solutions while you stay in the ivory tower or ignorant self righteous judgment of others.

The chief irony of your nonsense, is after spouting out unworkable brain dead solutions to complex problems, you take any disagreement with that stupid solution to mean that opposition of your idea is automatically promotion of the problem. Anyone who thinks your solutions are silly are automatically drug users in your eyes. Must be tough to live with such a chip on your shoulder, no wonder you throw so many tantrums on here.

hill · #**130** 12-20-2013, 11:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Air&Road

Nope, in my case, I want to see a society that respects the rule of law and underestand the difference between right and wrong.

BTW, thanks for perpetuating the insulting and ongoing "psychoanalysis." Doing so, is a hint about what you see as right or wrong.

So all laws are right and they never need changes?

Air&Road · #**131** 12-20-2013, 11:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JB3

I said I would stop beating this dead horse, but one more time.

The problem here is you seem to confuse addiction with a premeditated choice to pursue "decadence" as you call it. Lets say for example you were on hard drugs and heavily addicted, (not something stupid, like marijuana), from your viewpoint, you seem to think if you became aware that its highly illegal, you would stop using it, as there would be a price to be paid for bad behavior that you would be able to rationally consider. IE- Jailtime.

This point of view ignores both the fact that most drug use IS highly illegal already, and people break the law anyway, AND ignores the nature of addiction in the first place. Addiction is not rational, someone strung out on PCP will not rationally be considering the damage to their hand when they smash out a windshield with it, let alone care about jailtime during the high.

If you don't understand and don't care to educate yourself on some pretty cast iron facts related to drug addiction or use that are in the public domain, then theres not much to say. Other people will have to muddle along trying to actually discuss real solutions while you stay in the ivory tower or ignorant self righteous judgment of others.

The chief irony of your nonsense, is after spouting out unworkable brain dead solutions to complex problems, you take any disagreement with that stupid solution to mean that opposition of your idea is automatically promotion of the problem. Anyone who thinks your solutions are silly are automatically drug users in your eyes. Must be tough to live with such a chip on your shoulder, no wonder you throw so many tantrums on here.

So, does being condescending make you feel better? It seems to help lots of your fellow Larry pounders, so maybe it's making you feel good as well. I hope so, because my whole goal is to give you and your buddies a punching bag.

Enjoy.

Air&Road · #**132** 12-20-2013, 11:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hill

So all laws are right and they never need changes?

You obviously have not read all of my posts. In another post, I think it was on this thread, I stated clearly and at length, that if you don't like the law, there is a process in place to change it.

Just thought I would point this out, before you get yourself too far out in the weeds by doing as many do on this forum, that is ASSUMING that you know all of what I think.

Air&Road · #**133** 12-20-2013, 11:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JB3

I said I would stop beating this dead horse, but one more time.

The problem here is you seem to confuse addiction with a premeditated choice to pursue "decadence" as you call it. Lets say for example you were on hard drugs and heavily addicted, (not something stupid, like marijuana), from your viewpoint, you seem to think if you became aware that its highly illegal, you would stop using it, as there would be a price to be paid for bad behavior that you would be able to rationally consider. IE- Jailtime.

This point of view ignores both the fact that most drug use IS highly illegal already, and people break the law anyway, AND ignores the nature of addiction in the first place. Addiction is not rational, someone strung out on PCP will not rationally be considering the damage to their hand when they smash out a windshield with it, let alone care about jailtime during the high.

If you don't understand and don't care to educate yourself on some pretty cast iron facts related to drug addiction or use that are in the public domain, then theres not much to say. Other people will have to muddle along trying to actually discuss real solutions while you stay in the ivory tower or ignorant self righteous judgment of others.

The chief irony of your nonsense, is after spouting out unworkable brain dead solutions to complex problems, you take any disagreement with that stupid solution to mean that opposition of your idea is automatically promotion of the problem. Anyone who thinks your solutions are silly are automatically drug users in your eyes. Must be tough to live with such a chip on your shoulder, no wonder you throw so many tantrums on here.

I've never said that. What I INDEED espouse, and no one will ever believe me, is that drug use SHOULD BE ILLEGAL NO MATTER WHAT! If you can cure them like the Portuguese ALLEGEDLY have, GREAT, but I want drug users to PAY THE CONSEQUENCES, PERIOD. In fact, I don't think much of most of his BS, but I would go along with Nixons proposed capital punishment for drug dealers. I know this is different from the discussion here regarding drug users, but that's how I feel.

I have, in the past, made comments about the druggies on this forum, and there CLEARLY are some, but I have never claimed that just because a persons ideas are different than mine as are 99% of the folks on this forum, probably 100%, that they are drug users. Making stuff up spoils your other arguments.

Many of you claim that I have tantrums. It seems to me that you and folks like you are having tantrums of your own. I'm perfectly calm and collected. Of course so many people seem to think that they can tell someones state of mind over a discussion forum. I think anyone who thinks that they are capable of doing this is a bit overconfident. Of course there's always the possibility that they have a well tuned crystal ball.

Hatterasguy · #**134** 12-20-2013, 11:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MTI

NJ's experience with drug courts touted by Gov. Christie/

Drug courts surfaced in New Jersey in 1996 and have since expanded to all 21 counties. Only 8 percent of graduates have been convicted of another crime in the state since 2002, according to the Administrative Office of the Courts, which runs the drug court program.

The recidivism rate for those who leave prison is 43 percent, according to Department of Corrections data.

While estimates vary, Christie said incarcerating a single person costs $49,000 annually, compared with about $25,000 for a drug court participant.

Fiscal conservatives and social issue liberals have a place to intersect!

That sounds like a pretty good plan.

Their are a lot of treatment programs for drug abusers already; but the problem is if they are caught they end up in jail which doesn't seem to help anyone.

They should just treat them like alcoholics treat them. They don't go to jail for having a beer, they go to AA meetings.

davidmash · #**135** 12-20-2013, 01:00 PM

So long as there are more people who think the goverment should dictate morality then proactive solutions to problems will not be adopted.