Think about the human rights violations the next time you buy a cheap Chinese good, or the animal rights violation the next time you eat meat. I know your intentions are good, but if we all worried about the implications(OTHER PEOPLE'S ACTIONS WHICH YOU CANNOT CONTROL) of everything, then you will find yourself lying in bed immobilized. If people are really dying to keep other people from smoking pot, then the rulebook may need to be changed. If you consult your history book(which is always a good idea, because ideals get jaded often), you will see the criminalization of marijuana in the first place was a sham.

http://www.officer.com/online/article.j ... 1&id=51417

Tell that to the families of these men. Whether marijuana is legal to use/possess or not, there will be illegal production and sales to some extent. What's more in control for every casual user - the legality, politics, and actions of those that want a slice of the revenue no matter what, or the choice to put down a joint and not smoke one again?

You can rail against why marijuana is illegal all you want, I don't care. The reality is that it is. The other reality is that marijuana is little more than a simple means for people to get high. Why do people want to fight so hard for the right to use a substance that is so very insignificant in their lives as that of a means to get high? Obviously those with honest medical issues have a special place in the equation, but that population is not what drives the violent trafficking of marijuana.

Don't hit me with the alcohol argument either. If it were deemed illegal, I wouldn't drink it, and it would be that simple for me. It would be much easier, legal or not, to refuse alcohol if honest men like in the above article were dying as a result of my silly and insignificant habit of consuming it.

Hey SFS1980, havent seen this till now.

I know that's not directly what you're saying, but it is in effect what you are saying.

Look at the situation now, weed is still technically illegal, and the mexicans are fucking slaughtering each other. You cant say that making it legal would lead to even MORE mexicans slaughtering each other, quite frankly you've shown no direct evidence of a correlation, and I dont understand why you're even linking the two together so strongly. They are different situations, the gangs in mexico, southern cali need to be dealt with BECAUSE IT'S WRONG AND PEOPLE ARE FUCKING DYING. Also, in a lot of situations it would be better to legalize weed here in the US, they are in fact separate issues that should be dealt with individually, even if they do have corollary effects on each other. I'll repeat myself, letting some drug gangs in mexico determine our laws is FUCKED, and stating how you believe they will react is not a valid reason to give against decriminalization here in the US.
What if some democratic senator from a state bordering mexico were to stand up and say "We cannot enforce our border laws, because the mexican gangs would go insane and start killing people, so we're basically just letting people cross over the border". There is NO FUCKING WAY you'd stand for that, hell, no one would.

And dont say "you just dont understand it", I know you're a cop, but i'm not in any way convinced that gives you some special insight into complex international situations. No offense.

I'm with you Yankee...
Along with the fact that the war on cannabis part of the "War on Drugs" is basically not working. Marijuana use has gone up, harmless users are getting fined, going to jail, and basically the government is wasting its money on a war that they are losing. Why not invest that money into something useful for the government to go after. Police officers risk there lives daily over something that shouldn't be illegal in the first place. Obviously a few problems will arise once legalization is in full effect, but they will most likely be minute anyway.

We live in a democracy. If more people think it should be deemed legal, rather than illegal (which is what it seems like right now) and it would be more of a benefit than a burden to society, than why not legalize it? Prohibition is obviously causing more harm then good right now for the government and law enforcemnt officials, along with going against what the majority of voting society wants. Legalization seems inevitable anyway. Its really just a matter of time now that the Regan administrations war on drugs campaign is evidently failing because of the LIES it said about cannabis. Now that communications and information are rapidly spreading, the true information and studies are getting out to the public, falsifying the governments old claims and skewed test results. It really is only a matter of time...

I'm sorry dude, but I'm glad you're in enforcement, and not in legislature. You'd rather people adhere to outdated, uneducated legislature than change it.

Simple, if Federales are being hurt by marijuana traffickers, then what can you do? NOTHING. You can't blame the Americans for smoking it can you?? It's fun as hell, even better than anti-depressants I'm sure. Maybe all Americans should quit to save a Mexican policeman's life, ya, that's the fuckin ticket! How about you let the people do what they want to do, which is PROVEN to be less harmful than alcohol or tobacco, AND SAVE A FEDERALES LIFE.

JUST DO THE LEGISLATION FFS, IT'S WAY EASIER.
/sorry for the screaming rant at the end, but I had an awful day at work, and weak arguments aren't high on my list right now. my apologies.

edit: to be fair, I'll stop smoking until the legislation passes, if they take action immediately.

double edit: You'd refuse a shot of Jack Daniels after The Bills win the Super bowl, because some person of semi-latin nature was kicked in the balls for it(it was only one shot, not a criminal ring). hell, I'd kick 4 Bosnians and a bearded goat in the nuts for a Bills Super Bowl win. j/k

Yankee, Mexican cartels are far and away the biggest source of marijuana trafficking into the US, so the two issues are tied together rather tightly. I still don't quite understand the point you're making though. I'm not at all saying that we should base our laws on how DTOs will respond to them, I'm saying that legalization will not be some instant or certain cure to illegal trafficking and the violence involved in it. There are too many factors. If there was a total commitment to stomping down on these cartels then I wouldn't really worry about it. There isn't, hasn't been, and I still don't expect there to be that commitment any time soon. Eliminating them first would be my priority, then discussing legalization without fear or corruption infecting that process.

Sk8haggard9, I don't really care about the war on drugs, reefer madness, whatever the hell people use for their arguments. If it were purely about whether marijuana should be legal to possess and use, without manufacturing or selling, I wouldn't care on way or the other. That discussion cannot be had without considering all kinds of practicalities that are actually more important than whether people should be able to get high.

Daz, you want to have your way without taking the proper route, and ignoring the reality of the drug trade in favor of your stance on the issue. I don't care how right you might be in your stance, the fact is that all the users out there are 1) not following the legislative process and 2) selfishly choosing their habit and justifying it with ideology, and ignoring the violence that provided them a joint. Why can't you do it the right way and put traffickers out of business until it's legalized?

Is it possible that if you were investigating cases as we speak that you would be prohibited from having opinions on SJ? That's not a snap, I'll wait for an answer.

1980, think of it as prohibition, not inhibition.

/no wait.

"SJ"??

You're going to have to spell that thought out a little better, because I don't know what you're saying.

Okee, if you were currently investigating cases for the government, describing your positions on law via the interwebz izn't a good idea?

You can find all kinds of opinions from law enforcement online. As long as I'm not discussing specific ongoing cases I'm not doing anything that would violate policies, and certainly nothing that would be against the law. My job doesn't prohibit me from having an opinion, and my job doesn't make my opinion more important either. I'm probably a little more informed than most people on lesser known factors in the drug trade, but that doesn't make my opinion better. Many law enforcement have a different opinion, fwiw. Many that are well in favor of legalization (imo) don't think the whole scenario through, or just wish that they didn't have to enforce marijuana laws because most of their cases are street level possession that only put low end offenders in jail, and that seems pointless.

aksks marky mark furmann about dat shizz??

foreo


!!!!!YEAAH!!!!!111

Ok, lets clear up some acronyms first, SJ = SabresJunkie...what is DTO? (Wait...um, drug trafficking organization?) Thats probably what that is. Ok.


Ok, I agree that Mexican weed is the most prelavant source here in the US. And that Mexican DTO's are responsible for bringing it here. But I feel like you arent really considering all the factors. If National decriminalization were to occur, the factors shaping this situation would change to the point where this conversation probably wouldnt be relevant. For the most obvious one I can think of, if it is decriminalized, and the US market is actually opened, who are these DTO's going to be fighting for? Their potential market has just expanded enormously, they wouldnt even be able to come close to meeting demand. Basically, what they would be doing wouldnt be that illegal, they would have more customers than they knew what to do with...that doesnt seem like a recipe for increased violence in a black market situation to me. But, who can really say for sure how that would play out.

That example was predicated upon 1) Decriminalization and 2)EVERYTHING ELSE remaining static.
For a slightly more dynamic scenario, if it was decriminalized here, why wouldn't the cigarette manufacturers simply start growing another crop? Why wouldn't we start our own, high quality, REGULATED, taxed, etc etc, system of production and distribution? Why would anyone choose the crappy Mexican dirt weed when they can run down to 7-11 and pick up some safe, legal, Kind-bud grown right here in the USA? The BEST way to put the DTO's out of business is to make them irrelevant, no? Take away their market with our own, why should THEY be profiting from this?

Again, this is a complex situation with many shades of gray, I really think it's absurd for anyone to make some simple claim like X will lead to Y, without including many tangential possibilities because of Z Q and T which must be thrown into the equation somehow. (I know this is getting long winded, sorry)


Ok, thanks for clarifying. I completely agree actually, It wouldn't happen overnight. I just see this war going on, with the mexican government seemingly impotent to do anything about it. Do we even have a solution on our end other than mega-secure borders and lots and lots of money and manpower put to trying to secure our borders, something we've basically already decided not to do (I mean..wtf, if we really wanted to construct something that would not let illegal aliens cross the border into the US, we would. Some fucking Mega-wall would do the trick, with seismic sensors and electricity, etc etc) What's our strategy now, talking to the Mexican government to try and work with them so they're not completely ineffectual ass-hats? Whatever is being done seems pretty ineffective quite frankly.




Again, I agree, ideally this is the scenario i'd prefer, the one that seems most common sense. But, it doesnt seem realistic at this point in time.

SFS1980, i'm wondering about a few things, I thought perhaps you'd know the answers to them?
So, i'm curious what the laws are about the US eventually just sending troops or something into mexico. What are the international laws? Is mexico able to/allowed to ask us to bring in the army (or whatever super-armed force it would be) and just occupy these places, detain these drug runners, and possibly use lethal force to simply put them down? Is that realistic in any way? Does mexico have the ability to do it themselves? What is our level of involvement at the moment? How can these cartels be beaten by force? Is that even possible?


Again, sorry for the wall of text. And I must say SFS1980, I quite enjoy talking with you, we seem to have two very different viewpoints on the world, but I find you very rational and reasonable.

http://liveshots.blogs.foxnews.com/2010 ... latestnews

White House Drug Czar Chief Gil Kerlikowske said on Saturday that the U.S. has a responsibility to bear when it comes to the ongoing drug war in Mexico.

Speaking on Fox News, Kerlikowske admitted that the U.S. is “a large consumer nation” of drugs and that the Obama Administration is working hard to combat the problem and “reduce the amount of drugs that we consume.”‪

Kerlikowske’s comments come as violence in Mexico has continued to escalate in recent days, notably in the border city of Juarez. He says the U.S. is working to seize money that fuels Mexican drug cartels and to ”stop the flow of guns” between the two countries.

Earlier this week, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton led a high level White House delegation to Mexico. Secretary Clinton told the Mexican government the two countries will work “together to solve the problems posed by the criminal cartels that stock the streets on your cities and ours.”‪

Following up on a promise to support Mexico, the United States has provided the Mexican government with a gun tracking system called “E-Trace” that will allow Mexican authorities to trace firearms from their point of sale, including within the United States.
--------------------------------------------------------

Just a quick note - Kerlikowske is a former ranking officer with St. Petersburg PD, Buffalo Police Commissioner, Seattle Police Chief, and now "Drug Czar" at the White House. While in Buffalo he taught at Buffalo State, where I studied under him during my junior and senior years there. The issue of criminal cartels has to be a addressed jointly bewteen the US and Mexico. Without cooperation and equal effort there will be no end to the problems they cause in our lifetimes, legalized marijuana or not.

Yankee, read your post after my last one...

Yes, Mexico could ask for ground troops. For now, the US is too spread out elsewhere and Mexico wants to try to take the lead, but with tactics and a level of cooperation with the US that hasn't been used before. The gun tracing mentioned in the article above and intellligence sharing is a decent start, but it may come down to simply needing more manpower - from men that don't have famalies at risk - to make a final difference.

I'd talk more but I have to check out of a hotel and catch a plane. We'll catch up later in the week.

I just had to drink a quart of a motor oil like substance at 6:45 in the morning a few days ago....LEGALIZE IT NOW !

_________________
"It is more about them than it is about the team...Cannot play with them, cannot win with them, cannot coach with them. Can't do it. I want winners. I want people that want to win." - Mike Singletary

Tyler Myers - Future captain of the Buffalo Sabres, and future Norris Trophy Winner

Manning the machine gun on the Tyler Myers Bandwagon - just in case any teams have an idea of prying him away from us (3 GM's shot already)

Connolly/Roy - 2 goals in the last 47 playoff games

Who cares honestly.

_________________
"Counting all the assholes in the room, I'm definitely not alone!" ~ Michael Poulsen, Volbeat, Still Standing.

Hm, perhaps the people who've been talking about it for 3 pages?

LMAO...dude, they have pills for that shit. Or you could bypass all that and just quit for a month...

Tolerance breaks make the heart grow fonder