War on drugs. Question. [Archive] - Page 2 - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : War on drugs. Question.


Pages : 1 [2]

Sharky7
12-10-2011, 17:36
The reason that the addicts use so much is because I am willing to bet that it is a very diluted form of heroin cut with god knows what, therefore they have to shoot much more to acquire the same high that they need when compared to a purer form of heroin..



Heroin is almost always "cut" with dormin or actifed. Those are your most common cuts for white powder heroin. The cut is put in partially to relieve itching and also to increase profits for the dealers.

Your statement does not make sense. Heroin is the purest it has ever been in US history.
"Street heroin is rarely pure. A "bag," or single dose, may contain 50 milligrams of powder. In the past, very few of those milligrams were likely to be heroin—most of the bag was filled with such additives as milk sugar, powdered milk, or quinine. In 1980, the average bag was only 4 percent pure heroin. By the mid-Nineties, however, purity was generally 40 percent or higher. In the Northeast, it averaged between 60 and 75 percent."
http://www.acde.org/common/Heroin.htm

The heroin you see on the street right now is the best it has ever been and the best it will ever be. A "bag" of heroin weighs 0.2 grams - next to nothing...it's a very small amount of powder. Yet, a full bag of current day heroin injected IV can be enough to cause an OD in a first time user of low weight with no opiate tolerance built up. It can't get anymore potent there buddy.

This would be like me telling a mechanic what he is doing wrong when he is replacing my timing belt and re-building my transmission when I have never been under the hood of a car.

certifiedfunds
12-10-2011, 20:06
What is your experience? Where do you get these statements from?

I don't think it's fair to compare alcohol and cannabis with heroin and cocaine. Just like we don't compare meth to caffeine.

I'm not comparing alcohol to heroin. I'm comparing the insanity of one prohibition to another.

What we have here is one of two things:

a. You are so close to the trees that you can't see the forest.
b. You are of limited intellectual capacity.
c. Both a and b

I tend to think it's likely a.

RyanBDawg
12-11-2011, 04:19
Heroin is almost always "cut" with dormin or actifed. Those are your most common cuts for white powder heroin. The cut is put in partially to relieve itching and also to increase profits for the dealers.

Your statement does not make sense. Heroin is the purest it has ever been in US history.
"Street heroin is rarely pure. A "bag," or single dose, may contain 50 milligrams of powder. In the past, very few of those milligrams were likely to be heroin—most of the bag was filled with such additives as milk sugar, powdered milk, or quinine. In 1980, the average bag was only 4 percent pure heroin. By the mid-Nineties, however, purity was generally 40 percent or higher. In the Northeast, it averaged between 60 and 75 percent."
http://www.acde.org/common/Heroin.htm

The heroin you see on the street right now is the best it has ever been and the best it will ever be. A "bag" of heroin weighs 0.2 grams - next to nothing...it's a very small amount of powder. Yet, a full bag of current day heroin injected IV can be enough to cause an OD in a first time user of low weight with no opiate tolerance built up. It can't get anymore potent there buddy.

This would be like me telling a mechanic what he is doing wrong when he is replacing my timing belt and re-building my transmission when I have never been under the hood of a car.


Ok, but you still haven't answered the question.. What would you do about the "war on drugs"..

You must admit that it is a) A complete failure and b) Has caused more harm than good..

Obviously you have admitted than in large areas, like Chicago, you cannot put people in prison for possession of drugs.. Therefore it simply dissolves into fines, court dates, etc.. One pays the fine and moves on.. A money making scheme for the government..

Even with incarceration rates at their highest level ever, drug related violence has never been higher when it comes to cartels.. Mexico is literally at a state of civil war over who will control the drug trade for the US..

There will always be drug addicts.. I say we pass laws that move the majority of harm caused by drug use onto the drug addict, rather than have society, and innocent people suffer because of someones addiction.

Let me give you my idea if I could pass the laws..

I would make all drugs legal to posses.. "Soft" drugs would be made available at certain areas like alcohol is today.. Age restrictions would be strictly enforced and any business found to be violating these regulations would have their license revoked, no second chances.. Law enforcement patrols would be stepped up in these areas, people would be informed that if they behaved in a civilized manner, then there would be no problems.. But if they behaved like an idiot while under the influence of alcohol or anything else, a zero tolerance policy would be enforced and off to jail they would go..

"Hard" drugs, would be sold at clinics, such as methadone is today.. All "hard" drugs such as heroin, opiates, etc would be sold at a minimal price at the clinic and consumed while on the property, clean needles would be given and disposed of.. Also I would ensure that volunteer's were available (preferably former addicts who got clean) to give information to every addict that comes in about treatment and recovery..

We must end this idiotic "war" on drugs, and start handing off the problem of addiction to individuals instead of the whole of society..

By doing this it would allow police officers to focus on things like murder, rape, etc instead of enforcing impossible drug laws..

Sharky7
12-11-2011, 07:06
I'm not comparing alcohol to heroin. I'm comparing the insanity of one prohibition to another.

What we have here is one of two things:

a. You are so close to the trees that you can't see the forest.
b. You are of limited intellectual capacity.
c. Both a and b

I tend to think it's likely a.

You still not have answered what your experience is, why not?

You also keep trying to hurl unfounded insults instead of putting up intelligent conversation or facts to support your claims. Calm down and come back with a response that supports your claims. No reason to hurl insults because someone does not agree with you - grow up.

Sharky7
12-11-2011, 07:30
I wouldn't say the war on drugs have failed just like I wouldn't say the laws on DUI have failed. People are going to drink and drive - people are going to use drugs. It's about harm reduction and management if a better society.

I am not opposed to another look at the cannabis laws. It's basically legal in states with the medical cards. Might as well open it up - but still not tolerate DUI aspects obviously. I rarely if ever see property crime or violent crime on the street level related to cannabis except for gang argument about street area dealing ownership.

I am still not a fan if legalizing heroin or cocaine. I think it would put more of a stress on our society. Addicts will always need money for their fix. Coke and heroin are not similar to weed, I do see lots of crime involved with users who will do crazy things to get their money for the drug. To the current users, there is already lots of easy access to their drugs. Lots of open air drug markets...it is not the difficulty of finding the drug, it is the difficulty of obtaining money for the drug which turns people to crime. I am not willing and I don't think our voting public is willing to supply these drugs for free. The overwhelming majority of my arrestees are already receiving gov money anyways which they abuse to buy dope.

Heroin is a wild drug. Once you have a tolerance built and you are physically and psychologically dependent, you would be surprised what people do. It's easy to find it - they always need they money to get it though.

certifiedfunds
12-11-2011, 08:11
You still not have answered what your experience is, why not?

You also keep trying to hurl unfounded insults instead of putting up intelligent conversation or facts to support your claims. Calm down and come back with a response that supports your claims. No reason to hurl insults because someone does not agree with you - grow up.

Experience in what?

BTW, I'm not hurling insults. Just trying to figure out why you can't seem to get your mind around the bigger picture.

certifiedfunds
12-11-2011, 08:19
I wouldn't say the war on drugs have failed just like I wouldn't say the laws on DUI have failed. People are going to drink and drive - people are going to use drugs. It's about harm reduction and management if a better society.

I am not opposed to another look at the cannabis laws. It's basically legal in states with the medical cards. Might as well open it up - but still not tolerate DUI aspects obviously. I rarely if ever see property crime or violent crime on the street level related to cannabis except for gang argument about street area dealing ownership.

I am still not a fan if legalizing heroin or cocaine. I think it would put more of a stress on our society. Addicts will always need money for their fix. Coke and heroin are not similar to weed, I do see lots of crime involved with users who will do crazy things to get their money for the drug. To the current users, there is already lots of easy access to their drugs. Lots of open air drug markets...it is not the difficulty of finding the drug, it is the difficulty of obtaining money for the drug which turns people to crime. I am not willing and I don't think our voting public is willing to supply these drugs for free. The overwhelming majority of my arrestees are already receiving gov money anyways which they abuse to buy dope.

Heroin is a wild drug. Once you have a tolerance built and you are physically and psychologically dependent, you would be surprised what people do. It's easy to find it - they always need they money to get it though.

Well there ya go. DUI laws are among society's dumbest passions.

You still haven't addressed any of the analogies to ethanol prohibition, btw.

Sharky7
12-11-2011, 11:43
Experience in what?

BTW, I'm not hurling insults. Just trying to figure out why you can't seem to get your mind around the bigger picture.

Experience with drugs, drug addicts, courts, law enforcement, drug court, rehab facilities, etc. Anything that would give experience with this subject matter.

Re-read your posts. 2 jabs you have thrown out. People have differing opinions, that is what is great about our country. The big picture in my view is consistent with my views. You have not explained any rationale behind your views other that jabs and blanket statements without facts or experience.

Sharky7
12-11-2011, 11:47
Well there ya go. DUI laws are among society's dumbest passions.

You still haven't addressed any of the analogies to ethanol prohibition, btw.

Alcohol prohibition is a mistake in my opinion. But, you can't compare alcohol prohibition to heroin or coke. That is why some drugs are over the counter and some are prescription. I wouldn't compare cannabis to heroin or coke either though.

Each have different effects on individuals and society.

RyanBDawg
12-11-2011, 14:59
Alcohol prohibition is a mistake in my opinion. But, you can't compare alcohol prohibition to heroin or coke. That is why some drugs are over the counter and some are prescription. I wouldn't compare cannabis to heroin or coke either though.

Each have different effects on individuals and society.

But why? We all know that alcohol has a much worse effect on socket than heroin or cocaine combined! And something that really costs more than anything are the health effects caused by tobacco..

Like I said. We need harsher laws when dealing with violent drug offenders.. But we need to completely drop the laws when dealing with simple possession, etc..

Let them understand that there will he a certain area where they can shoot up, in a supervised environment.. If they don't like that, then they can feel free to go to jail..

But it also must be a multi pronged approach, Americans need to change their thinking..

NorthCarolinaLiberty
12-11-2011, 17:21
We have done year after year study on our crime motivations to help combat our street crimes. Every year, "money to obtain drugs" is the motivation over 90% for all our categories.



Beware of spurious relationships. We are talking about the legalization issue and general crime, sometimes two separate issues.

The logical fallacy is Most of the criminals apprehended are drug users, therefore all drug users are criminals. That is like saying Most people we catch commiting crimes are poor, therefore most poor people commit crimes.

NorthCarolinaLiberty
12-11-2011, 17:26
Where are you getting your information on this? What is your experience? Is this a personal statistic you made up or did you get it from somewhere?



"In 2004, 17% of State prisoners and 18% of Federal inmates said they committed their current offense to obtain money for drugs." (Department of Justice, 2007; http://www.ncvc.org/ncvc/main.aspx?dbName=DocumentViewer&DocumentID=32348 (http://www.ncvc.org/ncvc/main.aspx?dbName=DocumentViewer&DocumentID=32348))

This number is in sharp contrast to your 90% claim. The legalization issue goes far beyond your beat.

series1811
12-11-2011, 17:26
I am personally of the opinion that we need a drastically different approach to dealing with drugs. So that is my view.

My question is for the people who are in favor of continuing the war on drugs.
Bear with me for a second. I think the war on drugs is only having a very small effect toward the goal of preventing americans from getting drugs. I would guess for every $1 worth of drugs we prevent, $100 gets through. And it costs us $100 in resources to keep out that $1.
That is a terrible return on our money. And it looks to me like we are losing ground. We are not winning.

So if you support the war on drugs, how do you see this going? Are you comfortable with continuing down the same path and just hoping for the best?

It should be treated like the national security problem it is.

NorthCarolinaLiberty
12-11-2011, 17:33
83% of Cook County inmates tested positive for drug use upon admission.




What does this have to do with the legalization issue? Saying that all criminals are drug users is not the same as all drug users are criminals.

Your own report says that a disproportionate number of that 83% is marijuana. This includes a lot of teen punks who simply smoke a joint before a burglary. That's a far cry from the small percentage of hard core addicts who need drug money.

NorthCarolinaLiberty
12-11-2011, 17:37
.

The government does not give out methadone. Methadone clinics are for profit clinics that are approved for the use of opiate withdrawal.


Clinics are both public and private. It is often a mix.

NorthCarolinaLiberty
12-11-2011, 17:43
The big picture...

You are not discussing the big picture. Your view is the limited experience of your beat. You see most criminals using drugs, so you make the logical fallacy that most drug users are criminals.

You also like the hyperbole of the hardcore heroin addict, a very small portion of the big picture.

NorthCarolinaLiberty
12-11-2011, 17:47
People are going to drink and drive


It's funny how the phrase Don't Drive Drunk insidiously changed to Don't Drink and Drive. People are now worried about simply drinking a glass of wine for dinner.

RyanBDawg
12-11-2011, 23:21
It should be treated like the national security problem it is.

Well gosh golly.. The US government is doing a piss poor job of doing that..

Last time I checked if something is a "national security" problem, then its probably not a good idea for said government to sell a boatload of AKs to the enemy, which goes to killing hundreds if not thousands of Mexicans and numerous US law enforcement agents..

But hey, we are talking about the US government now.. They get confused sometimes.. :upeyes:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_VTTgoIk84vc/TNmZ3bnmTqI/AAAAAAAABd4/9smOKI0ogb4/s400/Retaking%2BLSAT%2BSuccess%2BStory%2BLSAT%2BDiary.jpg

RussP
12-12-2011, 04:40
A heroin addict can hold a job and function fairly normally in society if he doesn't have to spend all day chasing a fix.What does drug and alcohol use cost businesses annually, in dollars, due to lower productivity, absenteeism, theft, accidents, injuries, death compensation claims?

What exactly is your definition of "hold a job and function fairly normally in society"?

Let's say you own a business. Do you want someone functioning at 100%, or would you rather your employees function "fairly normally"?

certifiedfunds
12-12-2011, 05:15
What does drug and alcohol use cost businesses annually, in dollars, due to lower productivity, absenteeism, theft, accidents, injuries, death compensation claims?

What exactly is your definition of "hold a job and function fairly normally in society"?

Let's say you own a business. Do you want someone functioning at 100%, or would you rather your employees function "fairly normally"?

Russ - I'd say more or less as well as any of the tens of thousands of prescription opiate addicts in society. Rush managed to fool quite a number of folks and perform at a high level. Favre won superbowls.

I'm sure drug and alcohol abuse are costly. So, we should ban them. Both of them.

certifiedfunds
12-12-2011, 05:18
Experience with drugs, drug addicts, courts, law enforcement, drug court, rehab facilities, etc. Anything that would give experience with this subject matter.

Re-read your posts. 2 jabs you have thrown out. People have differing opinions, that is what is great about our country. The big picture in my view is consistent with my views. You have not explained any rationale behind your views other that jabs and blanket statements without facts or experience.

Silly question if you're implying that because I don't work in law enforcement or drug rehab that my opinion is invalid. I would ask you the same: What experience do you have working/living in an American society where drugs are decriminalized?

certifiedfunds
12-12-2011, 05:19
Alcohol prohibition is a mistake in my opinion. But, you can't compare alcohol prohibition to heroin or coke. That is why some drugs are over the counter and some are prescription. I wouldn't compare cannabis to heroin or coke either though.

Each have different effects on individuals and society.

Again, I think we're back to forest/trees for you.

series1811
12-12-2011, 07:28
You also like the hyperbole of the hardcore heroin addict, a very small portion of the big picture.

Really? Go to Baltimore, where about twenty percent of the population is addicted to heroin. That's what legalization looks like, and if you want something, you should at least go see it and make sure you know what you are asking for.

RussP
12-12-2011, 08:44
Russ - I'd say more or less as well as any of the tens of thousands of prescription opiate addicts in society. Rush managed to fool quite a number of folks and perform at a high level. Favre won superbowls.

I'm sure drug and alcohol abuse are costly. So, we should ban them. Both of them.That is not an answer to either of my questions.What does drug and alcohol use cost businesses annually, in dollars, due to lower productivity, absenteeism, theft, accidents, injuries, death compensation claims?What exactly is your definition of "hold a job and function fairly normally in society"? Let's say you own a business. Do you want someone functioning at 100%, or would you rather your employees function "fairly normally"?


First, where did I exclude prescription opiate addicts?

What is the dollar cost to business in the United States?

How do you define "fairly normally" when describing someone on drugs functioning in the workplace? How about at home?

Do you expect your employees to perform at full capacity, or do you accept performance that is "fairly normally"?

RyanBDawg
12-12-2011, 11:30
Really? Go to Baltimore, where about twenty percent of the population is addicted to heroin. That's what legalization looks like, and if you want something, you should at least go see it and make sure you know what you are asking for.

Baltimore is crappy because of the generational entitlement system, lack of care, lack of intelligence, etc..

The average IQ probably hovers around the level of mental retardation, perhaps slightly above. The reason why Baltimore is a crappy place to live is the same reason why Port-au-Prince is a crappy place to live.

Not because of heroin.


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

RussP
12-12-2011, 11:59
Baltimore is crappy because of the generational entitlement system, lack of care, lack of intelligence, etc..

The average IQ probably hovers around the level of mental retardation, perhaps slightly above. The reason why Baltimore is a crappy place to live is the same reason why Port-au-Prince is a crappy place to live.

Not because of heroin.


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engineAnd, of course, you have links to your research sources supporting those statements, or was it the experience from all the years you lived in Baltimore?

RussP
12-12-2011, 12:02
That's a good question for you to answer!What experience do you have working/living in an American society where drugs are decriminalized?Your experience there is what?

RyanBDawg
12-12-2011, 12:05
And, of course, you have links to your research sources supporting those statements, or was it the experience from all the years you lived in Baltimore?

Hahaha..

Why don't you provide something which proves me wrong.. Why don't you show me the graduation rates as compared to the national average, the teen pregnancy rate, the rate of people on welfare, the murder rate, the rates of STDs, the rates of rape, the rates of robbery etc..

Then tell me, does Baltimore then vote for the democrat that perpetuates the victimhood mentality?

My experience comes from having eyes and a functional brain.

Why this is even an argument is beyond me. Im not Barak, you don't have to act like everyone is smart but just got some bad break because whitey took all your chances.

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

RussP
12-12-2011, 12:39
Hahaha..

Why don't you provide something which proves me wrong.. Why don't you show me the graduation rates as compared to the national average, the teen pregnancy rate, the rate of people on welfare, the murder rate, the rates of STDs, the rates of rape, the rates of robbery etc..

Then tell me, does Baltimore then vote for the democrat that perpetuates the victimhood mentality?

My experience comes from having eyes and a functional brain.

Why this is even an argument is beyond me. Im not Barak, you don't have to act like everyone is smart but just got some bad break because whitey took all your chances.

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engineExactly the mentality I expected...

RussP
12-12-2011, 13:05
Why don't you provide something which proves me wrong.. Why don't you show me the graduation rates as compared to the national average,I take it you are familiar with the Baltimore School System. Am I incorrect?

certifiedfunds
12-12-2011, 14:42
That is not an answer to either of my questions.First, where did I exclude prescription opiate addicts?



You didn't. But we're talking about legal and illegal here. My point being that there are high-functioning opiate addicts around you every day.

What is the dollar cost to business in the United States?



Is that what federal laws are for? To ensure workers of optimum productivity? What's your point?

In my view a business owner should be able to hire or not hire someone strictly according to his own desires. So what does "cost to businesses" have to do with drug laws?

How do you define "fairly normally" when describing someone on drugs functioning in the workplace? How about at home?



I dunno. I'd say can hold a job, support himself, contribute to society, be reasonably social and go through his day not harming anyone else.

Do you expect your employees to perform at full capacity, or do you accept performance that is "fairly normally"?

Whether or not I choose to hire someone who has a known drug problem isn't the issue. If I don't sub test him how would I know if he performs his duties as expected?

Now, in our current environment I would expect that at some point he might well run afoul of the law and those problems would extend to his presence/performance at work.

Do I want someone "high" at work? No. Do I care if the guy fixes to prevent withdrawals and I'm none the wiser? I guess not. How would I know?

certifiedfunds
12-12-2011, 14:44
That's a good question for you to answer!Your experience there is what?

I have none. But I do have experience in this society and any thinking person can see it isn't working. (nevermind the lack of constitutional authority)

RussP
12-12-2011, 16:48
That is not an answer to either of my questions. First, where did I exclude prescription opiate addicts?You didn't. But we're talking about legal and illegal here. My point being that there are high-functioning opiate addicts around you every day.How is it you know they are around? How many functioning addicts who work are in your personal life, people you know?

How do you recognize a functioning addict?
What is the dollar cost to business in the United States? Is that what federal laws are for? To ensure workers of optimum productivity? What's your point?

In my view a business owner should be able to hire or not hire someone strictly according to his own desires. So what does "cost to businesses" have to do with drug laws?Knowing the cost provides a basis for this question. If drug laws are removed, would drug use at work increase or decrease. Would the loss of revenue due to drug use decrease or increase. Would costs related to drug use in the workplace increase or decrease. How do you define "fairly normally" when describing someone on drugs functioning in the workplace? How about at home?I dunno. I'd say can hold a job, support himself, contribute to society, be reasonably social and go through his day not harming anyone else.How many addicts do you know who can do all that? Do they never have issues at work? There are never issues at home with family members? How would that change with legalizing drugs?

Do you expect your employees to perform at full capacity, or do you accept performance that is "fairly normally"?Whether or not I choose to hire someone who has a known drug problem isn't the issue. If I don't sub test him how would I know if he performs his duties as expected?

Now, in our current environment I would expect that at some point he might well run afoul of the law and those problems would extend to his presence/performance at work.

Do I want someone "high" at work? No. Do I care if the guy fixes to prevent withdrawals and I'm none the wiser? I guess not. How would I know?Have you ever been in a position where you were responsible for the product or service made or performed by employees? Have you been in a position to evaluate an employee's performance? It sounds like the answer to those questions is "No."

If you miss deadlines, have quality control issues, and it isn't you doing the work, then there must be something wrong with others.

certifiedfunds
12-12-2011, 17:52
Russ - You have exceeded my vbulletin fu with the way you capture those quotes. I can't respond effectively and keep the conversation coherent.

Sharky7
12-12-2011, 19:47
Again, I think we're back to forest/trees for you.

I am starting to have a circular conversation with you. You are failing to respond logically with any details.

If your entire view is from living in a society, we all have that view. That doesn't make everyone an expert on drugs or how drugs effect our society. No offense, but you have not put out any good rebuttals or valid arguments besides vague references with no backing of experience.

Sharky7
12-12-2011, 19:51
Is it a coincidence we are talking about Baltimore and Vanguard just did a special on how heroin use has risen due to the Oxycontin trends over the last decade or two.

Vanguard has some great specials if you haven't checked them out yet. Oxycontin express is one of their more popular, available on YouTube.

HardtopTE72
12-13-2011, 01:39
I love the phrase victimless crime.

Based on my experience I would venture to say that 80-90 percent of crime is committed by people who are currently under the influence or attempting to obtain drugs. Drug users and those attempting to obtain drugs are the ones who are burglarizing your homes, your vehicles, Robbing your son your daughter who is working a part time job at a store. Stealing anything metal that isnt bolted down. Causing the Fatality accident that kills your son, daughter friend. Carries out the assaults, murders, rapes, I could go on and on. Most dont understand the concept until something happens to them and even then they only get a small glimpse at the darkside of things. I have had a front row seat to those effected by this victimless crime for the last 11 years.

Unless you can get hard numbers you would be hard pressed to prove that 8 or 9 of every 10 crimes (meaning all activity labeled criminal) is committed by drug users or people who are trying to obtain drugs. Also remember legal Alcohol and even taking too much Tylenol or even simple fatigue cause accidents that kill people every single day. That doesn't include carelessness or reckless driving. Also take the simple example. Kid tries cocaine. Like it and it makes him feel good. One day he is speeding while sober and left his pipe in the center console. LEO searches his car and finds Cocaine and drug paraphernalia. Kid goes to jail. Bonds out goes to court pleads guilty and gets 21 days CJ or a drug rehab program or whatever the judge feels like giving that day. He is done right? Don't ever do it again right? What you don't take into account is most of that kids dreams are out of the window. He will never be a cop, fireman, banker, doctor etc. now because everyone does FBI background checks and that cocaine charge is going to haunt him forever. For the majority they will end up working minimum wage jobs or submitting to the peer pressure of the wrong crowd and resorting to a life of crime. This leads to more possesion charges, selling, robberies, and eventually a murder. I have seen the rap sheet progression. All that beginning not because of anything but the possesion of a drug. And it happens like this ALL THE TIME. You just do not hear about it everyday. The problem with a lot of these crimes is the system itself. Hell nowadays if a 16 year old teen sends her boyfriend a picture of herself naked they are both made sex offenders FOREVER!!!!! Good luck with life being labeled a sex offender and trying to explain that at your next job interview or on your next application.

If you allow the unregulated and uncontrolled use of any mind altering substance abuse is going to happen. You can argue that legalizing it and taxing it and regulating it like prescription medication would be more beneficial. Has that been effective with Prescription Narcotics? Prescription Diversion is at an all time high and is so widespread and rampant that it is hard to quantify. It is a taboo subject and doesnt get a lot of media attention because like alcohol abuse many take part in it and it doesnt have the same stigma that someone who abuses meth or heroin imparts.

You forget that while prescription drugs are legal but highly regulated the cocaine, marijuana, meth, and heroin are not. The same dealer who sells weed is probably selling pills too or at least knows the guy who does. Also I say again. Alcohol is legal and plenty of drunks ruin the lives of everyone around them. There are casualties of everything. This war isn't the answer at least not in its current form.

In texas around 8 years ago the shift became apparent for drug offenders. TDCJ the Texas prison system was over capacity. So they shifted from incarceration to rehabilitation for not only drug abusers but drug dealers. Most first second and third time Drug Offenders that would normally be sent to prison (Serious level charges) not small user quantities are sent to a program called SAFP. This is a 6 month to 1 year long intensive drug rehabilitation program. What have the results been? Pretty poor, 70 to 80 percent recidivisim rate for offenders in my area I dont have access to statistics state wide.

Again this doesn't solve the initial real problems the offenders face and the fact that the big dealer (the one that would still go to prison) is still out dealing and not affected by this program.

So is rehabilitiation the answer? Maybe it would work elsewhere but currently it is not working here. When you break down the mechanics of addiction you see that unless someone is forced to change they wont and unless they are removed from the enviroment that enabled them in the first place the are unlikely to succeed at remaining clean.

Look around a room of 1000 people and I bet you couldn't pinpoint half the drug users. They are not all burnt out, consumed, and withdrawing addicts seen on TV shows like Intervention. Not everyone who smokes a joint smokes one everyday and not everyone who drinks is an alcoholic .Again alcohol is legal but it has intoxicating effects that cause people to kill others every single day. I can imagine more people shoot themselves or others every year from being drunk than in cold blooded rage.

So all that being said what do we do?

There are many theories to the best way of policing. Typically police are reactive in nature. They "Respond" to crimes instead of preventing them. Not only because of Manpower constraints but because they dont have crystal balls to tell them where the next murder is going to occur.

We can attribute a large amount of All crime to drug abuse and distribution so we can take the proactive stance of treating the symptoms of Burglary, Theft, Assault, Murder, Rape. And in doing so prevent some of these from happening.

Another talking point that people love to spout is the "Theft" by the government in regards to asset forfeiture. Asset Forfeiture is probably one of the most effective tools at preventing the Distribution of Illegal Narcotics. The most simple way of looking at it is If you take their money they cant buy the dope to put it on the street. Illegal drugs are relatively cheap at the point of distribution. The markup comes down the road. It is also hard to control the point of origin since it usually originates for some drugs in other countries. So what do you do? You target them where it counts. The vehicles, houses, jewelery, boats, and cash that they funnel all their illicit proceeds into. In one fell swoop you can knock out a dope dealers rainy day fund and reset them to Square 1. If you can prove that the property was obtained by legitimate means you will usually get it back. So If you call taking something that was obtained by illegitimate means theft than I would call into question your value system.

While this may work in theory unless you are going to simultaneously take down every dealer at the same time and all of their apprentices and partners then it is going to be the same thing over and over again. As matter of fact as soon as you clear one dealer all you do is make way for his competition to pick up his route/zone/neighborhood, and get bigger. While it is illegal someone will do it. We do not have the manpower, technology, or apparent drive to implement the fixes we say we want to.

My points highlighted in blue.

The only fix I see is outright decriminalization. There may be some shockwaves at first but in our current system we are locking up our youth and the senseless murders and robberies are still going on.

NorthCarolinaLiberty
12-13-2011, 03:14
Is it a coincidence we are talking about Baltimore and Vanguard just did a special on how heroin use has risen due to the Oxycontin trends over the last decade or two.

Vanguard has some great specials if you haven't checked them out yet. Oxycontin express is one of their more popular, available on YouTube.

Rather than a coincidence, I'd say there's a direct relationship between a person's television viewing and their support for prohibition.

NorthCarolinaLiberty
12-13-2011, 03:15
If your entire view is from living in a society, we all have that view.

You get your information from cable TV shows, but then criticize the experience of others?

NorthCarolinaLiberty
12-13-2011, 03:18
Go to Baltimore, where about twenty percent of the population is addicted to heroin.


That figure lacks such common sense that I wasn't even going to ask for a source. Sharky must have answered that one though.

NorthCarolinaLiberty
12-13-2011, 03:25
Unless you can get hard numbers you would be hard pressed to prove that 8 or 9 of every 10 crimes (meaning all activity labeled criminal) is committed by drug users or people who are trying to obtain drugs.



HardtopTE72, it's sad to say, but you, I, and others are wasting our time. I quoted a Dept. of Justice statistic that showed the exact opposite of that 8 out of 10 figure, but people chose to ignore it. It seems from this thread that television entertainment is the standard for information and public policy.

Sharky7
12-13-2011, 06:15
You get your information from cable TV shows, but then criticize the experience of others?

A thread worth posting in is a thread worth reading first. Read through and you will see some of my experience already posted.

As for the Vanguard comment - it has nothing to do with me. It is to show YOU that the problem is so prevalent that there are even documentaries to showcase the problem. The Baltimore example was brought up by another poster to you on the previous page.

RussP
12-13-2011, 08:26
This...I can't respond effectively and keep the conversation coherent.has absolutely nothing, nothing to do with this......the way you capture those quotes.Well, then, let's try it this way:


How is it you know they, functioning addicts, are around?


How many functioning addicts who work are in your personal life, people you know?


How do you recognize a functioning addict?


Knowing the cost provides a basis for these questions:



If drug laws are removed, would drug use at work increase or decrease?


Would the loss of revenue due to drug use decrease or increase?


Would costs related to drug use in the workplace increase or decrease?



How many addicts do you know who can



hold a job?


support himself?


contribute to society?


be reasonably social and


go through his day not harming anyone else.?


Do they never have issues at work?


Are there never issues at home with family members?


How would that change with legalizing drugs?


Have you ever been in a position where you were responsible for the product or service made or performed by employees?


Have you been in a position to evaluate an employee's performance? It sounds like the answer to those questions is "No."


Would you agree that if you miss deadlines, have quality control issues, and it isn't you doing the work, then there must be something wrong with your employees.

Sharky7
12-13-2011, 20:38
HardtopTE72, it's sad to say, but you, I, and others are wasting our time. I quoted a Dept. of Justice statistic that showed the exact opposite of that 8 out of 10 figure, but people chose to ignore it. It seems from this thread that television entertainment is the standard for information and public policy.

Did you even read the study that you posted on the previous page? Did you read it completely and not just scan it for small factoids you believe help support your argument.

From YOUR article you posted on the previous page - this is the summary:

Conclusion

Drug use and criminal behavior certainly seem to be correlated. The evidence indicates that:


Drug users are more likely than nonusers to commit crimes,
Arrestees and inmates were often under the influence of a drug(s) at the time they committed their offenses, and
Drug trafficking and distribution generate violence.

Sharky7
12-13-2011, 20:46
HardtopTE72, it's sad to say, but you, I, and others are wasting our time. I quoted a Dept. of Justice statistic that showed the exact opposite of that 8 out of 10 figure, but people chose to ignore it. It seems from this thread that television entertainment is the standard for information and public policy.

I would be much more impressed and would take your opinion with more weight if it came from professional or personal experience, background, interviews, career work, current or past environment, and training in this field. Doing quick half-read google searches to try and support an idea you have does not validate your argument to me.

series1811
12-14-2011, 04:01
That figure lacks such common sense that I wasn't even going to ask for a source. Sharky must have answered that one though.

You even looked at the DAWN numbers for Baltimore?

RussP
12-14-2011, 04:41
HardtopTE72, it's sad to say, but you, I, and others are wasting our time. I quoted a Dept. of Justice statistic that showed the exact opposite of that 8 out of 10 figure, but people chose to ignore it. It seems from this thread that television entertainment is the standard for information and public policy.What exactly is the opposite of 8 out of ten?

If the numbers you say are "the exact opposite opposite of that 8 out of 10" are national averages, would that not mean that some facilities have higher ratios?

Is it possible that in some jurisdictions the ratio is 8 out of 10?

Sharky7
12-15-2011, 20:56
http://www.buytumbleweednow.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/iStock_000005615825Small-300x199.jpg

RyanBDawg
12-15-2011, 21:02
http://www.buytumbleweednow.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/iStock_000005615825Small-300x199.jpg



http://www.digital-anarchy.com/imagehosting/33824cf1b9e4cb80a.jpg

holesinpaper
12-15-2011, 21:40
This thread took a really humorous turn.

Thanks for the entertainment.

NorthCarolinaLiberty
12-16-2011, 03:30
My replies in blue.

A thread worth posting in is a thread worth reading first.
I always read others' posts before posting.

Read through and you will see some of my experience already posted.
I thoroughly read your posts. This is what is disturbing, especially for a police officer. Your sources of information are a newspaper article, cable TV, and your beat. Your internal source that corresponds to your statement of, "Drugs are still the number one motivator for almost all crimes" is the most hyperbolic and logically fallacious kind of misinformation. Your mythical ideas on how the process of addiction begins is the silliness fueling the emotion of TV viewers.


As for the Vanguard comment - it has nothing to do with me. It is to show YOU that the problem is so prevalent that there are even documentaries to showcase the problem. The Baltimore example was brought up by another poster to you on the previous page.
Silly entertainment vs. meaningful research. I don't know which is worse: law enforcement that can't tell the difference or law enforcement that promotes such nonsense.

NorthCarolinaLiberty
12-16-2011, 03:33
If drug laws are removed, would drug use at work increase or decrease?


Would the loss of revenue due to drug use decrease or increase?


Would costs related to drug use in the workplace increase or decrease?

How many addicts do you know who can



hold a job?


support himself?


contribute to society?


be reasonably social and


go through his day not harming anyone else.?


Do they never have issues at work?


Are there never issues at home with family members?


How would that change with legalizing drugs?

Have you ever been in a position where you were responsible for the product or service made or performed by employees?


Have you been in a position to evaluate an employee's performance? It sounds like the answer to those questions is "No."


Would you agree that if you miss deadlines, have quality control issues, and it isn't you doing the work, then there must be something wrong with your employees.


Your post was meant for someone else, but it is unusual how you are so deeply concerned with the detailed habits of private employers.

NorthCarolinaLiberty
12-16-2011, 03:45
My replies in blue.




Yes, it is my source, an advocacy organization for crime victims. I chose this source because the statistics are likely to be the most conservative. Even these conservative stats aren't the hyperbole of your sources. The conclusions though, are sometimes misleading or poor interpretation of the DoJ stats.
I purposely stayed away from sites like NORML and Drug War Facts.



Conclusion

Drug use and criminal behavior certainly seem to be correlated. The evidence indicates that:



Drug users are more likely than nonusers to commit crimes,
Addicts? Yes, but that’s not even a majority of addicts. Users? Depends on your definition of user. Hard core alcoholics are more likely than nonalcoholics to shoplift, but that says nothing about the millions of casual alcohol consumers. Your focus is always sensational, focusing on a minority of addicts and hard core types. None of this supports your blatantly fallacious claim of “Drugs are still the number one motivator for all crimes.”<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>

Arrestees and inmates were often under the influence of a drug(s) at the time they committed their offenses,...
The word “often” is not quantified here. It is also grossly out of context in a conclusion.<o:p></o:p>

Drug trafficking and distribution generate violence.
Yes, obviously. A precise reason for legalization. See prohibition.<o:p></o:p>

NorthCarolinaLiberty
12-16-2011, 04:01
I would be much more impressed and would take your opinion with more weight if it came from professional or personal experience, background, interviews, career work, current or past environment, and training in this field. Doing quick half-read google searches to try and support an idea you have does not validate your argument to me.

How does a person know anything? You experience. You observe. You research. You live.

It's entirely possible that I might have a wider ranging experience than you. I've hung out with plenty of low life drug users. I've been around better class drug users. I learned things such as how smoking or injecting heroin one time does not even lead to a 2nd time. I learned that the wild exaggeration of those PCP TV movies were more anomalies than everyday reality. I learned that a drug user was a thief or addict, but also a decent boss or a classmate. The person was also and anywhere in between the whole range of human experience. The situations were almost never the situations portrayed in emotional media.

I later complemented my experiences with research. I do quite a bit of primary and secondary source research, either for personal interest, for my current side job, or a couple of past jobs.

I use paid library databases, select and vetted websites, and search engines like Google. The method is not as important as the result. I evaluate sources, especially for authority. The topics widely vary, but I've had good practice distinguishing quality information from less than stellar. <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>

NorthCarolinaLiberty
12-16-2011, 04:13
You even looked at the DAWN numbers for Baltimore?


Never heard of this, but looked it up. Seems they just cover mortality. Nothing about addiction rates, especially your claim that 1 in 5 people in Baltimore are heroin addicts.

NorthCarolinaLiberty
12-16-2011, 04:17
My answers in blue.

What exactly is the opposite of 8 out of ten?
See the DoJ stat that I quoted.

If the numbers you say are "the exact opposite opposite of that 8 out of 10" are national averages, would that not mean that some facilities have higher ratios?

Is it possible that in some jurisdictions the ratio is 8 out of 10?
Yes I suppose that certain sections of Baltimore are worse than Beverly Hills. TV's unrelenting use of the statistical measure of mode is fine for entertainment, but it hardly should be the only measure considered when gathering information, let alone forming public policy.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>

Sharky7
12-16-2011, 10:21
You need to humble yourself a bit. Saying because you have known a few drug users who were addicts and some who were not does not make you an expert. Your research is reading articles also does not make an expert.

I am not the king of drugs, but I have worked in specialized units statewide, I currently teach classes on drug use/recognition as well as retail theft trends involving drug use, have worked as a counselor for drug courts, been in thousand of homes with drug use families, been in hundreds of dope stash and cut houses, interviewed and established relationships with informants of all level of addictions, talked with thousands of people about their motivations for crimes or prostitution or violence, etc etc etc. I've arrested everyone rem your homeless heroin addict to your coke head big money politician and every one in between.

Plain and simple there is a correlation between drug use and addiction and crime. The more articles and proof people show you the madder you get and attack those sources or try to confuse the facts. The easier it is to get drugs in hub areas and open air markets - the higher the crime is. It is not prohibition in englewood, k-town, or even Detroit that causes crime. It's not hard to get drugs, people flag you down and yell "blow" on the corners to sell you dope.

RussP
12-16-2011, 11:43
Let's compare you to Sharky...How does a person know anything? You experience. You observe. You research. You live.

It's entirely possible that I might have a wider ranging experience than you.

I've hung out with plenty of low life drug users.


I've been around better class drug users.


I learned things such as how smoking or injecting heroin one time does not even lead to a 2nd time.


I learned that the wild exaggeration of those PCP TV movies were more anomalies than everyday reality.


I learned that a drug user was a thief or addict, but also a decent boss or a classmate.


The person was also and anywhere in between the whole range of human experience.


The situations were almost never the situations portrayed in emotional media.

I later complemented my experiences with research.
I do quite a bit of primary and secondary source research, either for personal interest, for my current side job, or a couple of past jobs. I use paid library databases,


select and vetted websites, and


search engines like Google. The method is not as important as the result.


I evaluate sources, especially for authority.


The topics widely vary, but


I've had good practice distinguishing quality information from less than stellar.


You need to humble yourself a bit. Saying because you have known a few drug users who were addicts and some who were not does not make you an expert. Your research is reading articles also does not make an expert.

I am not the king of drugs, but
I have worked in specialized units statewide,


I currently teach classes on drug use/recognition


as well as retail theft trends involving drug use,


have worked as a counselor for drug courts,


been in thousand of homes with drug use families,


been in hundreds of dope stash and cut houses,


interviewed and established relationships with informants of all level of addictions,


talked with thousands of people about their motivations for crimes or prostitution or violence, etc etc etc.


I've arrested everyone rem your homeless heroin addict to your coke head big money politician and every one in between.


Plain and simple there is a correlation between drug use and addiction and crime. The more articles and proof people show you the madder you get and attack those sources or try to confuse the facts. The easier it is to get drugs in hub areas and open air markets - the higher the crime is. It is not prohibition in englewood, k-town, or even Detroit that causes crime. It's not hard to get drugs, people flag you down and yell "blow" on the corners to sell you dope.Or, in SE DC where long stem roses sold at the curb are $20 each. Guess the little package of "flower-fresh" stuck down in the paper wrapping is good stuff.

Now, NorthCarolinaLiberty, for clarification, would you mind telling us just how many the "plenty" in "plenty of low life drug users" is?

When you said, "I learned that a drug user was a thief or addict, but also a decent boss or a classmate. The person was also and anywhere in between the whole range of human experience," are you describing just one person you know?

You say, "The topics widely vary, but I've had good practice distinguishing quality information from less than stellar." How much of your research has been on drug users, drug use, addicts? Is it 10%, 25%, 50%? To what topic would you say you devoted the most research time?

holesinpaper
12-16-2011, 11:56
Plain and simple there is a correlation between drug use and addiction and crime

Correlation does not prove causation.

There's a "link" between schizophrenia and drug use. But no proof that drug use causes (or increases the risk of) schizophrenia. It's far more likely that schizophrenics use illegal drugs to self medicate.

To say that drug users are criminals is circular logic. Drug use is illegal, ergo by definition drug users are criminals.

When you force people to turn to the black market to make a purchase it has the effect of promoting additional criminal behavior. Just look at what alcohol prohibition did.

Also, when you force products into the black market you artificially raise the price to a level beyond the means of the average person's income. It's an unwritten "black market tax" that is unavoidable based on 1) rarity and 2) risk. If the price is artificially high, then someone with a dependency problem will do whatever it takes to avoid withdraws from the harder drugs (e.g. meth, coke, heroin).

Make it legal and the price decreases. Use does not increase (proven by countries that have decriminalized drugs). And property crimes decrease (again proven in other countries). Gee, close the BLACK MARKET and things improve, alcohol prohibition sure didn't prove that, oh wait, it did.

The above are just some reasons why corrolation does not prove causation in this case. Drug use alone does NOT cause a person to engage in criminal behavior -- especially marijuana.

And of course there's correlation between drug use and 'addiction' (or at least dependence). That's also true with prescription drugs (lawfully taken). it's true with coffee and alcohol. If you NEVER drink coffee, then you NEVER suffer headaches from withdrawal -- and failed resolutions to "quite coffee forever."

Want to REALLY save lives, and REALLY stop the suffering in famlies and REALLY save the nation money... then take all the money and attention currently wasted on the WoD and focus it on helping OBESE people in Ameica lose weight.

More people die due to food served in schools, fast food restaurants, grocery stores... combined with inactivity due to glocktalk, err I mean TV, internet, being LAZY, etc than die from drug abuse. Fat Americans cost this country FAR more than drug abuse. Fat people dying from obesity related illnesses, or just suffering from the symptoms from them, cause FAR more pain and suffering in families than drug use. It's a question of scale.

And we can combat the obesity epidemic without burning the Constitution. It's a double win. Plus, you can prove someone is obese, you can't prove someone is a drug addict (sorry, the DSM is a croc when it comes to diagnosing drug addiction).

holesinpaper
12-16-2011, 12:06
talked with thousands of people about their motivations for crimes or prostitution or violence, etc etc etc.

It is not prohibition in englewood, k-town, or even Detroit that causes crime. It's not hard to get drugs, people flag you down and yell "blow" on the corners to sell you dope.

Dig deeper.

You will find that root causes are things like:



Child neglect
Child abuse (emotional)
Child abuse (sexual)
Child abuse (physical)
Domestic violence
Untreated learning disabilities
Untreated mental health conditions
Poverty. Extreme poverty.
Cycle of criminal activity passed on over generations
Lack of educational options or inadequate education
A severe downward spiral after their first conviction (for anything) since they are now second class citizens
Lack of employment possibilities
Poor parental modeling
Alcohol abuse by parents and all it's glorious consequences on children
Etc.


To simply say "it's a drug problem" is both narrow sighted, and short sighted -- and patently false.

Being LEO you have a warped perspective. Talk to some social workerd, no, strike that. Talk to some honest to God LMFTs (therapists).

RussP
12-16-2011, 12:07
You are not discussing the big picture. Your view is the limited experience of your beat. You see most criminals using drugs, so you make the logical fallacy that most drug users are criminals.

You also like the hyperbole of the hardcore heroin addict, a very small portion of the big picture.What portion of the big picture are hardcore heroin addicts?

holesinpaper
12-16-2011, 12:08
It is not prohibition in englewood, k-town, or even Detroit that causes crime. It's not hard to get drugs, people flag you down and yell "blow" on the corners to sell you dope.

Well, at least you admit your effort is wasted.

Can't even stop an open drug bizarre, where people run up and shout "BUY SOME BLOW".

I want a refund on all my taxes that have been 100% wasted on the WoD.

RussP
12-16-2011, 12:51
Gangs, street crimes, drugs, prostitution, violence - all go hand in hand. Come do a week on my beat.Sharky, has anyone taken you up on your offer to do a week of ride-alongs?

holesinpaper
12-16-2011, 13:20
Sharky, has anyone taken you up on your offer to do a week of ride-alongs?

Do a 'ride along' back in the 1920s and guess what officers would be saying:

Alcohol goes hand in hand with:


violence
prostitution
Street crime
gangs

Well, it doesn't. Prohibition goes hand in hand with those items.

When you make a health issue into a law enforcement issue, outcomes and perspectives get skewed.

holesinpaper
12-16-2011, 13:28
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0145213481900508

Many studies have shown a link between child sexual abuse, and turning toward prostitution later in life.

Once a woman turns to prostitution you usually have pimps involved. Unless you are in a place with legalized prostitution -- in a first world country like the USA or Amsterdam.

Once a pimp is involved, then drug dependence will usually be intentionally introduced to help the pimp exert control over his 'commodity.' We aren't talking soft drugs like alcohol or marijuana, we're talking hard drugs like meth and heroin.

So prostitution, in and of itself, is not the cause of drug addiction.

There might be a lot of drug use by prostitutes (e.g. illegal prostitutes, not those who do it legally), but to say that drugs cause prostitution is patently false. It would be far more accurate to blame prostitution on the sexual abuse of children.

RussP
12-16-2011, 13:58
Do a 'ride along' back in the 1920s and guess what officers would be saying:

Alcohol goes hand in hand with:


violence
prostitution
Street crime
gangs

Well, it doesn't. Prohibition goes hand in hand with those items.

When you make a health issue into a law enforcement issue, outcomes and perspectives get skewed.Have you been on many, any ride-alongs?

holesinpaper
12-16-2011, 14:26
Have you been on many, any ride-alongs?

Several.


And I've attended civilian 'academy' community relationship programs.
And I have many LEO friends.
And I have many friends who are social workers and LMFTs.
And I have done extensive work in the 'addiction' recovery field.
And I occasionally eat Oatmeal (meaning the requirement of going on a ride along to understand the WoD is false thinking, might as well require someone eat oatmeal before they can 'really' understand the WoD).

But really, someone does not need any of the above to formulate accurate ideas about health issues, prohibition, drug dependence and the WoD.

RC-RAMIE
12-16-2011, 15:08
http://www.leap.cc/

Here is a group of LEO who are against prohibition

Sharky7
12-16-2011, 15:10
Dig deeper.

You will find that root causes are things like:



Child neglect
Child abuse (emotional)
Child abuse (sexual)
Child abuse (physical)
Domestic violence
Untreated learning disabilities
Untreated mental health conditions
Poverty. Extreme poverty.
Cycle of criminal activity passed on over generations
Lack of educational options or inadequate education
A severe downward spiral after their first conviction (for anything) since they are now second class citizens
Lack of employment possibilities
Poor parental modeling
Alcohol abuse by parents and all it's glorious consequences on children
Etc.


To simply say "it's a drug problem" is both narrow sighted, and short sighted -- and patently false.

Being LEO you have a warped perspective. Talk to some social workerd, no, strike that. Talk to some honest to God LMFTs (therapists).

I've spent a lot of time volunteering as a counselor for drug court. I have a graduation I am going to tomorrow for our current class.

There are a wide range of reasons some people turn to drugs or get started on drugs. The longer you use drugs though to suppress those problems the worse shape you will be in. At some point you have to take back control of your life and work positively.

----------------------------

For the bold part above - You never get a conviction after your first drug charge. Simple cannabis charges under an ounce (30 grams under law) are fine only and usually get charged as ordinance so they are not even criminal matters.

Felony possession charges such as heroin, cocaine, crack cocaine, pills, etc - you get the choice of drug court. If you complete it, it is expunged. If you refuse drug court, you can still be found guilty, but not convicted. Most people are found guilty, but get supervision which allows them to keep it off their record as long as they are not arrested again in a certain period of time. It takes an act of God to get a conviction for drug charges in most locations. If you are actually convicted for a possession charge - you worked hard to get that conviction.

Sharky7
12-16-2011, 15:14
Well, at least you admit your effort is wasted.

Can't even stop an open drug bizarre, where people run up and shout "BUY SOME BLOW".

I want a refund on all my taxes that have been 100% wasted on the WoD.

I don't think you would like the society that you would live in to put an absolute 100% end to all drugs. Law enforcement and the criminal justice system is always a balancing act between personal liberties and the rights, freedoms, and better living for the rest of society.

We can't just come in busting in every door without warrants searching for drugs without reason or suspicion. It's a balancing act. Law enforcement will never be able to end ALL crime, but we do our best to end it and make a better society for you, your family, and the rest of the community.

Just imagine how things would be if we didn't spend any resources on drug enforcement or prevention.

holesinpaper
12-16-2011, 15:16
I've spent a lot of time volunteering as a counselor for drug court

Do you have a graduate degree? Is yes, what field?

Do you have an undergrad degree from an accredited 4 year university? If yes, what major?

Sharky7
12-16-2011, 15:16
Sharky, has anyone taken you up on your offer to do a week of ride-alongs?

Nope, unfortunately - but you know if you are in the area Russ to drop me an email.

Too many people are comfortable in their bubble.

Sharky7
12-16-2011, 15:18
Do you have a graduate degree? Is yes, what field?

Do you have an undergrad degree from an accredited 4 year university? If yes, what major?

I have undergrad degrees in Political Science and Business Administration. I am almost done with my Master's degree in Law Enforcement Executive Administration.

holesinpaper
12-16-2011, 15:21
Felony possession charges such as heroin, cocaine, crack cocaine, pills, etc - you get the choice of drug court. If you complete it, it is expunged. If you refuse drug court, you can still be found guilty, but not convicted. Most people are found guilty, but get supervision which allows them to keep it off their record as long as they are not arrested again in a certain period of time. It takes an act of God to get a conviction for drug charges in most locations. If you are actually convicted for a possession charge - you worked hard to get that conviction.

Again you have a myopic view.

They can become a second class citizen via a felony conviction (thus ineligible to vote, join the military, hold public office, get educational grants and loans, etc) without having anything to do with drugs.

A child who is starving at home might steal food from a grocery store to subsist. That can lead to a conviction.

A child living in neglect can turn to vandalism or gangs to find power and comfort -- in a world that otherwise offers them none. That can lead to a felony conviction.

Etc.

Once convicted their once dismal financial, employment and educational prospects get even smaller. What is left for them to do, in order to make money?

That's right, deal drugs -- exactly because the WoD makes it the most profitable endeavor that is left available to them.

Sharky7
12-16-2011, 15:22
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0145213481900508

Many studies have shown a link between child sexual abuse, and turning toward prostitution later in life.

Once a woman turns to prostitution you usually have pimps involved. Unless you are in a place with legalized prostitution -- in a first world country like the USA or Amsterdam.

Once a pimp is involved, then drug dependence will usually be intentionally introduced to help the pimp exert control over his 'commodity.' We aren't talking soft drugs like alcohol or marijuana, we're talking hard drugs like meth and heroin.

So prostitution, in and of itself, is not the cause of drug addiction.

There might be a lot of drug use by prostitutes (e.g. illegal prostitutes, not those who do it legally), but to say that drugs cause prostitution is patently false. It would be far more accurate to blame prostitution on the sexual abuse of children.

I was featured in a prostitution special on MSNBC several years ago. Russ can confirm since he knows my name and it is available on youtube.

What you are talking about is more common with traveling prostitution who start at younger ages.

holesinpaper
12-16-2011, 15:23
I have undergrad degrees in Political Science and Business Administration. I am almost done with my Master's degree in Law Enforcement Executive Administration.

So your degrees have absolutely nothing to do with counseling.

Thanks for the honest answer.

holesinpaper
12-16-2011, 15:24
I was featured in a prostitution special on MSNBC several years ago. Russ can confirm since he knows my name and it is available on youtube.

What you are talking about is more common with traveling prostitution who start at younger ages.

Well lots of folks make it on TV. That does not prove that they are an accurate source of information.

You're essentially offering the argument that "I'm the only one in the room professional enough to have an accurate opinion." That doesn't hold water.

You do not actually have the proper training, as admited by your majors and grad program. And what training you do have is tilted to produce biased officers. -- imho and experience.

RC-RAMIE
12-16-2011, 15:25
[QUOTE=Sharky7;18295380]
----------------------------

For the bold part above - You never get a conviction after your first drug charge. Simple cannabis charges under an ounce (30 grams under law) are fine only and usually get charged as ordinance so they are not even criminal matters.

/QUOTE]

Not true for the whole country.

Sharky7
12-16-2011, 15:28
Again you have a myopic view.

They can become a second class citizen via a felony conviction (thus ineligible to vote, join the military, hold public office, get educational grants and loans, etc) without having anything to do with drugs.

A child who is starving at home might steal food from a grocery store to subsist. That can lead to a conviction.

A child living in neglect can turn to vandalism or gangs to find power and comfort -- in a world that otherwise offers them none. That can lead to a felony conviction.

Etc.

Once convicted their once dismal financial, employment and educational prospects get even smaller. What is left for them to do, in order to make money?

That's right, deal drugs -- exactly because the WoD makes it the most profitable endeavor that is left available to them.

Juvenile records do not follow.

To get felony convictions for most offenses is pretty rare as well if you are not a career criminal and there is not aggravation in the case. As long as you meet supervision requirements.

There is penalties for committing crimes when you are an adult. That does not mean you can turn to selling drugs.

holesinpaper
12-16-2011, 15:28
BTW, this thread is still really entertaining, even if it was moved to the ghost town ;)

holesinpaper
12-16-2011, 15:30
Juvenile records do not follow.

Not true in all cases. Juvenile cases are no longer automatically sealed, and no longer discounted by adult court afaik (state laws vary).

And still, once a kid is in the system (you know this) the outcome is much easier to predict. He becomes a repeat visitor.

Sharky7
12-16-2011, 15:33
Well lots of folks make it on TV. That does not prove that they are an accurate source of information.

You're essentially offering the argument that "I'm the only one in the room professional enough to have an accurate opinion." That doesn't hold water.

You do not actually have the proper training, as admited by your majors and grad program. And what training you do have is tilted to produce biased officers. -- imho and experience.

Ok...I am willing to have an intelligent conversation with you. You are starting to get immature.

First you say that my degrees in college don't have anything to do with counseling - so, I guess that makes me an ineffective drug counselor? I've gone through many hours of "proper training" to become a drug counselor on my own dime to help people.

I never said anything about anything you are claiming. If I didn't think you were up to par, I would not be having a conversation with you. It's a fact, I was on prostitution special. It is what it is.... I have quite a deal of experience with it.

holesinpaper
12-16-2011, 15:35
Simple cannabis charges under an ounce (30 grams under law) are fine only and usually get charged as ordinance so they are not even criminal matters.



Amount varies by state.

Whether possession is a felony or misdemeanor for smaller amounts also varies by state.

Some states (MA, AK) have decriminalized small amounts completely.

And a misdemeanor is a bit more severe than a just a 'small fine.'

Misdemeanors are far more serious than civil infractions. To try and play it off like they aren't is disingenuous.

holesinpaper
12-16-2011, 15:36
Ok...I am willing to have an intelligent conversation with you. You are starting to get immature.

First you say that my degrees in college don't have anything to do with counseling - so, I guess that makes me an ineffective drug counselor? I've gone through many hours of "proper training" to become a drug counselor on my own dime to help people.

I never said anything about anything you are claiming. If I didn't think you were up to par, I would not be having a conversation with you. It's a fact, I was on prostitution special. It is what it is.... I have quite a deal of experience with it.

You claimed you were a counselor.

RussP
12-16-2011, 15:36
Several.


And I've attended civilian 'academy' community relationship programs.
And I have many LEO friends.
And I have many friends who are social workers and LMFTs.
And I have done extensive work in the 'addiction' recovery field.
And I occasionally eat Oatmeal (meaning the requirement of going on a ride along to understand the WoD is false thinking, might as well require someone eat oatmeal before they can 'really' understand the WoD).

But really, someone does not need any of the above to formulate accurate ideas about health issues, prohibition, drug dependence and the WoD.Thank you for the information. I certainly hope the oatmeal helps.

holesinpaper
12-16-2011, 15:40
I guess that makes me an ineffective drug counselor

In some states, claiming to be a drug and alcohol counselor, when you are in fact not would get you into some serious trouble.

To be a drug and alcohol counselor in most states requires an applicable degree, and a license or certification. And you have to do intern hours at an agency, or under an already licensed or certified counselor who meets certain requirements.

Stuff like that makes it ok to question your education, and your professional knowledge imho. It's a clear misrepresentation imho -- and depending on your state could get you into serious hot water with your agency.

Sharky7
12-16-2011, 15:41
Several.


And I've attended civilian 'academy' community relationship programs.
And I have many LEO friends.
And I have many friends who are social workers and LMFTs.
And I have done extensive work in the 'addiction' recovery field.
And I occasionally eat Oatmeal (meaning the requirement of going on a ride along to understand the WoD is false thinking, might as well require someone eat oatmeal before they can 'really' understand the WoD).

But really, someone does not need any of the above to formulate accurate ideas about health issues, prohibition, drug dependence and the WoD.

You need to be able to see a big picture approach to the subject. Too many people see the Mexico violence on TV and say, "Let's put an end to that War on Drugs to stop the violence."

Well....it's like Business. Change the price of oil in the Middle East and that can have an effect on the price of soup in China, new buildings going up in Las Vegas, YOUR raise at work, etc.

The biggest problem I bring up that people do not see is the relationship with local crime in your neighborhoods. It's important to have a very clear understanding on crime trends and addiction to know how it will effect the US as a whole. Right now, the areas where drugs are more easily available in open air drug markets also have the highest amount of crimes. There are major drug hubs in the US where almost all of your dope comes in from Mexico.

If you solve one problem you create a few hundred more.

holesinpaper
12-16-2011, 15:41
Thank you for the information. I certainly hope the oatmeal helps.

Well, it helps with regularity ;)

Just trying to add some levity :supergrin:

Sharky7
12-16-2011, 15:47
In some states, claiming to be a drug and alcohol counselor, when you are in fact not would get you into some serious trouble.

To be a drug and alcohol counselor in most states requires an applicable degree, and a license. And you have to do intern hours at an agency, or under an already licensed counselor who meets certain requirements.

Stuff like that makes it ok to question your education, and your professional knowledge imho. It's a clear misrepresentation imho -- and depending on your state could get you into serious hot water with your agency.

I gave you a shot....Grow up buddy.

Russ knows who I am. He knows I do a lot volunteer work and he has even helped me with graphics for a youth program I volunteer for and run as well.

RyanBDawg
12-16-2011, 16:13
You need to be able to see a big picture approach to the subject. Too many people see the Mexico violence on TV and say, "Let's put an end to that War on Drugs to stop the violence."

Well....it's like Business. Change the price of oil in the Middle East and that can have an effect on the price of soup in China, new buildings going up in Las Vegas, YOUR raise at work, etc.

The biggest problem I bring up that people do not see is the relationship with local crime in your neighborhoods. It's important to have a very clear understanding on crime trends and addiction to know how it will effect the US as a whole. Right now, the areas where drugs are more easily available in open air drug markets also have the highest amount of crimes. There are major drug hubs in the US where almost all of your dope comes in from Mexico.

If you solve one problem you create a few hundred more.

So again.. If you were the guy making all the rules.. What would you do about the war on drugs? Reading some of your posts it's obvious that it has been a total failure in that in Chicago you can get virtually any drug you want.. So what would you do seeing as the current solution is not working, and has only compounded the problem for the past 40 years..

holesinpaper
12-16-2011, 16:33
I gave you a shot....Grow up buddy.

Russ knows who I am. He knows I do a lot volunteer work and he has even helped me with graphics for a youth program I volunteer for and run as well.

Volunteer work does not make one a drug and alcohol counselor.

You literally said "I'm a drug counselor." That's like saying "I'm a Doctor" or "I'm a lawyer," or "I'm a massage therapist." All require specific training in most states, and licensing or certification.

Or it's like saying "I'm a cop" when you are in fact a civilian volunteer that 'patrols' parking lots looking for cars parked in handicapped stalls without a proper tag.

In some states (I believe a majority), you could be in legal trouble for making such a statement.

holesinpaper
12-16-2011, 16:43
You need to be able to see a big picture approach to the subject. Too many people see the Mexico violence on TV and say, "Let's put an end to that War on Drugs to stop the violence."

Well....it's like Business. Change the price of oil in the Middle East and that can have an effect on the price of soup in China, new buildings going up in Las Vegas, YOUR raise at work, etc.

The biggest problem I bring up that people do not see is the relationship with local crime in your neighborhoods. It's important to have a very clear understanding on crime trends and addiction to know how it will effect the US as a whole. Right now, the areas where drugs are more easily available in open air drug markets also have the highest amount of crimes. There are major drug hubs in the US where almost all of your dope comes in from Mexico.

If you solve one problem you create a few hundred more.

I hear that specific cities were hotbeds of governmental corruption, bribery, violence, gang activity and drug trafficking (alcohol is a drug) during alcohol prohibition. For example... Chicago! Also violence was increased along "drug running corridors" during Alcohol prohibition (remember, alcohol is a drug).

So yes, I believe there is a connection between prohibition, and regional crime trends. We just disagree on causes.

BTW, using the "butterfly effect (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butterfly_effect)" as a tool to spread FUD (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear,_uncertainty_and_doubt) doesn't work so well. You are just trying to use fear as a rhetorical tool, without actually offering anything of real substance (or an real, reasonable explanation of the connection you allege).

NorthCarolinaLiberty
12-16-2011, 16:51
My replies in blue.

You need to humble yourself a bit. Saying because you have known a few drug users who were addicts and some who were not does not make you an expert. Your research is reading articles also does not make an expert.
You asked for my experience and I told you. You asked me where and how I get my information and I told you. Never claimed to be an expert. There are about five things in life that I know fairly well, but this is hardly one of them.
<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
The funny thing is that I really don’t have a lot of interest in this issue, at least from the standpoint of activity. I got involved in this thread because I see how the misuse of the statistical measure mode often drastically muddles an issue.



I am not the king of drugs, but I have worked in specialized units statewide, I currently teach classes on drug use/recognition as well as retail theft trends involving drug use, have worked as a counselor for drug courts, been in thousand of homes with drug use families, been in hundreds of dope stash and cut houses, interviewed and established relationships with informants of all level of addictions, talked with thousands of people about their motivations for crimes or prostitution or violence, etc etc etc. I've arrested everyone rem your homeless heroin addict to your coke head big money politician and every one in between.
You’re experience is certainly valuable. I am sure you teach people a lot. (And this is not a sarcastic comment).

<o:p></o:p>


Plain and simple there is a correlation between drug use and addiction and crime.
I never said there wasn’t, but the devil is always in the details. Where are those correlations? Are they simply with the hardcore users and the exaggerations of TV, or do they go further?

I presented deeper issues that you never addressed, such as, Does criminalizing drugs lead people to come in contact more frequently with other criminal elements? Would they necessarily interact with these criminal elements if their durg of choice were legal? What is different about the housewife ingesting pain killers versus the street thug ingesting pain killers?

You never even bothered to define “user.” If a policy maker or officer is speaking of “users,” are they speaking of common surveys where people indicate they have used in the past month? If so, how many of those users are first-time users? Semi-annual users? Regular users? How many of those users are abusers? How many of those users are addicts?<o:p></o:p>




The more articles and proof people show you the madder you get and attack those sources or try to confuse the facts.
You have much experience, so why don’t you represent it? You instead google an article from the Chicago Sun Times and quote an entertaining TV show. I can be critical of those sources because there is objective criteria for evaluating sources.

Your facts are either inaccurate, or are not verified by other research. Among your “facts”:

“Methadone clinics are for profit clinics...” (My comment: Clinics are a mix of non-profit and for profit.)
<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
Heroin addiction begins in a few days. (My comment: Contradicted by my experience and research. This feeds the misconception regarding instantaneous addiction.)
<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
“Drugs are still the number one motivator for almost all crimes.” (My comment: I don’t even know what to say about that one.)
<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>

…people flag you down and yell "blow" on the corners to sell you dope.<o:p></o:p>
I’ve been on those “corners,” but even a suburban housewife could almost see the lack of common sense in this statement. You make it sound like the newsboy who yells, “Extra! Extra! Read all about it!”<o:p></o:p>

NorthCarolinaLiberty
12-16-2011, 17:04
My replies in blue.


Or, in SE DC where long stem roses sold at the curb are $20 each. Guess the little package of "flower-fresh" stuck down in the paper wrapping is good stuff.
What does this have to do with anything? That might get you support from the suburban housewife, but it’s pretty blasé and says nothing about statistical trends.



Now, NorthCarolinaLiberty, for clarification, would you mind telling us just how many the "plenty" in "plenty of low life drug users" is?
Depends on if you’re talking about "friends," acquaintances, or others. All told, several dozen, if not more. That involvement was no more than five years.



When you said, "I learned that a drug user was a thief or addict, but also a decent boss or a classmate. The person was also and anywhere in between the whole range of human experience," are you describing just one person you know?
I just described four people in that statement, so the answer to your question is no.



You say, "The topics widely vary, but I've had good practice distinguishing quality information from less than stellar." How much of your research has been on drug users, drug use, addicts? Is it 10%, 25%, 50%? To what topic would you say you devoted the most research time?
Well, I’m not a mathematician who keeps a journal. I first looked up drug statistics after the Reagan’s September 1986 speech that launched the current “drug war.” We had a teacher who taught us to always dig a little deeper on such matters, so I went to the library and looked up the University of Michigan surveys on drug use. I continued to look at such things and consistently noted a startling reality. That reality was a serious inconsistency between statistics and the hyperbole of law enforcement, public policy, and TV. <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
I’m actually not even all that interested in this topic, but please tell your interest. Have you done research? What is the basis of your opinion? Have you ever done any drugs? Have you ever bought drugs? How many dealers have you personally known? Have you ever had a conversation with a heroin user? How long will you stay high on PCP? What if it’s the fake stuff made from Clorox bleach? How much bleach is too much? Do you know how to detect fake acid? Have you ever had a collapse looking in the mirror? Are your lungs burning?

NorthCarolinaLiberty
12-16-2011, 17:07
What portion of the big picture are hardcore heroin addicts?

I'm sure I could learn something on that ridealong (as long as I'm not cuffed, ha ha). I'll do that week ride if you spend a weeking learning some basic research. Questions like yours above aren't that hard to answer.

NorthCarolinaLiberty
12-16-2011, 17:15
My answers in blue.

You need to be able to see a big picture approach to the subject. Too many people see the Mexico violence on TV and say, "Let's put an end to that War on Drugs to stop the violence."
You say this, but then tell everyone to watch a similar sensational TV show to get a better understanding of things.


The biggest problem I bring up that people do not see is the relationship with local crime in your neighborhoods.
People aren't dumb. They can easily see this. The problem is with pithy slogans/solutions based on sensational cable TV shows.

NorthCarolinaLiberty
12-16-2011, 17:24
IYou are just trying to use fear as a rhetorical tool, without actually offering anything of real substance (or an real, reasonable explanation of the connection you allege).

Thanks, HIP. That's exactly my point. This thread has been filled with hyperbole: Roses in Wash. DC. The myth of instantaneous addiction. The privacy of rehab clinics. "Documentaries" with lurid titles. NBC special on prostitutes. The idea that almost all crime is motivated by drugs.

These are ideas sold to the suburban housewife and the majority of people who have no experience with such matters. Combine this with media entertainment, and it's an easy sell.

NorthCarolinaLiberty
12-16-2011, 17:49
The easier it is to get drugs in hub areas and open air markets.


More hyperbole that is only part of the equation. If you're going to focus on the statistical mode, at least give consideration to other methods.

There is also the huge market where one needs to have connections. Many dealers will not even sell to you if they don't know you, or at least have a friend to vouch for you. It widely varies.

It's the same way for a user. A user wants to know his shopkeeper. What is the quality of what I'm buying? Did the guy unscrew the capsules and cut them with something? Is this crap going to give me a headache (or worse) later on? Should I deal with somebody I don't know well? I'm sure not buying a rose from some idiot in Washington DC.

The dumbest of the dumb openly advertise. They're the clowns who get caught. They're the easy catches you see on COPS TV.

holesinpaper
12-16-2011, 19:40
Oh yeah, if drugs cause crime, why is drug use up and crime rates down across the nation -- as a trend over decades. http://www.youthfacts.org/drugs.html

Some think guns cause crime. Yet in actuality states that moved to shall issue CCW permits, and generally loosened gun laws, have experienced a significant drop in crime rates. http://www.nraila.org/Issues/FactSheets/Read.aspx?id=206&issue=007 Even the NRA states crime rates are at historic lows when they point out that gun ownership does not cause crime.

Claims that drug use causes an increase in crime are not based on factual or accurate data imho.

Likewise for claims that guns access causes crime -- it's a disprovable, politically motivated lie.

So to break it down: more gun ownership causes a reduction crime. More drugs use causes a reduction in crime.

Oh wait, I mean more drug use does not cause an increase crime. See I almost drew an incorrect correlation like Sharky and Russ ;)

holesinpaper
12-16-2011, 19:42
To Shark and Russ:

In your professional experience, is it easier for the average teenager to obtain alcohol, or illegal drugs?

I'm honestly curious about your opinions.

Personally I have always seen it being easier for kids to get illegal drugs. Marijuana is far easier to obtain for kids, than alcohol (i.e. they can get 1/8th of weed a lot easier than a full case of beer or a full fifth of hard alcohol). My own experience as a youth (umm, a long time ago) backs up my experience of working in the field.

I can find numerous sources that back up my claim and experience, but I don't feel like taking the time. Instead here's a just one, from a hardcore 'toe the party line' anti-drug website that backs up my claim. They admit it's easier for kids to obtain Marijuana than Alcohol http://www.adolescent-substance-abuse.com/substance-abuse/is-marijuana-or-alcohol-having-more-impact-on-your-teen.htm The quote is "experts and adolescents say it's easier" to get pot than alcohol. Yes there are source studies and surveys that back up that claim.

That's some damning proof that the WOD = failure. When it comes to prohibition, the black market will always win. Those who don't learn from history, are doomed to repeat it.

holesinpaper
12-16-2011, 19:50
Roses in Wash. DC.

Those roses in DC are just an attempt to cover up the stink of rotten politicians.

See that's just adding levity :tongueout:

Sharky7
12-16-2011, 20:28
people flag you down and yell "blow" on the corners to sell you dope.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
I’ve been on those “corners,” but even a suburban housewife could almost see the lack of common sense in this statement. You make it sound like the newsboy who yells, “Extra! Extra! Read all about it!”<o:p></o:p>
--------------------

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/il-court-of-appeals/1573315.html

Sharky7
12-16-2011, 20:32
Heroin addiction begins in a few days. (My comment: Contradicted by my experience and research. This feeds the misconception regarding instantaneous addiction.)
<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
--------------------
Opiate Dependance only takes a few days. Good for you for not becoming an addict. Others are not so lucky.

Every has their niche. Some people are drawn to stimulants, some opiates, some hallucinogens, etc. Hopefully that niche never consumes you.

RussP
12-16-2011, 20:59
Obviously I lack the experience of using drugs, the experience of socially interacting with addicts that y'all profess to have. Since you deem your extensive research of the works of others that support your positions far superior to decades of field experience putting bad guys in jail and keeping others out of jail, and the specific training on Sharky7's part, I really see no sense in trying to explain to you how the real world works for other people.

Just be careful what you wish for. There are unintended consequences lurking out there. The vacuum resulting from your liberation from drug laws will be filled.

Y'all have fun...

holesinpaper
12-16-2011, 21:35
Obviously I lack the experience of using drugs, the experience of socially interacting with addicts that y'all profess to have.

Now that's a tried and true Glocktalk tactic.

Anyone who does NOT support the war on drugs, must therefore be a drug user. Utter fail.

Quote where I said I used drugs.

And since a large number of Americans use drugs, and are drug dependant, it means you do interact with them every day -- they are your friends, co-workers and family. You'll find out about when they die, get arrested or hit a moment of clarity and sober up.

I know an LAPD officer who is such a chronic drunk he has to drink before his shift. This is current (Dec 2011). None of his co-workers know (or if someone does they are just ignoring it).

Eventually this officer will make a mistake that brings his problem of being drunk on the job to light. That's when his co-workers will find out. Same thing goes with drugs.

BTW he has the same old story or justification. Going through a divorce, losing his house to the wife, losing the custody fight for his kids, but in the end they are just inadequate justifications of an alcohol abuse. After all, he had other excuses before the divorce to rationalize his alcohol abuse... and can't admit that his alcohol abuse helped cause the divorce.

holesinpaper
12-16-2011, 21:37
The vacuum resulting from your liberation from drug laws will be filled.

Yes, by RJ Reynolds, Phillip Morris, Pfizer, Eli Lilly, et cetera.

NorthCarolinaLiberty
12-17-2011, 08:32
--------------------

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/il-court-of-appeals/1573315.html


Did the officer recover his megaphone, too?

By the way, what kind of ordinance prevents solicitation of unlawful business? Isn't that redundant? Guess that's government for you.

NorthCarolinaLiberty
12-17-2011, 08:36
Every has their niche. Some people are drawn to stimulants, some opiates, some hallucinogens, etc. Hopefully that niche never consumes you.

Don't forget the many people whose physiology rejects these highs the first time out.

Geez, does the drama never stop with you people?

NorthCarolinaLiberty
12-17-2011, 08:40
By the way, the crazy prices and flucuations of one drug are often the result government crackdowns on other drugs. It's the result of a drastic supply change, not some wild new demand. I've seen that.

NorthCarolinaLiberty
12-17-2011, 08:46
Speaking of levity, the science of this thread gave me a flashback. Who doesn't remember this blast from the past?:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nl5gBJGnaXs
:laughabove:



Denny's marketing must've used that one for their burnout customers.

Sharky7
12-17-2011, 17:36
Did the officer recover his megaphone, too?

By the way, what kind of ordinance prevents solicitation of unlawful business? Isn't that redundant? Guess that's government for you.

In some areas it is like Extra Extra like a news boy.

Sharky7
12-17-2011, 17:37
By the way, the crazy prices and flucuations of one drug are often the result government crackdowns on other drugs. It's the result of a drastic supply change, not some wild new demand. I've seen that.

Where did this come from? Go ahead with your experience on this....What do you mean?

Sharky7
12-17-2011, 17:40
Don't forget the many people whose physiology rejects these highs the first time out.

Geez, does the drama never stop with you people?

It's definitely interesting to see who is drawn to what drugs and how the make up of one person is different from another. Guys who are all about the rush and enjoy betting are usually drawn to stimulants for example. Others such as someone with already existing ADHD problems may also be drawn to stimulants.

You wouldn't consider it drama with your eyes further open. You should humble yourself a bit as well....people much stronger than you have fallen and been consumed by drugs.

Sharky7
12-17-2011, 17:46
I know an LAPD officer who is such a chronic drunk he has to drink before his shift. This is current (Dec 2011). None of his co-workers know (or if someone does they are just ignoring it).

Eventually this officer will make a mistake that brings his problem of being drunk on the job to light. That's when his co-workers will find out. Same thing goes with drugs.



If you are being honest, then you need to man up and take action otherwise it is putting people in danger. Reading your post history just in this thread alone, I question your integrity and maturity.

holesinpaper
12-17-2011, 21:15
I question your integrity and maturity.

You can't win an argument about the WoD, so you do a personal attack. Now that's real mature glocktalk of you.

At least I didn't misrepresent myself as a Drug and Alcohol counselor.

You are either a liar or ignorant: and that's based on fact, based on what you typed. That's not a personal attack, that is simply true.



You made a claim to be a drug counselor -- a position that has educational and licensure requirements
I called you on it.
You had to backpedal and say that you were really a "volunteer" with a drug court.

If you intentionally lied, then it is fair to question all of what you have said.

If you made that statement out of ignorance, then it is fair to question all that you have said, along with your professional competency.

I can't see a third explanation. It's either an intentional misrepresentation (lie), or ignorance. If you have a third explanation, I'd love to hear it. Seriously, because if it's reasonable then I'll just drop this issue.

Again, this isn't a personal attack, it's fact. Yes I'll keep coming back to this because it is what YOU SAID. It is in black and white. It's either an ethical issue, or a matter of ignorance that shows you know next to nothing about drug and alcohol treatment.

http://education-portal.com/drug_counselor_career.html
To paraphrase the linked website:


Every state has a licensing requirement.
A masters degree (in a applicable field) is typically required.
Drug and alcohol counselors are "heavily monitored" by the state (umm, you think that's because they deal with 'at risk' populations. Populations that people prey on by misrepresenting their professional credentials).

How about this, since this is actually a real legal issue. How about Russ (an active LEO I think) bring this thread (and your claim to be a "drug counselor") to the attention of your superiors.

I'm serious. People who are real drug counselors spend a lot of time and money for the privileged of using that title. For you to usurp it to try and win an internet argument based on an "appeal to authority" (your own) is alarming and bespeaks your personal and professional moral character imho.

Again, this is NOT a personal attack.

You made a sincere statement, I am just holding you to what you actually typed. Because you are someone who has sworn an oath (I presume), this is a very serious issue imho. Because you are somene who testifies in court on a regular basis (I assume), this is a very serious issue imho.

You're a court mandated reporter too btw, if you are a sworn LEO. To have a court mandated reporter misrepresent themselves, or be so ignorant as to make such a huge misstatement, is distressing.

On the other hand, I am not a mandated reporter. I have sworn no oath. Therefore I have no legal or professional obligation to report that LAPD officer. Do I have a moral one? That depends on the personal philosophy of who you ask.

Personally I do not think a crime has occurred until there has been damage to property, or a person. So imho he is not breaking a just and moral law -- he's breaking an illegitimate nanny-state law, and perhaps contractual terms of his employment.

I sincerely hope he gets caught before he hurts someone, but no... I will not take any steps on that issue. In fact, I can honestly say I've forgotten enough details so as to make finding him implausible even if I was trying hard.

BTW here are some typical requirements for being a real drug and alcohol counselor http://www.adp.ca.gov/Licensing/pdf/FAQs_CADPAAC_13010.pdf

Admittedly this case involved taking payment, but the fact is when someone claims "I'm a drug counselor" it can result in arrest and conviction http://www.winknews.com/Local-Florida/2011-11-23/Venice-man-arrested-for-misrepresenting-himself-as-therapist
http://www.sarasotasheriff.org/press_detail.asp?R=11-179&ForPrintout=1

What's your state? I'll look up its requirements for you.

holesinpaper
12-17-2011, 21:27
By the way, the crazy prices and flucuations of one drug are often the result government crackdowns on other drugs. It's the result of a drastic supply change, not some wild new demand. I've seen that.

Where did this come from? Go ahead with your experience on this....What do you mean?

Sharky, since you're unwilling to concede simple and widely accepted economic theory in this debate, then really all that is left is low hanging fruit (like your seriously erroneous claim to be a drug counselor).

Law enforcement all but sets the price of illegal drugs https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/191856.pdf

holesinpaper
12-17-2011, 21:38
FWIW, normally I'm just here to debate with my head not my heart. It's the internet, not worth getting all worked up over anything. So converse, and have a little fun.

But claims that involves a professional license when there isn't one kinda piss me off. Sorry about that. I think it's far, far worse than some jerk wearing a fake Rolex or a chick carrying a fake gucci bag. Sharky should REALLY rethink how he presents his professional experience imho.

Ok fine, I'll drop it now... I've said my piece and I believe I'm right on this.. but I know this ain't going anywhere except maybe the ban hammer -- so y'all have fun arguing without me.

RussP
12-17-2011, 22:02
You might want to think again about your tirade...At least I didn't misrepresent myself as a Drug and Alcohol counselor.

You are either a liar or ignorant: and that's based on fact, based on what you typed. That's not a personal attack, that is simply true.


[LIST]
You made a claim to be a drug counselor -- a position that has educational and licensure requirements


What's your state? I'll look up its requirements for you.Is this the post that has your panties in a wad?I am not the king of drugs, but I have worked in specialized units statewide, I currently teach classes on drug use/recognition as well as retail theft trends involving drug use, have worked as a counselor for drug courts, been in thousand of homes with drug use families, been in hundreds of dope stash and cut houses, interviewed and established relationships with informants of all level of addictions, talked with thousands of people about their motivations for crimes or prostitution or violence, etc etc etc. I've arrested everyone rem your homeless heroin addict to your coke head big money politician and every one in between.Is it Sharkey7's statement that he has worked as a counselor for drug courts your problem?

Are you familiar with Drug Courts?

Are you knowledgeable about their structure?

Are you knowledgeable about who works within the Drug Court system, the professions whose members volunteer to counsel offenders?

Are all participants in the Drug Court system required to be licensed?

Sharkey7 did not say at any time he is a "Drug and Alcohol counselor," now did he? Quote his post where he stated that.

Sharkey7 did not say at any time he is a "drug counselor," did he. Quote the post where he specifically said that.

Your turn...if you have the courage.

RussP
12-17-2011, 22:03
FWIW, normally I'm just here to debate with my head not my heart. It's the internet, not worth getting all worked up over anything. So converse, and have a little fun.

But claims that involves a professional license when there isn't one kinda piss me off. Sorry about that. I think it's far, far worse than some jerk wearing a fake Rolex or a chick carrying a fake gucci bag. Sharky should REALLY rethink how he presents his professional experience imho.

Ok fine, I'll drop it now... I've said my piece and I believe I'm right on this.. but I know this ain't going anywhere except maybe the ban hammer -- so y'all have fun arguing without me.No, you are not even close to being right. YOU really need to know what you are talking about before you engage your wild imagination.

holesinpaper
12-17-2011, 23:14
You might want to think again about your tirade...Is this the post that has your panties in a wad?Is it Sharkey7's statement that he has worked as a counselor for drug courts your problem?

Are you familiar with Drug Courts?

Are you knowledgeable about their structure?

Like this state:
https://www.governmentjobs.com/view_job.cfm?JobID=398182

Or this state:
http://jobportland.net/job/5369/drug-court-counselor-ne-portland-at/

Or this state:
http://www.jud10.org/Jobs/drug_co_desc.htm

Etc.

All are "drug court counselors" positions. All require licensure or a certificate plus a college degree in related a field.

Legally I can call myself an attorney (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_of_attorney). Legally I can represent you, with your consent.

I have not attended law school, and I have not passed the bar. If I were to actually walk around calling myself an attorney then it would just make me look like an idiot imho.

If Shark has some legal loophole that allows him to refer to himself as a drug court counsler without any relevant license, certificate or applicable education than it is likely no different than me walking around calling myself an attorney. We'll probably never know what he really is without knowing his state, the county, the city, and the specific job title -- because then it could be researched. All that non-withstanding, he clearly used vernacular that a layman would realistically interpret as him having a professional license imho.

See, you're dragging me in again ;)

I have the courage, just please don't ban me. Tell me his city and actual court job title and I'll research this issue and get back to you. I'll look up state code, I'll call state licensing departments, I'll call the court, etc. More than happy to get real data, I just need to know the court's name, and his actual job title.

Sharky7
12-18-2011, 05:15
Holes, I've basically ignored you. You are making some goofy straw man argument and manipulating facts. Ok, it's not just not manipulation, it's lying. Go and re-read my posts, it no where says I am a licensed drug counselor. Every single post says exactly what I do. Our drug courts all use peer or volunteer counselors, our title is volunteer drug counselor. Get over it. It is what it is.

Plenty of guys at my Pd also go through certification for special rape training and their title is rape counselor, not certified licensed official rape counselor. Losing the argument on one front so you are turning it to another - I'm done with you.

Sharky7
12-18-2011, 07:46
If someone knows a police officer abusing alcohol on the job, they need to take action for his safety and the public. If you cared about your friend, you would tell him to get help and use some vacation time otherwise you turn him in. If you cared about the public, you would follow through with that promise.

Sometimes doing the right thing isn't always easy. It takes character, integrity, and being strong. Your non action as well as your posts here paint a clear picture of you. Even your post on the last page talking about the failure of the war on drugs shows either a lack of understanding or failure to read the rest of the thread. I am done conversing with you - you have shown some clear traits I would not enjoy as a friend and I am not going to waste anymore of my free time trying to talk through your insecurities.

RussP
12-18-2011, 08:00
You didn't do your homework very well. Here again are my questions:...

Is it Sharkey7's statement that he has worked as a counselor for drug courts your problem?

Are you familiar with Drug Courts?

Are you knowledgeable about their structure?

Are you knowledgeable about who works within the Drug Court system, the professions whose members volunteer to counsel offenders?

Are all participants in the Drug Court system required to be licensed?

Sharkey7 did not say at any time he is a "Drug and Alcohol counselor," now did he? Quote his post where he stated that.

Sharkey7 did not say at any time he is a "drug counselor," did he? Quote the post where he specifically said that...None of those questions are answered in yet another tirade.Like this state:
https://www.governmentjobs.com/view_job.cfm?JobID=398182

Or this state:
http://jobportland.net/job/5369/drug-court-counselor-ne-portland-at/

Or this state:
http://www.jud10.org/Jobs/drug_co_desc.htm

Etc.

All are "drug court counselors" positions. All require licensure or a certificate plus a college degree in related a field.

Legally I can call myself an attorney (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_of_attorney). Legally I can represent you, with your consent.

I have not attended law school, and I have not passed the bar. If I were to actually walk around calling myself an attorney then it would just make me look like an idiot imho.

If Shark has some legal loophole that allows him to refer to himself as a drug court counsler without any relevant license, certificate or applicable education than it is likely no different than me walking around calling myself an attorney. We'll probably never know what he really is without knowing his state, the county, the city, and the specific job title -- because then it could be researched. All that non-withstanding, he clearly used vernacular that a layman would realistically interpret as him having a professional license imho.

See, you're dragging me in again ;)

I have the courage, just please don't ban me. Tell me his city and actual court job title and I'll research this issue and get back to you. I'll look up state code, I'll call state licensing departments, I'll call the court, etc. More than happy to get real data, I just need to know the court's name, and his actual job title.As to giving you more information about himself, As I have counseled others in law enforcement over the years here, I will counsel Sharkey7 to not do so by any means. And I am not going to tell you any more than he is who he says he is.

As to what he really is, he's a real "cop" with all the **** that comes with being a real "cop".

To you, a four year degree is more important than years upon years upon years of practical on-the-job experience.

You say, "All that non-withstanding, he clearly used vernacular that a layman would realistically interpret as him having a professional license imho." First, the word is "notwithstanding."

Understanding more of the who, what, when, where, and how of drug courts, and being a layman myself, I can say your "interpretation" of "have worked as a counselor for drug courts" is incorrect.

Now, do your homework and research the drug court system. I'll give you a hint: The system relies on volunteers from multiple professions.

RussP
12-18-2011, 08:14
I know an LAPD officer who is such a chronic drunk he has to drink before his shift. This is current (Dec 2011). None of his co-workers know (or if someone does they are just ignoring it).

Eventually this officer will make a mistake that brings his problem of being drunk on the job to light. That's when his co-workers will find out. Same thing goes with drugs.

BTW he has the same old story or justification. Going through a divorce, losing his house to the wife, losing the custody fight for his kids, but in the end they are just inadequate justifications of an alcohol abuse. After all, he had other excuses before the divorce to rationalize his alcohol abuse... and can't admit that his alcohol abuse helped cause the divorce.If you are being honest, then you need to man up and take action otherwise it is putting people in danger. Reading your post history just in this thread alone, I question your integrity and maturity.If someone knows a police officer abusing alcohol on the job, they need to take action for his safety and the public. If you cared about your friend, you would tell him to get help and use some vacation time otherwise you turn him in. If you cared about the public, you would follow through with that promise.

Sometimes doing the right thing isn't always easy. It takes character, integrity, and being strong. Your non action as well as your posts here paint a clear picture of you. Even your post on the last page talking about the failure of the war on drugs shows either a lack of understanding or failure to read the rest of the thread. I am done conversing with you - you have shown some clear traits I would not enjoy as a friend and I am not going to waste anymore of my free time trying to talk through your insecurities.Yeah, Sharkey7, I was wondering about that situation myself.

holesinpaper, is this LAPD officer a member of your family?

NorthCarolinaLiberty
12-18-2011, 13:42
You should humble yourself a bit as well....people much stronger than you have fallen and been consumed by drugs.

Not sure how you assessed my entire constitution from a couple dozen posts, but I was not referring to myself. I was referring to the many people who physiologically eschew drugs because the effects of those drugs can be wildly exaggerated and distorted by media types and the uninformed. Every man's weakness is not necessarily linked to a narcotics schedule.

You can assign yourself all kinds of euphemistic job titles and actions, but it does not change the fact the you perform your duties in the context of law enforcement. Your title of "volunteer drug counselor" doesn't exactly denote (or even connote) the traditional definition of counselor. Yes, I can only imagine your department's job titles reflect your description of, "It is what it is."

I think it's really a shame that even such issues like job titles get muddled because the state chooses to mix and muddle behaviors. Your claim is sadly true: "Gangs, street crimes, drugs, prostitution, violence - all go hand in hand." That statement has become a catchall blank check to create all kinds of grossly misinformed spurious relationships, some of which you have made here.

Finally, you bear the responsibility of government's approach. It is clear that you would rather not have this as an issue that society decides, as evidenced by your statement, "Everyone has a choice on where they live - if people strive for no penalty drug use then they can move to a country to accomodate it."

It's just good to know that you have set yourself up as this nation's righteous caretaker. I guess it really "is what it is."





<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>

holesinpaper
12-18-2011, 14:11
You didn't do your homework very well. Here again are my questions:None of those questions are answered in yet another tirade.As to giving you more information about himself, As I have counseled others in law enforcement over the years here, I will counsel Sharkey7 to not do so by any means. And I am not going to tell you any more than he is who he says he is.

As to what he really is, he's a real "cop" with all the **** that comes with being a real "cop".

To you, a four year degree is more important than years upon years upon years of practical on-the-job experience.

You say, "All that non-withstanding, he clearly used vernacular that a layman would realistically interpret as him having a professional license imho." First, the word is "notwithstanding."

Understanding more of the who, what, when, where, and how of drug courts, and being a layman myself, I can say your "interpretation" of "have worked as a counselor for drug courts" is incorrect.

Now, do your homework and research the drug court system. I'll give you a hint: The system relies on volunteers from multiple professions.

Yeah, Sharkey7, I was wondering about that situation myself.

holesinpaper, is this LAPD officer a member of your family?

Hmm, you actually go grammar nazi on me. Now we almost have a trifecta of internet winning: grammar criticism and the word nazi on a thread.

You advise to not give additional information to people on your side of the argument.

Then you turn around and request additional information from me.

Hardly fair and balanced, and it's telling in regards to this entire debate. You and Sharky have a personal financial interest in the continuation of the WoD, it helps pay your wages.

It's almost like trying to convince welfare recipients that welfare is bad for society and should be ended. (note, I'm not saying you and sharky are on welfare, just pointing out that it's very hard for someone with a vested financial interest in the outcome to change their position based on hard data).

Like I already said, I can call myself an attorney. It would make me a joke, but I can do it. Someone who walks around saying he is a "counselor for a drug court" (drug court counselor) is no different imho.

I'll let other readers determine for themselves if Sharky misrepresented himself, or did some dramatic hyperbole in order to set himself up an "appeal to authority" type argument. If yuo can't win on the facts, try something else right? That's all I see it as, this claim to be a counslor, to have been on TV, etc.

I have no dog in this hunt really. I'm not an illegal drug user. I derive no financial benefit from the WoD. I just see the WoD as wasting my tax dollars and eroding civil liberties and freedom.

Drug use is up, crime is down. Not just within 1 year, or a 5 year period, but consistently over decades as a nationwide US trend. That alone proves the WoD is a failure, and drug use is not the root cause of crime.

holesinpaper
12-18-2011, 14:22
I'm bowing out. There's 4 guys arguing on the net, and none will EVER change their minds.

Good luck to y'all, and to all a Merry Christmas. God bless ;)

RussP
12-18-2011, 16:26
Hmm, you actually go grammar nazi on me. Now we almost have a trifecta of internet winning: grammar criticism and the word nazi on a thread.Hey, nazi is your word, and yet another false interpretation of someone's words.

You advise to not give additional information to people on your side of the argument.

Then you turn around and request additional information from me.Where have I asked for your city, county, state, employer? That was your request of Sharkey7. You are the one asking for the personal information, not me.

Hardly fair and balanced, and it's telling in regards to this entire debate. You and Sharky have a personal financial interest in the continuation of the WoD, it helps pay your wages. My wages? Where do you get that idea? Oh, do you think I am in law enforcement? Again, you don't do your homework very well. Never have been employed in law enforcement and never said so.

It's almost like trying to convince welfare recipients that welfare is bad for society and should be ended. (note, I'm not saying you and sharky are on welfare, just pointing out that it's very hard for someone with a vested financial interest in the outcome to change their position based on hard data).No, I have no vested financial interest in the outcome of your desire to eliminate drug laws.

Like I already said, I can call myself an attorney. It would make me a joke, but I can do it. Someone who walks around saying he is a "counselor for a drug court" (drug court counselor) is no different imho.Have you done that homework assignment yet? Obviously not, nor do I believe you ever will, because if you do, you'll have to apologize to Sharkey7.

I'll let other readers determine for themselves if Sharky misrepresented himself, or did some dramatic hyperbole in order to set himself up an "appeal to authority" type argument. If yuo can't win on the facts, try something else right? That's all I see it as, this claim to be a counslor, to have been on TV, etc.there are no facts you would deem credible. You want statistics, but the real facts are lived out on the streets, in the classrooms, on college campuses, in the workplace, including some boardrooms, in homes, and in the jails and prisons. Yeah, we know. All that is too emotional for you.

I have no dog in this hunt really. Your emotional responses to Sharkey 7 don't agree with that. I'm not an illegal drug user.You would prefer remaining an enabler. I derive no financial benefit from the WoD. I just see the WoD as wasting my tax dollars and eroding civil liberties and freedom.Let's go back and talk about the cost of drug use to businesses. How about the cost to...sorry, that's not your fight, is it?

Drug use is up, crime is down. Not just within 1 year, or a 5 year period, but consistently over decades as a nationwide US trend. That alone proves the WoD is a failure, and drug use is not the root cause of crime.Are drug related crimes down, crimes where drugs were a factor?

RussP
12-18-2011, 16:29
Yeah, Sharkey7, I was wondering about that situation myself.

holesinpaper, is this LAPD officer a member of your family?Since you refused to answer, we'll take that as a yes. That makes the lack of intervention even more egregious.

RyanBDawg
12-18-2011, 17:31
So again.. If you were the guy making all the rules.. What would you do about the war on drugs? Reading some of your posts it's obvious that it has been a total failure in that in Chicago you can get virtually any drug you want.. So what would you do seeing as the current solution is not working, and has only compounded the problem for the past 40 years..

I'm still waiting for an answer to this question..


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

TBO
12-19-2011, 11:29
I wouldn't say the war on drugs have failed just like I wouldn't say the laws on DUI have failed. People are going to drink and drive - people are going to use drugs. It's about harm reduction and management if a better society.

Exactly. So many people approach the topic of drugs by first forming a conclusion ("I want drugs legalized"), then go off in search of an argument to support it. That's why we see such grasping and leaps of logic on the subject.

One of the most common refrains is:

-WOD is expensive
-WOD is a failure, drugs are still here

That is nothing but hyperbole. I guess we can call the War on Murder a failure too, since people still kill. The War on Burglary hasn't fared any better. Same for the War on Police Brutality. It still happens, so I guess we should repeal all the laws covering those things and save money! Yeah!

If one approaches the topic by applying logic and deductive reasoning you don't see such simple and flawed "arguments".

jmho

RussP
12-19-2011, 12:31
Exactly. So many people approach the topic of drugs by first forming a conclusion ("I want drugs legalized"), then go off in search of an argument to support it. That's why we see such grasping and leaps of logic on the subject.

One of the most common refrains is:

-WOD is expensive
-WOD is a failure, drugs are still here

That is nothing but hyperbole. I guess we can call the War on Murder a failure too, since people still kill. The War on Burglary hasn't fared any better. Same for the War on Police Brutality. It still happens, so I guess we should repeal all the laws covering those things and save money! Yeah!

If one approaches the topic by applying logic and deductive reasoning you don't see such simple and flawed "arguments".

jmho
Welcome TBO...

Sharky7
12-19-2011, 16:56
I'm still waiting for an answer to this question..


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

I have been waiting for the thread to change from the grade school tone to adult level. Hopefully we are there, no offense meant to you.

There are so many variables to what happens in our world. From a criminal justice enforcement stand point, I would start with some of these ideas.

Connecting restrictions on government welfare programs with drug arrests would have a significant impact. You would be surprised how much money, aid, and food stamps go to drug addicts who constantly are arrested for drug or theft crimes. There is no consequences. You can drop $50 a day on heroin, but still keep getting food stamps. That is not right/ethical. Giving an offender the option of taking drug treatment and continued drug tests to continue receiving benefits or stop getting benefits all together.

Better probation/supervision for people currently in the system. We have a lot of programs already in place to help people not repeat their offenses, unfortunately they are rarely followed through. Even with a positive urine test, it is rare to have your supervision/probation/parole revoked.

Sharky7
12-19-2011, 17:07
I'm bowing out. There's 4 guys arguing on the net, and none will EVER change their minds.

Good luck to y'all, and to all a Merry Christmas. God bless ;)

Well, sounds like you will still be busy. A Google search yielded 1,450,000 results for "volunteer counselor drug court." On the first few pages alone there are several people who use the same title for their programs on their resumes.

That is a lot of people to contact to let them know you don't like the title they use - good luck!!

In case you want to volunteer yourself - I found 2,810,000 results. So, you should be able to find at least a drug court or two to help out in your area. Some places call it a mentor, I found 888,000 results for that. So....if you feel uncomfortable being called a volunteer counselor for drug court, you can be called a volunteer mentor for drug court too if you would like.

:wavey:

RyanBDawg
12-19-2011, 19:24
I have been waiting for the thread to change from the grade school tone to adult level. Hopefully we are there, no offense meant to you.

There are so many variables to what happens in our world. From a criminal justice enforcement stand point, I would start with some of these ideas.

Connecting restrictions on government welfare programs with drug arrests would have a significant impact. You would be surprised how much money, aid, and food stamps go to drug addicts who constantly are arrested for drug or theft crimes. There is no consequences. You can drop $50 a day on heroin, but still keep getting food stamps. That is not right/ethical. Giving an offender the option of taking drug treatment and continued drug tests to continue receiving benefits or stop getting benefits all together.

Better probation/supervision for people currently in the system. We have a lot of programs already in place to help people not repeat their offenses, unfortunately they are rarely followed through. Even with a positive urine test, it is rare to have your supervision/probation/parole revoked.


I've got no argument against this. Especially connecting restrictions on all types of welfare..

railfancwb
12-20-2011, 02:34
I always get a good laugh when I read the local paper's story of a marijuana eradication operation.

99% of the time, it's a group of 10-12 overweight cops, all dressed in tactical gear with ATV's and a helicopter, posing with a small growing operation.

I would guess they spend thousands of dollars to wipe out a few plants.

This is a great example of waste.

But don'cha know ALL of the seeds and plant fragments were destroyed in the blaze, and no one was allowed downwind.