The War on Drugs in America

godix · Post by **godix** » Wed Mar 07, 2007 1:49 am

slackergirl wrote:Also, my big argument against legalizing pot would be that there's no quick, reliable "blood pot level" test to weed out (pun intended) the ****tards who think driving high is a good idea. And you can't deny that number would go up if pot were more readily available. (Not that it isn't pretty easy to get as is...)

Just my 2 cents. Take it for what it's worth.

We don't need no test to tell if someone is driving if they're high, we need a test to see if someone is capable of driving regardless of the reason. I mean if we're honestly concerned about safety then lets make some rules based on safety for a damned change. No driving unless your reaction time is better than X. No driving while your depth perception is worse than Y. No driving while your vision is impaired beyond Z. Test and find out what values X Y and Z should be, then pass the fucking law. Then forget about outlawing driving while high on pot and nullify any laws about driving while drunk. If they're high/drunk enough they can't pass the standard then they get nailed. If they can pass the standard then what does it matter how much they drank/smoked? And yes, I'm fully aware this some people who haven't touched a drop or smoked a joint would get caught. Good. If they don't know how to drive they're every bit as dangerous as a pot head behind the wheel.

slackergirl · Post by **slackergirl** » Wed Mar 07, 2007 2:14 am

point conceded

guy07 · Post by **guy07** » Wed Mar 07, 2007 2:16 pm

godix wrote:Personally I think the answer is easy. Legalize and tax most drugs, boom instant profit and fewer victimless criminals in jail.

Ditto, Make the same laws with the drugs as you do booze, no drugs and driving,don't go to work on drugs ext. That's way too much money spent on a dead topic, hell if i legalize it, half the drug dealers will go broke. win win, cept for catholics and scientologists :p

slackergirl · Post by **slackergirl** » Wed Mar 07, 2007 7:37 pm

guy07 wrote: win win, cept for catholics and scientologists :p

And of course, cept for the people who kill themselves doing drugs!

Beowulf · Post by **Beowulf** » Wed Mar 07, 2007 8:19 pm

What slackergirl fails to notice is that people are by and large, completely capable of driving while stoned. People can NOT drive when they have drank a certain amount of alcohol. After smoking 2 joints, people can still drive fine.

Also the reason drugs, and particularly heroin, will NEVER be legalized in this country is because the government makes a ton of money selling them. End of story.

Its not going to happen.

Kalium · Post by **Kalium** » Wed Mar 07, 2007 11:16 pm

Beowulf wrote:Also the reason drugs, and particularly heroin, will NEVER be legalized in this country is because the government makes a ton of money selling them. End of story.

Ah, conspiracy theorists. They never fail to amuse.

Shazzy · Post by **Shazzy** » Thu Mar 08, 2007 12:16 am

Kalium wrote:
Beowulf wrote:Also the reason drugs, and particularly heroin, will NEVER be legalized in this country is because the government makes a ton of money selling them. End of story.
Ah, conspiracy theorists. They never fail to amuse.

THE MOON LANDING WAS FAKED!!!

requiett · Post by **requiett** » Thu Mar 08, 2007 12:27 am

Kalium wrote:
Beowulf wrote:Also the reason drugs, and particularly heroin, will NEVER be legalized in this country is because the government makes a ton of money selling them. End of story.
Ah, conspiracy theorists. They never fail to amuse.

I like the running gag that CIA stands for "Cocaine Importing Agency."

While there's certainly no hardcore evidence to indict the CIA, their mission statement involves the use of any means delegated by their agency president in the name of national security. It says so right on the agency's site. If those means involve getting extra funding via trafficking, it can justified internally as long as it's hidden.

There have been alot of "whistle blowers" and ex-CIA operatives who talked openly about possible drug activities in the past. Whether they were for real, out for publicity, or made up for journalistic purposes, it doesn't stop alot of people from being convinced. You should naturally be concerned about agencies that have free reign in many of their activities because of the urgency for national security.

You can roll your eyes all you want and call people who have their theories "kooks," but you should also take note of your rights slowly being ground away right in front of you.

slackergirl · Post by **slackergirl** » Thu Mar 08, 2007 12:55 am

Capable, maybe, but I still wouldn't recommend it! I've seen my share of stoned people/animals in my time, and I wouldn't let a one of them drive me anywhere! :p

(and before you jump to any conclusions about the animals bit, I'm a veterinarian, and have treated a few dogs for weird signs after eating "oregano". True story

Beowulf · Post by **Beowulf** » Thu Mar 08, 2007 1:20 am

There are quite a few whistle-blowers who spell it all out, and have been spelling it out for a while now. Instead of citing numerous sources that you won't check and don't care about I'll just ask a couple of questions.

Does it seem ridiculous that the Central Intelligence Agency has secret projects that very few people know about? (the answer is a big fucking NO, fyi)

What would be a good way to pay for all these projects? Taxes? Fund raisers? National loans? Charity?

John Gotti, the famous New York gangster was asked if he sold drugs and he quipped "What, and compete with the U.S. government?" Its a running joke.

Type "golden triangle" into google. The history of the CIA and heroin, and how they both have REALLY shaped global history is really fascinating.

If anyone really gives a shit about any of this, I'll post book names and publishers and all that stuff later. If your just going to file this under conspiracy bullshit, don't waste my time. It is fascinating history, however.