US drug war has met none of its goals

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

The Christian movement was VERY involved in prohibition, but they lost because the corrupters had more money and influence and were able to manipulate the people into the thinking it was a war that could not be one. Which is in part true because all the other countries were making booze and importing it to America.

Though what about drugs? Will that excuse fly today? NO. America is paying countries around the world, money to do a job they are not doing, and if they cant do it? Time to cut off the funds and wage war ourselves.

Again, you are missing the point. It doesn't really matter who is making what and sending it where, or what countries around the world are doing. You are attempting to tackle the symptom of the problem, not the problem itself.

When you say thing like: "Alcohol has been used for MILLENNIUMS to keep the poor suppressed..." It sounds as if poor people were rounded up and forced to drink alcohol against their will! "Was used" indicates someone made the conscious effort to utilize alcohol to obtain a specific result, and it completely ignores the root problem, in an attempt to shift blame. Alcohol was made available, but people make the individual choice to use it.

You're never going to stop people from using drugs or alcohol by stopping the supply, or prohibition. Because it is an action that doesn't address the PROBLEM! You must get to the root of the problem, and find why people desire to get high, why they need that escape from reality, what is the underlying cause of their addiction. Until you start to do that, you will never make a dent in the drug and alcohol abuse problems.

 

[Timshel]

The same way they separate hate speech and racism. BAN IT. Debating about legalizing drugs is one thing. Promoting the use to millions of children is another.

Sure, that's a real clear distinction that I am sure the judges will accept. So, "Legalize It," okay or not?

The main sources were European. Not to mention alot of politicians were alcohol drinkers. Therefore it was a losing battle.



If there is one subject I know ALOT about? Its the drug trade and drug use. So spare me your Bullshit.

Yes drugs are everywhere. It used to be an elite and poor man's drug but no more. Doesn't deflect from the reason why drugs were introduced to society in the first place.

Alcohol has been used for MILLENNIUMS to keep the poor suppressed(and to escape their miserable lives) also. It was the recessions and depressions that made alcohol popular.

I don't think you know the first fucking thing about it. Alcohol was used for centuries because it was often safer than well water.

You think there was some sort of conspiracy by the rich that occured independently in nearly every culture. Okay, whatever. You're a dumbfuck. That's just insane and deserves no more consideration from a rational person.

Here are a few countries where the alcohol was coming from, but much was coming from Europe.

There is not one bit of information in that supporting the idea that the vast majority came from Europe. Frankly, I would guess much more came from the Americas, but still a large amount was being produced domestically.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Frankly, I would guess much more came from the Americas, but still a large amount was being produced domestically.

During Prohibition, there was probably more Gin made in bathtubs, than hooch smuggled from Europe.

 

[Timshel]

During Prohibition, there was probably more Gin made in bathtubs, than hooch smuggled from Europe.

I would guess so. I have not been able to find any stats on it. Sure, some came in from foreign countries, but most of that would have been from Canada, Mexico and the Caribbean (just like with the current prohibition), not Europe. I don't know what the fuck he is talking about.

 

[wiseones2cents]

Again, you are missing the point. It doesn't really matter who is making what and sending it where, or what countries around the world are doing. You are attempting to tackle the symptom of the problem, not the problem itself.

When you say thing like: "Alcohol has been used for MILLENNIUMS to keep the poor suppressed..." It sounds as if poor people were rounded up and forced to drink alcohol against their will! "Was used" indicates someone made the conscious effort to utilize alcohol to obtain a specific result, and it completely ignores the root problem, in an attempt to shift blame. Alcohol was made available, but people make the individual choice to use it.

You're never going to stop people from using drugs or alcohol by stopping the supply, or prohibition. Because it is an action that doesn't address the PROBLEM! You must get to the root of the problem, and find why people desire to get high, why they need that escape from reality, what is the underlying cause of their addiction. Until you start to do that, you will never make a dent in the drug and alcohol abuse problems.

Listen. Obviously an ounce of prevention is better than a pound of cure, and I agree educating the children is a part of the answer.

Alcohol was made available by WHOM in America? Criminals. Take away the criminals and their money flow and you take away AVAILABILITY.

The main thing to weaken these criminals is to take away their money supply. Once we achieve that, we can work on everything else.

And we must stop the promotion of drugs by musicians and actors. This is unacceptable. This is how they are poisoning the kids at a young age when they are vulnerable and do not know any better.

People do drugs because its the "in thing" to do for the most part. Then it develops into an addiction for many.

 

[wiseones2cents]

Sure, that's a real clear distinction that I am sure the judges will accept. So, "Legalize It," okay or not?

Free speech should have boundaries. And promoting illegal activity is that boundary.

I don't think you know the first fucking thing about it. Alcohol was used for centuries because it was often safer than well water.

Alcohol to compensate for water? It is clear I am dealing with an idiot of grand proportions. You should be the poster child for a reason why kids should not do drugs.

You think there was some sort of conspiracy by the rich that occured independently in nearly every culture. Okay, whatever. You're a dumbfuck. That's just insane and deserves no more consideration from a rational person.

Yes.

There is not one bit of information in that supporting the idea that the vast majority came from Europe. Frankly, I would guess much more came from the Americas, but still a large amount was being produced domestically.

Yes a large amount was being made domestically but the problem was more foreign, since there was no way to stop production outside the country. Here is some reading for you.

It mentions the British owned Caribbeans, Ireland, Canada, France I wouldn't be surprised Germany, Italy ect...

The point is, it was foreign booze being smuggled for the most part.

Read up on the history.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rum-running

 

[Timshel]

Free speech should have boundaries. And promoting illegal activity is that boundary.

You're evading. "Legalize It," ban it or not?

Alcohol to compensate for water? It is clear I am dealing with an idiot of grand proportions. You should be the poster child for a reason why kids should not do drugs.

Yes. Methods of alcohol preparation often involve pasteurization. The Egyptians did not understand why their beer was safer than water. But, it often was. Most ships would not have gone out without healthful benefits of alcohol.

Also, alcohol was largely a way to preserve grain.

These things are crazy while your worldwide conspiracy among witch doctors and other tribal healers makes perfect sense... To the delusional.

Yes a large amount was being made domestically but the problem was more foreign, since there was no way to stop production outside the country. Here is some reading for you.

It mentions the British owned Caribbeans, Ireland, Canada, France I wouldn't be surprised Germany, Italy ect...

The point is, it was foreign booze being smuggled for the most part.

Read up on the history.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rum-running

Do you want to change your ridiculous assertion to most of it came from foreign sources? Even your sources talk about how most of the imports came from the Americas. I seriously doubt European sources accounted for more than a small percentage of alcohol. You have provided nothing to show otherwise. You have not even shown that most of it was imported.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Listen. Obviously an ounce of prevention is better than a pound of cure, and I agree educating the children is a part of the answer.

Alcohol was made available by WHOM in America? Criminals. Take away the criminals and their money flow and you take away AVAILABILITY.

The main thing to weaken these criminals is to take away their money supply. Once we achieve that, we can work on everything else.

And we must stop the promotion of drugs by musicians and actors. This is unacceptable. This is how they are poisoning the kids at a young age when they are vulnerable and do not know any better.

People do drugs because its the "in thing" to do for the most part. Then it develops into an addiction for many.

Going after the supply or the user, is not going to ever work. It doesn't matter if you approach it from that perspective, it just will not work. Why? Because it doesn't address the root problem! To hell with 'better educating the children' they seem to be getting it, because use is declining among the teens, it's the ADULTS who need some education! You can't solve a problem by tackling the symptoms! Tons and tons of drugs are produced, sold, and used in America... until you address WHY, you will not solve the problem.

People do drugs because they are not content with life naturally. They seek to escape the 'norm' or remove the 'pain' of emotion, or maybe out of boredom, depression, or loneliness, they seek to escape the sense of reality. A variety of issues and pressures may cause this, and some people have a higher degree of susceptibility to addiction.

 

[Topspin]

Going after the supply or the user, is not going to ever work. It doesn't matter if you approach it from that perspective, it just will not work. Why? Because it doesn't address the root problem! To hell with 'better educating the children' they seem to be getting it, because use is declining among the teens, it's the ADULTS who need some education! You can't solve a problem by tackling the symptoms! Tons and tons of drugs are produced, sold, and used in America... until you address WHY, you will not solve the problem.

People do drugs because they are not content with life naturally. They seek to escape the 'norm' or remove the 'pain' of emotion, or maybe out of boredom, depression, or loneliness, they seek to escape the sense of reality. A variety of issues and pressures may cause this, and some people have a higher degree of susceptibility to addiction.

no people use religion to escape the reality you MORON

 

[Timshel]

People do drugs because they are not content with life naturally. They seek to escape the 'norm' or remove the 'pain' of emotion, or maybe out of boredom, depression, or loneliness, they seek to escape the sense of reality. A variety of issues and pressures may cause this, and some people have a higher degree of susceptibility to addiction.

Or they have a headache, they want a little wake up or they want to unwind. You seem to be buying into the myth that all drug use is abuse. The medical profession might object.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Unread Today, 03:35 PM
Remove user from ignore list
Topspin
This message is hidden because Topspin is on your ignore list.

I wish you would stop responding to my every post, you fuckwit! I am not reading any of it, and don't really give a shit what you have to say about anything. Nor does anyone else here, as far as I can tell. It's just annoying as piss, you want to run around obsessed with responding to anything I have to say, don't you have a fucking life?

 

[USFREEDOM911]

I wish you would stop responding to my every post, you fuckwit! I am not reading any of it, and don't really give a shit what you have to say about anything. Nor does anyone else here, as far as I can tell. It's just annoying as piss, you want to run around obsessed with responding to anything I have to say, don't you have a fucking life?

Wait until he starts PMing you.

At least he's easy to laugh at.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Or they have a headache, they want a little wake up or they want to unwind. You seem to be buying into the myth that all drug use is abuse. The medical profession might object.

Well, that is where we need to be having the discussion and debate, what reasons and justifications do people make for self-medicating? I think of the BILLIONS dumped into the War on Drugs through the years, and I wonder if we may not have been better off to have this discussion first... let's try to get to the bottom of what makes people use drugs, and if there is something wrong in their life, or something causing them to seek an escape through drug abuse, let's put it out there on the table and address it, not pretend it doesn't exist, or it's 'acceptable' and 'okay' to be that way.

 

[Timshel]

Well, that is where we need to be having the discussion and debate, what reasons and justifications do people make for self-medicating? I think of the BILLIONS dumped into the War on Drugs through the years, and I wonder if we may not have been better off to have this discussion first... let's try to get to the bottom of what makes people use drugs, and if there is something wrong in their life, or something causing them to seek an escape through drug abuse, let's put it out there on the table and address it, not pretend it doesn't exist, or it's 'acceptable' and 'okay' to be that way.

Okay, most people use drugs to treat some sort of ailment or because it just makes them feel good. Some people get carried away or use it to avoid there problems.

But people avoid reality in lot's of different ways. Shit, I come here sometimes to distract my mind from my own problems. Some people read books, go to a movie or contemplate God. What is wrong with that? Why isn't that acceptable? Just because you stay focused on your problem does not mean you are going to solve it. Sometimes you need a distraction.

Making your way in the world today takes everything you've got. Taking a break from all your worries, sure would help a lot. Wouldn't you like to get away?

Sometimes you want to go
where everybody knows your name,
and they're always glad you came.
You wanna be where you can see,
our troubles are all the same
You wanna be where everybody knows
Your name.

lol

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Okay, most people use drugs to treat some sort of ailment or because it just makes them feel good. Some people get carried away or use it to avoid there problems.

I think we can establish there is a distinct difference between those who are taking medication to treat an ailment, and those who are just trying to feel good. Since we can discern between the two from an ethical and moral standpoint, we should do that and not be afraid to have that conversation.

But people avoid reality in lot's of different ways. Shit, I come here sometimes to distract my mind from my own problems. Some people read books, go to a movie or contemplate God. What is wrong with that? Why isn't that acceptable? Just because you stay focused on your problem does not mean you are going to solve it. Sometimes you need a distraction.

What is wrong with that is the fact you are asking what is wrong with it. You obviously understand there is something unnatural about indulging in chemicals and alcohol, which prompted your response... What's wrong with it? Someone challenged your justifications for your own personal abuses and indulgence, and you feel the need to defend, prompting the question you ask. This IS the problem! Since.. oh, about the 1960s, we've embarked on establishing a culture of "if it feels good, do it" and we've become so entrenched in that immoral philosophy, when someone introduces common sense, we jump to defend our position, because we KNOW it's wrong.

 

[Timshel]

I think we can establish there is a distinct difference between those who are taking medication to treat an ailment, and those who are just trying to feel good.

I don't.

Since we can discern between the two from an ethical and moral standpoint, we should do that and not be afraid to have that conversation.

With which pill did Rush cross the line from moral drug user to immoral drug user? From what I understood, he had a legitimate use for his drug but apparently got carried away. You claim there is some bright line, I don't see it.

What is wrong with that is the fact you are asking what is wrong with it. You obviously understand there is something unnatural about indulging in chemicals and alcohol, which prompted your response... What's wrong with it? Someone challenged your justifications for your own personal abuses and indulgence, and you feel the need to defend, prompting the question you ask. This IS the problem! Since.. oh, about the 1960s, we've embarked on establishing a culture of "if it feels good, do it" and we've become so entrenched in that immoral philosophy, when someone introduces common sense, we jump to defend our position, because we KNOW it's wrong.

There is nothing unnatural about using "chemicals" to satisfy our needs or wants. Food and water set off chemical reactions in our body that we need for life. Medicines have helped to prolong our lives and have relieved much suffering.

There is something wrong with knowingly harming yourself and we have found that overusing just about anything is bad for you.

But there is nothing inherently wrong with wanting escape, which is what you are arguing is the root of the problem. Florida has a mutli-billion dollar industry built around escape (i.e., tourism). There are plenty of other industries that cater strongly to the human need for escape. All arts are largely dependent on it. Sports too.

I am sorry you are wrong. The desire to feel good and the need for recreational outlets is not a problem, at all. Over indulging can be a problem.

 

[Timshel]

BTW, the "if it feels good do it" philosophy is not new. It was not invented in the sixties. But, I would argue if it feels good do it until it starts hurting, e.g., pursue pleasure and happiness, but know the dangers and stop when it turns negative. Just remember, nobody wants a four hour boner. lol

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

There is nothing unnatural about using "chemicals" to satisfy our needs or wants.

Uhm, yes, putting chemicals into your body that do not occur naturally, is by definition, unnatural! Your attitude is EXACTLY why we can't even BEGIN to address the drug problem in America! Too many people like you, have brainwashed yourself into believing your own excuses and justifications for abusing drugs and alcohol. You don't see anything wrong with it... well, actually you DO see something wrong with it, you just don't want to admit it, and you'd rather remain in denial. You'd rather spew your rhetoric about Rush Limbaugh, and pontificate on freedom of personal choice. And since this is your philosophy and you aren't willing to change, we can't solve the drug problem... we can't even START to solve it.

 

[Topspin]

LOL at the guy who believes in majical powers cracking on people using chemicals. Bet Dixtard is the average fat ass pickup driving redneck.

 

[Timshel]

Uhm, yes, putting chemicals into your body that do not occur naturally, is by definition, unnatural!

Explain. Marijuana is just as natural as corn. Is this where you guys use some ridiculous circular logic and label things you don't like as unnatural?

Your attitude is EXACTLY why we can't even BEGIN to address the drug problem in America! Too many people like you, have brainwashed yourself into believing your own excuses and justifications for abusing drugs and alcohol. You don't see anything wrong with it... well, actually you DO see something wrong with it, you just don't want to admit it, and you'd rather remain in denial. You'd rather spew your rhetoric about Rush Limbaugh, and pontificate on freedom of personal choice. And since this is your philosophy and you aren't willing to change, we can't solve the drug problem... we can't even START to solve it.

I have not made excuses for abusing drugs. I have stated explicitly that it is not good.

There is something wrong with overeating. There is nothing wrong with eating. Likewise, there is nothing wrong with using substances to improve your condition, but those substances should not be abused.

You claimed there is some sort of clear distinction, but there is not. The line is dependent on the individual. Some people need 1500 calories some need 12000 (Phelps). 12000 calroies, for just about anybody, is way too much, but it works for Phelps.

Rush's scenario is a very good example of what I am talking about and so you avoid addressing it. When did he cross the line? I certainly don't know, I don't believe that the line can be drawn clearly and if it can then Rush himself is probably best able to figure out where the line is.

You are tilting at the wrong windmill. The human desire for pleasure is perfectly natural and good. It produces an enormous amount of good things. But, yes sometimes we go overboard. For instance, you, as an individual, probably would not be here without the fact that your mama and uncle were seeking pleasure.