Law Enforcement - The Good, The Bad, The Ugly.....

Who was in the wrong?

  • Cop

    Votes: 23 20.7%

  • Dude who got shot

    Votes: 33 29.7%

  • I like turtles

    Votes: 55 49.5%
  • Total voters
    111
Re: Wonder why some folks distrust LEO's?

You obviously didn't read the rest, I stated previously that I supported not throwing end users in jail.

Decriminalization ( not throwing users in jail ) is different from legalisation ( state sanctioned enterprise )
 
Re: Wonder why some folks distrust LEO's?

OpenGambit said:
You obviously didn't read the rest, I stated previously that I supported not throwing end users in jail.

Decriminalization ( not throwing users in jail ) is different from legalisation ( state sanctioned enterprise )
Click to expand...

Yes, I read it and it doesn't change the fact that prohibition doesn't work.
 
Re: Wonder why some folks distrust LEO's?

try quoting the whole paragraph.
 
Re: Wonder why some folks distrust LEO's?

mungo said:
We are talking about drug use. I call it the way I see it. If you can provide an example of prohibition that works I'll be happy to look at it.
Click to expand...

if you define "work" as 100 % elimination then no law does that.

but sure I can give an example of a place where harsh drug laws is also coupled with low drug use numbers: Singapore. Certainly not a perfect situation by any means, but this isn't exactly a "perfect solution" situation.

From the Guardian, a reputable news source.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/jun/05/singapore-policy-drugs-bay

"According to the 2008 World Drug Report by the United Nations office on drugs and crime 8.2% of the UK population are cannabis abusers; in Singapore it is 0.005%. For ecstasy, the figures are 1.8% for the UK and 0.003% for Singapore; and for opiates – such as heroin, opium and morphine – 0.9% for the UK and 0.005% for Singapore."


No I am not suggesting that we adopt that model. Before someone freaks out and starts talking about how I want to shoot a bunch of people.
 
Last edited:
Re: Wonder why some folks distrust LEO's?

"Singapore's drug enforcement agency admitted it had under-reported the number of people arrested for drugs offences between 2008 and 2010 due to a statistical error.As a result, the picture showed the drug situation in the city-state was improving during the period when it fact it got worse each year"

http://www.google.com/hostednews/af...ocId=CNG.b2efdd27b5ce40ab871e7fe5bf8ca0f8.881


Looks to me like they didn't go away, they just got more expensive.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2007/12/10/idUSSIN135004
 
Re: Wonder why some folks distrust LEO's?

OpenGambit said:
No I am not suggesting that we adopt that model. Before someone freaks out and starts talking about how I want to shoot a bunch of people.
Click to expand...

So unless we are willing to go that far as society, it is not a valid argument. In other words, not even worth mentioning.
 
Re: Wonder why some folks distrust LEO's?

mungo said:
"Singapore's drug enforcement agency admitted it had under-reported the number of people arrested for drugs offences between 2008 and 2010 due to a statistical error.As a result, the picture showed the drug situation in the city-state was improving during the period when it fact it got worse each year"

http://www.google.com/hostednews/af...ocId=CNG.b2efdd27b5ce40ab871e7fe5bf8ca0f8.881


Looks to me like they didn't go away, they just got more expensive.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2007/12/10/idUSSIN135004
Click to expand...


Looks to me like the numbers are still very low compared to the UK numbers.
If your definition of "work" is 100 % elimination. Then thats just unrealistic. By that definition, nothing works.
 
Last edited:
Re: Wonder why some folks distrust LEO's?

eastcoast_gsx said:
So unless we are willing to go that far as society, it is not a valid argument. In other words, not even worth mentioning.
Click to expand...

I'll mentioned it as a example of a place that high penalities are coupled with low drug use numbers. Because people asserted that it doesn't exist, when in fact it does.
 
Re: Wonder why some folks distrust LEO's?

OpenGambit said:
I'll mentioned it as a example of a place that high penalities are coupled with low drug use numbers. Because people asserted that it doesn't exist, when in fact it does.
Click to expand...

No, I asserted that it doesn't work ....not that it doesn't exist

In your Singapore example, drug use has gone up consistently for three years and the price has gone up. That tells me that the reward for trafficking outweighs the risk.

If people want it, they are going to get it.
 
Re: Wonder why some folks distrust LEO's?

mungo said:
No, I asserted that it doesn't work ....not that it doesn't exist

In your Singapore example, drug use has gone up consistently for three years and the price has gone up. That tells me that the reward for trafficking outweighs the risk.

If people want it, they are going to get it.
Click to expand...

There will always be people who consider money to be worth more than (your) life.
 
Re: Wonder why some folks distrust LEO's?

mungo said:
No, I asserted that it doesn't work ....not that it doesn't exist

In your Singapore example, drug use has gone up consistently for three years and the price has gone up. That tells me that the reward for trafficking outweighs the risk.

If people want it, they are going to get it.
Click to expand...

Again, if your definition of work is elimination of the behaviour, nothing works, and certainly not legalization or decriminalization.

drug use going up during some, yet not all of the years of strong laws isn't a definitive statement on whether the program is effective, as there are other factors, and the easy question of (what would the numbers be without these laws?)
 
Re: Wonder why some folks distrust LEO's?

turbo must have had some affidavits to file this morning.
 
Re: Wonder why some folks distrust LEO's?

OpenGambit said:
Again, if your definition of work is elimination of the behaviour, nothing works, and certainly not legalization or decriminalization.
Click to expand...

That is basically my point. You can't stop people from wanting it/them. If you slow the supply, it raises the price. Then, it becomes more attractive to someone to take the risk to fill the demand.

I'm not claiming to know the answer but I do know that I don't like draconian laws to try to control it, I don't like gang violence and I don't like incarcerating people for something that is essentially harmless to others.

I'll accept that extremely harsh penalties under prohibition can slow supply temporarily ......and prevent people of lower income from using.
 
Re: Wonder why some folks distrust LEO's?

If this is all about societal cost, I guess I fail to see the part where legalizing hard drugs is somehow a benefit.
I get the decriminalizing and not throwing drug addicts in jail, but legalization is a completely different ballpark.

lastly, really rich people snorting all their money isn't really the concern here. They are 1, small subset, and 2, they can generally afford the loss, meaning that their drug use doesn't necessarily impact the people around them. That is absolutely not true for the average person.
 
Last edited:
Re: Wonder why some folks distrust LEO's?

I think the goal of any policy change should be the just improvement of society. And, monetization may be a means to that end. I really don't know where the balance lies concerning hard drugs.

By hard drugs I mean anything harder than alcohol (opiates, amphetamines, cocaine..)

And, the cost is only high because because supply is being limited.

.............I could go on but this has already taken this thread way off topic ..I'm done
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom