There is no drug traffic without drug buyers

bestcandy

jr. member

Activity: 95

Merit: 2

Quote from: paxmao on December 02, 2024, 08:10:46 AM

It has been a captcha and common place of the Hollywood movies, well financed by the financial elites, to make the villain out of the Latin Americans evil gansters and druglords. And they probably are - who would call them nice people?

But everyone knows that there is no market without a buyer. So may people in the US have the tendency to self-inyect, inhale, gulp or otherwise get filled with whatever substance is out there promising something out of the ordinary. This is a sick society.

The presidents of Mexico tend to be cautios in their relations with the US, but even despite that, the current president Claudia Sheinbaum (who is happy to use the populism when dealing with Spain) has answered to Trump in a very contained manner:

- Many migrants to the US are not Mexican.
- Fentanil can be made anywhere and the precursos do not come from Mexico.

But it is due to add that there cannot be drug cartels without drug buyers in the US. It is time for the US to recognise the damage they are doing to Latin America. In countries with limited government and law, having a bunch of druglords is enough to create failed states and insecurity for the people and a system that is always at the border of failure

The war on drugs has failed, it is like a hydra - cut one head, get two more, has saturated the US prison system with possibly the largest percentage of people in prison and has, in the process, thrown Latin America in the hands of the gangs. May be time to legalise because whatever is there is not working.

You are totally correct for saying that there is no drug traffic without a pitential buyer because the motivation of every business is the potential buyer. If we must stop drug traffic we must first stop the patronizing of drug across the world which I believe is the most reason for drug trafficking.

DeathAngel

legendary

Activity: 3346

Merit: 1618

#1 VIP Crypto Casino

Quote from: paxmao on December 07, 2024, 06:25:49 AM

What is clear is that they have not been able to stop illegal traffic. It was bad with heroine in the 80s, it is still with crack. It is more difficult to OD with coke, but then it came... fentanyl. And it is super easy to OD with fentanyl, does not require sophisticated labs and it is distributed all over.

It is time to face it, the only win in the "war agains drugs" is to actually legalise, regulate content like in medical products and ensure they are not consumed in circumstances where others could be harmed.

What I think is that the governments get a lot from it being illegal. They can blame the "bad bad guys that produce", there is a self-Darwinian selection on the lower income classes and it affects much more the minorities. Also, the DEA keeps that super-nice funding.

You make some really good points. I honestly do see the positives of legalising all drugs & making a national narcotics service, selling to the public, I don’t think it will ever happen. I am somebody that has experimented a lot with drugs (not heroin or crack) & I’ve never had any addiction problems. I just don’t think the government would take on the risk of legalising everything. Like you say, they want to blame it on the bad guys. FBI & DEA probably takes big bribes from large cartels so they don’t even want the taxes they’d get by making it all legal as they get paid any way & without risk of angry citizens.

paxmao

legendary

Activity: 2436

Merit: 1634

Do not die for Putin

Quote from: DeathAngel on December 05, 2024, 09:36:22 AM

I have often wondered why governments don’t just legalise all drugs. They can profit from taxes or even sell & distribute them themselves. It would stop a lot of violent crime, murders, kidnapping, bribery etc. The flip side of that is that maybe with drugs more acceptable & accessible, the health systems would be overwhelmed with the repercussions of drug abuse. Maybe there is a middle ground somewhere.

What is clear is that they have not been able to stop illegal traffic. It was bad with heroine in the 80s, it is still with crack. It is more difficult to OD with coke, but then it came... fentanyl. And it is super easy to OD with fentanyl, does not require sophisticated labs and it is distributed all over.

It is time to face it, the only win in the "war agains drugs" is to actually legalise, regulate content like in medical products and ensure they are not consumed in circumstances where others could be harmed.

What I think is that the governments get a lot from it being illegal. They can blame the "bad bad guys that produce", there is a self-Darwinian selection on the lower income classes and it affects much more the minorities. Also, the DEA keeps that super-nice funding.

BADecker

legendary

Activity: 3990

Merit: 1385

There is no drug traffic without drug buyers

In a free country, freedom to use drugs is part and parcel. Let the warnings against drugs abound. Then let each person make up his own mind, and get the results of his action by free choice. Don't legalize drugs. Don't make them illegal, either.

Punish appropriate all drug users who harm or damage other people through their use of drugs. And don't force us to pay for their stupid mistakes through taxation.

Cool

DeathAngel

legendary

Activity: 3346

Merit: 1618

#1 VIP Crypto Casino

I have often wondered why governments don’t just legalise all drugs. They can profit from taxes or even sell & distribute them themselves. It would stop a lot of violent crime, murders, kidnapping, bribery etc. The flip side of that is that maybe with drugs more acceptable & accessible, the health systems would be overwhelmed with the repercussions of drug abuse. Maybe there is a middle ground somewhere.

iBaba

sr. member

Activity: 630

Merit: 291

Bitcoin in Niger State💯

Quote from: Hispo on December 03, 2024, 06:34:10 PM

Quote from: iBaba on December 03, 2024, 03:56:11 PM

Quote from: BADecker on December 02, 2024, 10:26:57 AM

Freedom in America should allow drugs. Government should apply welfare money that is normally spent on druggies, to advertising how bad drugs are. If people still make the mistake of ODing, let their families or the church take care of them, not the government... except if they die with nobody else to bury them.

If the above were done, the drug usage would stop because the drug users would be gone, one way or another.

Cool

I pretty know this is a form of sarcasm. You don't expect pushing of drugs should be publicly allowed by the government when it is known that it's a wrong practice and kills the person taking it. Drugs is suicidal and should never be allowed for a practice. It's a multi billionaire industry but it is very dangerous to human health and life as an entirety.

He is not being ironic or sarcastic at all, actually. There is a movement within the United States which advocates for the freedom of the American citizens should be absolute when comes to what they are allowed to put in their bodies or not, as long as they do not harm others. I have seen libertarians arguing the government of the country should allow people to buy cocaine legally from stores (in the same way people are now buying Weed for recreational purposes) so they can sniff as much cocaine as they want and as much their wages allows them to.
Same with magical mushrooms and LSD.

It is a sensitive debate and I am pretty against giving legal access to hard drugs to the average adult in a country which is already hit by drugs epidemics. Just my personal opinion, though.

If I'm not mistaken, most hard drugs deal with the mental health of the drug takers or addicts. It affects their psyche making many of them lose their memory for a time until they're able to recover when the effect of the drugs is expired. Most drugs also have the different ways in which people respond to them as well as the individual system which is being absorbed.

I'm making more emphasis on the effects of these hard drugs on the mental wellness of the person to validate why drug takers can actually harm others while they're drugged and even goes to the length of committing crimes. Let's not even talk about the other harmful effects it had on the body. I saw someone trying to justify this subject matter with the effects of sugar intake like the soft drinks, etc.

Hewlet

full member

Activity: 518

Merit: 227

Quote from: Frankolala on December 02, 2024, 12:30:44 PM

We are in a world where drug cannot be eradicated because it has it's own advantages, but very small compared to the disadvantages. The bad news is that more people are going into taking drugs.

it become an huge problem when we see the consumption of these drugs on music videos which has a way of enticing the fan base of the musician to want to go into such act even though some of them were not initial users of drugs. the producers, the drug lords, the retailers and the consumers are all working in synergy and the fact that they are in their numbers makes it very difficult to think that it can be eradicated. in most third world countries, sex enhancement drugs is what is very predominant and the ease with which you can access them is what makes it too bad even though this drug has sent a lot of youths to their early grave. you cant totally ban some of these drugs because they have their good side and for the fact that the main issues is that it is being abused and that is when it becomes a bad thing.

BADecker

legendary

Activity: 3990

Merit: 1385

^^^ Taxation is possibly the biggest gangster crime of all. It's akin to a protection racket.

Cool

paxmao

legendary

Activity: 2436

Merit: 1634

Do not die for Putin

Quote from: iBaba on December 03, 2024, 03:56:11 PM

Quote from: BADecker on December 02, 2024, 10:26:57 AM

Freedom in America should allow drugs. Government should apply welfare money that is normally spent on druggies, to advertising how bad drugs are. If people still make the mistake of ODing, let their families or the church take care of them, not the government... except if they die with nobody else to bury them.

If the above were done, the drug usage would stop because the drug users would be gone, one way or another.

Cool

I pretty know this is a form of sarcasm. You don't expect pushing of drugs should be publicly allowed by the government when it is known that it's a wrong practice and kills the person taking it. Drugs is suicidal and should never be allowed for a practice. It's a multi billionaire industry but it is very dangerous to human health and life as an entirety.

Well, eating sugar and fat are also know factors for heart disease, cancer and a fat unhealthy life, yet that is "allowed" or even encouraged as it was tobacco during many decades. But no, that is not the point, the point is that drugs are being used anyway - you cannot stop them, there is always another dealer seeking to be the king dealer on the hood no matter how many you send to prison (which is quite expensive too).

It is much better to control it, so that stuff has proper controls, prices are regulated by an open market - thus making it not that profitable for producers - taxes are paid like with any other product and all those gangters south of the Colorado river have no reason to exist. That would give a chance for half of latin America to be great ... for the first time.

BADecker

legendary

Activity: 3990

Merit: 1385

Quote from: Hispo on December 03, 2024, 06:34:10 PM

Quote from: iBaba on December 03, 2024, 03:56:11 PM

Quote from: BADecker on December 02, 2024, 10:26:57 AM

Freedom in America should allow drugs. Government should apply welfare money that is normally spent on druggies, to advertising how bad drugs are. If people still make the mistake of ODing, let their families or the church take care of them, not the government... except if they die with nobody else to bury them.

If the above were done, the drug usage would stop because the drug users would be gone, one way or another.

Cool

I pretty know this is a form of sarcasm. You don't expect pushing of drugs should be publicly allowed by the government when it is known that it's a wrong practice and kills the person taking it. Drugs is suicidal and should never be allowed for a practice. It's a multi billionaire industry but it is very dangerous to human health and life as an entirety.

He is not being ironic or sarcastic at all, actually. There is a movement within the United States which advocates for the freedom of the American citizens should be absolute when comes to what they are allowed to put in their bodies or not, as long as they do not harm others. I have seen libertarians arguing the government of the country should allow people to buy cocaine legally from stores (in the same way people are now buying Weed for recreational purposes) so they can sniff as much cocaine as they want and as much their wages allows them to.
Same with magical mushrooms and LSD.

It is a sensitive debate and I am pretty against giving legal access to hard drugs to the average adult in a country which is already hit by drugs epidemics. Just my personal opinion, though.

Actually, Americans already have this freedom. Their problem is that they don't know it, and this makes it hard for them to use it. Here's how it works.

Government is paperwork. Paperwork can't attack a man or woman when no harm has been done. So, what the courts have done is tricked people into thinking/saying that they are paperwork. Then paperwork government can mess with them, because government is all about paperwork.

The trick is in the man/woman stating one way or another that they are the name on the indictment. If the man/woman shows that they are human, and NOT the name on the indictment, the whole case doesn't apply to them. But they can't do this if they don't realize that they are being tricked.

The drug in question is the property of the man/woman. It's not even a drug unless somebody who owns it says that it is. It's private property, and should be called such, and is required to be returned to them when the owner requires it. If it isn't returned, government people have performed theft and can be prosecuted. Remember that the body of the man/woman is their private property, as well.

Cool

Hispo

legendary

Activity: 1162

Merit: 2025

Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform

Quote from: iBaba on December 03, 2024, 03:56:11 PM

Quote from: BADecker on December 02, 2024, 10:26:57 AM

Freedom in America should allow drugs. Government should apply welfare money that is normally spent on druggies, to advertising how bad drugs are. If people still make the mistake of ODing, let their families or the church take care of them, not the government... except if they die with nobody else to bury them.

If the above were done, the drug usage would stop because the drug users would be gone, one way or another.

Cool

I pretty know this is a form of sarcasm. You don't expect pushing of drugs should be publicly allowed by the government when it is known that it's a wrong practice and kills the person taking it. Drugs is suicidal and should never be allowed for a practice. It's a multi billionaire industry but it is very dangerous to human health and life as an entirety.

He is not being ironic or sarcastic at all, actually. There is a movement within the United States which advocates for the freedom of the American citizens should be absolute when comes to what they are allowed to put in their bodies or not, as long as they do not harm others. I have seen libertarians arguing the government of the country should allow people to buy cocaine legally from stores (in the same way people are now buying Weed for recreational purposes) so they can sniff as much cocaine as they want and as much their wages allows them to.
Same with magical mushrooms and LSD.

It is a sensitive debate and I am pretty against giving legal access to hard drugs to the average adult in a country which is already hit by drugs epidemics. Just my personal opinion, though.

philipma1957

legendary

Activity: 4354

Merit: 9201

'The right to privacy matters'

Quote from: coolcoinz on December 03, 2024, 01:47:04 PM

Quote from: philipma1957 on December 03, 2024, 09:45:18 AM

All drugs should be legal.

All penalties for doing crimes when stoned should be increased by 50% as compared to doing them when you are not stoned.

That's an interesting idea, but there are no perfect scenarios. So, we make all drugs legal... are we talking about distribution too? If we make distribution legal, we'll get dealers at every school, selling drugs to kids. If we only make possession legal, we'll get more mules, more minors dealing. Large drug organizations will get more profits as more people will want to try hard drugs. You'll get all those who were afraid of going to jail walking around with a bunch of coke, openly sniffing lines at work and all that.

I'm not a supporter of a total ban on drugs, but we also can't let people walk and drive high, with only 50% penalty increase.
Junkies don't care about penalties when they're high. They'll cause an accident, kill someone and instead of 20 years in jail they'll get 30. They don't care. They probably got HIV anyway and won't live another 20 years. 20 or 100 is all the same to them.

In the usa no drugs are legal for underage..

If USA based and you are drunk on the job you can be fired.

I could give two fucks about someone being stoned on any drug.

But I do give two even three fucks about a stoned doctor doing surgery.

I grew up in an Italian American neighborhood. I was very dissappointed to find out being ¾ Italian and ¼ Norwegian meant I could not be a full fledged member of a certain group. Even though my aunt was married to Al Capone’s first cousin.

AS I look back at that I can say thank god I was part Norwegian.

I am looking to remove an income stream from illegal earners.

I grew up with a lot of people that earned a certain way and I am 100% certain taking that away is better than what we have now.

iBaba

sr. member

Activity: 630

Merit: 291

Bitcoin in Niger State💯

Quote from: BADecker on December 02, 2024, 10:26:57 AM

Freedom in America should allow drugs. Government should apply welfare money that is normally spent on druggies, to advertising how bad drugs are. If people still make the mistake of ODing, let their families or the church take care of them, not the government... except if they die with nobody else to bury them.

If the above were done, the drug usage would stop because the drug users would be gone, one way or another.

Cool

I pretty know this is a form of sarcasm. You don't expect pushing of drugs should be publicly allowed by the government when it is known that it's a wrong practice and kills the person taking it. Drugs is suicidal and should never be allowed for a practice. It's a multi billionaire industry but it is very dangerous to human health and life as an entirety.

348Judah

hero member

Activity: 714

Merit: 521

DGbet.fun - Crypto Sportsbook

Do you know what, most of the drugs lords we have are the prominent people we are seeing around us without knowing what they are up to, but because they are having the money needed, they can use such as they want, perpetrate their cause over the illegal act and uses the privilege for being in the circle to make their personal desires, while someone who does not have anyone will be may be prosecutive for doing same.

coolcoinz

legendary

Activity: 2814

Merit: 1192

Quote from: philipma1957 on December 03, 2024, 09:45:18 AM

All drugs should be legal.

All penalties for doing crimes when stoned should be increased by 50% as compared to doing them when you are not stoned.

That's an interesting idea, but there are no perfect scenarios. So, we make all drugs legal... are we talking about distribution too? If we make distribution legal, we'll get dealers at every school, selling drugs to kids. If we only make possession legal, we'll get more mules, more minors dealing. Large drug organizations will get more profits as more people will want to try hard drugs. You'll get all those who were afraid of going to jail walking around with a bunch of coke, openly sniffing lines at work and all that.

I'm not a supporter of a total ban on drugs, but we also can't let people walk and drive high, with only 50% penalty increase.
Junkies don't care about penalties when they're high. They'll cause an accident, kill someone and instead of 20 years in jail they'll get 30. They don't care. They probably got HIV anyway and won't live another 20 years. 20 or 100 is all the same to them.

Bright0515

member

Activity: 225

Merit: 64

For sure there is no business without a buyer. Just recently in my country it was reported by the Economic and financial crime commissions (EFCC) the a man was caught in the countries border with cocaine of 700g stock in his body. And he was interrogated then he had to confess that he had buyers from different countries not only in my country so even illegal business moves.

philipma1957

legendary

Activity: 4354

Merit: 9201

'The right to privacy matters'

Quote from: paxmao on December 02, 2024, 08:10:46 AM

It has been a captcha and common place of the Hollywood movies, well financed by the financial elites, to make the villain out of the Latin Americans evil gansters and druglords. And they probably are - who would call them nice people?

But everyone knows that there is no market without a buyer. So may people in the US have the tendency to self-inyect, inhale, gulp or otherwise get filled with whatever substance is out there promising something out of the ordinary. This is a sick society.

The presidents of Mexico tend to be cautios in their relations with the US, but even despite that, the current president Claudia Sheinbaum (who is happy to use the populism when dealing with Spain) has answered to Trump in a very contained manner:

- Many migrants to the US are not Mexican.
- Fentanil can be made anywhere and the precursos do not come from Mexico.

But it is due to add that there cannot be drug cartels without drug buyers in the US. It is time for the US to recognise the damage they are doing to Latin America. In countries with limited government and law, having a bunch of druglords is enough to create failed states and insecurity for the people and a system that is always at the border of failure

The war on drugs has failed, it is like a hydra - cut one head, get two more, has saturated the US prison system with possibly the largest percentage of people in prison and has, in the process, thrown Latin America in the hands of the gangs. May be time to legalise because whatever is there is not working.

All drugs should be legal.

All penalties for doing crimes when stoned should be increased by 50% as compared to doing them when you are not stoned.

Cops still get work and drug dealers get shit. They will need to do hoe's , extortion , protection , loan sharking, and gambling.

The U.S. proved prohibition made richer thugs and criminals as does making drugs illegal.

I would love to see a free U.S. government Herion office the only catch is one in a thousand doses are fentynal and you odds and die.

It's the junkies choice to use the free clinic or go to the legal store and pay for the safer dope.

In fact we could have a game show. Od or no Od.

I simply want junkies to have real choices. It is their life.

bitterguy28

full member

Activity: 2254

Merit: 182

Quote from: BADecker on December 02, 2024, 10:26:57 AM

Freedom in America should allow drugs. Government should apply welfare money that is normally spent on druggies, to advertising how bad drugs are. If people still make the mistake of ODing, let their families or the church take care of them, not the government... except if they die with nobody else to bury them.

If the above were done, the drug usage would stop because the drug users would be gone, one way or another.

Cool

why would the church handle that? selling drugs and possession of drugs are illegal what does the church nor their family know about that? besides we know that addicts are not in their right state of minds

if they end up harming other people while under the influence, the government and the law should be the one to prosecute them and not just let them roam free to let them OD and eventually die not only is that inhumane but that’s not how a community should function

TEBTC

jr. member

Activity: 182

Merit: 6

Quote from: paxmao on December 02, 2024, 08:10:46 AM

It has been a captcha and common place of the Hollywood movies, well financed by the financial elites, to make the villain out of the Latin Americans evil gansters and druglords. And they probably are - who would call them nice people?

But everyone knows that there is no market without a buyer. So may people in the US have the tendency to self-inyect, inhale, gulp or otherwise get filled with whatever substance is out there promising something out of the ordinary. This is a sick society.

The presidents of Mexico tend to be cautios in their relations with the US, but even despite that, the current president Claudia Sheinbaum (who is happy to use the populism when dealing with Spain) has answered to Trump in a very contained manner:

- Many migrants to the US are not Mexican.
- Fentanil can be made anywhere and the precursos do not come from Mexico.

But it is due to add that there cannot be drug cartels without drug buyers in the US. It is time for the US to recognise the damage they are doing to Latin America. In countries with limited government and law, having a bunch of druglords is enough to create failed states and insecurity for the people and a system that is always at the border of failure

The war on drugs has failed, it is like a hydra - cut one head, get two more, has saturated the US prison system with possibly the largest percentage of people in prison and has, in the process, thrown Latin America in the hands of the gangs. May be time to legalise because whatever is there is not working.

This is a sensitive question that you raised here as the problem of drugs has lingered for years with government only paying lip service to it I strongly agree with you that there are strong and powerful men behind it because with the whole government trying to clamps down on drugs from all over the world it's still there and available for people to get at the Conner of the road there are people who are behind it and is making money out of it and they will do everything within their powers to make sure that the business continue to sell do there is a relationship between those producing the drugs those distributing it and the buyers

caroasi

member

Activity: 99

Merit: 18

Violence begets violence. Immorality begets immorality. Among the largest drug suppliers in the world are Walgreens and CVS. We don't see the CEO of Walgreens attempting to gun down CVS employees. By ruling that some drugs are illegal, it causes entire illegal organizations to pop up.

In the same way it would be clearly and obviously illegal for you to personally go to Walgreens and tell them you will personally shut them down at gun point if necessary if they stop selling a specific drug, it is equally and every bit as immoral and outrageous for a gang of government workers to do the same thing. It is an act of violence to deny someone access to a drug. There is no moral way of telling someone you will intentionally hurt them if they manufacture, sell, or use drugs of a specific kind. Violence begets violence. Immorality begets immorality.

It is a human right to use God's creations in any way one sees fit in cooperation with others. It is a human right to sell anything one owns. It is a human right to create anything one imagines. It is a human right to consume any thing one owns. And it is a violation of equal rights for some people to make exceptions but not others. I describe an actually moral government type in my signature link.

Topic: There is no drug traffic without drug buyers (Read 316 times)