The War on Drugs is going into Insane Mode
I am praying to the God(s) I half-believe in that the latest attempts to scare our youth away from marijuana are merely the death throes of an institution on the decline.
I don't think anyone can really deny that the War on Drugs is/was/will be a tremendous failure, so it astounds me that the government spends so much energy and money to foist this garbage upon us still.
Why our tax dollars go to fund advertisements that run during the Super Bowl that tell us that marijuana causes teen preganancy while beer commercials run over and over and over I will never understand.
Will it take the dying off of my parents' generation to get rid of this embarrasing failure and depressing money pit?
I am intellectually insulted by this crap, and if it does anything to me specifically it will make me tell my children the truth (which is, incidentally, not the message THEY* want out there) if I am cursed enough to have these commercials around when I am a father.
In the words of scumbag Traficant: BEAM ME UP!
(By THEY I mean the DEA and those who pay for and run these godawful commercials)
I don't think anyone can really deny that the War on Drugs is/was/will be a tremendous failure, so it astounds me that the government spends so much energy and money to foist this garbage upon us still.
Why our tax dollars go to fund advertisements that run during the Super Bowl that tell us that marijuana causes teen preganancy while beer commercials run over and over and over I will never understand.
Will it take the dying off of my parents' generation to get rid of this embarrasing failure and depressing money pit?
I am intellectually insulted by this crap, and if it does anything to me specifically it will make me tell my children the truth (which is, incidentally, not the message THEY* want out there) if I am cursed enough to have these commercials around when I am a father.
In the words of scumbag Traficant: BEAM ME UP!
(By THEY I mean the DEA and those who pay for and run these godawful commercials)
Comments
when people know you're flat out lying to them about the subject, they're not going to believe much of what you say.
it's the stupidest association game i've ever seen.
well, we can't really say that weed is bad for you, so we'll just invent situations where weed might have bad things worse, then lead off with some bullshit innendo.
cripes.
.
.
.
.
.
.
(And I am against pot more than alcohol)
it's also not nearly as scaring as saying "smoking a joint will get you pregnant"
[ 01-27-2003: Message edited by: alcimedes ]</p>
He said there are simply two choices:
- just legalize it
or
- truly go balls-out (my phrasing, not his) and crack down and punish dealers, suppliers, shippers, celebrities caught with them, etc. like never before. Treat drugs (and those bringing them into this country) like acts of war and intruders into the country and bring the full force of the military and intelligence community in to truly lay waste to the trade and make it to where those who are smart will take their millions and go find something else to do. All this while providing true, serious treatment and counselling to anyone truly desiring to kick drugs and rid their lives of them, once and for all.
He said the "war on drugs" is a miserable failure that, like so many other things the government has tried to tackle with the "best of intentions", has only made worse and - in many instances - created problems where there were few or none before. We haven't truly done what it takes, merely pussy-footing around and throwing half-hearted platitudes and small efforts to the problem. It's so complex and involves so many agencies all jockeying for budgets, credit, face-time, etc. that it's a complete mess and a joke.
Plus the corruption and nonsense that goes on with the authorities in the various nations (including the U.S.) that are involved in this make it hard to just approach it half-assed.
And I agree.
You'd have to read the actual wording to get it.
Like him or not, you came away from it going "okay, now THAT would probably work...".
I not quite nuts about marijuana being illegal and seen in the same way as crack, cocaine, heroin, etc. because I honestly don't believe that it is (no, I don't smoke the stuff, but I don't necessarily think it's a life-altering, addictive and truly destructive drug like the others are).
I equate pot with beer: 95% of the population can take it or leave it, doing only in certain situations or scenarios and not mugging old women and selling their sister's stereo to get money to buy more.
But the other stuff? The life-destroying, addictive, "gotta-have-it-so-much-that-I-sold-my-baby-to-get-some" drugs?
Go to town on them, for all I care. Make the lives of the people who grow it, transport it, sell it, deal it, spread it around, use it, commit crimes for it, etc. absolutely miserable, 24/7.
But, it'll never be done so what do I care.
[ 01-27-2003: Message edited by: pscates ]</p>
"Traffic," baby. The Drug Czar's own daughter was a junkie. This is a serious fvcking problem that we have indeed "pussy-footed" around for too long. Newty boy correctly assesess the sorry-ass state of the war on drugs.
Abysmal.
</rant>
In the series of pre-Super Bowl anti-weed commercials there was another one about how if you smoke weed you can get date-raped. Never in my life have I heard a story about that. Date rape from extreme alcohol consumption? Yep. Date rape from rophynol (sp?) or other drugs (not weed)? Yep.
The best of those (because the SB one is the absolute king in my mind) was the one where the kids are smoking out in a bathroom and a plain-clothes cop busts them with the message literally being: "Don't smoke weed because you'll get in trouble." No reasoning, just Mommy Government saying "Because I said so." No affectation of logic or study, just "NO!"
I can remember in the not-so-distant past when these ad campaigns at least tried to focus on hard drugs. The "This Is Your Brain" series was about hard drugs, at least, as stupid as it was. Now it's just "No!".
Communist Hippie Rapist: "Well... why?"
Uncle Sam: "NO!"
CHR: "You used to at least try..."
US: "NO!"
I started a thread a few months back about the things that I will feel ashamed of when my children look back and say "What the hell was your generation thinking?" This is a big one. It's not my generation pushing this crap, but it's still going on while my generation is going strong. It's sickening. It's depressing that we spend even a penny on this crap while we go into further debt.
GAH!
I'm with Newt in spending MORE on the War on Drugs.
turns out most people think it's a good idea to trade a raptist in jail for a pot head outside.
go figure
Usually what happens when you merely pay lip service to something and don't take it all the way and do the often-unpleasant work that tough problems usually require.
I hate politicians. All of them.
<strong>Disagreement time.
I'm with Newt in spending MORE on the War on Drugs.</strong><hr></blockquote>
It's not really even a "war", really. Kinda more like a "let me make a speech and wave my fist a bit, then let's burn a field in the Andes and show it on CNN so I'll look good...".
We haven't truly initiated a "war", in the traditional sense of the word.
I don't mind money being spent WHEN IT'S WORKING AND ACTUALLY DOING SOMETHING. When it's just being pissed away down an empty black hole somewhere in D.C., that's when I get a little irked.
And yes, Gingrich is - and it may come as a shock to many of you - is fully supportive of true, effective programs that WORK and get people off drugs. The line he used in his book was something like "we should have every sympathy for the addict who is wishing to truly rid themselves of drugs...a program, a bed to sleep in, qualified professional to do their part...", etc. I remember it because it just struck me as "well, yeah...that's what I think".
And that's true. I'm all for tossing murderers, rapists, child molesters, etc. into the joint for 1,000 years, but some idiot strung out on God-knows-what needs treatment and help...and should - as long as they're sincere and are holding up THEIR end of the deal and are doing their best to stay clean - have a place to turn to so they can.
It might mean "tough love" and some unpleasant, hardcore methods, but if the end result is a person free from this stuff, then that's what it should be.
But the rich drug lords, the dealers, the thugs getting kids hooked and destroying entire families and neighborhoods in the process? Fück 'em.
I'd rain down on them like nobody's business.
Like I said, the smarter ones will realize the jig is up, take their millions and go off and enjoy the rest of their lives on a yacht somewhere. And the idiots who choose to stick around and duke it out?
They'd wish they hadn't.
[ 01-27-2003: Message edited by: pscates ]</p>
Gotta have the issue! Gotta have the issue! Screw what's best for the people or what's actually intelligent! Gotta have the issue!
My parents' and grandparents' peers still think wacky weed makes you go mad. Or more realisitically, they don't think about it beyond "NO! BAD!", which is exactly what politicians like, because then it's easy to sell them.
I tried having this discussion with my mother once... it was a trainwreck. Oh well, looks like we'll have to hash it out until her generation dies.
SPJ:
You're for spending MORE on the WoD? Why is that, exactly?
<strong>The problem with Newt's plan is that to really make it a "war" would require many many violations of the U.S. Constitution.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Like what, exactly? Not being antagonistic, but rather genuinely curious.
If we decided that those bringing drugs into this country represent a genuine, serious threat to this nation and its citizens, aren't we allowed (or supposed) to do the things to defend ourselves?
As for punishing people, the laws are on the books in many cases. But we all know the typical movie star or athlete gets a nudge, a wink and a slap on the wrist where you or I would be thrown UNDER the jail.
I don't think too much would have to be done that would threaten the Constitution. I think it would be a more a matter of judges and others applying the existing laws equally, for imposed sentences that are already on the books to be truly carried out to their full term, etc.
Things like that.
I don't support (or wish for the their to be) armed, black-suited "Drug Snipers" running around, kicking in doors of innocent citizens and the like. That's not America and that's not what it's about. And it should never have to come to that.
But criminals? When the investigation has proven they're criminals and warrants are issued? Nail their asses to the boards...hard.
All by the book, just with a little less leniency and willingness to "cut slack" wouldn't be treading on any Constitutional issues.
<strong>If we decided that those bringing drugs into this country represent a genuine, serious threat to this nation and its citizens, aren't we allowed (or supposed) to do the things to defend ourselves?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Who do you "declare war" on? The government can't declare war on citizens. So Columbian druglords? Would that solve anything?
[quote]<strong>I think it would be a more a matter of judges and others applying the existing laws equally, for imposed sentences that are already on the books to be truly carried out to their full term, etc.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Well perhaps I was confused with the "real war" implication. That's just strict law enforcement.
"War" has many nasty, not-nice things I thought 'ole Newt was saying (albeit sarcastically) could be deployed.
And I'd bet dollars to doughnuts that there are some old-ass Southern politicians who love the idea of "drug snipers" and black helicopters to take out the evil pot smokers.
Right now, if you're savvy, have a network of informants, authorities "on the take", good legal representation, etc. you're not really afraid or worried about much.
But if you knew that there was this relentless assault upon your "business" (and finances), after a while you'd probably just go "screw THIS...".
It's about money and power.
Take those away and there's not much glamour in that particular life. Hard to be a badass "kingpin" when all your shit is gone.
Legal age: 21
It's all just so insanely stupid it's difficult for me to even look at it. I have to go listen to some Tom Waits and read to avoid witnessing our self-righteous politician-driven government shuffle along bogged down by almost-unchecked conservatism. "Change? Wassat?"
<strong>Well perhaps I was confused with the "real war" implication. That's just strict law enforcement.</strong><hr></blockquote>
The whole "war" thing is someone else's term, not mine. Yes, it would simply be strict law enforcement and the like. Call it whatever sounds cool, but treating it like the scourge and damaging threat it is would be an initial step. Bear in mind that I'm not considering pot in the same league as the others. I'm not being selective or cute, I just truly don't think it ranks up there with the truly horrible, destructive stuff.
[quote]<strong>And I'd bet dollars to doughnuts that there are some old-ass Southern politicians who love the idea of "drug snipers" and black helicopters to take out the evil pot smokers.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Don't get TOO cute with that broad brush, 'rat. I'm sure plenty of young northern politicians (on both sides of the aisle) might think the same thing. Especially if it meant looking good in the polls and re-election next time around.
<strong>Legalize marijuana, tax it, and let the non-violent weed criminals out so they can deliver it to the convenient stores in big trucks.
Legal age: 21</strong><hr></blockquote>
I could totally live with that.
Just treat it like you would alcohol when it comes to driving and so forth: you want to stay home, listen to Pink Floyd and get baked? Knock yourself out. But get pulled over while driving high as a bat and a danger to others? It's your ass, pal.
Goes with the territory and it's that risk you take.
Legalized pot wouldn't (and shouldn't) mean an all-out free-for-all with no rules or whatever. You temper life's pleasures and good stuff with responsibility and common sense, that's all. Most could live with that and be cool.
[ 01-27-2003: Message edited by: pscates ]</p>
And it's far more likely to be found in the South.
I'm allowed to make that generalization because I'm a very proud white male Texan.
But to back you up: fuckwads like Daschle do exist.
Ye Gods, maybe there is no hope.