Criminal justice?

Rich and Austin,

Very good points. Having worked in law enforcement (on a drug-enforcement task force no less), I learned first-hand that the war on drugs will not end in my lifetime. As you said, there is a lot of money to be made from the criminal element, and no law-enforcement agency wants to see its budget cut.

Personally, I don't care if people want to get high or not. What I have a huge problem with is the behavior changes that come from addiction, and the lengths people will go to in order to get their high. If you want to mainline heroin all day in your own house, then go for it. If you want to B & E my house to steal things to fence, you better hope I'm not home at the time. If you rob a bank while stoned, or drive drunk and kill people, then I have a huge problem with your "hobby". So many times you hear addicts say that they're not hurting anyone but themselves. Wrong! Drug money has to come from somewhere, and addiction is not a victimless crime. It destroys careers, families, and credit ratings. But it also gives a lot of people jobs, and brings in a lot of revenue to municipalities "fighting" the war on drugs.

I wish I had the answers, but alas, I don't.

Kathy

Originally Posted by insomniac101

Rich and Austin,

Very good points. Having worked in law enforcement (on a drug-enforcement task force no less), I learned first-hand that the war on drugs will not end in my lifetime. As you said, there is a lot of money to be made from the criminal element, and no law-enforcement agency wants to see its budget cut.

Personally, I don't care if people want to get high or not. What I have a huge problem with is the behavior changes that come from addiction, and the lengths people will go to in order to get their high. If you want to mainline heroin all day in your own house, then go for it. If you want to B & E my house to steal things to fence, you better hope I'm not home at the time. If you rob a bank while stoned, or drive drunk and kill people, then I have a huge problem with your "hobby". So many times you hear addicts say that they're not hurting anyone but themselves. Wrong! Drug money has to come from somewhere, and addiction is not a victimless crime. It destroys careers, families, and credit ratings. But it also gives a lot of people jobs, and brings in a lot of revenue to municipalities "fighting" the war on drugs.

I wish I had the answers, but alas, I don't.

Kathy

Yes, I understand that perspective. But the problem is that personal responsibility is being preempted by the "nanny state" choosing what is good and/or safe for YOU to do based on their withholding your own personal choice from you. A *potential* for wrong doing has made something illegal just based on *potential* misuse by ANYONE, whether or not YOU are capable of making that choice concerning your own welfare and FREEDOM of choice. Where is the line drawn to where the government does not have the authority to tell US what we can and cannot do? Yes, I can smash my thumb with a hammer if I am not careful, but does that warrant making the use of a hammer illegal to protect me from myself? Yes, I may get so angry at smashing my own thumb that I may throw that hammer in a fit of anger and hit a neighbor with it. Again, does that potential MISUSE warrant illegality?

Now just for the record here, I have never used recreational drugs at all in my life, and never had any inclination to do so. My gripe is with the authoritarian view that the government knows best and can make things illegal without any actual constitutional authority whatsoever. Quite frankly, if someone wants to grow marijuana in their back yard and make use of that crop locally, then quite frankly that just is not within the jurisdiction of the federal government at all. It may well be within the jurisdiction of local government, but then the same issue comes to mind about where the line is drawn as to what constitutes the actual authority for any level of government to step in to say that such an activity SHOULD be illegal based on some potential MISUSE.

http://www.parascope.com/mx/articles...WebbSpeaks.htm

Here is an interview with a man named Gary Webb. He is a reporter that has documented proof that the CIA imports, distributes and traffics cocaine. It started to fund the Contra war. It's the "unspoken" side of the Iran Contra affair.

If you look into it, Ricky Ross, a major cocaine dealer, was being tipped off to clear his crack houses the day before they got raided. Ricky got all his cocaine from CIA supported Contras. The CIA protected there drug distribution centers, and made sure Ricky stayed in business, for a while anyways.

So not only do we have to pay a back door tax, law enforcement, prisons, judicial system ect., because of all this illegal drug consumption, we have proof the government has a hand in getting the drugs here in the first place.

I think this quote from the interview sums it up to me.

"So it seems to me that if you're looking for the root of your drug problems in a neighborhood, nothing else matters except the drugs, and where they're coming from, and how they're getting there."

The question has to be asked how does a poor, uneducated black man end up with millions of dollars worth of drugs that came from foreign countries. These black men living in our ghettos don't have boats, plains, 18 wheelers, or distribution centers. So how do they get it, and where is it coming from?

Being in manufacturing I would guess that over 50% of the workers use illegal drugs. They will continue to be "productive" members of society until they are caught. Not all illegal drug users rob banks or steal little old ladies change purses. I don't think they are any different than people who drink alcohol or use gas station stackers and mini thins. I know a lot of older people don't agree with that though.

Originally Posted by insomniac101

I have a degree in "Criminal Justice", and have always thought that the name is an oxymoron. In this country, it seems that only the criminals get justice, and the judicial system is criminal.

Commit a crime, and you get free room and board (including meals), full medical, and a free gym membership, courtesy of the taxpayers. Don't get me wrong; prison is not a place I would want to be, but I think it should be much more miserable than it is; so much so that no one would ever want to be there, or go back if they have been there.

Ever heard of "Tent City" in Maricopa county, Arizona? That's how prison should be.

Sorry, Rich; I don't know how the wording came about either.

Kathy

Tent City is the only decent thing Sheriff Joe Arpaio has ever done for AZ. He's one of the biggest racist anti-immigrant shmucks I've ever had the displeasure to know.

Originally Posted by insomniac101

Rich and Austin,

Very good points. Having worked in law enforcement (on a drug-enforcement task force no less), I learned first-hand that the war on drugs will not end in my lifetime. As you said, there is a lot of money to be made from the criminal element, and no law-enforcement agency wants to see its budget cut.

Personally, I don't care if people want to get high or not. What I have a huge problem with is the behavior changes that come from addiction, and the lengths people will go to in order to get their high. If you want to mainline heroin all day in your own house, then go for it. If you want to B & E my house to steal things to fence, you better hope I'm not home at the time. If you rob a bank while stoned, or drive drunk and kill people, then I have a huge problem with your "hobby". So many times you hear addicts say that they're not hurting anyone but themselves. Wrong! Drug money has to come from somewhere, and addiction is not a victimless crime. It destroys careers, families, and credit ratings. But it also gives a lot of people jobs, and brings in a lot of revenue to municipalities "fighting" the war on drugs.

I wish I had the answers, but alas, I don't.

Kathy

I agree addiction can destroy careers, families ect. Is that a good enough reason to throw them in prison, make them unproductive members of society and pay for them to live there? I don't think you can have it both ways. If we're willing to build prisons and fill them up with people who posses and sell illegal drugs, do we have a right to complain about the price tag? There is no way around it. There will be a HUGE price tag on society for those who posses illegal drug.

Every dollar municipalities bring in "fighting" the war on drugs is one less dollar in the real economy. "Municipalities" are destroying businesses in order to create their own business, in the form of law enforcement and prisons ect. If they didn't take those dollars, those dollars would go to cabinet makers, carpet layers, car dealerships, local stores ect. ect. Instead they go to law enforcement and prisons ect.

What happens when guns are illegal? We fill the prisons up with gun owners and call them dangerous losers? What happens if the dollar collapses and gold becomes illegal to posses? We fill the prisons up with greedy gold losers? What happens if we have a food shortage and owning more than 20lbs of rice is illegal? We fill the prisons up with loser rice hoarders? If any of this happens people will complain illegal gun owners, illegal gold owners and illegal rice owners have too many rights and we spend too much money taking care of them in prison. Will the solution be take away their TVs, hot meals and put them in tent cities?

Originally Posted by Rich Z

Yeah, it certainly puts a different spin on our perceptions of the government when you begin to awaken to the fact that law enforcement is more about revenue generation than it is about "protecting and serving" the populace. If the government wants to collect raise more money, simple make something illegal or raise fines and fees without having to go through the headaches and bad press of having congress raise taxes.

Going right along with your thought here. What if the government said everyone had to purchase a financial instrument from Wall Street bankers or they would be fined and be put in jail? Would the majority of people be ok with that? What kind of cost would it be to the tax payers to house these criminals who didn't buy these Wall Street financial instruments? How much money would the government make from fines, and how much would your taxes go up to pay for enforcement and jail space?

This scenario has already happened in the state of Ohio. The Wall Street financial instrument is known as car insurance. Some don't realize insurance is nothing but a financial instrument. People loose their jobs, go to jail and pay hefty fines all the time for not having car insurance. We call them criminals for not buying a Wall Street financial instrument. Most think it's a good idea and don't seem to have a problem with the insurance law breakers being fined, loosing their jobs or going to jail. Most don't seem to have a problem paying higher taxes to enforce the law and house the prisoners.

Is health insurance next...Fine them and throw them in jail for not having health insurance? Is it going to be ok to fine us and throw us in jail for that too?

I used to go along with politicians who were "tough on crime". Now I have to ask what crime is it they are going to be tough on, and what are they going to make a crime? And we wonder why we are paying so much in taxes and being squeezed.

Criminal Justice!

Yeah, you have to wonder whose palms got greased with MAJOR campaign contributions to make it a LAW that people have to buy a service (auto insurance) from private industry.

Sure wish they had made it a law when I was breeding corn snakes such that EVERY person in the USA had to have a SerpenCo corn snake or be fined.