A Precedent For Tyranny

[Diogenes]

And in modern times we have the example of Portugal. Do they still have problems? Well DUH. And is their system perfect? Are you kidding me?

Do they plan on returning to the prior regime? No way Jose.

http://www.zcommunications.org/the-powe ... en-redmond

They are about to have an economic collapse, so people won't be able to buy drugs anyway.


I for one have the greatest trust in the things which the Socialist government of Portugal tells me about the success of their Governmental policies. They can't manage money, but they obviously do everything else right.

[Diogenes]

You should Trust the government when they tell you their polices are a success.


http://www.westernfreepress.com/2011/07 ... xperiment/

[MSimon]

Killing the addicts - a pretty good idea. There are at most half a million in the US. If we did a thousand a day we could clear up "the problem" in under two years. Of course we will have to skimp a bit on due process if we are to process that number efficiently. And not counting any that came down with the malady in the intervening time.

No heroin addict has ever done any good for society. Except maybe Wm. Halsted - father of modern surgery. But no matter what you do there is a risk. If you count the harm junkies cause and balance it against a Halsted... And of course Joe McCarthy.

BTW why hasn't Portugal turned into the land of addicts? They have had 10 years.

From that same period you see in America a decline in alcohol consumption as living conditions improved. Do you suppose drug use rates track living conditions?

[palladin9479]

Killing the addicts - a pretty good idea. There are at most half a million in the US. If we did a thousand a day we could clear up "the problem" in under two years. Of course we will have to skimp a bit on due process if we are to process that number efficiently. And not counting any that came down with the malady in the intervening time.

No heroin addict has ever done any good for society. Except maybe Wm. Halsted - father of modern surgery. But no matter what you do there is a risk. If you count the harm junkies cause and balance it against a Halsted... And of course Joe McCarthy.

BTW why hasn't Portugal turned into the land of addicts? They have had 10 years.

From that same period you see in America a decline in alcohol consumption as living conditions improved. Do you suppose drug use rates track living conditions?

This is what I'm saying. Get us some barbed wire, guard towers, dogs and a few big sealed warehouses. Round em all up, then march them into the warehouse and toss cyanide tablets inside. Remove the remains and march the next batch in. Could possibly get 2000 a day or more that way, would cut your production time in half. Put a bit swastika out front and have a mad scientist use them for experiments.

When your finished call it a day. Problem solved in the good ole republican way. We could call it republican town and have a dog dance around with a top hat singing his song.

[Diogenes]

Killing the addicts - a pretty good idea. There are at most half a million in the US. If we did a thousand a day we could clear up "the problem" in under two years. Of course we will have to skimp a bit on due process if we are to process that number efficiently. And not counting any that came down with the malady in the intervening time.

And here comes the extremism as a means of rebuttal. No one said anything about getting rid of due process. Make distribution a death penalty offense, and handle it like any other Death Penalty case.

Apart from that, you neglect to take into account the "Deterrence Effect". (The principle by which EVERY law is intended to operate) Kill a few drug dealers, and you raise the costs of doing such business. Kill enough, and far more will leave the vocation voluntarily.

You will get an exponential drop for a very small investment.

No heroin addict has ever done any good for society. Except maybe Wm. Halsted - father of modern surgery. But no matter what you do there is a risk. If you count the harm junkies cause and balance it against a Halsted... And of course Joe McCarthy.

You have mentioned Halsted before, and I looked him up at that time. It turns out he became an addict because he was unaware of the addictive nature of certain drugs prior to using them on himself to demonstrate their medical efficacy. He struggled with his addiction, and he went to treatment for it. It severely impacted his ability to do his job and it was a curse to him.

I argue that EVERY addict is like Halsted in that they are unaware of the addictive nature of drugs. Sure, they hear about it in the abstract, but they truly have no actual understanding of the concept; Not until it hits them anyway.

BTW why hasn't Portugal turned into the land of addicts? They have had 10 years.

How do we know they aren't on their way? Why would you think ten years was sufficient time to discover the truth? China took nearly a hundred years to get to the 50% addiction rate. I found another report that indicates the Socialists in Portugal are LYING about the success of their drug legalization experiment.


http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1 ... 383.x/full

From that same period you see in America a decline in alcohol consumption as living conditions improved. Do you suppose drug use rates track living conditions?

Not sure what you are trying to say here, but I DID happen to see a PBS broadcast last night about Meth addiction. Were it not for these discussions about legalizing drugs, I would not have bothered to watch it, but since I am constantly being drawn into this topic I decided to spend an hour seeing what PBS had to say. Here is a link to the online version of the program. It does not support your position very well at all.





http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/meth/


It also claims to show a direct correlation between purity of the meth drug available on the street and addiction rate, which is pretty much the same argument I make regarding the subsequent effect of Opium availability in China.

It also points out that Quaaludes were completely wiped out as a result of supply side intervention. Apparently prohibition can work fine under the right circumstances.

[Diogenes]

Killing the addicts - a pretty good idea. There are at most half a million in the US. If we did a thousand a day we could clear up "the problem" in under two years. Of course we will have to skimp a bit on due process if we are to process that number efficiently. And not counting any that came down with the malady in the intervening time.

No heroin addict has ever done any good for society. Except maybe Wm. Halsted - father of modern surgery. But no matter what you do there is a risk. If you count the harm junkies cause and balance it against a Halsted... And of course Joe McCarthy.

BTW why hasn't Portugal turned into the land of addicts? They have had 10 years.

From that same period you see in America a decline in alcohol consumption as living conditions improved. Do you suppose drug use rates track living conditions?

This is what I'm saying. Get us some barbed wire, guard towers, dogs and a few big sealed warehouses. Round em all up, then march them into the warehouse and toss cyanide tablets inside. Remove the remains and march the next batch in. Could possibly get 2000 a day or more that way, would cut your production time in half. Put a bit swastika out front and have a mad scientist use them for experiments.

When your finished call it a day. Problem solved in the good ole republican way. We could call it republican town and have a dog dance around with a top hat singing his song.

What a vile little pile of stink you are. Sorry, it is the Socialist side of the Aisle which has the tendency to pile the bodies up. 100 million dead from direct murder, and probably more than a 100 million dead from inadvertent consequences of stupid Liberal/Socialist policies.

Your response to a legitimate observation* is to denigrate the idea as the equivalent of Socialist run death camps. When the right wing has killed as many people as have you leftist, then you might have a reasonable claim on making such an allegation. Till then, the world will thank you to not bother us with your childish mouthings.




* That the "War on Drugs" is not intended to "Win" but is instead an ongoing holding action. To "Win" enemy soldiers need to be killed.

[KitemanSA]

Killing the addicts - a pretty good idea. There are at most half a million in the US. If we did a thousand a day we could clear up "the problem" in under two years. Of course we will have to skimp a bit on due process if we are to process that number efficiently. And not counting any that came down with the malady in the intervening time.

No heroin addict has ever done any good for society. Except maybe Wm. Halsted - father of modern surgery. But no matter what you do there is a risk. If you count the harm junkies cause and balance it against a Halsted... And of course Joe McCarthy.

BTW why hasn't Portugal turned into the land of addicts? They have had 10 years.

From that same period you see in America a decline in alcohol consumption as living conditions improved. Do you suppose drug use rates track living conditions?

This is what I'm saying. Get us some barbed wire, guard towers, dogs and a few big sealed warehouses. Round em all up, then march them into the warehouse and toss cyanide tablets inside. Remove the remains and march the next batch in. Could possibly get 2000 a day or more that way, would cut your production time in half. Put a bit swastika out front and have a mad scientist use them for experiments.

When your finished call it a day. Problem solved in the good ole republican way. We could call it republican town and have a dog dance around with a top hat singing his song.

Heinrich, is that you?

[Diogenes]

Killing the addicts - a pretty good idea. There are at most half a million in the US. If we did a thousand a day we could clear up "the problem" in under two years. Of course we will have to skimp a bit on due process if we are to process that number efficiently. And not counting any that came down with the malady in the intervening time.

No heroin addict has ever done any good for society. Except maybe Wm. Halsted - father of modern surgery. But no matter what you do there is a risk. If you count the harm junkies cause and balance it against a Halsted... And of course Joe McCarthy.

BTW why hasn't Portugal turned into the land of addicts? They have had 10 years.

From that same period you see in America a decline in alcohol consumption as living conditions improved. Do you suppose drug use rates track living conditions?

This is what I'm saying. Get us some barbed wire, guard towers, dogs and a few big sealed warehouses. Round em all up, then march them into the warehouse and toss cyanide tablets inside. Remove the remains and march the next batch in. Could possibly get 2000 a day or more that way, would cut your production time in half. Put a bit swastika out front and have a mad scientist use them for experiments.

When your finished call it a day. Problem solved in the good ole republican way. We could call it republican town and have a dog dance around with a top hat singing his song.

Heinrich, is that you?

Obviously not. He calls himself palladin9479. I don't know how you expected to get Heinrich out of that.

[palladin9479]

Killing the addicts - a pretty good idea. There are at most half a million in the US. If we did a thousand a day we could clear up "the problem" in under two years. Of course we will have to skimp a bit on due process if we are to process that number efficiently. And not counting any that came down with the malady in the intervening time.

No heroin addict has ever done any good for society. Except maybe Wm. Halsted - father of modern surgery. But no matter what you do there is a risk. If you count the harm junkies cause and balance it against a Halsted... And of course Joe McCarthy.

BTW why hasn't Portugal turned into the land of addicts? They have had 10 years.

From that same period you see in America a decline in alcohol consumption as living conditions improved. Do you suppose drug use rates track living conditions?

This is what I'm saying. Get us some barbed wire, guard towers, dogs and a few big sealed warehouses. Round em all up, then march them into the warehouse and toss cyanide tablets inside. Remove the remains and march the next batch in. Could possibly get 2000 a day or more that way, would cut your production time in half. Put a bit swastika out front and have a mad scientist use them for experiments.

When your finished call it a day. Problem solved in the good ole republican way. We could call it republican town and have a dog dance around with a top hat singing his song.

Heinrich, is that you?

Long Live the 5th Reich!

Heck if we're gonna start indiscriminately killing one category of our population, might as well learn from the masters of the art. I mean, if your going to do something why do it half ass?

After all,

China solved it's problem by KILLING THE ADDICTS! We just keep arresting them and letting them go. We never really get rid of them until they end up killing themselves accidentally through overdose, or in some sort of criminal act.

The reason the drug war is such a nuisance is because it isn't designed to actually WIN the war on drugs, it is designed to fight a continuous holding action, and it has been successfully holding addiction rates down around the 2% of the population which is where it was back in 1900 when the whole drug war was getting started.

If we want decisive results we have to use decisive tactics, but since people cannot stomach what it would take to actually win, we just have to keep paying for the compromise people insist on having.

So all we need to do is name Dio our new leader and follow his plan to the final solution of the Drug Addict question. We'll just call it the "Final Solution" for short.

Like he has any credibility left after this one.