BajaNomad - Mexico: the War Next Door 60 Minutes on CBS

Mexico: the War Next Door 60 Minutes on CBS

rogerj1 - 3-1-2009 at 11:02 PM

A surprisingly informed and balanced look.

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=4836946n

CaboRon - 3-2-2009 at 05:15 AM

Excellent assesment of the situation.

Hook - 3-2-2009 at 06:43 AM

I've always liked Anderson Cooper, but it's complete hogwash that these weapons are available to the general public by virtue of the 2nd Amendment. RPGs and 50 cal machine guns? Come on, 60 Minutes.

These weapons are in some way traceable back to military sources. Time for an investigative report on how these manage to leave military stockpiles.

Woooosh - 3-2-2009 at 09:56 AM

There's a good Off Topic post on the origins of these hgih-powered guns. Not from the states. Most all are unmarked or marked as being made in other countries. Intersting read.

DENNIS - 3-2-2009 at 09:58 AM

Who makes the "Cuerno De Chivo".......AK47?

elgatoloco - 3-2-2009 at 10:19 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Woooosh
There's a good Off Topic post on the origins of these hgih-powered guns. Not from the states. Most all are unmarked or marked as being made in other countries. Intersting read.

Author spent some time in Mexico and talked with average citizens. It would be a real interesting as a follow up if he surveyed the cartel members and asked where they got their firearms. :smug:

tjBill - 3-2-2009 at 10:27 AM

A gun enthusiast told me you can buy non-automatic AK 47s is the US and they can easily be converted to semi-automatic.

LancairDriver - 3-2-2009 at 10:46 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by DENNIS
Who makes the "Cuerno De Chivo".......AK47?

The AK47 is a Russian design derived from a German WW2 automatic improved upon by Alexi Kalishnikov. The "47" comes from the year 1947 when it went into production in Russia. The "AK" is of course Alexi's initials. For awhile it was a closely protected design by the Soviets. It was licensed for manufacture in many countries, mostly Eastern European and is the highest production and most deadly efficient weapon ever produced in history. This is primarily because of it's simplicity, extreme reliability and low cost of manufacture due to the of the use of sheet metal stampings instead of expensive machined parts. Arguably the worst thing to happen to the world as it is carried by everyone from children and Elephant poachers in Africa, to gang members in the US and cartel gangs in Mexico. If civilization were to melt down, this is the weapon you want. If Alexi had a patent he would be a billionaire. He regrets what has become of his design that he made for protecting the "motherland"

Bajaboy - 3-2-2009 at 11:19 AM

One idea to help stop the flow of money and guns coming into Mexico is for Mexico to check cars coming into their country :light:

Bajahowodd - 3-2-2009 at 11:30 AM

I second that. It seems to me that they have stepped up the red light green light thing a bit, but they really need to be more proactive. I know, it would affect my travel time, but geez, this problem is of epic proportions.

DENNIS - 3-2-2009 at 11:32 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Bajaboy
One idea to help stop the flow of money and guns coming into Mexico is for Mexico to check cars coming into their country :light:

Then the flow of traffic would just be reversed at the border between ports of entry. It probably is now to some extent.

JESSE - 3-2-2009 at 12:44 PM

If you can buy a Barret .50 cal sniper rifle without nobody knowing, then there is something truly wrong.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i9lMViBr6d8

The seller would know

Dave - 3-2-2009 at 01:14 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by JESSE
If you can buy a Barret .50 cal sniper rifle without nobody knowing, then there is something truly wrong.

But here you go:

http://www.50bmgstore.com/50bmgcurrentprices.htm

tjBill - 3-2-2009 at 01:24 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Dave

Quote:

Originally posted by JESSE
If you can buy a Barret .50 cal sniper rifle without nobody knowing, then there is something truly wrong.

But here you go:

http://www.50bmgstore.com/50bmgcurrentprices.htm

That's an cool link. :coolup:

I wonder if they ship to Mexico.

I'm sure someone does

Dave - 3-2-2009 at 02:39 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by tjBill
I wonder if they ship to Mexico.

For the right price you could even get a factura. :rolleyes:

DENNIS - 3-2-2009 at 02:43 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Dave
For the right price you could even get a factura. :rolleyes:

Nuthin to it. All they do is paint the muzzle red and call them toys.

You got to be kidding me

JESSE - 3-2-2009 at 09:29 PM

*All prices reflect a CASH discount of 5%

Stickers - 3-2-2009 at 09:44 PM

It's very sad that every gangster terrorist gun in Mexico was bought in the U.S. --- that's being a little too neighborly. We should try and keep all the gun violence in the U.S. where it's our "rights".

TITAN NUCLEAR MISSILE BASE FOR SALE

JESSE - 3-2-2009 at 09:45 PM

http://tiny.cc/2QiXF

The Gull - 3-3-2009 at 07:19 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by JESSE
http://tiny.cc/2QiXF

Looks like an excellent place for drug storage. Since the US is the source of the problem in Mexico with its insatiable drug usage, why not provide suitable storage at an affordable price?

Can we count the number of countries who are currently destroyed because of the US drug culture?

DENNIS - 3-3-2009 at 08:11 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by The Gull
Can we count the number of countries who are currently destroyed because of the US drug culture?

You're right on that, Gull, but the consumer is only part of the problem. To lay all blame on the U.S. user would be the same as attributing all of today's bank problems to the real estate buyer. It's just not the full picture.

Stickers - 3-3-2009 at 10:07 AM

It is simplistic to blame users.

If a bank is robbed you cant blame them for the robbery because they keep money there.

You cant blame a women when she is assaulted because she is pretty.

"We" the U.S. spends billions of dollars at the border trying to keep drugs from crossing.

I was once told by a heroin addict that if he had marijuana available he would not need to score drugs in the streets, use dirty syringes and avoid potentially horrible diseases like Aids??

Maybe easing availability of medical marijuana can stem the demand from over the border. There already are numerous licenced legal growers in California and that should make Mexican imported 'pot' less profitable and at least take that profit motive away from the cartels.

Barry A. - 3-3-2009 at 10:22 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Stickers
It is simplistic to blame users.

If a bank is robbed you cant blame them for the robbery because they keep money there.

You cant blame a women when she is assaulted because she is pretty.

Apples and oranges!

The robber of Banks wants money, therefore he is the guilty one.

Those who assualt women think somehow they are entitled to do that, and want "it", therefore they are the guilty ones.

The "user" thinks he must have drugs, therefore he is the guilty one.

If none of these three types carried out their irresponsible desires there would be NO problem.

I repeat, take the users out, and there is no problem. The weight of the problem lies squarely on the shoulders of the user.

Barry

LONG BEACH PORT OF ENTRY

bajajazz - 3-3-2009 at 10:49 AM

During his presidency Bill Clinton made what I considered a potentially disastrous mistake in permitting the sale of warehouse and docking facilities in Long Beach to Red China.

I have always thought it highly likely that guns and the precursor chemicals used to make speed and refine heroin are being shipped by the container load from China to Long Beach to Mexico.

I can't visualize the thousands of illegal weapons floating around Mexico being brought into the country one-by-one in the trunk or under the hood of some hood's car. But I sure as hell find it easy to visualize containers full of cheaply made AK-47s being waved through border checkpoints by customs officials who have had their palms greased by the cartels.

Regardless of where the guns and drugs are coming from, the only way to win this socalled "war on drugs" is to move to harm reduction policies then to decriminalization then to legalization and taxation. As someone on this board has astutely pointed out, bootleggers like Joe Kennedy and Al Capone weren't put out of business by Elliot Ness, but by FDR's repeal of Prohibition.

The one good thing I can see about the current economic mess we're in is that government at all levels is waking up to the fact that we simply can't afford to incarcerate people for recreational use of drugs just as we can't afford to wage a phony "war on drugs" that hasn't worked, doesn't work and never will. Why in hell can't we learn from experience what succeeds and what doesn't? In this case the object lesson is right before us in FDR's repeal of Prohibition. My hunch is that too many people on both sides of the border are making too much money and want to maintain the status quo just as it is, regardless of the consequences.

Woooosh - 3-3-2009 at 10:53 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Barry A.

Quote:

Which is exactly why the war on drugs can never be won. It is a war and cross-border blame game against addicts- which accomplishes nothing so far.

Barry A. - 3-3-2009 at 11:09 AM

I tend to agree, Wooosh.

Barry

Bajahowodd - 3-3-2009 at 11:56 AM

You guys know how I feel about the "war". I do wish to pick up on one point made by jazz. the term "Red China" actually sounds quaint today. Anyway, while I don't worry that China posseses any extraordinary threat, it is true that 98% of all overseas shipping is conducted by foreign flagged vessels. Relinquishing American flagging allowed tax dodging and reduction in wages and benefits to the men and women that operate those ships. Our apparent only line of defense against shipments of contraband is the Coast Guard and Port Security.

[Edited on 3-3-2009 by Bajahowodd]

Stickers - 3-3-2009 at 12:25 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by bajajazz

I have always thought it highly likely that guns and the precursor chemicals used to make speed and refine heroin are being shipped by the container load from China to Long Beach to Mexico.

You are right about the guns coming into Long Beach because it is legal. All these years the AK-47s and equivalent cheap affordable weapons have been shipped (millions of them) form China into the U.S.

The most horrible drug making materials (for methamphetamine) are not being imported through Long Beach because it's illegal.
Not sure if anybody is checking what raw chemicals China is shipping into Mexico but the methamphetamine problem is huge and getting worse.

The Gull - 3-3-2009 at 03:48 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by DENNIS

Quote:

Originally posted by The Gull
Can we count the number of countries who are currently destroyed because of the US drug culture?

But Dennis, it is a start. Why don't you fill in the rest of the picture for us? You know it, don't you?

Pescador - 3-3-2009 at 04:56 PM

Guess I should have put this here:

You know some day our politicians will decide that we should take responsibility for our own shortcomings and problems. The United States should really be willing to accept responsibility for creating the drug problem in the first place. Since some significat portion of the population has decided that they have an unlimited hunger for marijuana, cocaine, and other drugs, Mexico and other southern neighbors were responding to the great market that has been created. Now we spend untold millions of dollars on trying to shut down this industry and the only thing that has happened is the demand is increasing almost daily. Law enforcement has gotten to the point where they know that they cannot put any kind of lid on the problem so they have started turning their heads the other direction and it is not uncommon to walk down the streets in any major city in American and watch people trading or smoking marijuana pretty much uninhibited and oftentimes in the sight of police officers.
So, to me, this looks pretty much like the days of prohibition where it became the "in thing" to do where everyone went to speakeasys and after hours clubs to buy illegal alcohol. Whole industries developed for the manufacture and distribution of alcohol.
I do not condone nor use any of the drugs forementioned but I am a realist and have become increasingly aware that we do have a great vacuum that seems unable to fill itself up with drugs. As long as that market of consumers is active, the market of suppliers will find some way to fill the pipeline.
So, Calderon is trying to shut this organized, well funded, and well established force with a group of military kids that are short of training and skill and using a police force that is constantly being caught with corruption and graft, and an infastructure that is aged and not very effective, and fund it all with diminishing pesos. I suspect that the only honorable thing we could actually do is to take a deep responsibility for the problem and go about solving it. Some have suggested that legalization would change things, others argue that it is too big a step, but the reality is that we can no longer afford to sweep this thing under the carpet as the cost has become too great for the systems of law enforcement, judicial, penal, social, as well as the very structure of the family as we know it. This is not an issue that can be done with intermittent reinforcement of some half baked laws and we are but fooling ourselves if we think that things are going to get better.

Bajahowodd - 3-3-2009 at 05:07 PM

There's a big hue and cry when anyone even mentions decrimialization, let alone legalization. Truth is that decriminalization would take a significant load off local law enforcement, including the courts. But it would have negligible effect on trafficking and all the problems that entails. Who's against legalization? I can't begin to imagine how many people directly and indirectly earn their living from the war on drugs. Family values groups are certainly against legalization. probably the liquor industry. Maybe even the tobacco companies.

JESSE - 3-3-2009 at 08:47 PM

Lets face it, one day drugs are going to be legalized, why waste billions and billions and thousands and thousands of lives trying to hold on to something that has no future?

DENNIS - 3-3-2009 at 11:03 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by JESSE
Lets face it, one day drugs are going to be legalized, why waste billions and billions and thousands and thousands of lives trying to hold on to something that has no future?

Because there are some people who think that this world would be a better place without drugs. If you don't agree with that, tell the world, right here. Now's your chance.

fishbuck - 3-3-2009 at 11:10 PM

Ya, the idea that people in the US are going to use less drugs is urealistic. And so is blaming them for the problem.

If no one was manufacturing drugs there would be no users.
Look at the tobacco industry as an example. They want to get you hooked on cigarettes so you will be a life long customer. Until it kills you.
The drug producers are following that model.

Bajahowodd - 3-4-2009 at 12:29 AM

Fishy-I've never seen a marijuana factory. This is the big kahuna. Can't remember who it was that posted on another thread that he was told by a hard drug user that if that user had been able to score pot, he wouldn't be on the hard stuff. That flies in the face of all those fans of pot being a gateway drug. But gateway is nonsense. Easy and legal availability of pot would surely cut down the use of meth, coke and H.

BajaGringo - 3-4-2009 at 12:38 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by fishbuck
Ya, the idea that people in the US are going to use less drugs is urealistic. And so is blaming them for the problem.

If no one was manufacturing drugs there would be no users.
Look at the tobacco industry as an example. They want to get you hooked on cigarettes so you will be a life long customer. Until it kills you.
The drug producers are following that model.

The problem with that analysis is that is only true if the users never had experienced or knew about the drugs in the first place. Once the cat is out of the bag there is no going back. We learned that during prohibition, remember?

Don't believe me? Criminalize tobacco tomorrow and see how many millions of folks in the USA will be figuring out a way to get a cigarette, no matter what the cost or penalty.

I agree with Dennis that I WISH all these drugs were gone from society but wishing won't do much about it. Incarcerating them with increasing time and penalties isn't working either.

So instead of telling me what you WISH would happen, offer up a realistic answer to the problem that will work in the long term.

fishbuck - 3-4-2009 at 12:40 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Bajahowodd
Fishy-I've never seen a marijuana factory. This is the big kahuna. Can't remember who it was that posted on another thread that he was told by a hard drug user that if that user had been able to score pot, he wouldn't be on the hard stuff. That flies in the face of all those fans of pot being a gateway drug. But gateway is nonsense. Easy and legal availability of pot would surely cut down the use of meth, coke and H.

I'm no expert on meth, coke, heroin etc. I know very little of pot. Beer is my drug of choice.
I find it difficult to believe that a "hard" drug user would be satified with pot. They work totally different in the mind. And pot is not an addicting drug either. so I doubt it would counteract the addiction of a hard drug.
I haven't seen a marijuana factory either. But I would say it looks like a typical house with the windows blocked with curtains or something. All the rooms would be filled with plants in pots and grow lights on the ceiling. Could be right next door.
Marijuana is legal in California. I doubt if it has cut down on hard drug use or encouraged hard drug use.
Gateway drugs? Alcohol and cigarettes.

Bajahowodd - 3-4-2009 at 12:45 AM

There are some class issues involved. Sure, technically pot is legal in CA. But one must visit a doctor, get a scrip and then buy. Fairly expensive for street people. Not to mention that street people are preyed upon by their dealers. Price of MD 20-20 alot higher in the ghetto than on mainstreet.

fishbuck - 3-4-2009 at 01:01 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by BajaGringo

Quote:

I believe what you said is true. It's like when the cigarette companies hand out free cigarettes at concerts. They are really hoping you get hooked.
Drug producers do it very similarly. In fact it was in the news that they set up shop in some small mid-west town recently. They moved huge amounts of drugs through the little town. But not all of it leaves town. People, and the includes kids, are exposed to it. And they start using it. And get addicted.
It has happened in a lot of the little baja towns too. As the drugs pass through town people are exposed. And they start using it.
The first step to "solving" this is acknowledging what is really happening.
If I am in the business of growing a big field of heroin poppies I'm also in the business of making sure someone buys and consumes my product.
So what came first here the chicken or the egg? My guess is that before drugs were produced there were no addicts or users. That came after. And it was intentional.
But the cat is most definately out of the bag. And I don't think he's going back in.
So acknowledge people are using drugs here in the US. Lots of it too! And it's not going to stop.
So what is you plan to deal with that reality.
And there are large scale producers of all these different drugs. And they fully intend to get you, or your family, or friends addicted to their product. And as long as they get your money they don't care what happens to you.
They are continuosly looking for new customers. And they will find them.
Now what?

[Edited on 3-4-2009 by fishbuck]

BajaGringo - 3-4-2009 at 01:14 AM

Well, now that we accept what the reality is we have to decide what a realistic solution is. As much as I would like to see drugs gone from this planet it won't happen anymore than we could get rid of gambling or prostitution. I say that drugs, gambling and prostitution should be legal everywhere - regulated, taxed and zoned. With the billions saved you can educate the public and provide treatment. It will not be a 100% solution but I don't see how any solution ever could be. It seems to me to be the lesser of two evils.

fishbuck - 3-4-2009 at 01:27 AM

Society has worked very hard to cut down on cigarette useage. And I believe there has been a measure of success to it.
Society has worked very hard to cut down on drunk driving and I think there has been a measure of success there also.
So there may be realistic ways to have an impact on these issues or at least to civilize them and try to make them fit into society.
But acknowledging that they aren't going away is a good first step.
I mean the cigarette and alcohol producers don't go around shooting each other with military grade weapons anymore.
That would be a big improvement in Mexico!

BajaGringo - 3-4-2009 at 01:32 AM

My point exactly

fishbuck - 3-4-2009 at 02:58 AM

I was thinking that if there were no violence associated with the drug shipping would we care as much about this?
It would still be a very bad problem.
But what if it was peaceful? The drugs just move through. No shootings etc.
It's the violence that we are scared of! Not the drugs.
The drugs aren't going away. And that is a problem. But it is the violence that we must deal with.
The weapon of choice for the drug army is the AK-47, semi-auto. Bought legally here and smuggled into Mexico. That is scary.
I haven't fired one for a while but I am a small arms expert with an M-16 too. And the idea of "the enemy" armed with that weapon is very sobering.
And I don't want to be that sober!

k-rico - 3-4-2009 at 08:21 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by fishbuck
I was thinking that if there were no violence associated with the drug shipping would we care as much about this?
It would still be a very bad problem.
But what if it was peaceful? The drugs just move through. No shootings etc.
It's the violence that we are scared of! Not the drugs.
The drugs aren't going away. And that is a problem. But it is the violence that we must deal with.
The weapon of choice for the drug army is the AK-47, semi-auto. Bought legally here and smuggled into Mexico. That is scary.
I haven't fired one for a while but I am a small arms expert with an M-16 too. And the idea of "the enemy" armed with that weapon is very sobering.
And I don't want to be that sober!

I agree, it is the recent violence that is the problem, not the drug business per se. Remember baja before the violence? I do, Tijuana and Rosarito were full of tourists, Americans were buying beach homes, and there were very few news items about the thriving drug business.

TJ has calmed down recently (knock on wood). I wonder why. Maybe the drug trade has stopped in the area, or maybe the competition between cartels to take over the Arellano-Felix turf is over and there is a new "crime outfit" in charge. I suspect it's the latter if anything.

ckiefer - 3-4-2009 at 08:33 AM

K-rico: That sounds like a reasonable analysis. But if the U.S. legalizes, pot for example, do these guys then infiltrate the U.S. and take their violence there in an effort to control the distribution and keep all the cash for themselves? Horrifying thought, all those decapitations on U.S. soil, and all for the few hours of smoking, doping pleasure it delivers. It's surely a sad situation. Either way you look at it, we need to tighten up our borders.

k-rico - 3-4-2009 at 08:49 AM

The border is being tightened up and stopping smuggling is a reasonable and non-violent course of action.

The smuggling (both drugs and people) has recently moved to the ocean along the TJ / San Diego coastline. A sign that land based smuggling has become much more difficult.

Legalization is a can of worms. I question the basic premise that it would stop the black market. Just sell it cheaper than the legal stuff, bingo, you're in business.

Afterall, what's the cost of goods for producing a pound of skunk? Not much.

[Edited on 3-4-2009 by k-rico]

ckiefer - 3-4-2009 at 09:11 AM

k-rico: and even less if it were legalized. Then those who wish to partake in the U.S. buy locally (I can see those "made in usa stickers now), making it less appealing to purchase the import. That makes the cost to smuggle higher, no? Smuggling moved to ocean, well so much for having beach-front property there.

shari - 3-4-2009 at 09:27 AM

Yes, the world would be a better place without drugs.....or booze, cigarettes, porn, poverty, racism...etc etc. I concur that way more people die from booze and nicotine than pot.

I too have heard MANY cases in our village where men were looking for some marijuana but when they can't find it, they buy chuki or crystal meth which is always around. This really stinks. Pot is hard to find because it is bulky, smelly thus risky to carry but crystal is cheap, easy to transport, hide and cant be detected when you take it like pot and thus readily available to poor mexicanos which is a shame as it is such a horrific drug.

If pot were legal, many kids and adults would not be hooked on meth which can destroy them for life. Legalization has been in the mexican media alot lately and I hope for the sake of all the teens and their uncles that soon meth will be no longer the drug of choice.

I just cannot believe the number of self righteous alcoholics that truly believe that their "drug" of choice should be the only legal one....junkies are always gonna find their fix whether it be beer, cigarettes, coffee, videogames, nomad forum.....legalize it, control it, tax it...educate the public with the revenues and hope for the best.

k-rico - 3-4-2009 at 09:55 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by ckiefer
Smuggling moved to ocean, well so much for having beach-front property there.

I believe it was the USCG that stopped a panga with 20 or so people in it last week just inside the Coronado Islands. I know that would put the US in Mex waters, maybe that's OK now, maybe it was just north of the border as it extends into the ocean. I wonder where they planned on coming ashore? Hotel del Coronado? La Jolla? San Diego Yacht Club?

The pot smugglers are dumping the packages overboard when they get chased. TJ beachcombing is becoming popular. I just got back from a beach walk with the dogs. Didn't see any tightly wrapped, duct taped packages though. Beautiful morning in TJ.

Submarines are next but that's tricky around here. Lots of underwater traffic given the nuclear attack sub base in San Diego bay.

[Edited on 3-4-2009 by k-rico]

Terry28 - 3-4-2009 at 10:08 AM

A better place with out booze and porn??What is this world coming to? Utah??

[Edited on 3-4-2009 by Terry28]

Pescador - 3-4-2009 at 11:37 AM

I can totally understand Fishbuck's position and it is echoed throughout society, but I have also come to realize that what I think of drugs relates to my value structure and determines whether or not I am going to use them. Where we run crossways, is that we have a major problem when we impose our belief system on someone else. I don't want to smoke pot but if you do, I hope you will take responsibility for your actions.
Do some people get addicted? Of course, some people are addicted to gambling, some to porn, some to alcohol, but we learned with prohibition that the answer was not to make it illegal because that did not change anything except to drive the price up.
Now, whenever anything is illegal to sell and distribute, we find that the distribution and sale of that illegal commodity is handled by the crooks and underground. This happened with prohibition it is certainly happening with drugs. It happens with all high interest items that are in the market but illegal. Think about how sex, drugs, assasinations, etc., are marketed. By choosing to sell things that are illegal, the price goes way up which is commensurate with the risk involved.
So our leaders were wise enough to recognize that during prohiition that the underworld was unbeatable, the hunger for alcohol too great, and the only thing that made sense was to end prohibition and make the sale and distribution of alcohol legal and taxable. We still have problems with abuse and alcoholism, but we no longer have to tolerate rum runners, mafia hit men shooting up the place, moonshiners, etc.. Instead, we allow the person, of a certain age, to make up his own mind about whether or not he wants to use and we control those things that we can control, like driving while under the influence, public intoxication, etc.,
Do we allow those companies to advertise and try to "hook" new customers? Let your mind think about the Superbowl ads for "Supersmoke" that makes you cool and gets the girls to fall all over you.
Drugs are a product, plain and simple, and obviously some people want to buy these things. The first step is to admit that the present system is broken and not working and maybewe can take a fresh look. I think it is Prohibition all over again.

Barry A. - 3-4-2009 at 11:54 AM

Well said, Pescador. I find that my staunch "anti-legalization" mind-set is wavering-----------and I am almost ready to throw in the towel--------actually, probably ready.

(sigh)

------and Shari's contribution makes a lot of sense to me, also.

Barry

[Edited on 3-4-2009 by Barry A.]

Bajahowodd - 3-4-2009 at 12:05 PM

As part of a forbidden fruit analysis regarding vices, there was a recent study published that showed socially conservative states have a higher rate of online porn subscribers than do liberal states. Utah and Louisiana were listed as the highest. The survey was of broadband subscribers, only. But someone would have to really be desperate to attempt watching porn on dial-up. :lol:

Barry A. - 3-4-2009 at 02:55 PM

That seems like flawed or skewed info to me---------I lived in Utah for 4 years and they always impressed me as being highly liberal, sexually speaking.

There are a lot of non-LDS folks there that are on the dole, and take advantage of Utah's liberal aid policies. To me Utah is "conservative" only in their political views.

I don't understand the "porn" connection---------------

Barry

DENNIS - 3-4-2009 at 03:24 PM

If the U.S. would put just half the effort into the flawed penal system as she has trying to clean up Mexico, the illegalities woudn't be so costly to society. Put the law breakers to work to earn their keep. Form a prisoner WPA and make them build roads and dams and parks. Take away their civil rights and ban the ACLU from meddeling in prisoner "rights." Then, rewrite the Constitution and Bill Of Rights to reflect the current state of affairs. Those worn out, stale old rags are the biggest problem facing America today.

Oh yeah...if prisoners don't want to comply or cause trouble in the process....shoot 'em.

fishbuck - 3-4-2009 at 04:18 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by DENNIS
If the U.S. would put just half the effort into the flawed penal system as she has trying to clean up Mexico, the illegalities woudn't be so costly to society. Put the law breakers to work to earn their keep. Form a prisoner WPA and make them build roads and dams and parks. Take away their civil rights and ban the ACLU from meddeling in prisoner "rights." Then, rewrite the Constitution and Bill Of Rights to reflect the current state of affairs. Those worn out, stale old rags are the biggest problem facing America today.

Oh yeah...if prisoners don't want to comply or cause trouble in the process....shoot 'em.

http://www.boingboing.net/2009/02/02/judges-jailed-for-ta.ht...

fishbuck - 3-4-2009 at 04:27 PM

Quote:

http://www.citizensugar.com/2806723

DENNIS - 3-4-2009 at 04:38 PM

These garbage pail judges would be the first ones swinging a pick on the new interstate.

fishbuck - 3-4-2009 at 04:40 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by DENNIS
These garbage pail judges would be the first ones swinging a pick on the new interstate.

"DENNIS for President!"

DENNIS - 3-4-2009 at 04:46 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by fishbuck
"DENNIS for President!"

Oh Yeah...I like that. I'll mix it up with my other title and straighten this place out.

President / Moderator DENNIS.

Woooosh - 3-4-2009 at 04:57 PM

Don't you folks think Obama's universal healthcare program will include addiction coverage? I think the bad economy will push even more peope over the edge- and add to addiction numbers. Legalizing soft drugs is a tough sell. Decriminalizing soft drug posession for personal use seems more likely and reasonable. The "Dutch" went that route and didn't show any statistical increase in addicts. While everyone is yelling "change" we should at least consider changing some our failed methods and biases for some better results.

[Edited on 3-4-2009 by Woooosh]

CaboRon - 3-5-2009 at 04:52 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Terry28
A better place with out booze and porn??What is this world coming to? Utah??

[Edited on 3-4-2009 by Terry28]

CaboRon - 3-5-2009 at 04:54 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by DENNIS

Quote:

Originally posted by fishbuck
"DENNIS for President!"

Oh Yeah...I like that. I'll mix it up with my other title and straighten this place out.

President / Moderator DENNIS.

President for Life .... Dennis Mugabe :lol:

Bajahowodd - 3-5-2009 at 05:47 PM

Woooosh- The Netherlands legalized marijuana 22 years ago. It is available at what they euphemistically call coffee shops. It is a step far beyond decriminalization. But, you are right in that that legalization did not result in any significant increase in drug use.

And for good measure, prostitution is legal. Oh, the poor Dutch...

[Edited on 3-6-2009 by Bajahowodd]

tripledigitken - 3-5-2009 at 05:48 PM

I was there is 1970 and it was like it was legal then!

Ken

Bajahowodd - 3-5-2009 at 05:50 PM

It had already been decriminalized. Not yet legal.

ckiefer - 3-5-2009 at 09:01 PM

While I can't speak from personal experience on this issue, I can say that somebody should be looking at Starbucks and where they grow their beans.....always ALWAYS gives me a buzz.