| Pages:
1
2
3 |
Iflyfish
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 3747
Registered: 10-17-2006
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by Barry A.
Fish----------The law enforcement actions are not designed to irradicate the illegal action, just to hopefully control it's spread. But, they have
not been too successful at that, either. Still, like the Dems say about the present economy, "it would be a lot worse if not for our efforts"
 
Barry |
I doubt very much that you could prove this assertion. You would need to prove a hypothetical and that is impossible. This is wishful thinking.
It is not wishful thinking but a fact that the laws of the USofA have created the CRIME of drug use, in my view a medical problem. It is also a fact
that because of these laws an underground economy has been created, a very lucrative and untaxed economy. It is a fact that these laws have created a
criminal class who profit by this law and many of whom are then incarcerated at our (government) expense. It is true that these laws have created a
trillion dollar infrastructure to fight this "War on Drugs". It is true that consumption of these illegal drugs has not decreased in relation to the
escalation of this "War on Drugs". It is true that these laws have generated a generation of criminals who have become increasingly violent in their
battles with eachother over turf. It is true that now innocent citizens are exposed on an ongoing basis to the violence of these criminals as they are
caught in the crossfire. It is true that these laws have created a source of illegal revenue for politicians, police and judicial public servants that
has undermined the very warp and woof of Mexican Society.
We can wish all we want, we can bemoan the excesses of the Cartels, the duplicity of public officials, the escalation of the violence and the personal
tragedy that we witness each day in this march to folley, but there is another alternative and that is to take the profit out of the business and
thereby starve the beast. It is very interesting to this writer that in the recent election in California, where decriminalization was on the ballot,
and nearly passed, that the marijuana growers of California were OPPOSED to this law. Is it any wonder they would be opposed? Passage of this law
would have PUT THEM OUT OF BUSINESS! Do you think that the Drug Cartels of Mexico are any different? The Cartels, Politicians, Corrupt Police and
members of the Judiciary AND the DEA all profit from this "War on Drugs" as do the arms dealers and boots on the ground on both sides of this
wack-a-mole game. It is all of us, the innocent bystanders, who are the real victims in this very dangerous game.
It is very easy to promote escalation of the use of power in the face of failure, witness the dynamics of the Viet Nam war and the subsequent wars in
the Middle East. How successful were these "surges"? What in the final analysis was accomplished besides more soldiers and innocent people
slaughtered, displaced and traumatized?
It is very difficult to advocate for peace and for the stopping of hostilities once the dogs of war have been unleashed. Those who have the courage to
challenge the machismo of these self defeating escalations are labeled as enablers of the enemy, traiters, weak, impractical, soft on crime etc.
Beware the waving of the flag my friends, beware unleashing the dogs of war and beware the denegration of those with whom you disagree as by doing so
you contribute to the escalation of anger and violence and by doing so share in the culpablity of the outcome of that which you discuss. We have
already seen a very prominant and helpful member of this board leave because of the rancor of a few who have poisoned his experience on this board to
the point that he felt he had to leave. Those of you who engage in personal attacks on this forum are like birds chitting in their own nests and at
some point will have to sleep in it.
Iflyfish
|
|
|
Barry A.
Select Nomad
Posts: 10007
Registered: 11-30-2003
Location: Redding, Northern CA
Member Is Offline
Mood: optimistic
|
|
Fish------
Since you quoted me above for the "lead in" to your essay, I assume that it was directed at me, as well as others.
You make a lot of very good points, and most of them I tend to agree with. Why you chose to direct your rancor at me is a mystery as I try very hard
to NOT use personal attacks and hostility in my posts. Normally your posts are fully capable of standing on their own, very readable, very logical
and informative. And then sometimes you "attack"!?!?!?!? the 'pot calling the kettle black'!?!?! Why, only you know.
I apologize if I have ever offended you personally-----that was never my intention. Poke humor at you?? Yes, I admit to that, but not personal
attacks.
In any case, I learn a lot from you and your intelligent and learned posts, so don't become discouraged-----you ARE getting thru to some of us. I may
not agree with all you say, but I certainly listen and think about your points, and yes they even influence my beliefs sometimes.
Barry
|
|
|
JoeJustJoe
Banned
Posts: 21045
Registered: 9-9-2010
Location: Occupied Aztlan
Member Is Offline
Mood: Mad as hell
|
|
I don't think he is talking about you Barry A.
But no doubt you make some pretty offensive posts. For example when you blame Portugal's economic problems on their highly successful decriminalizing
drug policy in that country.
It's well known in the US that it cost more to put a drug user in prison for four years than it does to pay four years of a college education.
The "war on drugs" is nothing but a big money pit, and it does nothing to solve the drug problems in both the US or Mexico.
|
|
|
Barry A.
Select Nomad
Posts: 10007
Registered: 11-30-2003
Location: Redding, Northern CA
Member Is Offline
Mood: optimistic
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by JoeJustJoe
But no doubt you make some pretty offensive posts. For example when you blame Portugal's economic problems on their highly successful decriminalizing
drug policy in that country.
It's well known in the US that it cost more to put a drug user in prison for four years than it does to pay four years of a college education.
The "war on drugs" is nothing but a big money pit, and it does nothing to solve the drug problems in both the US or Mexico. |
JoeJJoe--------I believe you are misinterpreting what I said----I did not "blame" Portugal's financial problems solely on their "decrimilalization"
policies----that of course is absurd--------what I said was that social programs like what Portugal is embarked upon are terribly expensive, and
Portugal is in deep doo doo economically, and it is these types of programs that contribute to this state of affairs-----no matter where they are.
(to me that is a "Duh" issue). Some Nations are spending way more than they are taking in--------logically that can't continue.
The fact that we spend so much on Prisons in this Country is equally absurd------they are PRISONS, for Gawd sake, not hotels. ALL this social
"spending" drives me nuts as a Conservative.
I hope you are right in that Fish was not directing his criticism at me-------but that is tough for me to swallow, for now. Why did he use my
statement as his "lead in"?
Barry
[Edited on 12-7-2011 by Barry A.]
|
|
|
Iflyfish
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 3747
Registered: 10-17-2006
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by Barry A.
Fish------
Since you quoted me above for the "lead in" to your essay, I assume that it was directed at me, as well as others.
You make a lot of very good points, and most of them I tend to agree with. Why you chose to direct your rancor at me is a mystery as I try very hard
to NOT use personal attacks and hostility in my posts. Normally your posts are fully capable of standing on their own, very readable, very logical
and informative. And then sometimes you "attack"!?!?!?!? the 'pot calling the kettle black'!?!?! Why, only you know.
I apologize if I have ever offended you personally-----that was never my intention. Poke humor at you?? Yes, I admit to that, but not personal
attacks.
In any case, I learn a lot from you and your intelligent and learned posts, so don't become discouraged-----you ARE getting thru to some of us. I may
not agree with all you say, but I certainly listen and think about your points, and yes they even influence my beliefs sometimes.
Barry |
My apologies Barry, my comments about aggressive speech have nothing to do with you, not at all. I included my comments about verbal attacks in the
context of discussing aggression/violence which exist on a micro as well as macro level and was focused on that issue in the context of my response to
you. My thoughts simply moved from the macro to the micro level. You are the kind of guy I would enjoy sitting around the proverbial fire and
discussing issues of the day. I respect the quality of our dialogue and feel just fine disagreeing with you. Reasonable people can disagree with out
engaging in hostility and vitriol. I know that you know this and that is evident in your posts.
How does one maintain a constructive dialogue including differences without devolving into rancor? It is clear to me that this is very possible. I for
one appreciate the exchange of ideas that a heterogeneous population like we have on this forum can afford us all. I consider discussions here to be
an exchange of ideas among friends. For some this is not their purpose. Psychological games played with the intent of causing harm to someone else via
this dialogue produce nothing of any value. The opportunity to tap into the thinking and knowledge base available here on this site is something I
value. I too learn from others here.
John Gottman, PhD, UofW spent 24 years studying predictors of marital satisfaction and divorce. He followed over 2,000 couples and his conclusions are
illuminating. He found that happy marriages are based upon good communication, how we talk with one another is important, very important. He also
found that how couples deal with differences is another significant variable. Differences are inherent in relationships; the issue is how we deal with
those differences and how compatible our styles of dealing with differences are. Having a compatible style is important. People have different styles
of expressing differences. This is an important finding. Some people are very passionate and loud in their self expression, some more reserved and
quiet. What is important for a happy long term relationship is that the couple shares their basic style. I recognize that on this site there is a
range of styles, that’s ok. Gottman found that contempt is damaging to the physical health of the person on the receiving end of it. Exposure to
contempt can actually make you sick. A significant amount of contempt in a couple’s relationship is a predictor of divorce and of physical illness of
the partner exposed to it. Contempt is a gut shot, bypassing the areas of the brain that think, it goes to the core emotional areas. Contempt is
corrosive and destructive in relationships and it is corrosive and destructive on this forum. I believe that some have quit posting or reading this
site because some choose to communicate their contempt to others. I am not saying that you do this Barry, but I would invite all readers to read posts
with this in mind and recognize that the posters using contempt are like birds crapping in the nest we all fly into.
The issues involved in the War on Drugs are complex and there clearly is no simple solution to them. How we address these issues has critical
importance to all of us who love Mexico. I appreciate the opportunity to discuss the varied issues involved. For instance I met a young man from
Holland, PhD Theoretical Mathematics, and I asked him about the effect of decriminalization of the use of drugs in his country. He said that when the
law was first passed was an increase in use, but now people just “get high sometimes”. He said that the “Americans come here and stay stoned for a
week and create trouble and bounce off light posts”. I am not saying that this single person’s opinion is any more valuable than another’s, but he
raises a significant perspective, that is that drug use may change over time if legalized. Different groups may increase use and other groups may
decrease use. Many of us are ethnocentric and forget that there is another world out there that may experience these things in very different ways.
There are some countries that execute drug users. Does this mean that we ought to do the same? There are some countries that have lax drug laws and
lower per capita use of drugs in various demographic groups.
Iflyfish
|
|
|
wessongroup
Platinum Nomad
Posts: 21152
Registered: 8-9-2009
Location: Mission Viejo
Member Is Offline
Mood: Suicide Hot line ... please hold
|
|
Interesting stuff fish... "contempt" ... maybe that is where "this®" fits in ...
|
|
|
Barry A.
Select Nomad
Posts: 10007
Registered: 11-30-2003
Location: Redding, Northern CA
Member Is Offline
Mood: optimistic
|
|
Another excellent post---------thanks, Fish. We NOW are on the same page. 
Barry
|
|
|
goldhuntress
Senior Nomad
Posts: 663
Registered: 1-28-2010
Member Is Offline
|
|
There's a new show on Discovery call Weed Wars and I watched last week and it was pretty good. I know, I know, another reality show. I can't help it
though, I watched the first episode and they got me, lol. It's on Thursday nights and I saw that tomorrow the first episode replays before the new
second episode.
Two quotes I like from Albert Einstein
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them.
The War on Drugs has failed. Forty years and one trillion dollars later the thinking has to change. Don't be afraid, change is good.
|
|
|
JoeJustJoe
Banned
Posts: 21045
Registered: 9-9-2010
Location: Occupied Aztlan
Member Is Offline
Mood: Mad as hell
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by wessongroup
Interesting stuff fish... "contempt" ... maybe that is where "this®" fits in ... |
I disagree with most of the stuff Fish and John Gotman, PhD say, however I do agree with what Gottman says about "contempt." Because once you have
contempt for your spouse it's just about all over. You can't save a marriage if you have contempt for your partner.
I been on many forums and blogs are rarely can so-called reasonable people can disagree with one another. The arguments almost always goes in the
gutter, and that's probably why the vast majority of forums and blogs attract certain kinds of people, and others are kicked out or banned. This is
especially true on political forum where the political forums are either very conservative or very liberal as are the members.
You will almost never see political forums open to both liberals and conservatives because they will fight like dogs.
There are certain people here with an agenda, and the ways of political dirty tricks are played here. And it's sometimes very effective to knock out
an opponent who disagree with by finding dirt on them.
Look at what happened to Herman Cain. The democrats could have talked about how bad the 999 plan was until they were blue in the face, but it still
wouldn't have mattered to conservative voters.
But when you find dirt on Herman Cain. Well then that's a different story. It's all over Harman Cain. Stick a fork in him...he's done!
That's why negative advertising and finding dirt on the other people works so well even if the dirt isn't always accurate and just is plain wrong.
I'm so sorry hard ball politics are played on the "Nomad" forum, but some of your members play for keeps. But really just about any place you go
political charged topics aren't discussed rationally for very long before they degenerate IMHO.
|
|
|
Iflyfish
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 3747
Registered: 10-17-2006
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by JoeJustJoe
| Quote: | Originally posted by wessongroup
Interesting stuff fish... "contempt" ... maybe that is where "this®" fits in ... |
I disagree with most of the stuff Fish and John Gotman, PhD say, however I do agree with what Gottman says about "contempt." Because once you have
contempt for your spouse it's just about all over. You can't save a marriage if you have contempt for your partner.
I been on many forums and blogs are rarely can so-called reasonable people can disagree with one another. The arguments almost always goes in the
gutter, and that's probably why the vast majority of forums and blogs attract certain kinds of people, and others are kicked out or banned. This is
especially true on political forum where the political forums are either very conservative or very liberal as are the members.
You will almost never see political forums open to both liberals and conservatives because they will fight like dogs.
There are certain people here with an agenda, and the ways of political dirty tricks are played here. And it's sometimes very effective to knock out
an opponent who disagree with by finding dirt on them.
Look at what happened to Herman Cain. The democrats could have talked about how bad the 999 plan was until they were blue in the face, but it still
wouldn't have mattered to conservative voters.
But when you find dirt on Herman Cain. Well then that's a different story. It's all over Harman Cain. Stick a fork in him...he's done!
That's why negative advertising and finding dirt on the other people works so well even if the dirt isn't always accurate and just is plain wrong.
I'm so sorry hard ball politics are played on the "Nomad" forum, but some of your members play for keeps. But really just about any place you go
political charged topics aren't discussed rationally for very long before they degenerate IMHO. |
You offer an interesting perspective and one that I am certain has great validity. However if one play a win/lose game then one's options are limited
aren't they? Complex problems often require complex solutions and as human beings I think we are hard wired to seek resolution and simplicity. It is
interesting to note that the brain is designed to conserve energy and it takes energy to maintain ones tolerance for ambiguity. Thanks for your
interesting and probably saddly true observation about the nature of dialogue now a days. We may have gotten so good at "playing for keeps" that we
have forgotten that the marble game ends much more quickly when we "play for keeps". In addition someone always ends up feeling bad about losing their
marbles and I have certainly witnessed some marbles being seriously lost on this forum (feeble attempt at humor, which usually doesn't play well in
this medium).
Your post leaves me thinking about the Kings of England and France who used to exchange syphilis infected hoars in order to infect eachother in their
attempts to "play for keeps". I don't know why this comes to mind at this stage in our discussion....but there you go.....
Iflyfish
Iflyfish
|
|
|
Cypress
Elite Nomad
Posts: 7641
Registered: 3-12-2006
Location: on the bayou
Member Is Offline
Mood: undecided
|
|
Legalize pot. And democracy? Democracy is a political process.
|
|
|
cielo
Newbie
Posts: 18
Registered: 11-18-2011
Location: San Jose del Cabo
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by Iflyfish
| Quote: | Originally posted by Mengano
| Quote: | Originally posted by Iflyfish
I am not alone in my views regarding the potential positive impact of legalization of drugs. If you go to the following link you will find scores of
Law Enforcement Professionals who share my perspective. |
Not being alone in your argument is not an argument. It is a logical fallacy called Argumentum ad populum. This fallacy concludes a
proposition to be true because many or most people believe it; which alleges: "If many believe so, it is so." As an example, the argument that there
is a God because so many people believe it is true.
Do you have any empirical evidence to present to support your argument that legalizing drugs will lower crime?
I stated:
I am not alone in my views regarding the potential positive impact of legalization of drugs. If you go to the following link you will find scores of
Law Enforcement Professionals who share my perspective. These people are seasoned professionals and reasoned people. I hope you will take the time to
inform yourself of their perspective.
Learn more: http://www.leap.cc/
There are also World Leaders who also propose legalization and I would also encourage you to familiarize yourself with their perspectives. The Global
Commission on Drug Policy responsible for the report includes: former Brazilian president Fernando Cardoso; former Colombian president Cesar Gaviria;
Mexico's former president Ernesto Zedillo; ex-UN chief Kofi Annan; former Chairman of the US Federal Reserve and of the Economic Recovery Board Paul
Volcker; former U.S. Secretary of State George Schultz; Mario Vargas Llosa; Carlos Fuentes; and Richard Branson.
Learn more: http://tinyurl.com/89yesc8
You state:
“Not being alone in your argument is not an argument. It is a logical fallacy called Argumentum ad populum. This fallacy concludes a proposition to be
true because many or most people believe it; which alleges: "If many believe so, it is so." As an example, the argument that there is a God because so
many people believe it is true.
Do you have any empirical evidence to present to support your argument that legalizing drugs will lower crime?”
I appreciate how you could interpret my statement to be an Argumentum ad populum and appreciate your concern about logical fallacies and their impact
on debate. However do you think that providing expert testimony is Argumentum ad populum? I provided you with evidence that my statements were not
simply “talking points” as you assessed them to be. I responded to your trivialization of my point by demonstrating that it was not just Liberal
Talking Points. By citing expert testimony I believe I rebutted your proposition that I was just parroting some “talking points” and was not familiar
with either the literature or the current thinking in the field.
In response to your question regarding an example of where legalization drugs of drugs reduced crime. I would cite the repeal of the Volstead Act,
otherwise known as Prohibition. http://eh.net/encyclopedia/article/miron.prohibition.alcohol
http://www.lp.org/issues/crime-and-violence
Violent crime and homicides rose during Prohibition and dropped after its repeal.
Secondly I would cite Portugal and its success with decriminalization of the use of ALL drugs:
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=portugal-dr...
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article28603.htm
I too find the sarcasm offensive and it does not contribute to a reasoned dialogue. I do appreciate the very real questions that you raise and this is
exactly the dialogue that needs to happen if we are to come up with a successful approach to this very real dilemma.
I posted:
““This is a Gorilla war taking place in urban as well as rural areas. How well did the Viet Nam war work for first the French then the USofA;
Afghanistan for the Russians and then the USofA? What are the successful presidents for wars like this?
How well has the legislation of morality ever worked? Have we stomped out prostitution? How about alcoholism with Prohibition? How about Tobacco use?
Public education and the use of social sanction, shame and laws protecting the places where tobacco can be used have had a major impact on tobacco use
in the USofA. Making tobacco illegal would not stop its use nor would a War on Tobacco.”
You have not answered my questions and then pose yours to me. You are a supporter of the War on Drugs. It is your responsibility to provide evidence
of its success. Where is your evidence of the success of this approach?
I appreciate the goldhuntress link to the LA Times site, lots to explore there and I will take some time to do so. This is the sort of post that is
useful.
Iflyfish |
Crickets from Mengano on presenting evidence that the war on drugs has been successful. You'll also get crickets if you ask him where he lives or
when's the last time he's actually stepped foot in Mexico. 
|
|
|
|
MrBillM
Platinum Nomad
Posts: 21656
Registered: 8-20-2003
Location: Out and About
Member Is Offline
Mood: It's a Zip-a-Dee-Doo-Dah Day
|
|
Gorillas in our Midst ?
??????????????????
“This is a Gorilla war taking place in urban as well as rural areas".
If they turn the Gorillas loose, EVERYBODY is in trouble.
Especially if they start throwing feces.
We may have to resort to Guerrilla warfare to defeat those Gorillas.
Reminds me of a scene from "Captain Ron".
Then, there's the question asked " What are the successful presidents for wars like this"?
Obama, Bush, Clinton, Bush, Reagan .......... ?
[Edited on 12-8-2011 by MrBillM]
|
|
|
Woooosh
Banned
Posts: 5240
Registered: 1-28-2007
Location: Rosarito Beach
Member Is Offline
Mood: Luminescent Waves at Rosarito Beach
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by JoeJustJoe
Kidnapping and sex trafficking doesn't bring in the kind of money that illegal drug selling does. The return on kidnapping takes a long time compared
to a drug sale. Sex Trafficking is often sensationalized in the news. According to articles I read "all" sex workers are underage sex slaves, and
that's just not true.
[Edited on 12-5-2011 by JoeJustJoe] |
This Frontera article says otherwise. ..
http://www.frontera.info/EdicionEnLinea/Notas/Nacional/10122...
Human trafficking more profitable than drug trafficking: UN
Tuxtla Gutierrez, Chiapas (SUN)
The resources obtained by transferring Mexican and Central American undocumented migrants to the United States are greater than those achieved by the
drug trade, said the representative of the UNODC, Paulina Trujillo. 's representative in Chiapas of the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime
(UNODC) reported that the fight against human trafficking requires a great social movement. In an interview, said that action to tackle this scourge
must be based on the application of the law, but also grounded in an intense campaign of promotion, awareness and prevention, and prosecution of
crimes and criminals. held that the challenge and commitment is to care for migrants of the risks that are, to visualize the problem from all areas,
from the dignity of the person, "because we need to reduce crime and create opportunities for participation in prevention." He acknowledged the
efforts of the State Council for Human Rights (ECHR) has launched a major campaign in the issue of trafficking migrants now, so they "reaffirm our
commitment to join efforts to combat this crime energetic." Trujillo said that human trafficking is one of the priority areas of work of the Office
United Nations Drugs and Crime, responsible for overseeing the implementation of the Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking, Especially
Women and Children. It is also responsible, he explained, to ensure the Protocol against the Smuggling of Migrants by Land , Sea and Air,
supplementing the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime, in particular those provisions relating to the mechanisms of
research, international cooperation and information. He said that every year men, women and children fall into the hands of traffickers in their own
country and abroad, adding that trafficking affects all countries, states, either as countries of origin or destination or transit of the victims.
Therefore, he stressed that there can be no default or impunity, responsibility to contain this scourge is all.
[Edited on 12-10-2011 by Woooosh]
\"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing\"
1961- JFK to Canadian parliament (Edmund Burke)
|
|
|
Dave
Elite Nomad
Posts: 6005
Registered: 11-5-2002
Member Is Offline
|
|
Sex trade margins are very profitable. As a wise marketing guru once said:
Pu$$y, Use it...still got it.
|
|
|
MrBillM
Platinum Nomad
Posts: 21656
Registered: 8-20-2003
Location: Out and About
Member Is Offline
Mood: It's a Zip-a-Dee-Doo-Dah Day
|
|
Baja Attractions
From 1957 until I went to San Felipe in 1966, I had always thought that the TJ Bordello and Bar Girls were the BEST reason to visit Baja with the
races at Agua Caliente and the Jai Alai games a VERY distant (but enjoyable) second and third.
Come to think of it, even AFTER seeing San Felipe, the TJ (and San Luis) hookers were still in first.
|
|
|
| Pages:
1
2
3 |
![[*]](images/xmbforum/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
