Should the U.S help President Duterte?

[FLOMBIE]

4 minutes ago, aztek said:

no dealer wants to kill their customers, especially since the law came out, that charges dealer with murder if someone he sold drugs to dies from od, or any other drug related reason.

it is more like sleeping pills and vitamins that dealers use to cut their stuff with, 

We have had plenty of finds with rat poison while I was working at the court. It does happen. And the guy who is last in line and selling the drugs on the streets usually cannot say much about the quality, unless he is a user himself, because they have nothing to do with the production. 

Edit: But you are right, of course, that it's often something considered less harmful. But even Aspririn, that is often used, can cause heavy complications. 

Edited June 20, 2017 by FLOMBIE

[Bama13]

Just now, Ellapennella said:

No I would not, but there's enough of  people addicted to legalized drugs already that are nothing but zombies. Drugs destroys lives no matter how you try to make it seem if it were legal, it's already legal.

So should ALL drugs be illegal? What do you have against freedom and personal responsibility? 

"I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do." - Robert Heinlein

[FLOMBIE]

5 minutes ago, Ellapennella said:

No I would not, but there's enough of  people addicted to legalized drugs already that are nothing but zombies. Drugs destroys lives no matter how you try to make it seem if it were legal, it's already legal.

I hope you strongly oppose alcohol. 

[Bama13]

1 minute ago, aztek said:

entire drug war and DEA will have no reasons to exist, billions in funds will be lost. private prisons will be out of business, cops will lose excuse to search and sleaze, in addition to   all those you mentioned. and probably many more we did not mention.

tax is nothing next to what they get fighting drugs

DEA having no reason to exist is a good thing. Save the taxpayers a lot of money. Billions will be gained by not wasting resources on locking up drug users. Cops can still search and seize for illegal things. Private prisons should be forced to be non-profits.

[Dark_Grey]

1 minute ago, Bama13 said:

So should ALL drugs be illegal? What do you have against freedom and personal responsibility? 

"I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do." - Robert Heinlein

This is ultimately what the issue of drugs comes down to. Either you believe the State has no business telling us what we can do with our own consciousness or you believe it should. I for one, believe in individual freedom. If you decide to take a drug that harms no one else that should be your right as a free citizen.

[Bama13]

1 minute ago, FLOMBIE said:

I hope you strongly oppose alcohol. 

And tobacco. 

But not Chewbacca!! I love that Wookiee!.

[aztek]

Just now, Bama13 said:

 Cops can still search and seize for illegal things. 

lol, like what? using what probable cause?  

 

[FLOMBIE]

Just now, Bama13 said:

And tobacco. 

But not Chewbacca!! I love that Wookiee!.

He's the best! 

[Bama13]

11 minutes ago, aztek said:

lol, like what? using what probable cause?  

 

Was there no search and seizure before drugs were made illegal? I'm pretty sure there was or our founding fathers wouldn't have felt the need to include a prohibition against unwarranted search and seizure.

[FLOMBIE]

13 minutes ago, aztek said:

lol, like what? using what probable cause?  

 

Exigent circumstance. 

[aztek]

Just now, Bama13 said:

Was there no search and seizure before drugs were made illegal? I'm pretty sure there was or our founding fathers wouldn't have felt the need to include a prohibition against unwarranted search and seizure.

still does not answer the question, what illegal things, and using what probable cause?  nothing is as profitable as taking cash in the name of drug war. or a car, or a house.

Edited June 20, 2017 by aztek

[Bama13]

5 minutes ago, aztek said:

still does not answer the question, what illegal things, and using what probable cause?  nothing is as profitable as taking cash in the name of drug war. or a car, or a house.

Illegal things like stolen goods. Probable cause will be up to a judge.

[aztek]

Just now, Bama13 said:

Illegal things like stolen goods. Probable cause will be up to a judge.

lol. sorry but no, it does not even come close to spoils of the war on drugs,. and power they have now in the name of this war.

[Stubbly_Dooright]

1 hour ago, Bama13 said:

1 hour ago, Ellapennella said:

Quote

So if the US legalized all drugs would you start shooting heroin? I wouldn't. Neither would anyone else that doesn't already want to use heroin. Anyone that really wants to use heroin is using heroin. Making them criminals isn't helping society or them.

 

No I would not, but there's enough of  people addicted to legalized drugs already that are nothing but zombies. Drugs destroys lives no matter how you try to make it seem if it were legal, it's already legal.

So should ALL drugs be illegal? What do you have against freedom and personal responsibility? 

"I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do." - Robert Heinlein

I don't think it's necessarily drugs that is the problem, but the people themselves. And granted, it might also be some of the big drug companies advertising it to death as well. In the end, I feel it's all in who and to why is using it. I was prescribed percocet when I was done with a herniated disc. Those around me, feared me being addicted to it. My hubby even called them 'happy pills'. The thing is, they never worked for me, and do not see what was all the rave about it. Alleve actually did the job, and I'm not addicted to Alleve. 

Drugs, more so legalized drugs, have been helping and things would be a lot less without them I think. It's just common sense, and responsible use that should be prioritized in using them. 

[kartikg]

3 hours ago, Bama13 said:

No, the stupidity of making drugs illegal has led to criminals selling drugs. Just like prohibition led to criminals selling alcohol. Ended prohibition and  ended bootlegging for the most part. End the damn "war on drugs" and end drug dealers for the most part. Pretty simple really.

no the criminals will then take on to something else like kidnapping , human trafficking ,  robbery or smuggling  it's naive to think that the criminals will just change into good guys . he is doing the right thing . 

[Bama13]

4 minutes ago, kartikg said:

no the criminals will then take on to something else like kidnapping , human trafficking ,  robbery or smuggling  it's naive to think that the criminals will just change into good guys . he is doing the right thing . 

Yeah because no one kidnaps, traffics in humans, or steals any more since drugs are illegal.

People who are only "criminals" because they want to use a drug will no longer be "criminals". They were never bad guys to start with.

 

[Yamato]

7 hours ago, Ellapennella said:

Well, in my mind I was really thinking of why they are labeled as committing crimes against humanity and because of that they can not be sold arms by the U.S but, undoubtedly the Saudi's  are committing crimes against humanity. It's just not clear. If the Philippines were killing ISIS affiliates who may be the drug lords and such , who are we to tell them they can't be aided in preventing a terrorist group of thugs from overthrowing their country? If that's the issue there.

Who said anything about anyone telling anyone else they can't be anything?    Talk is so cheap, it's almost free.  Weapons for oily Sharia monsters cost hundreds of thousands of millions of US dollars, apparently. 

 

Quote

Let me add that , the reason why it's considered a global one is because of networks globally

Right, so like many other things that are global like global commerce and international law, global networks are okay, rather than something to be put in a box and ostracized, such as "Islam".

[Yamato]

3 hours ago, aztek said:

still does not answer the question, what illegal things,

Weed.  

You know, "drugs".  

That's where the word "pharmaceuticals" came from.   If you're going to fight a war on drugs, you need silly new words to differentiate.   Through language, the people can be deceived into not being able to understand what nonsense the policy really is.

 

Quote

and using what probable cause?  

Smell.

Okay?  Now what?

FTR, I would've thought you'd be the last person to ask such questions.

[aztek]

Just now, Yamato said:

Weed.  

You know, "drugs".  

That's where the word "pharmaceuticals" came from.   If you're going to fight a war on drugs, you need silly new words to differentiate.   Through language, the people can be deceived into not being able to understand what nonsense the policy really is.

 

Smell.

Okay?  Now what?

FTR, I would've thought you'd be the last person to ask such questions.

lol, i was not talking about drugs, my question was about items and probable cause if drug are legal.  you may want to read posts before, to see what we are talking about,

[Yamato]

2 hours ago, aztek said:

lol. sorry but no, it does not even come close to spoils of the war on drugs,. and power they have now in the name of this war.

So probable cause is what they'll probably make more money on.

Is that what we want?   Is that what we stand for?

[aztek]

Just now, Yamato said:

So probable cause is what they'll probably make more money on.

Is that what we want?   Is that what we stand for?

i have no clue what you asking here,

[aztek]

dude stop making a good case against legalization, one only needs to read few of your posts on a good day. lol

Edited June 20, 2017 by aztek

[Yamato]

Just now, aztek said:

lol, i was not talking about drugs, my question was about items and probable cause if drug are legal.  you may want to read posts before, to see what we are talking about,

I do read posts, that's why I have questions.

Duterte is talking about drugs all the time, you know he's fighting a war on drugs too.

If something is legal, what does probable cause have to do with it anymore?

[aztek]

it does not, which is my point. if weed is legal, they will lose "i smell weed" probable cause.  if all drugs are legal, we do not need dea, and civil forfeiture also has no purpose.  

Edited June 20, 2017 by aztek

[Michelle]

6 minutes ago, aztek said:

it does not, which is my point. if weed is legal, they will lose "i smell weed" probable cause.  if all drugs are legal, we do not need dea, and civil forfeiture also has no purpose.  

They would still have probable cause to search because it would still be illegal to drive high. It's like the open container laws.