Drug Cartels - Any solution possible?

[trenchfoot]

It seems to me the drug cartels exist because they are allowed to exist.The countries from which the drugs come from could allow our military to go in with overwhelming superior forces and eradicate the cartels if that were a most critical and pressing need for the host country and ours.

However, the myriad layers of agendas at all levels of government from hosts and guest deem it not so. Ergo, we have the status quo. The governments that are affected by this trade do not want to expend the necessary resources to get rid of the supply and/or the demand for the stuff, seeing as if the trade apparently is not deemed a threat to our national security and our economy doesn't seem to suffer any from having those billions of $$$ exiting the country annually.

War on drugs? What a joke that was, is and will be. No one wants to get deadly serious about wiping out the cartels, especially the host countries that fully realize how much yankee $$$ is being spread out through their economies via the enormously profitable drug trade.

 

[Sloper]

The main problem is you're operating under the delusion that the U.S. government is somehow opposed to the illicit drug trade. This is a common myth, but it's still just a myth.

The reality is, the U.S. government LOVES and DEPENDS ON the illicit drug trade and wouldn't dream of doing anything to stop it. The war on (some) drugs is really just a giant racket, like all wars are. It's a scam that serves multiple purposes. First of all, it provides the excuse to militarize domestic police forces and create a full spectrum police state. Secondly, it provides the excuse to incrementally flush the Constitution down the toilet by conditioning the people to accept checkpoints, searches, no-knock paramilitary raids, and other fascist police state tactics. Thirdly, it's a giant corporate subsidy for the prison-industrial complex and other drug war vultures. Some of the biggest lobbyists against the legalization of marijuana, for instance, are police unions and private prison corporations. This is big business for them. We're talking many billions of dollars here. Hell, why do you think the CIA was knee-deep with the Contras in U.S. and Central American coke smuggling throughout the 80s?

As usual, it comes down to two things:

1. Control
2. Profit

The financial aspect is key, as the illicit global drug trade is what funds our CIA's off-the-books, "black budget" operations (funding terrorist groups, assassinations, psyops, and other destabilzation efforts around the world).

There's a lot more to it, but that's a decent start. The truth really is stranger than fiction sometimes.

This is the correct answer. It's illegal because it extends control and allows the inner circle to profit. Speaking of drugs, wasn't it recently that HSBC was caught laundering billions of dollars of drug money, for which persecution was not pursued because too-big-to-fail? Yup, profit.

 

[Dari]

Why do you think the profit margins are astronomical?

Since it's illegal there are less producers. Less producers means higher margins for each producer. Also, since it's illegal the producers can dilute it however much they want, increasing their margins further. Finally, no taxes.

 

[DucatiMonster696]

If the insinuation is that gun laws lead to this problem, I'd disagree without wanting to open a can of worms. But the proximity to the U.S. gun supply combined with useless law enforcement is a unique combination.

Practically speaking guns are freely available in Mexico. Legally and freely may not always be the same thing

Prohibition of any type leads to this problem. If we were to pass gun prohibition in the US you'd only see another market open up for these cartels to take advantage of in the US.

 

[Socio]

Legalize marijuana here and let the cartels devour themselves as demand for product from south of the border plummets.

Just the opposite, it would be legal, so number of users would naturally increase, cartels already have established pipe lines, they will still be able to deliver a cheaper, more potent "unregulated" product, and do it a lot easier.

Think about it, who is going to go buy a watered down, no doubt highly regulated over the counter version of a product when you can get a more potent version at a half the price on the street corner?

Of course you could try to regulate drugs coming from south of the border so they have to compete with pharmaceutical made over the counter brands but then you just start war on drugs all over again, regulated vs unregulated.

Legalizing drugs would be simply legalizing Cartels and making their life much easier.

 

[airdata]

Just the opposite, it would be legal, so number of users would naturally increase, cartels already have established pipe lines, they will still be able to deliver a cheaper, more potent "unregulated" product, and do it a lot easier.

Think about it, who is going to go buy a watered down, no doubt highly regulated over the counter version of a product when you can get a more potent version at a half the price on the street corner?

Of course you could try to regulate drugs coming from south of the border so they have to compete with pharmaceutical made over the counter brands but then you just start war on drugs all over again, regulated vs unregulated.

Legalizing drugs would be simply legalizing Cartels and making their life much easier.

You're mistaken. Research does not back up your suggestion that users would increase w\ legalization. That's simply an anti pot fallacy. One of the few straw man arguments people against legalization still cling to.

Legalizing would take the incentive away from cartels to even bother w\ the trade.

 

[Juddog]

Just the opposite, it would be legal, so number of users would naturally increase, cartels already have established pipe lines, they will still be able to deliver a cheaper, more potent "unregulated" product, and do it a lot easier.

Think about it, who is going to go buy a watered down, no doubt highly regulated over the counter version of a product when you can get a more potent version at a half the price on the street corner?

Of course you could try to regulate drugs coming from south of the border so they have to compete with pharmaceutical made over the counter brands but then you just start war on drugs all over again, regulated vs unregulated.

Legalizing drugs would be simply legalizing Cartels and making their life much easier.

LOL at the bolded part. You really don't know much about this subject, do you?

 

[BoberFett]

LOL at the bolded part. You really don't know much about this subject, do you?

Not to mention he thinks they could price it at half of what WalMart would charge for the stuff. He's confused, not even worth talking to on this subject.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

You're mistaken. Research does not back up your suggestion that users would increase w\ legalization. That's simply an anti pot fallacy. One of the few straw man arguments people against legalization still cling to.

Legalizing would take the incentive away from cartels to even bother w\ the trade.

My simple question with legalizing is... naturally... like humans will be... we always desire what we can't have.

Will the next level up in drugs become the new pot as far as popularity? Think about it based on the average retarded human brain before answering. Everyone always wants what they cannot have.

 

[Juddog]

My simple question with legalizing is... naturally... like humans will be... we always desire what we can't have.

Will the next level up in drugs become the new pot as far as popularity? Think about it based on the average retarded human brain before answering. Everyone always wants what they cannot have.

Your best bet is to look at what happened in Portugal. They decriminalized all drugs (yes even heroin and cocaine), so that while possession was legal, trafficking and possession of more than "10 days worth of personal use" are still punishable by jail time and fines.

Did their society dissolve? Nope. They took most of money they were spending on fighting their "war on drugs" and instead spent it on rehabilitation and guess what - usage actually dropped amongst teens, while going up slightly in terms of the overall populace. As a positive side-effect, the spread of HIV actually decreased.

 

[xj0hnx]

What about a full on monetized snitch program, though. Drug heads love money, so make them rich by turning in other drug heads, of course the unfortunate side effect is that now the remaining ones have even more money for drugs, so maybe that won't work.

Your assumption that the number of people willing to cook/sell meth is finite, is silly. A program like that, which already exist to an extent, is like trying to dam the Nile with your hands.

Just the opposite, it would be legal, so number of users would naturally increase, cartels already have established pipe lines, they will still be able to deliver a cheaper, more potent "unregulated" product, and do it a lot easier.

This entire sentence is just wrong start to finish. Any actual data shows that there is usually an initial spike in number users, then it tapers to steady, or drops. If drugs were legalized the cartels would be rendered moot in the drug field. Current US pot growers, and their indoor hydroponic super gardens and pharmaceutical companies would be the reigning kings. No one would buy shit mexi-brick when they can get legal dank, and same goes for heroin, coke and speed users, why would any of them use cut up clandestine manufactured drugs, cut with who knows what, when they could legally buy clean, measured out drugs from the pharmacy?

Think about it, who is going to go buy a watered down, no doubt highly regulated over the counter version of a product when you can get a more potent version at a half the price on the street corner?

You don't have a clue do you? For example, pharmaceutical heroin is infinitely better than that nasty ass tar, or questionable powder found on the streets, and no one would buy that crap if they had access to the real deal.

Of course you could try to regulate drugs coming from south of the border so they have to compete with pharmaceutical made over the counter brands but then you just start war on drugs all over again, regulated vs unregulated.

There would be no war, the market would phase out the cartels practically over night.

 

[Juddog]

This entire sentence is just wrong start to finish. Any actual data shows that there is usually an initial spike in number users, then it tapers to steady, or drops. If drugs were legalized the cartels would be rendered moot in the drug field. Current US pot growers, and their indoor hydroponic super gardens and pharmaceutical companies would be the reigning kings. No one would buy shit mexi-brick when they can get legal dank, and same goes for heroin, coke and speed users, why would any of them use cut up clandestine manufactured drugs, cut with who knows what, when they could legally buy clean, measured out drugs from the pharmacy?

^^ This - people can grow tobacco if they really wanted to right now to roll their own cigs but who would want to go through all that effort when you can just go to the local gas station and buy them? Same principal applies here; people aren't going to go for the home-made drugs in most cases when they can get a much cleaner version from a pharmacy.

 

[Spungo]

In our defense, it's hard to wear clothes when you're on drugs. This is true even if one is wearing clothes before taking the drugs. Especially meth.

Ha. So true. Look for videos of people on PCP and you'll notice all of them are men and none of them are wearing shirts. People on the show Cops don't wear shirts either. Correlation?
What I meant is that animals other than humans are big into drugs. Cats on cat nip are fun to watch. Cats also act weird on valerian root. What's that australian bear that eats nothing but drugs and is high all the time? Every dog I've met loves beer for some reason. Dogs all seem to drink until they are drunk enough to have trouble walking.

Well, gotta look at the bright side. At least when the cartels' meth labs blow up, they are safely in other countries.

It wouldn't blow up if it were legal and made in a lab. I'm assuming this. Maybe the Dexosyn lab has blown up several times already

 

[soundforbjt]

War on drugs is a total manufactured joke. We've been in Afghanistan for what 10 years or more...IIRC, 80% of all the worlds herion comes from there. And we've done zero to stop it while we've got the troops right there at the source.

 

[xj0hnx]

War on drugs is a total manufactured joke. We've been in Afghanistan for what 10 years or more...IIRC, 80% of all the worlds herion comes from there. And we've done zero to stop it while we've got the troops right there at the source.

 

[mistercrabby]

Originally Posted by 2timer

The issue in Mexico isn't the drugs or the brutality. Brutality is a part of their culture, it dates back to the Mayan empire.

Lol wut? What do Mayans have to do with anything?

Topic: A force from the U.S. would be resistant to corruption, but no one in Mexico is going to want foreigners, least of all yanks, to be patrolling their streets. They'd rather have the cartels.

He was kidding, right? Either way- racist. And not very informed, given that the predominant culture of Mexico is European, specifically Spanish.

 

[mistercrabby]

Is doing a line of coke really worth all this mayhem?

 

[Spungo]

Is doing a line of coke really worth all this mayhem?

hells yeah

Cocaine is strongly reinforcing. Studies with mice show that a mouse with a shitty life will take cocaine until it dies. Mice with a better social environment consume less but they still love it. Monkeys will hit levers thousands of times to get another dose of cocaine.

It's like those douchebags who wear Ed Hardy clothes and go to the club to get girls. How many times will a pathetic loser get rejected and laughed at before they stop being creepy? It must be in the thousands.

 

[Juror No. 8]

Is doing a line of coke really worth all this mayhem?

Replace the 'doing a line of coke' portion of your question with 'freedom' and ask it again.

Here's a little hint: Drugs aren't the problem when the pursuit of freedom results in mayhem.

 

[blankslate]

Decriminalize drugs and only arrest people for having amounts on their person that they clearly would not be able to ingest by themselves within a few days.

 

[Juror No. 8]

Decriminalize drugs and only arrest people for having amounts on their person that they clearly would not be able to ingest by themselves within a few days.

Why arrest someone for having a lot of drugs on them?

Who's the victim?

 

[blankslate]

Why arrest someone for having a lot of drugs on them?

Who's the victim?

Let me clarify myself I'd say treat it like alcohol. If you're transporting booze or drugs to a licensed corner store and are licensed to do so then fine. If you're carrying a large amount and it looks like you're selling on a black market then that's not ok.

 

[Juror No. 8]

Let me clarify myself I'd say treat it like alcohol. If you're transporting booze or drugs to a licensed corner store and are licensed to do so then fine. If you're carrying a large amount and it looks like you're selling on a black market then that's not ok.

What's not OK about it? Why should a person need permission from the government (a license) to sell drugs or alcohol? Whose rights is a person violating by selling a good or service to others on the open market?

Again, who's the victim?

 

[blankslate]

What's not OK about it? Why should a person need permission from the government (a license) to sell drugs or alcohol? Whose rights is a person violating by selling a good or service to others on the open market?

Again, who's the victim?

The regulations would be there to try to ensure that the beer as the alcohol content that it says on the label and that the drugs are not cut up to excess with other things (including materials that could be harmful if used)

Plus some states might wish to have limitations on hours of sale or a "sin" tax on the product beyond the federal regulations.

 

[Juror No. 8]

The regulations would be there to try to ensure that the beer as the alcohol content that it says on the label and that the drugs are not cut up to excess with other things (including materials that could be harmful if used).

If someone is knowingly mislabeling his products, that would constitute fraud and you would have grounds for a dispute. Sellers with a reputation for mislabeling their products and defrauding customers will eventually be put out of business by their more honest competitors.

On the other hand, if someone is accurately labeling his drugs and alcohol products, and his customers are getting exactly what they want, why should he need government permission to sell his wares? Who's the victim in this scenario?

And why should there be limitations or a "sin tax" on the sale of drugs and alcohol?