Posted on 11/27/2012 3:04:15 PM PST by Beave Meister
The woman mayor who was kidnapped and murdered by a Mexican drug gang pleaded with her attackers for her young daughter’s life, it emerged today.
Maria Santos Gorrostieta, who had already survived two assassination attempts, was driving the child to school at around 8.30am when she was ambushed by a car in the city of Morelia.
The 36-year-old was hauled from her vehicle and physically assaulted as horrified witnesses watched, according to newspaper El Universal. They described how she begged for her child to be left alone and then appeared to get into her abductors’ car willingly.
The little girl was left wailing as her mother was driven away on Monday November 12.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
Cool - nonjudicial mass executions! Screw the Founding Fathers, let's emulate today's Third World sh*tholes.
What problems and an underground markets do we have with the legal regulated recreational drug alcohol?
"The lush traffic in alcohol beverages during the violent years of 1920 to 1933 had laid the base of organization for a number of criminal gangs. The termination of the ban on liquor deprived these gangs of their most lucrative source of money" - Special Committee to Investigate Organized Crime in Interstate Commerce
Didn’t say I would approve of such action, only that it would be effective.
Far too often we approach today’s problems by not even considering a huge number of potential options. I propose we look at all possible options, then discard those that are unusable for one reason or another. Then we can at least recognize that the drug problem is not unsolvable, it’s just that we are unwilling to do what it takes to solve it. That’s often a good thing, as in avoiding nonjudicial mass executions.
Although if the public was notified well in advance of such action, it could perhaps be justified as assisted unplanned suicide, which seems so popular with today’s liberal. Or possibly as giving Darwin a helping hand.
I would not be surprised if the negative social effects of legalizing drugs did not outweigh the present negative social effects of criminalizing them. That’s to a considerable extent because we export a lot of the negative effects to Mexico and elsewhere.
Mexicans like this poor lady die because Americans want to get high.
That wouldn’t happen, but if legalized it is certain that drug usage would increase. We’d see a lot more of the bad effects of the drug itself, and a lot less of the side effects of attempting to outlaw use.
Whether A would be less than B is a good question, and I don’t have the answer.
We presently take perfectly good, drinkable (if diluted) ethanol and add poison to it, then sell it at the hardware store and use it in lots of industrial processes.
It’s called denatured alcohol.
Calling them "negative social effects" obscures a very important difference: the latter mean real crimes with actual unwilling victims, whereas the former are willingly self-inflicted and for the most part affect the rest of society only to the extent that society has chosen (through its elected representatives) to allow itself to be affected.
if legalized it is certain that drug usage would increase. We’d see a lot more of the bad effects of the drug itself
Where is the evidence that we'd see "a lot" more? Will YOU start using heroin if it's legalized?
Cool - nonjudicial mass executions! Screw the Founding Fathers, let's emulate today's Third World sh*tholes.
We presently take perfectly good, drinkable (if diluted) ethanol and add poison to it, then sell it at the hardware store and use it in lots of industrial processes.
It’s called denatured alcohol.
Is it released for human consumption? If not, it has no relevance to the original proposal.
And their families, and their neighbors, etc., etc.
I'm not a huge fan of the drug war, but I think those who think the drugs themselves are harmless are deluded.
No I wouldn't use drugs myself. Never have and never will. But it is simple human nature and common sense that a less expensive, more readily available and legal product will be used more widely than an illegal, expensive and hard to find product.
Do you want your airline pilot using meth? How about your surgeon doped up on cocaine? What percentage of the drivers in rush hour traffic do you think it would be a good idea to have doped up on anything?
Drugs are, IMO, very bad.
It's just that the Drug War MAY be worse. Especially for Mexicans.
And their families,
Hence my "for the most part." Many more families are affected by crimes committed by users to pay drug-war-inflated prices, and by criminals whose crime-committing resources are supplied by those drug-war-inflated prices.
and their neighbors, etc., etc.
How are neighbors, etc., etc. involuntarily negatively affected in anywhere near the degree of the effects of criminalizing drugs?
I'm not a huge fan of the drug war, but I think those who think the drugs themselves are harmless are deluded.
Has anyone on this thread claimed "the drugs themselves are harmless"? I fnot, why bring it up?
Where is the evidence that we'd see "a lot" more? Will YOU start using heroin if it's legalized?
No I wouldn't use drugs myself. Never have and never will. But it is simple human nature and common sense that a less expensive, more readily available and legal product will be used more widely than an illegal, expensive and hard to find product.
Still no evidence in sight that we'd see "a lot" more as you claimed.
Do you want your airline pilot using meth? How about your surgeon doped up on cocaine? What percentage of the drivers in rush hour traffic do you think it would be a good idea to have doped up on anything?
I don't want pilots, surgeons, or drivers drunk - but that hasn't and can't justify a general ban on the mind-altering drug alcohol, because many users DON'T pilot, operate, or drive while intoxicated, so it can't justify a general ban on other drugs.
I’m talking about “drugs”...NOT alchool...valium, pain killers, etc.
What problems and underground markets do we have with the legal regulated recreational drug alcohol?
I’m talking about “drugs”...NOT alchool
Alcohol IS a drug - and the absence of significant problems or underground markets for that legal regulated recreational drug indicates that legalization of other recreational drug will not lead to problems or underground markets.
YES, it is a LEGAL drug....as are Cigarettes....doesn’t mean we need to ADD more to the list....sheesh....but, then, regulation helps us SOOOO much
In a free society, the question is not what we "need" to allow adults to do, but what we have justification for prohibiting adults from doing. The example of the drug alcohol indicates no reason why adults should be prohibited from using other drugs.
....sheesh....but, then, regulation helps us SOOOO much
You'd prefer no regulation of alcohol? Why?
Good point.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.