Posted on 03/25/2009 1:29:37 PM PDT by yoe
Spell check is your friend. LOL. Of course I did! And as I recall, I was quite clear as to why. Now, I must move on, to go through this again is a waste of my time.
The US Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA)
Prior to the creation of the DEA, drug enforcement rested in the hands of two federal offices. The Bureau of Narcotics in the Treasury Department was responsible for the control of marijuana and narcotics, such as heroin. The Bureau of Drug Abuse Control (BDAC) in the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare was responsible for the control of “dangerous” drugs, including depressants, stimulants and hallucinogens, such as LSD. By 1968, America’s counterculture movement was in full swing and the use of illegal drugs for recreational purposes was steadily rising. Alarmed by the increasing acceptance of drug use, President Lyndon Johnson introduced legislation that combined the Bureau of Narcotics and the BDAC into one new agency: the Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs (BNDD), located in the Department of Justice.
Lyndon B. Johnson (January 17, 1968) State of the Union
This year, I will propose a Drug Control Act to provide stricter penalties for those who traffic in LSD and other dangerous drugs with our people.
I will ask for more vigorous enforcement of all of our drug laws by increasing the number of Federal drug and narcotics control officials by more than 30 percent. The time has come to stop the sale of slavery to the young.
Johnson started the War on Drugs, not Nixon.
An aside...Just above that statement is this...And I urge the Congress to stop the trade in mail-order murder, to stop it this year by adopting a proper gun control law.
you: Makes my point quite succinctly for me, thank you.
Actually, it refutes your point - which was that the cartels would replace their revenue from marijuana sales with other illegal activities.
If they are ALREADY maximizing revenue from these other illegal activities, then there is simply not the upside to replace the 2/3 of their revenue that would be lost if marijuana were regulated like alcohol. Economics 101.
the kidnappings are directly related to the Cartel violence. Human smuggling is a problem entirely independent from drugs even if they’re smuggled by the same people at the same time. Violence is a direct result of a lack of clear legal means to resolve what are essentially business disputes. Cartel bosses can’t sue each other in court, leaving the gun as their only means.
Human trafficking along the mexican border has never really been a violent affair on it’s own. Illegals on their way across the border don’t need to shoot at border patrol agents, because they just try crossing again the next day. Drug smugglers have an imperative not to be caught because it means going to jail.
Of course, that is anyone does not include their kids, grandchildren and nieces & nephews.
I'm aware of the hypocrites and the many "made up" stories, much like the ones on the ADD/ADHD threads. "Oh woe for my friend's first cousin twice removed..."
All taken with a grain of salt.
I didn’t intend to be a thread killer. My apologies.
Except for the fact that we get it from everywhere else without the violence.
Did you miss the 80 and 90’s?
Drugs come from everywhere without the massive violence in mexico so we disagree - you can import illegal drugs as we have for years without the violence.
apparently you missed ALL of the news out of Columbia throughout the 80’s and 90’s. Medellin Cartel was responsible for nearly destroying Columbia starting as early as the 70’s.
The violence in Mexico is not new, it’s only escalated over the past few years and migrated closer to the border.
I was in Colombia then - I actually was there when they - mowed down a Presidential candidate - was actually staying at the same hotel he was. It’s an interesting elevator ride surrounded by cops with machine guns.
how do you reconcile that with your previous comments then, if you are an eyewitness to the horror of narcoterrorism?
And while there was violence on the border it was nothing like it is today, instead that same violence was in Colombia back in the 80’s.
Legalize pot and much of that violence would end.
half measures will not solve the problem, only stall it temporarily. legalizing ALL drugs will crush the cartels’ ability to generate the huge ammount of cash needed to keep them going.
Billions of dollars are made in the illegal drug trade, even removing 75% of the revenue is still plenty of money to work with.
And her husband and brother-in-law account for about 1/3 of that trade.
So you believe that they would not find some other 'bread and butter'? That is naive.
Exactly. So using the 'lets take the profit out of drug smuggling' argument for legalizing drugs is silly.
How are they going to “switch” to these other drugs when they are already supplying most all the cocaine, heroin and meth consumed in this country? Our government says about 90% of the cocaine and more than 80% of the heroin and meth consumed in this country are coming through Mexican cartels. They bring this stuff in on top of all the marijuana they bring in and push it through the same distributors. They can't really switch to drugs they've already cornered the market on.
Yup.
Now if we could only get the border-bots to recognize that US demand for cheap labor (not to mention America's kindly offers of free education, welfare, and health care) is what drives illegal immigration....
I wonder where Clinton and Obama’s pot was sourced. And where from Obama’s coke come?
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.