Welcome to the APBWeb.

View Poll Results: Are prostitution and drug use victimless crimes?

Voters
83. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    9 10.84%
  • No

    70 84.34%
  • Only drug use is a victimless crime

    1 1.20%
  • Only prostitution is a victimless crime

    3 3.61%
Page 11 of 13 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 LastLast
Results 201 to 220 of 242
  1. #201
    TheOldRhino's Avatar
    TheOldRhino is offline Corporal
    Join Date
    05-23-06
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    1,142
    Rep Power
    2707686
    Quote Originally Posted by jcsdscott View Post
    For what it's worth, there has been excellent discussion in this thread however I don't think that these are victimless crimes. Hate to get up in my pulpit but if they were wrong in biblical times then they are still wrong.
    I apologize, everyone, but jcsdscott is going to make a liar out of me. I can't ignore this post.

    I don't know about other countries, but in the US there was no such thing has an illegal drug prior to 1914.

    Show me any proof that says drugs were illegal in Biblical times.

    But even if you're right, your logic is- to say the least- flawed. Hell, stoning a woman who showed too much skin was perfectly acceptable in Biblical times- does that mean we should do it? Ditto torture, subjugation of women, and slavery. Does that mean if they weren't wrong during Biblical times, then they are okay today?
    Last edited by TheOldRhino; 11-27-06 at 05:55 PM.
    The virtue of spirit has no need for thanks or approval. Only the certain conviction that what has been done is right. -Jor El, as played by Marlon Brando

  2. #202
    d_goddard is offline Banned
    Join Date
    11-27-06
    Posts
    17
    Rep Power
    0
    I think y'all are missing the easiest way to answer this question:
    The way to find out if a crime is victimless, is to just ask the people involved.

    Here it goes:

    "Ms. 'Escort', were you victimized by the John?"
    Escort: "Hell no, he gave a good tip and was done real fast! Now I am going shopping!"
    "Mr. 'John', were you victimized by the Escort?"
    John: "Hell no, she's hot!"

    "Mr: 'Dealer', were you victimized by Mr. 'Stoner'?"
    Dealer: "Hell no, he paid and he left and he ain't no narc. Cash money!"
    "Mr. 'Stoner', were you victimized by Mr. 'Dealer'?"
    Stoner: "Hell no, Joey gets the good s--t!"

    If the parties involved don't feel there was a victim, how is there a victim? Who is the victim then? "Society?" But isn't that how the communist lefties want to make us all pay for universal Hillarycare... because it would be better for "Society?"

  3. #203
    Piggybank Cop's Avatar
    Piggybank Cop is offline Nobody important.
    Join Date
    05-17-06
    Location
    Richmond VA
    Posts
    2,207
    Rep Power
    645058
    Quote Originally Posted by d_goddard View Post
    I think y'all are missing the easiest way to answer this question:
    The way to find out if a crime is victimless, is to just ask the people involved.

    Here it goes:

    "Ms. 'Escort', were you victimized by the John?"
    Escort: "Hell no, he gave a good tip and was done real fast! Now I am going shopping!"
    "Mr. 'John', were you victimized by the Escort?"
    John: "Hell no, she's hot!"

    Mr. John, Ms. Escortnow that the tests have come back and you have AIDS do you still feel victimless?

    "Mr: 'Dealer', were you victimized by Mr. 'Stoner'?"
    Dealer: "Hell no, he paid and he left and he ain't no narc. Cash money!"
    "Mr. 'Stoner', were you victimized by Mr. 'Dealer'?"
    Stoner: "Hell no, Joey gets the good s--t!"

    Ms. Home owner now that you know the items stolen from your house, including your mothers set of china she received as a wedding gift 50 years ago that is irreplaceable went to buy the drugs that will last the stoner half a day do you feel victimless?


    If the parties involved don't feel there was a victim, how is there a victim? Who is the victim then? "Society?" But isn't that how the communist lefties want to make us all pay for universal Hillarycare... because it would be better for "Society?"
    All the parties?
    We are the thin blue line
    between you
    and all the money in the world.

    And no you can't have any.

  4. #204
    Piggybank Cop's Avatar
    Piggybank Cop is offline Nobody important.
    Join Date
    05-17-06
    Location
    Richmond VA
    Posts
    2,207
    Rep Power
    645058
    Or even better Mr. d_goddard; but that new car stereo that was lifted from your brand new car you saved for a year to get just financed a victimless crime, so we as cops can’t do anything about it.

    Have a nice day.

    We are the thin blue line
    between you
    and all the money in the world.

    And no you can't have any.

  5. #205
    d_goddard is offline Banned
    Join Date
    11-27-06
    Posts
    17
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by 1sgkelly View Post
    Or even better Mr. d_goddard; but that new car stereo that was lifted from your brand new car you saved for a year to get just financed a victimless crime, so we as cops can’t do anything about it.
    Yes, exactly the point that all too many LEOs and prosecutors confuse.

    Theft is a real crime, one with a victim. You ask me if I was victimized by my car radio getting stolen, and I will say, "HELL YES! Damn good thing I asn't there when the basterd stole it or he'd have eaten a few of my Ney Certified Hardballs!"

    It doesn't matter a damn why he stole it.
    I don't care if he wanted to sell it to by crack, or if he "needed" to pawn it to pay for hospice care for his dying grandmother.

    Good intentions, bad intentions, good reasons, bad reasons, all irrelevant.

    Again, it's real simple:
    Ask the parties (privately, if you wish) if they have been victimized. If nobody answers "yes", then it's real simple: there is no victim.

    It's so simple!

  6. #206
    d_goddard is offline Banned
    Join Date
    11-27-06
    Posts
    17
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by 1sgkelly View Post
    All the parties?
    You can get AIDS from promiscuous sex, whether there was money involved in the transaction or not. Either way, both parties consented to the arrangement and have to take responsibility for the risks.

    One could use your identical logic to argue that guns should be illegal (which by now you should know I will NEVER do):

    "Oh, so you want to be 'free' to own GUNS? Well how do you feel now that your daddy died when the gun went off as he was cleaning it, hmm?"

    The above argument is invalid for the exact same reason: a person cleaning guns is taking a calculated risk. If he is very careful, he has almost no risk at all. The same person having (let's say) protected oral sex performed on him by a stranger is likely also in virtually no risk of contracting a disease.

    What REALLY pisses off some of us Libertarians is that we not only have to pay communist socialized health care for the dumbass that got AIDS, we also have to pay to keep him in jail! We'd far prefer to just get the State out of the equation. Let the John bear the full consequences of his actions, and let us keep our own hard-earned money.

  7. #207
    BEK's Avatar
    BEK
    BEK is offline Lieutenant
    Verified LEO
    Join Date
    01-02-06
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    2,101
    Rep Power
    3397458
    you know what really pisses me off is whiny liberals/libertarians that sit and bitch and moan about things not being handed to them. Its because of the 70's and MTV I blame these things, if you actually went out and did something besides sit in your little bistros drinking your star bucks pointing out how bad everything is for you and why you arnt able to just get what you want. If you dont like it move to canada to get your health care move to amsterdam to do your drugs and to screw your prostitutes. If you dont like it here dont come into MY HOUSE and tell me whats wrong with it. I will do to you what i do to the mormans and answer the door naked with a bible and a shotgun. Get off my lawn

    And that dumbass that got aids was prolly screwing some drugged up prostitute that you so want to be legal, well pay the health care costs, you cant have it both ways


  8. #208
    Piggybank Cop's Avatar
    Piggybank Cop is offline Nobody important.
    Join Date
    05-17-06
    Location
    Richmond VA
    Posts
    2,207
    Rep Power
    645058
    d_goddard
    Rookie

    StanSwitek does a much better job than me (from another thread):

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Citizen72521
    Hello everyone I'd like to encourage some clean logical debate here.
    I am an FTL subsciber and while I only started listening in hour 2 tonight I think I understand the crux of the debate.
    While I respect the current establishment of law I'd like to point out that Libertarianism is not about legalizing things. It is about free market economics.

    Milton Friedman http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milton_Friedman
    who was mentioned on the news last week extensively because he died at 96 was a Nobel Prize winning economist and two of his major efforts were on eliminating drug prohibition and public education.
    There is plenty of information about free market economics and specifically how black markets work available on the internet as well as a number of excellent books by friedman and his wife.

    Libertarianism is not about some Utopian ideals, that is what communism and socialism are about, which is what government in general is about. Government is supposedly a necessary EVIL for the common good of the Commune-ity.
    The closest thing we have to an example of a major active Libertarian politician in the US is (R) Rep. Ron Paul of Texas.

    The US Constitutional Republic is NOT supposed to be a democracy because democaracy aka "mob rule" allows others aka "society" to inffringe on individuals rights, which extend as far as an individual can imagine as long as imagined right does not infringe on the rights of any others because humans have free will to make any choice good or bad for themselves.

    Rights as everyone should know are not given by the Constitution, but are "endowed by their creator". The founding fathers were simply pointing this bit of logic out and thought it would be good to document it.
    As citizens it is our duty to be aware of things like the constitution as most of us know little I recommend a great refresher the Badnarik Constitution Classes for Real Patriots of the USA Republic.
    http://video.google.com/videosearch?...t ution+Class
    Yes its about 7 hours, but its mostly grade school stuff and its every Citizens duty to know.

    No one is suggesting a lack of security or allowing drugees to run amuck. Everyone should be able to have property and be able to defend their property. I personally do not think taking any drugs is ok and I never have. I don't even take pain killers and I believe in maximizing personal health, but I have seen what illegal meth can do to a community in my state and legalzing the worst drugs is the only way to eliminate the the value and market demand for them completely. Legalizing the worst drugs leads to a lack of motive for mass production and therefore no need to market them to new possible addicts looking to be rebelious and try new drugs.

    I challenge anyone to disprove the laws of the free market. It is true economics is not much of a hard science, but this is because the free market is really a force of nature that is unstoppable.

    I look forward to learning about the current state of law enforcement in this country and hearing more of your concerns.

    Baltimore Mayor Kurt Schmoke believes drugs can be a revenue source for the government. "Remove the profit motive, and you put the dealers out of business... have government stores and buy marijuana cigarettes... nicely wrapped, purity and potency guaranteed with a tax stamp."[42]

    Ethan Nadelmann, a former Princeton University professor and now director of the Lindesmith Center, states: "Make sure that junkies have access to clean needles; make it easy for addicts to obtain methadone; give heroin-maintenance programs a chance to work; decriminalize marijuana; stop spending billions on incarcerating drug users and drug dealers. We know we can reduce drug abuse more effectively by spending that money on education, pre and post natal care and job-training programs."[43]

    Nadelmann told the Rolling Stone audience, "...The Pentagon's interdiction efforts, which cost U.S. taxpayers close to $1 billion... had no impact on the flow of drugs.... [The] drug war has been most efficient at filling up the country's prisons and jails."[44]

    Dr. Robert Dupont, founding director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) and president of the Institute for Behavior and Health in Rockville, Maryland, refutes the economic myth. "We now have two legal drugs, alcohol and tobacco. We have 113 million current users of alcohol and 60 million tobacco users. The reason marijuana and cocaine use is so much lower is because they are illegal drugs. Cocaine and marijuana are more attractive than alcohol and tobacco. If we remove the prohibition of illegality we would have a number of users of marijuana and cocaine similar to that of tobacco and alcohol."[45]

    Health costs associated with legalization would be very high. And legalization would have consequences elsewhere. For example, the Drug Enforcement Administration says legalization of drugs will cost society between $140-210 billion a year in lost productivity and job-related accidents. And insurance companies would pass on accident expenses to consumers.[46] The Institute for Health Policy at Brandeis University found that in 1990 dollars the societal cost of substance abuse is in excess of $238 billion, of which $67 billion is for illicit drugs. The report states, "As the number one health problem in the country, substance abuse places a major burden on the nation's health care system and contributes to the high cost of health care. In fact, substance abuse -- the problematic use of alcohol, illicit drugs and tobacco -- places an enormous burden on American society asa whole."[47]

    The claim that legalization provides an opportunity to tax new products is misleading. For example, total tax revenue from the sale of alcohol is $13.1 billion a year, but alcohol extracts over $100 billion a year in social costs such as health care and lost productivity.[48] There is no evidence to demonstrate that taxing cocaine, heroin, and marijuana would bolster revenues any more than do alcohol and tobacco, nor would the revenue from such taxation offset the social and medical costs these illicit drugs would impose. The pro-drug lobby argues that legalization will save on enforcement costs. But elimination of drug enforcement would provide little funding for other uses. The government now spends 3.3 percent of its budget on the criminal justice system and half of that goes to enforcement. Less than 12 percent of law enforcement money goes to drug law enforcement.[49] Former Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare Joseph Califano cautions that in a post-legalization world, "Madison Avenue hucksters would make it as attractive to do a few lines [of cocaine] as to down a few beers."[50] This would line the pockets of legal drug producers, but it will clearly hurt the American taxpayer and American families.

    You tell 'em Stan.
    We are the thin blue line
    between you
    and all the money in the world.

    And no you can't have any.

  9. #209
    TheOldRhino's Avatar
    TheOldRhino is offline Corporal
    Join Date
    05-23-06
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    1,142
    Rep Power
    2707686
    Again, I ask:

    Do you want an industry that is on par with the oil trade ran and regulated by criminals?
    The virtue of spirit has no need for thanks or approval. Only the certain conviction that what has been done is right. -Jor El, as played by Marlon Brando

  10. #210
    d_goddard is offline Banned
    Join Date
    11-27-06
    Posts
    17
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by BEK320 View Post
    if you actually went out and did something besides sit in your little bistros drinking your star bucks pointing out how bad everything is for you
    As it turns out, hundreds of us uprooted our whole lives and moved to New Hampshire. Many dozens of us are extremely politically active. Dozens of others are heavily involved in the media (like FTL_Ian)
    One of us was recently elected to the NH State House of Representatives:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5GpZ5sbZOSs

    Ah yes, BEK. Ad-hominem attacks. I'll let 'em slide off me like water off a duck's back.

    Quote Originally Posted by BEK320 View Post
    move to canada to get your health care
    Hell, no!
    We are 100% opposed to all forms of socialism. Health care is NOT a right and NOBODY should be forced to pay for another person's care under ANY circumstances. The Canadians are hideously socialist and the health of their people is suffering because of it.

    Quote Originally Posted by BEK320 View Post
    If you dont like it here dont come into MY HOUSE and tell me whats wrong with it.
    Funny, you sound a lot like one of us libertarians

  11. #211
    Coloradocop's Avatar
    Coloradocop is offline It's the PoPo
    Verified LEO
    Join Date
    08-16-06
    Location
    Denver
    Posts
    1,042
    Rep Power
    282669
    Wow, I should have expected this given the radio show earlier today... But this thread has just become VERY popular with the addition of our occasionally-tripping Libertarian friends

  12. #212
    StanSwitek's Avatar
    StanSwitek is offline Corporal
    Join Date
    12-04-05
    Location
    Huntington Beach, CA
    Posts
    891
    Rep Power
    1143373
    The U.S. Government adopted a strong position against legalized prostitution in a December 2002 National Security Presidential Directive based on evidence that prostitution is inherently harmful and dehumanizing, and fuels trafficking in persons, a form of modern-day slavery.

    Prostitution and related activities—including pimping and patronizing or maintaining brothels—fuel the growth of modern-day slavery by providing a façade behind which traffickers for sexual exploitation operate.

    Where prostitution is legalized or tolerated, there is a greater demand for human trafficking victims and nearly always an increase in the number of women and children trafficked into commercial sex slavery.

    Of the estimated 600,000 to 800,000 people trafficked across international borders annually, 80 percent of victims are female, and up to 50 percent are minors. Hundreds of thousands of these women and children are used in prostitution each year.

    Women and children want to escape prostitution
    The vast majority of women in prostitution don’t want to be there. Few seek it out or choose it, and most are desperate to leave it. A 2003 study first published in the scientific Journal of Trauma Practice found that 89 percent of women in prostitution want to escape.[1] And children are also trapped in prostitution—despite the fact that international covenants and protocols impose upon state parties an obligation to criminalize the commercial sexual exploitation of children.

    Prostitution is inherently harmful
    Few activities are as brutal and damaging to people as prostitution. Field research in nine countries concluded that 60-75 percent of women in prostitution were raped, 70-95 percent were physically assaulted, and 68 percent met the criteria for post traumatic stress disorder in the same range as treatment-seeking combat veterans[2] and victims of state-organized torture.[3] Beyond this shocking abuse, the public health implications of prostitution are devastating and include a myriad of serious and fatal diseases, including HIV/AIDS.

    A path-breaking, five-country academic study concluded that research on prostitution has overlooked "[t]he burden of physical injuries and illnesses that women in the sex industry sustain from the violence inflicted on them, or from their significantly higher rates of hepatitis B, higher risks of cervical cancer, fertility complications, and psychological trauma."[4]

    State attempts to regulate prostitution by introducing medical check-ups or licenses don’t address the core problem: the routine abuse and violence that form the prostitution experience and brutally victimize those caught in its netherworld. Prostitution leaves women and children physically, mentally, emotionally, and spiritually devastated. Recovery takes years, even decades—often, the damage can never be undone.

    Prostitution creates a safe haven for criminals
    Legalization of prostitution expands the market for commercial sex, opening markets for criminal enterprises and creating a safe haven for criminals who traffic people into prostitution. Organized crime networks do not register with the government, do not pay taxes, and do not protect prostitutes. Legalization simply makes it easier for them to blend in with a purportedly regulated sex sector and makes it more difficult for prosecutors to identify and punish those who are trafficking people.

    The Swedish Government has found that much of the vast profit generated by the global prostitution industry goes into the pockets of human traffickers. The Swedish Government said, "International trafficking in human beings could not flourish but for the existence of local prostitution markets where men are willing and able to buy and sell women and children for sexual exploitation."[5]

    To fight human trafficking and promote equality for women, Sweden has aggressively prosecuted customers, pimps, and brothel owners since 1999. As a result, two years after the new policy, there was a 50 percent decrease in women prostituting and a 75 percent decrease in men buying sex. Trafficking for the purposes of sexual exploitation decreased as well.[6] In contrast, where prostitution has been legalized or tolerated, there is an increase in the demand for sex slaves[7] and the number of victimized foreign women—many likely victims of human trafficking.[8]

    Grant-making implications of the U.S. government policy
    As a result of the prostitution-trafficking link, the U.S. government concluded that no U.S. grant funds should be awarded to foreign non-governmental organizations that support legal state-regulated prostitution. Prostitution is not the oldest profession, but the oldest form of oppression.
    http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/rls/38790.htm

  13. #213
    sgtpelon's Avatar
    sgtpelon is offline Officer First Class
    Join Date
    11-10-06
    Location
    California
    Posts
    57
    Rep Power
    25092
    d_goodard

    Your extremely simplistic approach doesn't match the reality of the streets. Having worked Hollywood Division for a number of years, I can attest to the fact that most of the street prostitutes are drug abusers and rip the johns off on a regular basis. The pimps would commit strong arm robberies and beat up the johns too. If life was just one big Mustang Ranch, then prostitution would be a great thing. But it just doesn't work out that way. I have taken quite a few crime reports and arrested a number of prostitutes. Now if you want to venture into the human bondage issues of the brothels in our state where immigrants are forced into prostitution that is a whole new issue. Hit some internet research if you want to have an interesting time reading up on the topic.

    The same could be said for the drug abuse scenario that you mentioned. If you ever want to see the high cost of drug abuse to society, go down to skid row in LAPD's Central Division. Unfortunately, the majority of drug abusers are not recreational users, but hard core addicts. If everyone could just chip once a month and still hold a decent job, then your scenario would be a valid one.

    Unfortunately, life does not mimic your versions of victimless crimes. It has been a lot of fun reading the various posts though.

  14. #214
    d_goddard is offline Banned
    Join Date
    11-27-06
    Posts
    17
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by sgtpelon View Post
    If life was just one big Mustang Ranch, then prostitution would be a great thing. But it just doesn't work out that way.
    Yes it does -- the violence only becomes prevalent when the business is completely controlled by criminals. That's why the Mustang Ranch doesn't have workers getting beat up and Johns getting robbed. If they did, the Ranch's reputation would be shot, and they'd get no new business. That's how a naturally functioning free market works.

    By creating a Prohibition (yes, just like with alcohol) on what would otherwise be a voluntary exchange between willing adults, you create a criminal culture where one otherwise would not exist.
    I know this is hard to grasp, because in your daily life you see only true criminals engaging in prostitution and drug use. This does not alter the fact that many people who buy or sell sex for money, or who imbibe substances not presently allowed by the US DEA, are otherwise not criminals in any sense.

    You did describe real crimes -- theft (failing to deliver the goods as agreed) and assault (beating up the worker). Those should be vigorously punished. But the mutually consensual act in and of itself is indeed victimless. No matter how many johns or streetwalkers you "save" by throwing them in jail, the fact remains that there are plenty of highly-paid escorts in any large cosmopolitan city on Earth. The fortunate among them live in countries where they can safely report being assaulted, without fear that LE will continue the brutality. The fortunate among their clients can safely report theft, without fear that LE will incarcerate them.

    Quote Originally Posted by sgtpelon View Post
    brothels in our state where immigrants are forced into prostitution that is a whole new issue.
    Yes, that is a whole different issue.
    Again, you are confusing a real crime with a victim -- slavery -- with a consensual victimless act.

  15. #215
    Virginian's Avatar
    Virginian is offline Major
    Supporting Member Lvl 2
    Join Date
    12-28-05
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    3,647
    Rep Power
    8590746
    Quote Originally Posted by d_goddard View Post
    Yes, exactly the point that all too many LEOs and prosecutors confuse.

    Theft is a real crime, one with a victim. You ask me if I was victimized by my car radio getting stolen, and I will say, "HELL YES! Damn good thing I asn't there when the basterd stole it or he'd have eaten a few of my Ney Certified Hardballs!"

    It doesn't matter a damn why he stole it.
    I don't care if he wanted to sell it to by crack, or if he "needed" to pawn it to pay for hospice care for his dying grandmother.

    Good intentions, bad intentions, good reasons, bad reasons, all irrelevant.

    Again, it's real simple:
    Ask the parties (privately, if you wish) if they have been victimized. If nobody answers "yes", then it's real simple: there is no victim.

    It's so simple!

    So we should just respond to the result of "victimless crimes" rather than get to the root of the problem? That's moronic

  16. #216
    StanSwitek's Avatar
    StanSwitek is offline Corporal
    Join Date
    12-04-05
    Location
    Huntington Beach, CA
    Posts
    891
    Rep Power
    1143373
    Quote Originally Posted by d_goddard View Post
    Yes it does -- the violence only becomes prevalent when the business is completely controlled by criminals. That's why the Mustang Ranch doesn't have workers getting beat up and Johns getting robbed. If they did, the Ranch's reputation would be shot, and they'd get no new business. That's how a naturally functioning free market works.

    By creating a Prohibition (yes, just like with alcohol) on what would otherwise be a voluntary exchange between willing adults, you create a criminal culture where one otherwise would not exist.
    I know this is hard to grasp, because in your daily life you see only true criminals engaging in prostitution and drug use. This does not alter the fact that many people who buy or sell sex for money, or who imbibe substances not presently allowed by the US DEA, are otherwise not criminals in any sense.

    You did describe real crimes -- theft (failing to deliver the goods as agreed) and assault (beating up the worker). Those should be vigorously punished. But the mutually consensual act in and of itself is indeed victimless. No matter how many johns or streetwalkers you "save" by throwing them in jail, the fact remains that there are plenty of highly-paid escorts in any large cosmopolitan city on Earth. The fortunate among them live in countries where they can safely report being assaulted, without fear that LE will continue the brutality. The fortunate among their clients can safely report theft, without fear that LE will incarcerate them.


    Yes, that is a whole different issue.
    Again, you are confusing a real crime with a victim -- slavery -- with a consensual victimless act.

    Prostitution creates a safe haven for criminals.
    Legalization of prostitution expands the market for commercial sex, opening markets for criminal enterprises and creating a safe haven for criminals who traffic people into prostitution. Organized crime networks do not register with the government, do not pay taxes, and do not protect prostitutes. Legalization simply makes it easier for them to blend in with a purportedly regulated sex sector and makes it more difficult for prosecutors to identify and punish those who are trafficking people.

  17. #217
    BigDawg's Avatar
    BigDawg is offline K-9 Officer
    Verified LEO
    Site Moderator
    Join Date
    06-15-06
    Location
    So. Florida
    Posts
    5,312
    Rep Power
    1659729
    So when the drug buyer gets some bad shit and goes back and kills the dealer. Is it still victimless because it still only involves the two of them??

    Im really confused about something else to, basically everyone from FTL says how brutal the cops are. How we are just looking to be violent. Cant wait to beat someone or use a taser on them. Even been said we are just itching to use our guns every chance we get, and want to shoot someone. BUT.....If you look at almost all of them (FTL posters) they all eventually revert to saying how they would shoot this person if they did xyz to them. Or how they would beat the shit out of this person if they did xyz to them. Im sorry but you people sound a hell of alot more violent then any cop on here.


    What you people are advocating is basically the wild west with alot of anarchy. I understand you cant see that because you dont see what we deal with everyday, but trust us that is exactly what would happen.

    You say everyone would have the right to rule themsleves and decide what is right and wrong.

    This is so wrong because everyone has different morals and values. Alot of people think its ok to have sex with children, even their own children. Society says its wrong, you say it is ok.

    Mass murderers think its ok to kill for sport. I could go on and on.

    Let me ask you; what is the deffinition of normal?
    "An Unarmed man can only flee from evil, and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it." Jeff Cooper


    Some people are meant to be the police......Some people are meant to call the police!!!

    "Socialism only works in two places: Heaven where they don't need it and hell where they already have it."
    -Ronald Reagan


    " I believe that forgiving them (Terrorist) is God's function. OUR job is to arrange the meeting."
    General Norman Schwartzkopf

    Not all Muslims are Terrorists, but all Terrorists are Muslim.
    (author unknown)


    The statements posted by BigDawg DO NOT reflect the opinions, views, policies, or procedures of the author's employing agency. These statements are the personal opinions of BigDawg only, thereby releasing my agency of any liability, or involvement in anything posted under the user name of BigDawg. The opinions expressed by BigDawg are protected by the 1st Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. BigDawg’s messages are intended to invoke thought and discussion among the "Officer Resources" forum community and may not necessarily reflect the opinion of the author. BigDawg’s posts and any attachments are intended for an adult audience (18+) and may contain strong language, sexual content, nudity, violence, and may be graphic in nature. Some material may be considered offensive; reader discretion is advised. Please note that many of BigDawg’s posts are intended for entertainment value only. BigDawg’s posts are not intended to be used where prohibited by law. Furthermore, BigDawg's posts, and any attachments, may contain information covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, and is confidential and proprietary in nature. If you are not the intended recipient, please be advised that you are legally prohibited from retaining, using, copying, distributing, or otherwise disclosing this information in any manner.

  18. #218
    StanSwitek's Avatar
    StanSwitek is offline Corporal
    Join Date
    12-04-05
    Location
    Huntington Beach, CA
    Posts
    891
    Rep Power
    1143373
    Legalizers believe most black market and organized syndicate involvement in the drug business would die and that drug-induced crime would decrease with drug legalization. But these assertions are not supported by the facts. The United States experimented with legalization and it failed. From 1919 to 1922, government-sponsored clinics handed out free drugs to addicts in hopes of controlling their behavior. The effort failed. Society's revulsion against drugs, combined with enforcement, successfully eradicated the menace at that time.

    California decriminalized marijuana in 1976, and, within the first six months, arrests for driving under the influence of drugs rose 46 percent for adults and 71.4 percent for juveniles. Decriminalizing marijuana in Alaska and Oregon in the 1970s resulted in the doubling of use. Patrick Murphy, a court-appointed lawyer for 31,000 abused and neglected children in Chicago, says that more than 80 percent of the cases of physical and sexual abuse of children now involve drugs. There is no evidence that legalizing drugs will reduce these crimes, and there is evidence that suggests it would worsen the problem.

    Legalization would decrease drug distribution crime because most of those activities would become lawful. But would legalization necessarily reduce other drug-related crime like robbery, rape, and assault? Presumably legalization would reduce the cost of drugs and thus addicts might commit fewer crimes to pay for their habits. But less expensive drugs might also feed their habit better, and more drugs means more side effects like paranoia, irritability and violence. Suggestions that crime can somehow be eliminated by redefining it are spurious. Free drugs or legalizing bad drugs would not make criminal addicts into productive citizens. Dr. Mitchell S. Rosenthal, expert on drugs and adolescents and president of Phoenix House, a resident treatment center in New York, said, "If you give somebody free drugs you don't turn him into a responsible employee, husband, or father." The Justice Department reports that most inmates (77.4 percent male and 83.6 percent female) have a drug history and the majority were under the influence of drugs or alcohol at the time of their current offense. And a surprisingly large number of convicted felons admit their crime motive was to get money for drugs. For example, 12 percent of all violent offenses and 24.4 percent of all property offenses were drug-money motivated.

    Even if drugs were legalized some restrictions still would be necessary. For example, restricting the sale of legalized drugs to minors, pregnant women, police, military, pilots and prisoners would be necessary but would still provide a black market niche. Pro-legalizers contend that government could tax drugs, thus off-setting the social costs of abuse. But history proves that efforts to tax imported drugs like opium created a black market. Earlier this century Chinese syndicates smuggled legal opium into this country to avoid tariffs. Even today, there is ample crime based on the legal drugs, alcohol, and tobacco. For example, organized crime smuggles cigarettes from states with low tobacco taxes into those with high taxes, and such activities are accompanied by violence against legal suppliers.

    If now-illegal drugs were decriminalized, the government would have to determine the allowable potency for commercial drugs. But no government can okay toxic substances, so a black market would be created for higher potency drugs and those that remained banned, like the new "designer drugs."Even pro-drug forces do not call for blanket legalization of drugs like LSD, crack, or PCP. Therefore, we would continue to have drug-related crime and illegal drug distribution organizations that would push these drugs on youngsters, who would be more easily induced into drug abuse through the availability and social sanctioning of marijuana. Drug abuse is closely correlated with crime. The National Youth Survey found that 25 percent of youths who admitted to cocaine or heroin use also committed 40 percent of all the index crimes reported. The survey also found that youths who tested positive for cannabinoids have more than twice as many non-drug-related felony referrals to juvenile court as compared with those found to have tested negative.

    The extent to which individuals commit "drug-related crimes only" is overstated. Most incarcerated "drug"offenders violated other laws as well. Princeton University professor John Dilulio found that only 2 percent -- i.e., 700 -- of those in federal prisons were convicted of pure drug possession. They generally committed other and violent crimes to earn a sentence.

    However, 70 percent of current inmates were on illegal drugs when arrested and, if drugs become cheaper, violent crime could reasonably be expected to increase.

  19. #219
    Citizen72521 is offline Rookie
    Join Date
    11-27-06
    Posts
    9
    Rep Power
    0

    Commie Pinkoism has infested America

    Quote Originally Posted by BigDawg3533 View Post
    So when the drug buyer gets some bad shit and goes back and kills the dealer. Is it still victimless because it still only involves the two of them??
    Everyone except psychos understand murder is wrong.
    The point made by the "right wing" economists for eliminating prohibition and the black markets they create is that related crimes would go away.
    These are short concise articles by the famous economist who died recently I challenge anyone to please take a minute to read some of them.
    http://www.druglibrary.org/special/f...n_friedman.htm

    http://www.druglibrary.org/special/f..._and_drugs.htm
    The Writings of Nobel Laureate Milton Friedman
    Prohibition and Drugs
    by Milton Friedman
    From Newsweek, May 1, 1972

    LAW AND ORDER
    "... Legalizing drugs would simultaneously reduce the amount of crime and raise the quality of law enforcement. Can you conceive of any other measure that would accomplish so much to promote law and order? ..."
    Yes it really is all about the Benjamins, but its not that we don't care about the less fortunate. Many of us are just tired of being forced to pay for it all at gun point by a bunch of two-faced suit and tie wearing
    PINKOS.

    Im really confused about something else to, basically everyone from FTL says how brutal the cops are. How we are just looking to be violent. Cant wait to beat someone or use a taser on them. Even been said we are just itching to use our guns every chance we get, and want to shoot someone. BUT.....If you look at almost all of them (FTL posters) they all eventually revert to saying how they would shoot this person if they did xyz to them. Or how they would beat the shit out of this person if they did xyz to them. Im sorry but you people sound a hell of alot more violent then any cop on here.
    They are over exaggerating to prove their points in reality I don't think most people shoot to kill only to wound as much as needed and they'd give warning shots first to for most things.
    What you people are advocating is basically the wild west with alot of anarchy. I understand you cant see that because you don't see what we deal with everyday, but trust us that is exactly what would happen.

    You say everyone would have the right to rule themsleves and decide what is right and wrong.
    Not only do the economics show otherwise, but I think the fact that officers have to deal with scum all the time creates some serious bias in the direction of humanity being mostly bad and I am sorry you guys get treated like crap all the time, but humanity can not be as bad as you make it sound or your jobs would be much harder than they are now. Giving people the freedom and responsibility to pursue their hopes and dreams can go a long ways to making people more rational and moral.

    This is so wrong because everyone has different morals and values. Alot of people think its ok to have sex with children, even their own children. Society says its wrong, you say it is ok.

    Mass murderers think its ok to kill for sport. I could go on and on.

    Let me ask you; what is the definition of normal?
    [/QUOTE]

    The way we tell if something is blatantly wrong is if it violates someones rights obviously pedophiles and killers are violating peoples rights. I suppose there are other issues like animal rights, but I think sensible folks can agree they just aren't quite as important as human rights.

    Also if folks here on LEF would rather we stop wising up their forums with lots of posts I'd agree we should move any indirect LE topics to the FTL forums out of respect if necessary.

    Where is the War on Ignorance?

  20. #220
    StanSwitek's Avatar
    StanSwitek is offline Corporal
    Join Date
    12-04-05
    Location
    Huntington Beach, CA
    Posts
    891
    Rep Power
    1143373
    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen72521 View Post
    Everyone except psychos understand murder is wrong.
    The point made by the "right wing" economists for eliminating prohibition and the black markets they create is that related crimes would go away.
    These are short concise articles by the famous economist who died recently I challenge anyone to please take a minute to read some of them.
    http://www.druglibrary.org/special/f...n_friedman.htm

    http://www.druglibrary.org/special/f..._and_drugs.htm
    If now-illegal drugs were decriminalized, the government would have to determine the allowable potency for commercial drugs. But no government can okay toxic substances, so a black market would be created for higher potency drugs and those that remained banned, like the new "designer drugs."Even pro-drug forces do not call for blanket legalization of drugs like LSD, crack, or PCP. Therefore, we would continue to have drug-related crime and illegal drug distribution organizations that would push these drugs on youngsters, who would be more easily induced into drug abuse through the availability and social sanctioning of marijuana. Drug abuse is closely correlated with crime. The National Youth Survey found that 25 percent of youths who admitted to cocaine or heroin use also committed 40 percent of all the index crimes reported. The survey also found that youths who tested positive for cannabinoids have more than twice as many non-drug-related felony referrals to juvenile court as compared with those found to have tested negative.

 

 
Page 11 of 13 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •