how to win the war on drugs...

def

to fight fire with fire with will ony burn the house down, that is to say if you use conventional methods of warfare to fight a unconvetional war you are bound for failure
the "war on drugs" is a war on supply and demand , each must be tackled with a seperate battle plan , on supply economic warefare must be waged and on demand psycological warfare must be used.

the suppy only exists because there is a demand ,this is the root cause of its existance ,even those who studied economics for the first class in secondary school and then changed subject ,should have been explained this .
as it is the most basic economic principle , and the reason most economists are displeased or disagree with the currently employed methods of takling this economic problem(drug use and supply).

to use economic war fare is to "steal" supply ,by either nationalisation(government controled distribution) or regulation/legalisation (regulated free market), the method applied should be carefully considerd,
take for example the method of nationalisation of the opiate "market" created in england by the second world war, if they had denyed the addicted returning troops morphine or any treatment it would have created
a sizeable black market ,however they did not and as a result the useage rates steadily dropped, the same method (of nationalisation )could be applied to irelands modernday heroin problem, stripping supply of demand ,fully ,
not just partially, by providing either opiates for the pennys it is truely worth or a more suitable substitute for example cannabis sativa indica which with high levels of CBD to THC reducing or preventing psychosis(cravings and so on) associated with
heroin withdrawl,and also offering those ,who so choose, abstinance based treatment.

when takling demand psycological warefare/tactics must be utilised ,more over create the illusion of choice (like in an election),and offer the safer "softer" drugs ,by introducing a free but highly regulated market system take for example cannabis ,"magic" mushrooms ,MDMA ,and certain stimulents
the prohibition of these(and all drugs) creates health problems which otherwise would not exist ,transient psychosis from cannabis is caused by a lack of choice in the market ,the association of high quality and high strength, when cannabis is bred for high THC percenage it is done so at the expence of CBD , if cannabis was properly regulated then consumers would be aware of the cannabinoid profile of a particular crop of a particular strain, they could choose to consume it or not ,most people i feel would choose not to consume such high strength herb regularly if they were made fully aware of the possible consequences ,
other negative effects would also be reduced for instance an age limit would prevent heavy useage amongst the most vunerable, which leads to a retardation of growth in the fronal lobe and over use of the CB 1 and 2,cannabinoid recepters affecting future/current metabilisim and immune system development,

with mushrooms it reduces the chance of picking and eating poisonus strains ,which can kill, however like cannabis psyclobe containing mushrooms do not kill however much is consumed and if used in a positive social setting rarely have negitive consequences ,and again prohibition causes psycological problems which
would otherwise not exist ,when on any hallucinagenic the mind is vunerable ,if for example you consider yourself or are given a vague impression you are considerd an outcast ,unloved ,unwanted within a very short period of time can become suicidal,leaping to your death ,unless someone proclaims they can fly or displayed a lack of understanding with regard to the laws of areodynamics this should be assumed ,

it could be said prohibition validates paranoia ,for are there not people "after" you ,or that consider you sub-human?

with MDMA (extacy)and stimulants such as "speed" or synthetic cocaine ,warnings and better purity and in some cases research would drasticly reduce health consequences.

if their was this choice or "illusion" of choice would their be a demand for poor quality black market produce? would there exist a demand to generate supply?

also consider the special qualitys of the irish drug market ,drug use is excepted (alcohol) even glamorised, all (most)illegal drugs are sourced from outside the country meaning the vast majority of cash involved leaves the country,(street dealers make pennys by comparison)
the newly created or accepted markets would generate ligitimate employment ,reducing dole lines and so on,generating taxes and reduce costs of healthcare due to lack of (wanted and required) information and poor purity ,aswell as eliminateing the costly tactics of "regulation" used currently by the gardai making their job safer and reducing the friction/aggrivation this "style" may cause in society tward them, creating a greater and wider respect for the law

would this not be far safer,cheaper and more humane?

please the idea is fresh and i am weary of war ,can anyone on anyside of the trenches voice their opinion on my notion of peace?

i am fully prepared to admit defeat if you can convince me....

genericguy

you lost me at hello.

Menengroth™

Wall of text scores a critical hit and hits you for 1048 damage.

RoadKillTs

Way to long. I just read the title.
Can someone do me a summary? Cheers.

Jagera

RoadKillTs wrote: »

Way to long. I just read the title.
Can someone do me a summary? Cheers.

ok - drugs are bad m'kay

bluto63

I saw something about stealing economics in there, so I'm assuming this is the long winded way of saying 'let's legalise drugs' am I right?

RobbieTheRobber

RoadKillTs wrote: »

Way to long. I just read the title.
Can someone do me a summary? Cheers.

Summary is: body op's text most likely taken from somewhere else, words such as high-school changed to secondary school to make it seem written in an irish context, which it most certainly is not because war on drugs is an americanism, and to sum up the rest of the piece, crap, crap crap, more crap and finally a crap finish.

jd007

Is this world war 3? Whats happening? i'm confused!

DazMarz

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

Summary is: body op's text most likely taken from somewhere else, words such as high-school changed to secondary school to make it seem written in an irish context, which it most certainly is not because war on drugs is an americanism, and to sum up the rest of the piece, crap, crap crap, more crap and finally a crap finish.

Yep, that's a fairly good sum up.

Although the point on drugs being a supply/demand market is spot on, but the piece is mostly utter rubbish.

Buford T Justice

tl;dr

Jaysis. this is AH FFS! Waaaaaaayyyyyyy yoo long.....

Can you bulllet it to prevent boredom?

mailforkev

Omar comin' y'all.

:rolleyes:

Buford T Justice

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

Summary is: body op's text most likely taken from somewhere else, words such as high-school changed to secondary school to make it seem written in an irish context, which it most certainly is not because war on drugs is an americanism, and to sum up the rest of the piece, crap, crap crap, more crap and finally a crap finish.

Well the, with that

Drugs are bad
/thread

xzanti

tldr

AnonoBoy

So you're saying we should seize control of the world's cocaine supply by invading Columbia?

biko

OP - Read but not understood.

Overheal

Even I couldn't be bothered reading this.

Prof.Badass

That's not winning the war on drugs. That's giving up on it, which incidentally is the right thing to do.

I remember reading a story about gardaí taking bribes from some gang or other. The war on drugs is unwinnable.

TPD

If you're doing a project on drugs, it helps if your writing style doesn't make you appear high.

Dempsey

As long as there is a demand, there will be someone trying to supply. Not a chance of stopping people wanting to smoke, drink, take legal highs/illegal highs etc.

It would be best to educate people on the effects of all recreational drugs

def

Magnus wrote: »

OP - Read but not understood.

magnus?... go,going,gone...sold.. read it,think about it and then read it over ,

to think of the prohibition as a war , allows for a better veiw point , have you ever seen black hawk down , the somalian warlord who used hunger as a weapon ,this is unconventional warfare

china today seems to be waging an economic war on america sucking vast amounts of cash out of the country ,and destroying production ,this is true warfare modern ,effective , break the peoples spirit ,not just american style "show biz" war, with expensive toys

thinking with this frame of mind and imagining prohibition as a war allows for a better understanding of it ,moreover ,why it is how it is , two sides each seeing victory or defeat as the outcome ,instead of what it should be a sensible comprimise ,an excersize in risk management ,like all problems people can have ,a comprimise is needed to solve it,

you'll notice some people definatly understand but refuse to except because the notion of "peace talks" or a "treaty" is unexceptable total victory or nothing, i suspect they refuse to accept some sub human cannabis user could come up with a workable plan to modern societys biggist problem ,sittin around not getting paid to do it

you'll also notice the shoot the messanger "you didnt write this" , the- i cant even comprehend so ill attack the guy whos talking , instead of trying to understand the words or ideas hes suggesting ,mentality ....

which is a sure sign of defeat or surrender ... from someone who has their opinions spoonfed to them ,

def

jd007 wrote: »

Is this world war 3? Whats happening? i'm confused!

yes except no one is neutral,and the nazis are winning

def

AnonoBoy wrote: »

So you're saying we should seize control of the world's cocaine supply by invading Columbia?

this is unnessecary ,if the stigma with "legal highs" was nulled big pharma would pump out different safer ,synthetic versions ,,with cherry flavour etc

def

The Perfect Drug wrote: »

If you're doing a project on drugs, it helps if your writing style doesn't make you appear high.

sorry if it may appear that way but its hard for me to explain myself sometimes ,especially if i have to put it into text , plus my spelling has never been very good (like yerman with the e=mc2 for example)

def

Dempsey wrote: »

As long as there is a demand, there will be someone trying to supply. Not a chance of stopping people wanting to smoke, drink, take legal highs/illegal highs etc.

It would be best to educate people on the effects of all recreational drugs

and if you offer a limited suppy of the safer ones , there should be no demand for others , and clinics to "steal" the suppy of harder ones when needed

raptorman

Firstly I dont agree with drugs being illegal. People should be allowed to take whatever they want.

My solution to the drugs problem is two fold. The supply and demand must both be targeted.
People could be randomly tested for drugs and if tests come back positive jailed for a week and their name put on a website with lists of offenders.
This could start of by profiling the most likely users i.e. 20 to 30 year olds and start tests in that age bracket.

Then start eliminating the supply. Use Garda intellegence and the Ranger Wing from the Army to start a real war on drugs. I'm sure the Gardai could name the top 10 to 20 people involved in the drug trade in Ireland. Use those names to get more names and start removing the supply.

An extreme solution but one that might work. If people are shocked and complain about human rights etc then dont complain about the drug "problem".

My name is URL

If there was no war on drugs here then the innocent people laying down their lives to save others in places like South America are doing it in vain

If it was legit companies supplying drugs to the world, a war wouldn't be needed

but it's Cartels, that kill tens of thousands of people per year that are in control atm. Why should there be no war on them?

def

raptorman wrote: »

Firstly I dont agree with drugs being illegal. People should be allowed to take whatever they want.

My solution to the drugs problem is two fold. The supply and demand must both be targeted.
People could be randomly tested for drugs and if tests come back positive jailed for a week and their name put on a website with lists of offenders.
This could start of by profiling the most likely users i.e. 20 to 30 year olds and start tests in that age bracket.

Then start eliminating the supply. Use Garda intellegence and the Ranger Wing from the Army to start a real war on drugs. I'm sure the Gardai could name the top 10 to 20 people involved in the drug trade in Ireland. Use those names to get more names and start removing the supply.

An extreme solution but one that might work. If people are shocked and complain about human rights etc then dont complain about the drug "problem".

or you could give the dealth penalty for possession /dealing,chop off a finger , send us to proper "work" camps , this is fully going with the current irish way , if your going to do any thing go all the way saudi style (alcohol),
this might work but its very expencive and quickly puts us back in the dark ages ,then whos next jews?africans?muslims? prodestants?travelers? homosexuals?

what other life choices do you not approve of? id really like to know.. so i can warn them,and tell god who he should be expecting up next in large numbers.... honestly can you not see the comparison....the "war on drugs " only started after the second big war ,who do you think gave hitler the money to "campaign" do you think it would be hard to convince the world another type of person is sub human ,worthless and "camp" material, then start making more money of the process except on a global scale

drug dealers are created by laws ,bad laws ,dont let the idea of them cloud your judgement ,if you are not treated humanely why should you be expected to behave humanely?

Mike 1972

vinylmesh wrote: »

That's not winning the war on drugs. That's giving up on it, .

Perhaps the OP was speaking from the perspective of the inevitable victor of the "war on drugs"

I.E. Drugs

Rented Mule

Mike 1972 wrote: »

Perhaps the OP was speaking from the perspective of the inevitable victor of the "war on drugs"

I.E. Drugs

Would 'drugs' be the winner or would it be the individuals right to chose be the winner ?

def

vinylmesh wrote: »

That's not winning the war on drugs. That's giving up on it, which incidentally is the right thing to do.

I remember reading a story about gardaí taking bribes from some gang or other. The war on drugs is unwinnable.

i chose the title "how to win the war on drugs" very carefully ,, winning ,,a very powerful idea ,espeacially when its in a group/herd
it forces people to deal with certain aspects of why they think a certain way or at least realise they are thinking a certain way ,, hopefully forcing them to re-evaluate their opinions , or giving valid reasons as to why they hold the opinions they do

def

check out my other treads if you think there is at least some merit in my theroy/treaty