What is Digg?Sponsored by AVG
Windows 7 Needs An Extra Layer of Security view!
free.avg.com - AVG Anti-Virus Free 9.0 works with Windows 7, to provide the best protection against web threats.
63 Comments
- MacBookForMe, on 11/15/2009, -4/+41Too many people + far too corrupted politicians/leaders = national catastrophe
- duggtodeath, on 11/15/2009, -3/+40Mexico is becoming Colombia circa 1980s
- Vaiper, on 11/15/2009, -14/+39Legalize all drugs. Regulate them. Tax them. Stop needless deaths.
Also, wtf is up with that ***** ad? - spworm, on 11/15/2009, -4/+23Somebody should tell the journalists to stop killing people.
- sanman, on 11/15/2009, -1/+15Texas, Arizona, New Mexico are next
the problem is only growing
what was chased out of Columbia has only taken root in Mexico - Averness, on 11/15/2009, -9/+21It's because of the illegal drugs. Make them legal and this crime will go away. Shame on the drug policy makers of both the USA and Mexico. Like those responsible for Alcohol prohibition in the 1930's, they have a horrifying amount of blood on their hands and it keeps getting worse.
- noahgelman, on 11/15/2009, -5/+17Are you talking about Mexico or America?
- Averness, on 11/15/2009, -4/+15No, they will scramble to try and find other illegal activities to keep the money coming in, but with the drug trade eliminated probably 75% of all possibilities to make money illegally dry up. These cartels and drug lords will fight it out for what's left in a brief flurry of ultraviolence directed mostly at each other (the competition) and many will be eliminated. Those who remain will continue in other areas like prostitution (legalize that too), gambling (ditto), extortion, robbery, etc....and with most of the police freed from the task policing all those victimless crimes, they should finally be able to make a real impact in taking down the real criminals.
- Halsfield, on 11/15/2009, -0/+11As vaiper already touched on, people that want to do drugs can find them. Legalizing dangerous drugs stops the gang violence, drug cartel violence, and stops people from needing to steal to get the money to buy the drugs which stops a lot of armed robbery/home invasions. It also lowers deaths from overdose as the drugs become more pure as they become standardized by incorporation. There are so many things we can gain by legalizing and taxing drugs and there is very little negative side that we are not already experiencing with the war on drugs in full swing.
- Vaiper, on 11/15/2009, -2/+12@sanman
You are ignorant. I hate people who use that stupid ass argument. People do drugs every day regardless of whether or not they are illegal. Welcome to the real world. - Halsfield, on 11/15/2009, -2/+10Completely agree. People are so afraid of legalizing all drugs because of things like meth/crack but the thing is the war on drugs is not stopping the use/distribution of those drugs and instead it is causing new problems that are beyond just issues stemming from the drug use. We need to educate the young (real education) about drugs and drug use, spend a portion of the tax money on helping addicts that want to stop, and stop prosecuting addicts for possession and usage and prosecute them only when they commit lawbreaking acts (just as we currently do with alcohol users).
- DangerCollie, on 11/15/2009, -2/+10Maybe we should move Fox News HQ to Mexico.
Nah, probably wouldn't work. They're not real journalists. - Caergrim, on 11/15/2009, -1/+9Excellent reply, Averness.
- OAlvarez, on 11/15/2009, -0/+6seems more like the whole world
- Averness, on 11/15/2009, -0/+5Firefox + Adblock.
We only know about this video ad because you told us. It didn't bother me because I never saw it. - 13373h4X0r, on 11/15/2009, -0/+5All ethical people want the murders to end.
Making the sale of drugs legal would lead to increased competition in the drug market and would greatly reduce the profitability of selling drugs, and would also have the effect of eliminating the adversarial relationships between drug sellers, government, and the general population.
However, making the sale of drugs legal would greatly increase the availability of drugs, such that marijuana, heroin, cocaine, etc, could be purchased as easily as alcohol or cigarettes. Even if the government imposed an age limit, as it does for the purchase and consumption of alcohol and cigarettes, most young people would have easy access to drugs (just as young people can get cigarettes or alcoholic drinks from older friends). So, people of all ages will be doing drugs in addition to drinking alcohol and smoking cigarettes.
We all know that some people can become alcoholics and that some people will die from smoking-related illnesses. But as a society we decided that the freedom to drink and smoke is more important than the bad consequences. Also, prohibiting alcohol resulted in the formation of murderous criminal organizations, motivated and sustained by the profits of distributing and selling alcohol.
Legalizing marijuana seems like it would greatly damage the murderous drug-selling organizations in Mexico, and would significantly reduce the murder rate there, and would greatly reduce the burden to law enforcement and to society. A wide, legal availability of marijuana would likely result in many more people consuming marijuana. Although it is generally accepted that people under the influence of marijuana are calm and harmless, people under the influence of marijuana might be more likely to cause car accidents, and long-term users of marijuana might be less productive in society, and might become a burden to society, and might have diminished ability to make reasonable decisions when voting. Many people enjoy consuming marijuana without exhibiting any obvious long-term impairment, but impairment while under the influence and on a long-term basis will inevitably lead to marijuana users adversely affecting the lives of people who choose to not consume marijuana. Simply advocating the legalization of marijuana to reduce violent crime, without significant evidence to support the belief that society will be improved instead of harmed, is shortsighted or reckless.
I think that legalizing the sale of marijuana is a very promising and appealing idea. But before I would vote in support of such an idea I would want to see estimates of the various effects upon society.
A limited, but large, experiment, such as letting a single, willing state, among the 50 United States, legalize marijuana, so that we could all observe the effects over a meaningful time period, such as 10 years, might produce very comforting evidence that legalizing marijuana is beneficial. I don't think using other countries where marijuana is already legal as examples would be good because we would have no reference by which to judge whether or not things got better or worse (for example, widespread moderate impairment, subtle reduced productivity, and subtle reduction of voting quality, might only be observable if we have an abrupt legalization of marijuana). But I think such an experiment in the U.S. would simply lead to the rapid end of the illegality of marijuana, because there would be so much marijuana export to neighboring states, and there would be so much jealousy of other states due to the huge tax revenue for selling marijuana, that even politicians would be begging to expand the experiment to the whole country.
I predict that the sale of marijuana will be legal, and taxed, both in Mexico and in the U.S., within 5 or 10 years. My sense is that the adverse effects on society will be minimal, and the benefits will be significant. That is my hope, because I think that having marijuana be illegal is hurting more people than it is helping people.
It is tempting to assign some of the blame for the thousands of murders to all of the people who purchase marijuana illegally, but I strongly believe in the GENERAL principle that people who merely offer to pay for, and possibly come to possess, objects, information, or services, are not themselves criminals. If society chooses to make certain objects, information, or services illegal, then I think that moral blame and legal punishments should only apply to people who create the illegal objects, or create the illegal information, or perform the illegal services. It is very dangerous for all to make possession itself, or an offer to pay itself, criminal. - Vaiper, on 11/15/2009, -0/+5That's is exactly what I was referring too. All drugs even the "heavy ones". If a drug exists, then there are already people that abuse it. Simple as that.
- Halsfield, on 11/15/2009, -0/+5Solid, you really need to read what is written, Captain Jumptoconclusions. I was saying the money that came from the drug tax, not your income tax/etc (even though I'm sure right now some of the money from that type of tax is going to help addicts somewhere).
You could justify using the second type of tax money for treatment of addicts as helping your community and nation be a healthier and happier place to live in. It would mean your neighborhood/state/nation would be a better, safer place to raise kids, etc. However, as I said I was not asking for that money to be used, and only money that came from the tax on drugs sold legally in the USA. - danfive555, on 11/15/2009, -0/+4If that's possible, may as well nuke all the druggies on this side of the border too.
- danfive555, on 11/15/2009, -0/+4A drug dealer in Mexico will continue dealing drugs, not work as your gardener or carpenter. Get a clue.
- Propethic, on 11/15/2009, -0/+4All mexicans are not drug dealers. If you've ever worked in any food service job, you will see that migrant illegals and legal workers are the backbone of the industry. Working 2 years in a restaurant as a busboy, I don't think I've seen any of them get out of line, flip out, or bitch and moan about anything. They usually are all smiles when it's 2AM and they're hauling bag after bag of 50lb smelly trash bags into the dumpster at the end of the night.
- eavesdrop, on 11/15/2009, -0/+4They DID legalize small amounts remember?
- Halsfield, on 11/15/2009, -0/+3 I think the simple act of testing positive for a drug should not be a fireable offense. If you want to smoke up before and after work, be my guest, there should be no issue with doing that from a job market perspective. If an employer doesnt want you intoxicated on the job, that is their pejorative.
@Averness - that really is not a long-term solution. Right now if you are a smoker and want to avoid being fired you need to find jobs that don't test or don't test regularly, but long term it should not be a fireable offense unless you are messing up on the job from being intoxicated(just as they can do with alcohol, despite it being legal to consume).
I also think tobacco smoke breaks are ridiculous, but that is another topic entirely. - pixeldust, on 11/15/2009, -2/+5"Or we could just legalize it and have half of society as addicts.
Tricky debate."
It's only a tricky debate if you want to ignore facts and make ***** up like what you said above. - Stoyanov, on 11/15/2009, -1/+4Get your FREE* TRIAL of 5 jouralist murders NOW!
*Initial fee non-refundable. - HeavensNight, on 11/15/2009, -6/+9but cant you guys see how ***** up all those users are from it all. Nothing good will come from selling this junk legally, ***** man looks at the prescription drug addicts.. its legal and "regulated" but the number of people getting whacked-out on this crap rises..look at cigarettes, legal, taxed, regulated and still rising rate of use.
All we need to do is get weed legal . ***** the rest !! A legal sale of pot means never again would we have to deal with those shady dealers who expose us to the dirty drugs , and never again would another smoker buy a sack of bud laced with the ***** to most likely push them to a harder drug. - danfive555, on 11/15/2009, -0/+3Colombians still take the cake for violence.
Plus half of the actual country is under rebel control, so Mexico is better off than Colombia. - filovirus, on 11/15/2009, -1/+4I am an RN. I access controlled drugs every day. It is not easy to throw away a job that pays 85k a year and more vacation time than I know what to do with. My point is that alcohol is legal and they don't test for it either, unless you are intoxicated at work. Marijuana is safer than alcohol but is illegal and tested. In California, you can have a prescription but your employer can still test and fire you. I would like the freedom to use legal marijuana and not have to worry about losing my job. I don't know if that will ever happen. For now, the chance of being screened keeps me from trying pot.
- beerhound, on 11/15/2009, -0/+2It's the only way to be sure.........
- Halsfield, on 11/15/2009, -0/+2Forget your "/s" tag?
- X9001, on 11/15/2009, -1/+3you need to get out more
- filovirus, on 11/15/2009, -3/+5Yes. Stop the prohibition of marijuana. Stop testing for it too.
- Halsfield, on 11/15/2009, -0/+2We already have the "slew of other problems" that these "heavier" drugs cause(most of the heavier drugs are less deadly and socially destructive than alcohol/tobacco), and in addition to them we are paying for a war on drugs that isn't stopping anything and is in fact making it more profitable to smuggle/deal drugs.
If you can't look at the alcohol prohibition and see the direct parallels to the war on drugs and see exactly why it is failing then and now for the same reasons, you are blind. It makes smuggling/selling so profitable that there will never be a lack of people to run drugs/alcohol/whatever until you lock up everyone that needs money (and by then your government/nation will be so bankrupt from funding prisons it won't matter). It makes the drugs/alcohol themselves so expensive that people stoop to robbing/stealing to get the chemicals they need, but doesnt stop the flow of chemicals.
It creates a slew of new problems without solving any of the old. - BotchaMcCoola, on 11/15/2009, -0/+1Can't we get drug prices higher somehow?
- JohnnySoftware, on 11/22/2009, -0/+1You read in the papers that this summer Mexico legalized possession of small quantities of just about any drug you have ever heard of. You know, the violence level in Mexico did not go down, and in fact it has increased.
- niselat, on 11/15/2009, -0/+1Eh, it wasn't real journalism. It was just political opinion
- Halsfield, on 11/15/2009, -0/+1"If I want to snort cocaine what right do you have to tell me not to?"
How else am I supposed to take a line like that? I don't assume people are agreeing or disagreeing, I read what they write and then decide. Using "you" in an accusatory fashion without anywhere else in your post describing who the "who" you are referring to (in a nested reply no less) left me with nothing but to think you were attacking my point of view as I described above. - MrSteamTank, on 11/15/2009, -0/+1As danfive555 said Colombia still has over 3 times the murder rate than Mexico does.
Funny how Colombia is America's closest ally in South America yet it is the most unstable nation their by far. 8P - BotchaMcCoola, on 11/16/2009, -0/+1Are you going to pay for all that? If not the who will?
- JohnnySoftware, on 11/22/2009, -0/+1Right. If you legalized every contraband and every form of victimless crime they would adopt kidnapping, slavery, and political corruption. In fact, they already do those things so it would just increase the proportion of those activities in their business.
The only way to fight those gangs - any gang, is to completely stop buying any type of thing they sell, from anybody - and have the police fight them hard at the same time. In Mexico, the police are fighting really hard. People patronizing the gangs have to step up, do their part - do nothing that supports gangs at all.
Gangs have moved into suburbs. We now have people getting stabbed in the face by murders, people having their arms chopped off by machetes, people in their mid teens participating in murders, and prisons that say they cannot accept prisoners because certain Latino gangs do not mix well together. This is in suburbs that were quiet a decade ago.
Honestly, the US southern border seems to start at Canada now. There has always been a good reason to allow steady immigration and always a good reason to have a steady limit on it too. - Halsfield, on 11/15/2009, -1/+1I think you need to lay off the glue and respond to the correct person. I'm for the legalization of everything . Try again.
Hopefully the other people that dugg me down actually read my post instead of just seeing the word "No" and assuming I was anti-legalization. - MrSteamTank, on 11/15/2009, -1/+1@halsfield
Where did you get from my post that I was disagreeing with you? I was just adding to your point. I even dugg you up.
Maybe I did it in an accusatory tone but that wasn't the intention...and you shouldn't be so defensive and assume everybody is attacking you. 8P - tirau, on 11/16/2009, -1/+1For people who are digging niselat down: it's true. From California to Kansas to North Carolina, Mexicans are coming to small ag towns in extremely large numbers, often illegally. They are filling schools, altering the local culture, and bringing criminal elements to places which had previously been gang-free. Just because you don't see it where you are doesn't mean it's not happening.
- Averness, on 11/15/2009, -4/+3Stop submitting to drug tests. Don't support the companies that test employees for drugs. Don't work for those companies.
Did the independent contractors building the Death Star deserve to get blown up by the rebels? See what I mean? It's a choice you make to support them or not. To JOIN THEM, like crossing over to the dark side. Just say no to piss tests and the companies that use them. - Cracken, on 11/15/2009, -5/+4No no no.
As a politician, you cannot possibly fathom the responsibilities I have in keeping this Marijuana under a tight legislation. You weep for slain citizens and curse the police; you have that luxury. I do not care how many people die in a feud. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know: that even more deaths, while tragic, probably saved lives and that my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives. We use words like honor, code, loyalty. We use then as the backbone of a life trying to defend something. You use them as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you said "thank you and went on your way. Questioning authority is not american and not in keeping with the highest ideals that this country was founded upon. It needs to stay illegal because I do not give a damn what you think you are entitled to. Think of the of the children. Think of the terrorists. And always remember 9/11. God bless and amen. Where is my chopper? - erick103, on 11/15/2009, -3/+2Yes, but then they'd have to legalize heavier drugs as well, not just marijuana. Then you'd get a slew of other problems. Mainly because I'm sure pot is one of the many other drugs Mexicans distribute.
- MrSteamTank, on 11/15/2009, -2/+1If I want to snort cocaine what right do you have to tell me not to? As long as I don't affect anybody else it's my perogative. At least if it's in government hands(or government controlled) it would be much safer than it is right now.
Edit: Glue can be deadly and brain damaging and it gets you high? Why the hell isn't that illegal? Their are millions of substances that can be considered narcotics yet perfectly legal. Are we going to ban all of them? - dikky, on 11/15/2009, -2/+1execute for any violent gang related offenses. Imprison anyone associated with any criminal gang activity for minimum 30 years.
You can't rehabilitate gang members. Just lock the non violents up until they are old men and kill the violent ones -
Show 51 - 65 of 65 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is