Anyone else about sick to fucking death of the term "social distancing"?

If the war on drugs was rescinded 90% of cops would have nothing to do. Then there's the FBI, ATF and about a thousand useless social programs. The CIA, Taliban and numerous Mexican drug cartels would also lose a major source of funding. And the prison industry would be decimated... Congress will never go for it..
If it weren't so politicized, I suspect most members would enthusiastically support defunding the police (which is what ending the war on drugs would be). Take away the money spent on the war on drugs and police funding would be decimated. This is a prime opportunity for drug law reformers to seize.
 
Defund the police, how ironic as many pushing this agenda are anti-gun lobbyists yet the consequence will be skyrocketing legitimate gun sales!

JIM

The other consequence would be private police working for multiple competing organizations that could not operate without liability insurance. No one would still have a job as a cop with 18 complaints and multiple disciplinary actions against him. No insurance company would cover him.
 
Yes, it's Fox news, and Yes, Tucker Carlson is a fake libertarian. But I think he's found his calling here.

 
Defund the police, how ironic as many pushing this agenda are anti-gun lobbyists yet the consequence will be skyrocketing legitimate gun sales!

JIM
So then, logically, pro-gun lobbyists should be pushing this agenda too since it will cause legitimate gun sales to skyrocket?

That's 100% agreement between anti-gun and pro-gun. I don't believe it.
 
So then, logically, pro-gun lobbyists should be pushing this agenda too since it will cause legitimate gun sales to skyrocket?

That's 100% agreement between anti-gun and pro-gun. I don't believe it.

You don't believe the threat or reality of disbanding traditional police forces would result in higher gun sales? Just the demonstrations with associated violence and looting, which proves police are unable or unwilling to protect us, has driven gun sales to record levels. Maybe looking at things logically involves dismissing the claimed goals of the gun and anti-gun lobbies.
 
If it weren't so politicized, I suspect most members would enthusiastically support defunding the police (which is what ending the war on drugs would be). Take away the money spent on the war on drugs and police funding would be decimated. This is a prime opportunity for drug law reformers to seize.

Not withstanding the separate issue of interdiction and the number of recovering heroin addicts on this forum, do you really believe anyone benefits from the use of ilicit drugs?

So then, logically, pro-gun lobbyists should be pushing this agenda?
.

IDK you'll have to ask them.
 
You don't believe the threat or reality of disbanding traditional police forces would result in higher gun sales?
Of course, it will. What I can't believe is that both pro-gun and anti-gun lobbies may be supporting an agenda, albeit for different reasons, that could lead to this outcome, at a time of extreme divisiveness in politics. At the very least, the pro-gun lobby would benefit even if they don't openly come out in favor of it.
 
Not withstanding the separate issue of interdiction and the number of recovering heroin addicts on this forum, do you really believe anyone benefits from the use of ilicit drugs?
It's irrelevant to me. It's a question of a criminalization vs. medicalization approach to the problem.
 
It's irrelevant to me. It's a question of a criminalization vs. medicalization approach to the problem.

That's a cop out Millard as it allows you to ignore the deaths, disabilities and destroyed families that are the result of illicit drug use, and decriminalization or "medicalization" won't change that ask any addict.

How prophetic, as those who want to "legalize" all drugs of abuse are more than willing to overlook the life of the ABUSER.
 
Last edited:
That's a cop out Millard as it allows you to ignore the deaths, disabilities and destroyed families that are the result of illicit drug use, and decriminalization or "medicalization" won't change that ask any addict.
It's not a cop out. For the sake of argumennt let's accept the premise that illegal drugs are completely and categorically evil. The criminalization of drug abuse has been a disastrous failure.

To be explicit, I think the war on drugs, criminalization as a solution to drug abuse, has done more damage, caused more deaths, and destroyed more families than an alternate medicalization approach would have.

The entire point of medicalization is harm reduction for the drug abuser. Seems like a much more desirable approach than the punitive approach of dragging addicts through the criminal justice system, taking away their freedom, educational, occupational opportunities through criminal records and incarceration.
 
Far more people than the abusers are harmed by the war on drugs. Far more than even their families. Whole communities have become hostage to the armed individuals involved in distribution. At least the abusers are given a choice.
 
Same simplified solution I've heard over and over again that fails to address the scourge of drug abuse, for the abuser, their families and the community where they live.

And while I agree drug interdiction is and has been a huge waste of money nothing will change until those electing to use drugs, especially our youth, find a meaningful purpose in life.

And I KNOW quite well how this scourge has negatively impacted the lives of all the above bc I see the ramifications EVERYDAY, and have yet to locate a single abuser who has benefited.

ALL LIFE IS PRECIOUS!
 
Same simplified solution I've heard over and over again that fails to address the scourge of drug abuse, for the abuser, their families and the community where they live.
Do you think the current war on drugs better addresses "the scourge of drug abuse, for the abuser, their families and the community where they live" than a harm reduction approach?

Do you disagree with medicalization of drug abuse as a superior approach to criminalization for the goal of encouraging "those electing to use drugs, especially our youth, find a meaningful purpose in life"?

If not, what comprehensive approach would accomplish this goal? If criminalizing them doesn't work? If harm reduction doesn't work? What works?
 
Harm reduction ?

Medicalization ?

Define the terms and their goals in reproducible terms.
 
Same simplified solution I've heard over and over again that fails to address the scourge of drug abuse, for the abuser, their families and the community where they live.

And while I agree drug interdiction is and has been a huge waste of money nothing will change until those electing to use drugs, especially our youth, find a meaningful purpose in life.

And I KNOW quite well how this scourge has negatively impacted the lives of all the above bc I see the ramifications EVERYDAY, and have yet to locate a single abuser who has benefited.

ALL LIFE IS PRECIOUS!

I mean alcohol abuse is probably the worst and the use of alcohol has been normalized and accepted everywhere. Making alcohol illegal should be a given to curb the “scourge”, yet that will never happen. How is any other drug different in that regard?
 
I mean alcohol abuse is probably the worst and the use of alcohol has been normalized and accepted everywhere. Making alcohol illegal should be a given to curb the “scourge”, yet that will never happen. How is any other drug different in that regard?

Um, it did happen. Written right into the US Constitution. I'm sure you knew that, but I couldn't help myself. I had to comment.
 
Back
Top