There has never been a war on drugs. Just a few skirmish’s
If I were President, I would show you a war on drugs.
I would bomb the Poppy fields and Marijuana fields with Napalm. I would bomb the processing plants, I would shoot the dealers and drug cartel leaders just as I would a traitor in wartime.
I would poison the drugs like alcohol was poisoned during prohibition, and make any dealer I caught eat whatever drugs they had on them. Would they die?? Who cares.?
These people are killing users and their kids. Destroying their lives. I would turn all drug dealers in prison now loose, with a stern warning that next time they get executed.
War is war, fight it like a war or STFU and get out of the way.
Oh there is a war alright... the ATF is funding the wrong side.
No, I see that you want to purposefully POISON drug users. DRUG USERS. I can't say I morally object to the idea of making a heroin DEALER eat their heroin, but the idea of having the government purposefully poison drug users is about as anti-American an ideal as you get. You know why alcohol was poisoned during prohibition, don't you? Bootleggers wanted to increase their already sky-high profits, so they diluted the product. This caused people to die. We see the same thing today, with heroin dealers lacing their product to save money.
You don't seriously want our government acting more like drug dealers, do you? You want to shoot drug dealers. In other words, you think that drug dealing is more serious than rape, because even rapists don't get executed (because our stupid Supreme Court said that was too harsh). I gotta assume that your post is a joke.
You would do that over Pot?
What about ciggs and booze which have actually killed more people?
Replace ‘guns’ with ‘drugs’ in your screed and you’ll get a taste of what the Left would do to you if they could, all they lack is the power that you seem incredibly eager to give to them. May you never experience the end result of what you advocate.
Yet that didn't work, prohibition was eventually repealed because all it did was empower the state and gangsters at the expense of individual rights and safety.
You seek to legislate appetites, instead of transgressions of one person against another. Failure is the only outcome of such a policy, and sadly the failure is clarion for greater powers to the government, more profits to the gangsters, and further curtailing of individual rights.
The 'war' on drugs destroys more lives than the drugs themselves.
Blah blah, you would like hell blabbermouth.
All it takes is one person and a little knowledge to make piles of drugs. Then these drugs can be sold for more than their weight in gold because of prohibition. It's better than having your own cash printing press.
So many drugs can be manufactured from everyday plants, cacti and fungi. For example, swamp reeds grow everywhere that standing water exists. Yet, they contain the most powerful psychedelic drug known to man. A rainy cow field will spawn pounds of illegal mushrooms many times per year (then sold for hundreds per ounce). Now, if that one person happens to have a closet and a few months of privacy, they can make damn near any drug they want.
Unless you can have total control and surveillance of every single person at all times, this war is unwinnable. Oh wait...
That’s why people like you are not fit for high office in this country.
“I would poison the drugs like alcohol was poisoned during prohibition...”
I’m not sure if that is a joke or not. Lets say the state introduces its own supply of poisoned drugs into circulation somehow, or taint large amounts they find. Wouldn’t they just start to use “tasters”, volunteer junkies who don’t care as long as they get fixed up for free? They would also retaliate, assuming the drugs are poisoned by the state, by kidnapping innocent people, addicting them, and making them test the drugs. The really heavy cartels might nab whole groups of people and announce to the media that they are going to keep giving these people poisoned drugs until the program is dropped.
I suppose you could make the sickness from the tainted drugs very gradual, which would get more people. Maybe you make the illness non-lethal and non-permanent, but so bad they are miserable for days, which would discourage 1st timers from becoming 2nd timers perhaps. I think in prohibition they didn’t poison the actual final product, but the industrial alcohol products that bootleggers stole and were using to make illegal hooch. I guess you could try to do this with some of the stuff they put into meth. And you would have to make the effects of the poisoning worse than the prolonged effects of meth itself.
It is interesting to think about, but I don’t think poisoning drugs is a wise thing to do.
Freegards