[Gunnair]

Curtman Curtman:

andyt andyt:

Don't let Gunnair get to you Curt. He's actually for legalization, but spends all his time on this forum slamming you about it. That way he can keep in good with his right wing chums. Notice how he always goes after you, but leaves Zipper alone, even tho Zipper's position is more radical than yours (legalization without taxation). Then there's the moral superiority that his drinking is legal while you and Zip and Lemmy are moral scum for breaking the law. It's really not worth having an argument with somebody who positions himself like that. Seems like continually arguing against other people who hold the same position as you yourself do (eg. legalization) is also a form of trolling.

I know what Gunnair is. He's toned down considerably over the last year or so.

Stop being so sweet!

[Gunnair]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

Yogi Yogi:

Lemmy Lemmy:

Good point. Why is it that prisons can't keep the drugs out? It's prison, for Christ's sake. Surely Corrections Canada could keep drugs out if they really wanted to. How hard could it be?[/quote]


Extremely difficult!

But that is where they have to start. Prison staff are a major source of contraband into the prisons. They are not searched as they enter or leave the institution. Requires a situation quite like working in a diamond mine where workers, upon entering the property first go to a SUPERVISED locker room and change from street clothes into company provided apparel. Absolutely no personal items are permitted on site.

Visits at the institutions would be highly supervised and held completely in the open. Visitors would have their own washrooms which would absolutely unaccessible to inmates or anyone else having contact with inmates at any time.
As it is right now, visitors secret drugs within, and later hide them in the washrooms where they are later retrieved, and turned over to the intended inmate.

Here is one of my favorite methods of bringing drugs into a prison. Eventually I worked my way into an 'outside job' which entailed us to be bussed, under guard to a warehouse in the city. I had 'medical permission' to be in possession of 'tube type' lip balm. My contact on the street would turn the 'lip stick' out completely, remove the spike inside the tube, wrap a few grams of hash in saran wrap, stuff it inside the tube, and then top that with a plug of the 'lip stick'. The tube was then hidden in a predetermined spot within our 'smoking-break area outside. I picked up one of these tubes every day for a long time.

Inside prisons 'drugs = power'. No one fucks with 'a candy-man'!

Is your real name either Ricky or Julian?

Sounds like you've got some good stories to tell over a beer.

Hey, Zip, you're scum for smoking pot!

(Got to make Andy feel a bit better today!)

Shall we get together for an immoral beer some time?

[Curtman]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

Yes, the assumptions you have made or conveyed above. I do not know whether or not they are yours or talking points but I know that they're based on speculation.

I'm not telling you what to think, I'm just presenting what I have come to believe. I've been debating legalization as a way to fight the gangs for a very long time, and it's more of an observational thing than speculation. We have the experience of a lot of people to the South, who have been there done that with these policies to draw on.

Example...

Law Enforcement Against Prohibition Channel on Youtube

$1:

Judge Arthur Burnett, Joanne Naughton and Jack Cole of Law Enforcement Against Prohibition discussing a range of issues in the War on Drugs, with special emphasis on racial profiling and due process

[Thanos]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

Money is one aspect of desire for young men but these young men are in gangs for far more reasons that just looking to make a few bucks.

In the end, your assumptions of the outcome of legalization are just that, assumptions.

Got that right. I'd be nice one day for some of these guys to come out and admit that they chose to become criminals and gangsters just because it's fun. Lots of cash, attracts hot women, drive around in hot cars, pay no taxes at all, and get to play with guns. What's not to like about a totally free lifestyle that allows you to do all that?

[Gunnair]

Thanos Thanos:

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

Money is one aspect of desire for young men but these young men are in gangs for far more reasons that just looking to make a few bucks.

In the end, your assumptions of the outcome of legalization are just that, assumptions.

Got that right. I'd be nice one day for some of these guys to come out and admit that they chose to become criminals and gangsters just because it's fun. Lots of cash, attracts hot women, drive around in hot cars, pay no taxes at all, and get to play with guns. What's not to like about a totally free lifestyle that allows you to do all that?

Uh wrong. It's pot prohibition and McJobs that drove them to their life of crime. Anything else is black and white thinking.

[Freakinoldguy]

Thanos Thanos:

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

Money is one aspect of desire for young men but these young men are in gangs for far more reasons that just looking to make a few bucks.

In the end, your assumptions of the outcome of legalization are just that, assumptions.

Got that right. I'd be nice one day for some of these guys to come out and admit that they chose to become criminals and gangsters just because it's fun. Lots of cash, attracts hot women, drive around in hot cars, pay no taxes at all, and get to play with guns. What's not to like about a totally free lifestyle that allows you to do all that?

From the Denver DA's Office:

$1:

Why Do Kids Join Gangs?


There are different reasons for different kids.
•Some are drawn by parties, girls and drugs.
•Some are looking for respect and power.
•Some find a feeling of caring and attention in a gang. It becomes almost a family to them.
•Some want to make money—to help out at home or to have nice clothes, etc. ...
•Some join for self-protection because they are picked on by other gang members.
•Some grow up in a neighborhood where it is almost a way of life.
•Most have some real or imagined problem at home that makes them prefer the streets.
Some gang members are addicted to drugs. The problems at home can become worse because parents don't know how to cope with their addiction.

Doesn't sound like they all join gangs because of the lure of drugs and money. So to assume they'd all quit gangs or stop the violence if drugs were made legal is an unfounded assumption.

http://www.denverda.org/Prosecution_Uni ... _Gangs.htm

[Gunnair]

Admiral, I think we've had just about enough of your little bits of thoughtful logic for the day.

As your Lord High Muckamuck, I suggest you focus your attention on the heads of the Queen of Saanich. It's rather ripe in there tonight!

[Curtman]

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

From the Denver DA's Office:

$1:

Why Do Kids Join Gangs?


There are different reasons for different kids.
•Some are drawn by parties, girls and drugs.
•Some are looking for respect and power.
•Some find a feeling of caring and attention in a gang. It becomes almost a family to them.
•Some want to make money—to help out at home or to have nice clothes, etc. ...
•Some join for self-protection because they are picked on by other gang members.
•Some grow up in a neighborhood where it is almost a way of life.
•Most have some real or imagined problem at home that makes them prefer the streets.
Some gang members are addicted to drugs. The problems at home can become worse because parents don't know how to cope with their addiction.

Doesn't sound like they all join gangs because of the lure of drugs and money. So to assume they'd all quit gangs or stop the violence if drugs were made legal is an unfounded assumption.

http://www.denverda.org/Prosecution_Uni ... _Gangs.htm

That's a good list. Which of the 8 bullet items have to do with money, drugs, and power? 7 by my count. As far as why a kid would join a gang for a sense of family, why would a kid like that choose a gang over say a hockey team if the gangs didn't have wads of cash to lure him in?

[Freakinoldguy]

Curtman Curtman:

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

From the Denver DA's Office:

$1:

Why Do Kids Join Gangs?


There are different reasons for different kids.
•Some are drawn by parties, girls and drugs.
•Some are looking for respect and power.
•Some find a feeling of caring and attention in a gang. It becomes almost a family to them.
•Some want to make money—to help out at home or to have nice clothes, etc. ...
•Some join for self-protection because they are picked on by other gang members.
•Some grow up in a neighborhood where it is almost a way of life.
•Most have some real or imagined problem at home that makes them prefer the streets.
Some gang members are addicted to drugs. The problems at home can become worse because parents don't know how to cope with their addiction.

Doesn't sound like they all join gangs because of the lure of drugs and money. So to assume they'd all quit gangs or stop the violence if drugs were made legal is an unfounded assumption.

http://www.denverda.org/Prosecution_Uni ... _Gangs.htm

That's a good list. Which of the 8 bullet items have to do with money, drugs, and power? 7 by my count. As far as why a kid would join a gang for a sense of family, why would a kid like that choose a gang over say a hockey team if the gangs didn't have wads of cash to lure him in?

You have got to be shitting me?

You see the drug trade in everything. Gangs offer alot more than just the ability to sell drugs, but your myopic view of the problem and overwhelming desire to attach every societal ill to the prohibition of drugs makes your post more than somewhat biased.

Actually if this was 1918 we could insert alcohol as the cause of all these problems.............oh wait the WCTL and the ASL people already did that when then forced the prohibition of alcohol onto the American people, so it's apparent the facts can be twisted to suit a groups specific agenda, just like your saying that the prohibition of drugs is the cause of all these problems.

I'll reiterate, I'm not anti legalization I'm ambivalent about it. I just think that people assuming the gang problems and violence will magically dissapear if drugs are legalized is more than a little simplistic and will lead to a big letdown for those proponents of this theory who actually believe their own press.

So keep believing what you want, despite the obvious other reasons for gang violence and membership you're never going to change your opinion, which is fine since we're likely not going to find out which theory is the correct one any time soon.

[Freakinoldguy]

Gunnair Gunnair:

Admiral, I think we've had just about enough of your little bits of thoughtful logic for the day.

As your Lord High Muckamuck, I suggest you focus your attention on the heads of the Queen of Saanich. It's rather ripe in there tonight!

IMO alot of the theories I see being spouted here and by certain former elected officials actually belong in that ripe place you have instructed me to focus my attention on.

So given the diverse views on this subject maybe logic has no place in an argument.

[Curtman]

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

You see the drug trade in everything. Gangs offer alot more than just the ability to sell drugs, but your myopic view of the problem and overwhelming desire to attach every societal ill to the prohibition of drugs makes your post more than somewhat biased.

Actually if this was 1918 we could insert alcohol as the cause of all these problems.............oh wait the WCTL and the ASL people already did that when then forced the prohibition of alcohol onto the American people, so it's apparent the facts can be twisted to suit a groups specific agenda, just like your saying that the prohibition of drugs is the cause of all these problems.

I'll reiterate, I'm not anti legalization I'm ambivalent about it. I just think that people assuming the gang problems and violence will magically dissapear if drugs are legalized is more than a little simplistic and will lead to a big letdown for those proponents of this theory who actually believe their own press.

So keep believing what you want, despite the obvious other reasons for gang violence and membership you're never going to change your opinion, which is fine since we're likely not going to find out which theory is the correct one any time soon.

Every time we discuss this, you claim that someone is saying all crime will disappear with legalization. Nobody on this forum has ever made that claim, as far as I know. We're talking about the huge amount of cash that is available to gangs as a result of prohibition, particularly marijuana. It's their largest source of revenue, and it's completely unnecessary to give them a monopoly on drugs. It's a better idea to have a regulated market that makes treatment available to addicts.

[OnTheIce]

Curtman Curtman:

Every time we discuss this, you claim that someone is saying all crime will disappear with legalization. Nobody on this forum has ever made that claim, as far as I know. We're talking about the huge amount of cash that is available to gangs as a result of prohibition, particularly marijuana. It's their largest source of revenue, and it's completely unnecessary to give them a monopoly on drugs. It's a better idea to have a regulated market that makes treatment available to addicts.

And every time we discuss this, you claim that this will be a huge win for preventing gang crime. You lay it out like it's the silver bullet against organized crime.

You've mentioned you have experience either directly or indirectly with gangs so you know full well that if you regulate a product they'll either sell the product for less than what's publicly available or move over to other drugs and other revenue streams. IMO, legalizing marijuana won't stop gangs from selling it, it'll just reduce the price they're selling it at and I highly doubt will see a mass-exodus of gang members just throwing in the towel.

[Curtman]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

you know full well that if you regulate a product they'll either sell the product for less than what's publicly available or move over to other drugs and other revenue streams.

I'm saying both of those things would be a success. To drive the price down, and to force them into less lucrative, more visible markets.

Prohibition helps them, and hurts us. It's fertilizer for growing organized crime, and we could be funding treatment and public services instead of prisons. The Netherlands, Portugal, and Switzerland are the only 3 examples of progressive drug laws we have to look at, and all of them are doing a better job of reducing crime and addiction than we are.

[Gunnair]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

Curtman Curtman:

Every time we discuss this, you claim that someone is saying all crime will disappear with legalization. Nobody on this forum has ever made that claim, as far as I know. We're talking about the huge amount of cash that is available to gangs as a result of prohibition, particularly marijuana. It's their largest source of revenue, and it's completely unnecessary to give them a monopoly on drugs. It's a better idea to have a regulated market that makes treatment available to addicts.

And every time we discuss this, you claim that this will be a huge win for preventing gang crime. You lay it out like it's the silver bullet against organized crime.

You've mentioned you have experience either directly or indirectly with gangs so you know full well that if you regulate a product they'll either sell the product for less than what's publicly available or move over to other drugs and other revenue streams. IMO, legalizing marijuana won't stop gangs from selling it, it'll just reduce the price they're selling it at and I highly doubt will see a mass-exodus of gang members just throwing in the towel.

Agreed. This is no panacea for preventing gang activity.

Irrespective of the logic of legalization, Curt, I don't think it'll be that big a change.

So, here's an exercise Curt. Let's say gangs sell pot at 10 dollars a gram. Now let's legalize it, tax, it, and sell it and 20 dollars a gram.

Now, making it legal will likely attract a large number of pot heads to buy it from the government, but how many? 20 dollars a gram cuts into the extra cash for Doritos now.

So, lets say the criminal elements drop the price to 7 dollars a gram to undercut government prices, and unlike booze or cigarettes, pot, as we see, is relatively easy to produce in bulk.

Do you believe pot heads will stay away from gangs selling at 7 dollars a gram vice the government price of 20 dollars a gram?

Before you knee jerk answer that, check at the percentage of illegal cigarettes being sold these days.

Not rocket science, Curt, not at all. This is win win for pot heads, but not for the opportunity to vastly reduce gang activity.

[martin14]

Gunnair Gunnair:

Do you believe pot heads will stay away from gangs selling at 7 dollars a gram vice the government price of 20 dollars a gram?

Before you knee jerk answer that, check at the percentage of illegal cigarettes being sold these days.

Not rocket science, Curt, not at all. This is win win for pot heads, but not for the opportunity to vastly reduce gang activity.

And thus, the anti gang argument goes "up in smoke"