General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhat purpose is served in criminalizing drug use?
I am not talking about serious dealing or importing. I am talking about using and maybe selling small amounts to keep up with the cost of using.
I see no purpose at all to charging drug users and drug addicts as felons, or even misdemeanors, for that matter.
I am not condoning heroin use or any of the new addictives, but I am perfectly good with excluding it from the criminal system and putting where it belongs, in the medical system.
What good does it do for a person to be given a felony conviction and then told to get their shit together and live a good live. How do you get your shit together when you can't get a job other than restaurant server?
The threat, and ultimately the fact, of criminal penalties have shown themselves to have virtually zero downward mitigative effect on drug use. In fact, drug use is up and up by big numbers. It is epidemic in big cities, suburban neighborhoods, and rural towns. No one is immune, and no place, no law, no lecture, no leader, no penalty has been able to slow it down.
Its beyond time to decriminalize all recreational drugs, bite the bullet and treat addicts, and stop giving life sentences of poverty and societal shunning to people who get hooked.
And before anyone goes there . . . fuck Rand Paul.
RKP5637
(67,112 posts)more problems than it solves. ... and throwing in moralizing.
Avalux
(35,015 posts)Those in power don't give a shit if people kill themselves with drugs. Keeping them illegal is a way to control the populace. Just like the cruel idea to drug test those who need public assistance.
Control.
awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts)for-profit prisons
socialist_n_TN
(11,481 posts)there's always an economic reason. Some of the illegal drugs, most notably marijuana, is WAY too easy to acquire without having a go-between in the capitalist sector to make profit off of it. Also, hemp production would create a huge pressure on profits in several established industries. Ergo, something cheap and easy with a low rate of profit MUST BE CONTROLLED AND ELIMINATED IF POSSIBLE. Otherwise it threatens the capitalist system.
niyad
(113,552 posts)number of people.
mick063
(2,424 posts)From pot prohibition, profitable ventures have arose.
How many urine samples are tested daily? I'm sure the association of Piss Testers will lobby hard to keep things the way they are.
Privatized prisons? Can't keep them full on the taxpayers dime unless we incarcerate those guilty of victimless crime.
Bonus funds for your local police department? They confiscate vast amounts of property as wells as bundles of cash. A means for pot prohibition to "self fund." All by legislative design.
Where does the money go? To evil gangsters that perpetuate their operations with cold blooded ruthlessness. Do they want it legal? Of course not.
There are various profiteers that will vigorously fight pot legalization and I'm sure I have not scratched the surface of mentioning those that have a vested interest.
Response to Stinky The Clown (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
OriginalGeek
(12,132 posts)without drug user money?
Won't someone pleeeeeeease think of the corporate prison owners?
retired rooster
(114 posts)...I think they should be pistol whipped and stripped of the fortunes they have accumulated. Private prison corporations should dissolved and prisoners returned to state custody.
elleng
(131,102 posts)Newest Reality
(12,712 posts)Emperor Wears No Clothes, for starters.
From industry to racism, making drugs illicit has been useful across-the-board.
There are and have been a list of jackpots for it. Currently, there is so much money invested in enforcement, (along with profitable, private prisons) that the momentum carries on and we pay for it.
I read the book years ago, and knowing is very frustrating since we have not made enough strides out of this manipulation. At least more people are not in the "corruption of youth", Reefer Madness propaganda mode these days.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Emperor_Wears_No_Clothes
Newest Reality
(12,712 posts)retired rooster
(114 posts)...I highly recommend it as required reading.
LadyHawkAZ
(6,199 posts)for $aving $ociety from thi$ $courge. Any idea$?
mokawanis
(4,452 posts)It's just that most of them are too cowardly to say so.
rrneck
(17,671 posts)riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)Kurska
(5,739 posts)Oh and to give cops something to bust minorities over.
randome
(34,845 posts)Why motorcycle helmets? Why seat belt laws? Why have traffic signals?
All punitive laws are designed to instill a fear of consequences in everybody across the board. You can't have police officers making decisions about whether someone is selling or just toking. That leads too easily to bribery. That's why such decisions are up to a judge or jury to decide.
HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)many states DON'T require motorcycle helmets, because a dead motorcyclist is cheaper than one which is seriously injured.
Of course the justification is that without those laws people would have more expensive insurance policies.
randome
(34,845 posts)HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)It's all "business decisions" though, no hard feelings in that.
Curmudgeoness
(18,219 posts)I was with you up to that. I cannot imagine driving (or walking) to the store if it was just a free-for-all on the roads. Some rules really are necessary.
Dragonfli
(10,622 posts)either relatively harmless recreation choices, or in the case of harmful addictive drugs an illness (addiction is a disease and those that suffer from it are victims).
Why criminalize a sickness or a harmless choice, this is nothing at all like the examples you give and instilling fear with punitive laws for a choice or a disease is frankly a little sick if not just stupid.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)How can the officer decide if they are just sipping or are really manufacturers of illegal and potentially poison 'moonshine'? Shouldn't a judge decide that? To avoid bribery?
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)and to create the appearance of "otherness" in the persons who patronized it. Two, to exert and foster acceptance of a centralized authority that didn't exist prior to the anti-drug and alcohol movement.
You have to consider the times and attitudes that prevailed in those times. There were, and still are, many other reasons for creating this authority over people's lives, but these are the two primaries.
Cleita
(75,480 posts)I've seen some documentaries about it on Free Speech TV. It seems to create a revolving door of repeat offenders that keep the prisons full.
randome
(34,845 posts)Cleita
(75,480 posts)business kicked in and we seem to be going back to criminalizing again.
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)In the beginning there were several Big Players in the textile industry. Hearst was heavily invested in timber and wood pulp, there was a small but connected chemical company called DuPont that was sniffing for government contracts for its new product called nylon, the pharmaceuticals were trying to find a way around the patent laws regarding naturally occurring compounds, Washington DC, as usual, was mired in a shitstorm of scandal and looking for something to distract the press from the standard vote-selling, business as usual. The 18th was a new phenomenon, as well as a spectacular failure, and there were more than a few egos at stake in its general acceptance.
Add in the oil and petrochemical industries, plus the easily exploitable racism that virtually defined America at that time, and a pointless drug war becomes a politician's wet dream.
LegalScholar
(84 posts)Curmudgeoness
(18,219 posts)more years than I will discuss here. I cannot imagine why our society has not evolved beyond criminalization of people who use drugs.
I go further, and have come to the conclusion that we should just legalize all drugs in the same way that alcohol is legal, take the profit out of it for the gang bangers and drug lords, and tax it.
Bennyboy
(10,440 posts)bluedigger
(17,087 posts)But really, you had me at "Fuck Rand Paul".
spanone
(135,873 posts)Mr.Bill
(24,319 posts)And more taxes collected from liquor sales.
KamaAina
(78,249 posts)I do truly wish I were joking, or referencing The Onion. But alas, no.
ReRe
(10,597 posts)... and the only thing I can think of is they want to take your joy away from you. A harmless thing that don't hurt nobody. A small little thing at the end of a long day or week that will bring you peace and take you away from this fucking cruel GD world they have fucked up on everyone. They want everyone to be miserable until the day they die. That's all I can figure, Stinky...
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)Last edited Sun Apr 14, 2013, 01:35 AM - Edit history (2)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022665091http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/11/cca-prison-industry_n_3061115.html
Any changes with respect to drugs and controlled substances or illegal immigration could affect the number of persons arrested, convicted, and sentenced, thereby potentially reducing demand for correctional facilities to house them.
CCA 2009 and 2010 Annual Reports
We believe the issue of border enforcement will be a priority over the next several years, supported by both political parties as evidenced by increased funding on a year-over-year basis to the two agencies primarily responsible for dealing with border enforcement, ICE and the U.S. Marshals Service. We further believe that the private sector will play a major role in assisting these agencies deal with this mandate.
CCA 2005 Annual Report
We believe we have been successful in increasing the number of residents in our care and continue to pursue a number of initiatives intended to further increase our occupancy and revenue.
CCA 2010 Annual Report
jsr
(7,712 posts)ohheckyeah
(9,314 posts)You are not the author of this post.
Could you give me a link to that info? Interesting.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)I accidentally linked to the edit page.
I fixed the link now, and also added the direct link to the HuffPost article.
Thanks for the heads up.
ohheckyeah
(9,314 posts)I stumbled on it and read it and I'm sickened. I would love for some courageous reported to ask the President why it is we have such a high incarceration rate......either the American people are worse than people in other countries or our system is to blame. I'd love to hear what he would say.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)I want the Constitutional Scholar to try to explain this fucking surveillance state and Kill Lists and indefinite detention. And the brutal attacks on Occupy. And the drone murders. And pushing to cut Social Security when it adds not a cent to the deficit and it's opposed by Americans across party lines.
They are well-protected from accountability.
Did you see the post about the reporting on Obama's meeting this week with the corporate oligarchs? I had to laugh, or I would cry. Apparently sending an email to the President and then printing the reply that gets sent back passes for covering the story now.
ohheckyeah
(9,314 posts)and was so discouraged and dejected, quit reading.
My husband really only votes because I ask him to, but his basic philosophy is all politicians are self-serving and basically don't give a shit about us and nothing he will ever say or do will change that. I'm leaning more toward that attitude every day.
GiveMeFreedom
(976 posts)The threat, and ultimately the fact, of criminal penalties have shown themselves to have virtually zero downward mitigative effect on drug use. In fact, drug use is up and up by big numbers. It is epidemic in big cities, suburban neighborhoods, and rural towns. No one is immune, and no place, no law, no lecture, no leader, no penalty has been able to slow it down.
I do not quite know what causes this to happen, but as poor as I am getting, I can take a wild ass guess, money? I bet money has something to do with it? Huh? Am I right? Sarcasm at its worst.
Absolutely correct and harder to change, than I have time left to live. Keep up the "righteous fight" Stinky The Clown. Peace.
Initech
(100,102 posts)And yes fuck Ayn Rand Paul.
green for victory
(591 posts)usually the natural substances.
That protects patentholders and pharma, who sell drugs by the containerload to other countries, sometimes after bribing the officials of those countries. Some really hardcore "drugs" are advertised on tv and prescribed to children. Soldiers are routinely pumped full of really dangerous "drugs"all the time (used to be prohibited).
Some people wonder why this is, even after hearing (or not) that there is a revolving door between the FDA and Washington, District of Criminals.
It isn't all that complicated, really. You can't patent a plant (yet- see MONSANTO, who has operatives deeply ensconced in the bowels of government.)
Nothing will change until the people demand it. No "leader" is going to ride out of the sky on a white horse and save the people.
And for those that say the Drug War was and is a failure, ask yourself how you could manage to turn a nations citizens on themselves, get them to give up their right to self treatment, shred the Bill of Rights, and enrich the biggest drug makers on the planet all at the same time, while confiscating billions of dollars to pay for it all.
The "Drug War" has been one of the most successful big government programs ever unleashed on a population.
Paul E Ester
(952 posts)Nevernose
(13,081 posts)It's private prisons, plus:
Prison guards
Probation officers, juvenile and adult, local state & federal
Parole officers, juvenile and adult, local state & federal
Judges, local state and federal
Court employees, local state and federal
Police officers
DEA and the FBI
Army, marines, and Coast Guard
Prosecutors
Defense attorneys
The defense contractors making shit for local police departments
(On edit: look at the picture above and add banks to the list)
When you add it up, here might actually be more money on the side of the anti-drug forces than all the cartels together.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)1. As others have noticed, suppression, surveillance, repression of minorities & the poor (two formations likely to cause trouble, plus treating them like shit & criminalizing them provides 'the threat of a bad example' to middle class actors who might attempt to make common cause with them for economic justice a la MLK).
2. Military build-up, networked militarized towns, cities, regions.
3. Keynesian pump-priming directed at favored regions and actors.
4. An excuse to conduct militarized operations in other countries and a budget to do it with.
5. A pretense of 'fighting' the drug epidemic destroying communities & families (though various government & corporate actors have been proven to be dope pushers themselves).
6. As others have noted, rentier $$ to private prisons....
7. An excuse for general surveillance, surveillance both of drug activity qua drug activity and of the violence it brings with it.
8. Illegal drugs = criminality = violence, bad neighborhoods, fear = middle-class support for repression and police.
Apophis
(1,407 posts)Bill Maher was talking about this very subject on Friday's show. He was saying some high ranking prison official (in Ohio?) was making money on every person in his prison.
It's disgusting.