US Politics Mega-thread - Page 1131

On June 22 2014 09:09 Nyxisto wrote:
can't someone just run in Texas and campaign for getting rid of these draconian punishments and ridiculous laws? Or is the majority of people in Texas actually supporting this nonsense?

1900 - 20s

Mexican immigrants introduce recreational use of marijuana leaf

After the Mexican Revolution of 1910, Mexican immigrants flooded into the U.S., introducing to American culture the recreational use of marijuana. The drug became associated with the immigrants, and the fear and prejudice about the Spanish-speaking newcomers became associated with marijuana. Anti-drug campaigners warned against the encroaching "Marijuana Menace," and terrible crimes were attributed to marijuana and the Mexicans who used it.


1930s

Fear of marijuana

During the Great Depression, massive unemployment increased public resentment and fear of Mexican immigrants, escalating public and governmental concern about the problem of marijuana. This instigated a flurry of research which linked the use of marijuana with violence, crime and other socially deviant behaviors, primarily committed by "racially inferior" or underclass communities. By 1931, 29 states had outlawed marijuana.

On June 22 2014 09:09 Nyxisto wrote:
can't someone just run in Texas and campaign for getting rid of these draconian punishments and ridiculous laws? Or is the majority of people in Texas actually supporting this nonsense?

On June 22 2014 09:59 JonnyBNoHo wrote:

Many people sill remember the high crime era of just a couple decades ago. It'll take time to convince them that relaxing various laws is a good idea.

Dopaminergic agents- Used treat Parkinson's
Benzodiazepines- Valium/Xanax
Opioids- (Pharmaceutical Heroin)
Anticonvulsants- Used to treat seizures
Alpha2 -adrenergic agonists

fainting, mental/mood changes (e.g., confusion, depression, hallucinations, memory problems), increased difficulty moving/walking, muscle cramps/spasm, restlessness, decreased sexual ability, increased shakiness (tremor)/stiffness. falling asleep suddenly during their usual daily activities (e.g., talking on the phone, driving). In some cases, sleep occurred without any feelings of drowsiness beforehand. This sleep effect may occur any time during treatment with pramipexole, including up to 1 year after starting the medication.

thoughts of suicide or hurting yourself, unusual risk-taking behavior, decreased inhibitions, no fear of danger; uncontrolled muscle movements, tremor, seizure (convulsions) blurred vision

Prescription opioid painkillers are responsible for more fatal overdoses in the U.S. than heroin and cocaine combined, according to the Center for Disease Control (CDC).

Merck: With a long list of deaths to its credit, and more than $5.5 billion in judgments and fines levied against it, it was five years before Merck made its $30-billion recall of the painkiller Vioxx that I warned my readers that it might be a real killer for some people. After the drug was withdrawn, and 60,000 had already died, Merck picked up the pieces painlessly by getting a new drug fast-tracked and on the market.

That drug is Gardasil, a vaccine that so far has been linked to thousands of adverse events and at least 49 unexplained deaths. It's a situation that the FDA and CDC have been denying repeatedly, keeping their heads buried in the sand even as the adverse reports mount.

Baxter: Dozens of recalls of products that caused deaths and injuries, at least 11 different guilty pleas to fraud and illegal sales activity, more than 200 lawsuits – many of them stemming from selling AIDS-tainted blood to hemophiliacs – and more than $1.3 billion in criminal fines and civil penalties.

Pfizer: In the largest health care fraud settlement in history, Pfizer was ordered to pay $2.3 billion to resolve criminal and civil allegations that the company illegally promoted uses of four of its drugs, including the painkiller Bextra, the antipsychotic Geodon, the antibiotic Zyvox, and the anti-epileptic Lyrica.

The Obama administration, moving Friday to stem a flood of Central American children and families that has overwhelmed the U.S. immigration system, dispatched Vice President Joe Biden to Guatemala to warn about the perils of the journey and announcing that it will start to detain families at the border instead of releasing them on their own recognizance.

After weeks of insistence that criminal violence was responsible for the surge of Central American migrants, the U.S. has begun a regional public-relations campaign to dispel the widespread belief in Central America that children and families will be allowed to stay in the U.S. if they are caught by the Border Patrol.

That belief has been fueled both by migrant smugglers seeking more clients and by calls home from children and families who have been released by the tens of thousands in recent years — with notices to appear in immigration court — because there are no facilities to hold them.

The administration said Friday that it was opening detention centers to house families and that it would also boost law enforcement’s capacity to detain individuals who bring children with them into the U.S. The goal would be to detain a larger percentage of those migrants and accelerate their cases in immigration courts so that they can be deported more rapidly, officials told The New York Times.

Rights groups like the American Civil Liberties Union were skeptical about the proposed changes, which the Times reported would include more detention centers and extensive use of ankle bracelets to monitor the whereabouts of migrants after they are released.

On June 22 2014 12:04 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
The Obama administration, moving Friday to stem a flood of Central American children and families that has overwhelmed the U.S. immigration system, dispatched Vice President Joe Biden to Guatemala to warn about the perils of the journey and announcing that it will start to detain families at the border instead of releasing them on their own recognizance.

After weeks of insistence that criminal violence was responsible for the surge of Central American migrants, the U.S. has begun a regional public-relations campaign to dispel the widespread belief in Central America that children and families will be allowed to stay in the U.S. if they are caught by the Border Patrol.

That belief has been fueled both by migrant smugglers seeking more clients and by calls home from children and families who have been released by the tens of thousands in recent years — with notices to appear in immigration court — because there are no facilities to hold them.

The administration said Friday that it was opening detention centers to house families and that it would also boost law enforcement’s capacity to detain individuals who bring children with them into the U.S. The goal would be to detain a larger percentage of those migrants and accelerate their cases in immigration courts so that they can be deported more rapidly, officials told The New York Times.

Rights groups like the American Civil Liberties Union were skeptical about the proposed changes, which the Times reported would include more detention centers and extensive use of ankle bracelets to monitor the whereabouts of migrants after they are released.

"Almost all agree that a child who crossed the border illegally with their parents, or in search of a father or a better life, was not making an adult choice to break our laws, and should be treated differently than adult violators of the law,"

Jeh Johnson, Homeland Security Secretary under Obama, commenting on Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, and quoted (translated) in Central American newspapers

On June 22 2014 20:09 oneofthem wrote:
well i am of the position that borders are just undefensible if you are to take ethics at all seriously. so don't, and just do it as a kind of pragmatic land grab/demographics control. bring whomever and whatever is of use and discard the rest. welcome the elites and rich and keep out the criminal scum and unwanted trash who will lower property values.

On June 23 2014 00:12 Yoav wrote:
We should have Ellis Island style checkpoints at international airports and at the border. We should mandate a national ID card system to compensate for the instability such checkpoints would cause; every citizen's (especially the new ones) fingerprints and retinal scans would be taken. And we should have predator drones patrolling the borders with orders to shoot anything that moves, because if immigration was easy, it actually would be true that only criminals crossed illegally.

I obviously overstate every point, but you get the idea. America did very well for a long time (including during periods of serious terrorism, which is the only real objection) with a policy of welcoming the tired, poor, huddled masses. We still have tremendous space and natural resources, and an economy capable of absorbing immigration due to entrepreneurialism. All the "secure the borders" talk would be good and sensible if there was a legit route in, instead of this quotaed-up nonsense we have. I have a lot of friends (skilled, college grads) who have to try all sorts of shenanigans to stay here. I know we're still nicer than most countries in the world, but damnit, this is our thing. Immigration IS America the way that engineering is Germany or luxury goods and tourism are France or wit is England. The US making immigration harder is like David Cameron outlawing clever retorts.

On June 23 2014 03:42 Simberto wrote:
Why is getting a work permit that hard? Don't they WANT you to do something useful and work legally? That sounds like something the government would want people to do. That is pretty much all people who don't want immigration complain about here: "The lazy foreigners just come to not do anything useful and abuse our social system!".

I must honestly say i am kind of happy i don't have any plans of emigrating somewhere. The whole thing sounds like a bureaucratic nightmare. I guess getting into the EU isn't easy either.

On June 23 2014 03:42 Simberto wrote:
Why is getting a work permit that hard? Don't they WANT you to do something useful and work legally? That sounds like something the government would want people to do. That is pretty much all people who don't want immigration complain about here: "The lazy foreigners just come to not do anything useful and abuse our social system!".

I must honestly say i am kind of happy i don't have any plans of emigrating somewhere. The whole thing sounds like a bureaucratic nightmare. I guess getting into the EU isn't easy either.

On June 23 2014 03:44 KwarK wrote:

Nope. I should add that I also need a sponsor to guarantee that I won't be a burden to the government and be legally responsible for any costs I may accrue while here and that that sponsor pretty much can't be on minimum wage or have any dependents already.

The worry here is that they'll take your job for less.

"Once these minors come to the U.S., they are eligible for a wide array of benefits and it will be years before their case is ever heard in court," said GOP Rep. Bob Goodlatte of Virginia, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee.

One such measure, promoted by Republican Sen. Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire, would offset costs by "rein[ing] in fraud among illegal immigrants taking advantage of child tax credits."