Mexico's Drug War - Page 38

On May 17 2012 10:19 CrimsonLotus wrote:


Change "do not realize" with "couldn't care less".

It's just human nature, the vast majority of people don't care about anything or anyone that doesn't affect their innmediate lives. Who cares about the lives of tens of thousands of innocents?, getting high is far, far more important to most users.

On May 17 2012 18:02 Wombat_NI wrote:

It is something I personally care about, but apportioning moral blame onto drug users in the West is just a smokescreen with which the idiocy of official drug policy hides behind. Yeah sure it's not going to change everything overnight, but would it really be worse than what we've seen with the 'War on Drugs' in terms of the human cost?

At the very least legalisation is also a source of tax revenue, in addition to potentially being a productive economic sector. There aren't particularly good arguments against it that don't revolve around the moral qualms of drug use, at least that I have thus far heard in my own experience.

On May 17 2012 22:38 Goozen wrote:


But this is all in theory and quite irrelevant to the status quo, not to mention i highly doubt people want meth and cocaine legalized also. But the moral blame here is fine, its just like legalizing prostitution. If you go to a prostitute now you may go to one where she keep the money or to one thats abused and gets none of it. some people will check but most wont.
If you buy drugs you are breaking the law and although this may be a "victemless" crime you may also be funding these groups.
As a responsible consumer you shouldnt buy them regardless of the law. the same way when nike was accused of child labor they were boycotted by the consumer and if most of these pro legalize people want to be taken seriously they should do the same instead of the current attitude that is "because its illegal the fault that i fund these groups is actually the governments fault".
People should stop hiding their heads in the ground, if you dont know where your drugs come from then its your fault.

But this is all in theory and quite irrelevant to the status quo, not to mention i highly doubt people want meth and cocaine legalized also. But the moral blame here is fine, its just like legalizing prostitution. If you go to a prostitute now you may go to one where she keep the money or to one thats abused and gets none of it. some people will check but most wont.
If you buy drugs you are breaking the law and although this may be a "victemless" crime you may also be funding these groups.
As a responsible consumer you shouldnt buy them regardless of the law. the same way when nike was accused of child labor they were boycotted by the consumer and if most of these pro legalize people want to be taken seriously they should do the same instead of the current attitude that is "because its illegal the fault that i fund these groups is actually the governments fault".
People should stop hiding their heads in the ground, if you dont know where your drugs come from then its your fault.

As a responsible consumer you shouldnt buy them regardless of the law

the same way when nike was accused of child labor they were boycotted by the consumer and if most of these pro legalize people want to be taken seriously they should do the same instead of the current attitude that is
"because its illegal the fault that i fund these groups is actually the governments fault".

On May 17 2012 23:04 Mo0Rauder wrote:


It is a bit hard to understand what you are trying to say, or maybe I just can't read properly.



As a "responsible" government they should provide a better means of solving the problem than going to war with cartels, maybe start with legalizing pot? Allow your own citizens or government controlled industries to grow what they can (obviously similar to early/late tobacco, alcohol production), this alone takes billions out of the cartels pockets with one simple chop (excuse the pun)

Cocaine is a bit different, but let's not forget that for thousands of years cocaine was produced and brought to many parts of the world, for medical and recreational uses without it being made illegal until "somewhat" recently when you look at the big picture. Some people can live a normal life with addicted to this substance, some people can't, just like alcohol.

Meth, obviously unacceptable, I assume everyone can agree on this.



So, if i understand this correctly let me flay you to the brightest shade of red on this subject.

If I grow weed, what happens to me? 5 Years in jail. If I procure Cocaine or Meth, I will get upwards or 10 years possibly more. If I buy any of these substances from a dealer I'm supporting the Cartels, or other lawless individuals.

So, how is it not the government(s) fault in these cases? I can't get the substances by any means aside from breaking the laws.

Maybe the Government should change the rules i.e. LAWS, so that I can live my life freely and without the threat of a jail cell for 5+ years, or allow for people who want to buy the substances to buy them at their own risk, akin to alcohol, tobacco, and many other prescribed drugs that are insanely harmful or addictive (Oxy, many other examples) that are legal and made from the same base opiates as heroine.

Wake up nay-sayer's your arguments are all invalid in my eyes.

Back to d3, servers up

GG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

On May 17 2012 23:13 Goozen wrote:


I made no opinion for or against legalization of drugs, however you are once again saying "its all the govs fault for not legalizing weed" but you make it seem that people have to buy drugs so they are at no fault.
People dont have to buy drugs and as long as they do and do not know where it comes from they are actively funding these groups. If you want to break the law because its so importent to you, you should at least be responsible to make sure your enjoyment dosnt cause the suffering and death on others.

On May 18 2012 03:06 Mo0Rauder wrote:


Your assumption is incorrect.

Acutally I don't buy from street dealers and I do know where my pot comes from and its not the underbelly of society.

The problem you are ignoring, is when the government says it is at war with drugs, then they pick and choose which are illegal.

Cigarettes kill more people every year than the drug war itself not even the drugs sold in it, why are they legal? It's illegal to grow tobacco where I live and producing your own cigarettes is also illegal, how can government sold cigarettes then be sold at stores when I can't even create my own for my own consumption when even if I don't sell them.

Same with pot, why is it illegal to grow my own, for recreational purposes, why don't the governments sell it for taxable revenue? Simple.

Because big Pharma doesn't want it, and their lobby group is enormous. Law enforcement makes jobs off of policing it, the Judicial system makes jobs off prosecuting it, and people get elected off of enforcing these laws.

Wake up.

The high mortality rate in Mexico's drug war has seen women progress quickly in the shadowy underworld of the cartels and they are increasingly taking on key management roles, a new book says.

"Female Bosses of Narco-Traffic," by Arturo Santamaria, a researcher at the Autonomous University of the State of Sinaloa, traces the ascent of women in drug trafficking organizations.

"The narco-traffickers will become stronger as a result of this," wrote Santamaria. "They will be more difficult to fight because the women appear to be acting smarter."

An estimated 50,000 people have been killed since 2006 in a government crackdown on organized crime that has set off turf wars among rival groups even as they fight off the Mexican military's counter-narcotics units.

Santamaria said the dead have been mainly males belonging to the cartels, which has led to a changing of the guard with younger men and women rising to the top of drug trafficking organizations.

On May 28 2012 09:59 Lefiathen wrote:
if i could just say something... mexico wouldnt have all this problems (or at least not this big) if americans didnt buy so many drugs.

Most of the drugs that go trough mexico arent consumed here but in the US.

The vast profits made from drug production and trafficking are overwhelmingly reaped in rich "consuming" countries – principally across Europe and in the US – rather than war-torn "producing" nations such as Colombia and Mexico, new research has revealed. And its authors claim that financial regulators in the west are reluctant to go after western banks in pursuit of the massive amount of drug money being laundered through their systems.

The most far-reaching and detailed analysis to date of the drug economy in any country – in this case, Colombia – shows that 2.6% of the total street value of cocaine produced remains within the country, while a staggering 97.4% of profits are reaped by criminal syndicates, and laundered by banks, in first-world consuming countries.

"The story of who makes the money from Colombian cocaine is a metaphor for the disproportionate burden placed in every way on 'producing' nations like Colombia as a result of the prohibition of drugs," said one of the authors of the study, Alejandro Gaviria, launching its English edition last week.

"Colombian society has suffered to almost no economic advantage from the drugs trade, while huge profits are made by criminal distribution networks in consuming countries, and recycled by banks which operate with nothing like the restrictions that Colombia's own banking system is subject to."

His co-author, Daniel Mejía, added: "The whole system operated by authorities in the consuming nations is based around going after the small guy, the weakest link in the chain, and never the big business or financial systems where the big money is."

The work, by the two economists at University of the Andes in Bogotá, is part of an initiative by the Colombian government to overhaul global drugs policy and focus on money laundering by the big banks in America and Europe, as well as social prevention of drug taking and consideration of options for de-criminalising some or all drugs.

On May 17 2012 18:02 Wombat_NI wrote:

It is something I personally care about, but apportioning moral blame onto drug users in the West is just a smokescreen with which the idiocy of official drug policy hides behind. Yeah sure it's not going to change everything overnight, but would it really be worse than what we've seen with the 'War on Drugs' in terms of the human cost?

At the very least legalisation is also a source of tax revenue, in addition to potentially being a productive economic sector. There aren't particularly good arguments against it that don't revolve around the moral qualms of drug use, at least that I have thus far heard in my own experience.

On June 07 2012 02:00 Cirqueenflex wrote:


for me it is much less moral and much more about productivity. You don't call someone "pothead" for nothing. In my opinion increasing general intake of drugs (by legalizing it) will reduce overall health and productivity, thus increase poverty and the gap between the overall rich and poor parts of the community (and health care cost). This goes along with an increased violence/crime ratio driven by the need of drugs of those who can't afford it (anymore).

The Mexican navy says it has detained a son of Sinaloa cartel leader Joaquin Guzman, known as 'el Chapo', the country's most-wanted drug lord.

"Following an intelligence operation, Jesus Alfredo Guzman, the presumed son of Joaquin Guzman, was arrested this morning," a written statement said.

The man arrested, suspected of links to drug trafficking, was transferred to Mexico City under the watch of a heavy presence from security forces, a navy source said.

The elder Guzman, the billionaire head of the Sinaloa cartel, has a $5m reward on his head in the United States and has long sparred with US and Mexican authorities.

Jesus Alfredo Guzman and his wife Alejandrina Salazar were placed on a US list of Sinaloa cartel operatives last year.

In May, the US Treasury Department froze the assets of the fugitive druglord's sons Ivan and Ovidio, barring Americans from doing business with them.

The department said the sons had played "a significant role" in drug trafficking activities.

Thursday's arrest comes just a little over a week before Mexicans head to the polls to vote for a new president.

President Felipe Calderon's ruling National Action Party has lost popular support in the wake of brutal drug violence that has killed more than 50,000 people since December 2006.

On May 28 2012 10:06 Voltaire wrote:


This is correct. That's why the US (and all countries for that matter) should legalize drugs.