Trump Slams ‘Very Unfair’ Drug Sentences

Such unreasonable lengths to these sentences are, As Trump stated, unfair. They are unjust. The laws need to be reformed and everyone knows it,

a reply to: aniceday

Would you condemn cultures whose shamans use hallucinogenics?

a reply to: Metallicus

Locking people up is big business. I agree, locking people up because they have an illegal substance in their possession is doing nothing to help the person with an addicted drug problem. A majority of these individuals are not a threat to the population, but only to themselves. Instead of locking them up, they need help with their addictions. Most of these people are going to be thrown in jail with violent harden criminals. They'll end up coming out of jail worst than when they went in.

Props to Trump

originally posted by: Agree2Disagree
a reply to: Subaeruginosa

I dont see a world where legalizing coc aine, meth, crack, heroin, etc. makes the world a better place...I just don't see it, sorry.

While I do agree some of the sentences are ridiculous and could definitely be reevaluated.... legalization is, imho, not the answer.

A2D

Countries where all drugs are legal have less drug addicts, so there is that...

a reply to: Dem0nc1eaner

Correlation is not causation. There are actually a plethora of variables to consider....including socioeconimic variables with high degrees of fluctuation....

Look at Afghanistan...they're the worlds leader in production and consumption of opiates.

A2D

Drug users/dealers are scum. Anyone involved in a drug ring, no matter the role, can rot. Drug dealers/users decided to kill another drug dealer that they owed a lot of money to, went to the wrong damn house, and gunned down my cousin in front of her child, who was luckily hiding and not also gunned down. Now they rot in jail although their intended target is still alive.

I've no sympathy for anyone in the chain of selling drugs, even if it's just a telephone liaison. Good to hear she's changed her ways and made the most of her sentence but I have no sympathy for her.

When I was a kid most of us tried weed and,didn`t do us any harm,nor did we cause harm,steal,rape,etc.Nowadays meth and pills are a plague on the area.The pot smokers are not usually the ones doing this stuff.My opinion is that weed should be treated just like booze,the meth makers,dealers and pill pushing clinics should be treated the same as first degree murderers and put in front of a firing squad.

originally posted by: Agree2Disagree
a reply to: narrator

Not disagreeing or starting an argument, just honestly want to hear your opinion...

You previously mentioned the comfort of ones own home, etc... but does that go for every home? Homes with young children? Would it be cool for me to cook my own meth if I have a 3 and 4 year old in the house?

How many regulations would we need to realistically set in place and at what point do we just say holy crap that's a lot of regs, let's just make it illegal altogether?


A2D

I'm just now seeing this, sorry for the delay.

I honestly don't know the answer. Do I personally think it'd be ok to cook meth around kids? No, I don't, I think it'd be a horrible thing. However, I don't think it's ok to be an alcoholic with kids in the house, or smoke cigarettes in the same house as kids, the list could continue. Alcohol and cigarettes are legal. But, they're also lethal. That's where the disconnect is for me.
I'm not arguing the point that meth is the worst of the worst, and should have a LOT of regulations around it. I'm not the one to ask when it comes to what regulations those should be, because I'm not a drug abuse expert. But, I'm not speaking from a place of ignorance either. While I've never used it myself, I grew up in Appalachia, I was around meth and heroin most of my childhood and adolescence, I've had family members use, I'm fairly certain that my mother was using at one point in my childhood (I didn't know at the time obviously, but looking back on it I'm fairly sure that's what was going on). I know for a fact that the current laws aren't doing anyone any favors, and the focus needs to turn from punishment towards rehabilitation.
I've known several addicts in my life, and I know 2 things that described every single one of them: Every single one of them wanted to quit. And none of them cared that the drugs they were doing are against the law.
The laws aren't effective. No addict cares about the law they're breaking, and it doesn't stop people from trying the drug and becoming addicts themselves.
Rehabilitation can be effective. We just need some of the millions upon millions of dollars that go towards the war on drugs to go to rehabilitation instead. I truly believe that would help so many issues we see in the US today. Addiction, homelessness, welfare, etc.

a reply to: narrator

Well articulated valid points. I'm with you halfway.

I do believe rehabilitation needs to be a more sought after approach, however I also feel that the laws in place need to be readjusted not necessarily removed.

First offenses should generally be frowned upon but forgiven, depending on severity of course. I've been a huge proponent of habitual offender laws in regards to drug laws for the sole reason that I believe in 2nd chances.

As with most things I think we just need to find that solid middle ground where we focus on rehabilitation for those that need and want it. And firm but FAIR punishment for those who deserve it.

I know a guy personally who once sold meth through his younger cousin who was 11 years old. I would absolutely punish the dealer who was at that point in time 23 years old...he showed no signs of remorse or desire to change.

There absolutely has to be some middle ground found for any progress to be made imo.

A2D

originally posted by: Agree2Disagree
a reply to: narrator

Well articulated valid points. I'm with you halfway.

I do believe rehabilitation needs to be a more sought after approach, however I also feel that the laws in place need to be readjusted not necessarily removed.

First offenses should generally be frowned upon but forgiven, depending on severity of course. I've been a huge proponent of habitual offender laws in regards to drug laws for the sole reason that I believe in 2nd chances.

As with most things I think we just need to find that solid middle ground where we focus on rehabilitation for those that need and want it. And firm but FAIR punishment for those who deserve it.

I know a guy personally who once sold meth through his younger cousin who was 11 years old. I would absolutely punish the dealer who was at that point in time 23 years old...he showed no signs of remorse or desire to change.

There absolutely has to be some middle ground found for any progress to be made imo.

A2D

I agree, middle ground seems to be the best way to move forward.

And yes, by all means, punish the dealer who dealt through his 11 year old cousin, that's just insane.

If all drugs were legal 90% of drug crime would disappear. Because most drug crimes come from the procurement of the drug not the use. I don't condone stoned parents. But I certainly don't condone parents behind bars over a plant...

"The only thing someone smoking cannabis will ever assault is a bag of Doritos."
~me~

The thing is people falsely think of drug prohibition as regulation but this couldn't be further from the truth since prohibition just pushes everything into the black market where you can't see it and its the criminals gangs that take over the regulation, and drug use continues just the same or worse. Now if you make drugs legal you bring the problem out to the surface where you can actually see it and you can then do the best to steer it in a direction so it does the least harm possible.

Just look at Portugal which decriminalized all drugs 17 years ago and drug fatalities went down by more than 80%, also more people got treatment, less HIV cases contracted from dirty needles, less incarcerations, and lots of money saved. Begs the question: Why is it taking other countries so long to follow Portugals winning strategy?

Meanwhile the US continues to spend billions of dollars every year in a war that by all standards and possible ways to look at it has been a total and epic failure since the drug problem in the US is worse than ever before.

Though lets face, just like prostitution, drugs are not going away. Whether you drink it (alcohol), smoke it or sniff it, people like to get high. Research shows humans have been getting high since prehistoric times, so no I don't think we are going to win this war against drugs.

Legalizing drugs is the only sane solution.

First of all by legalizing drugs you disarm the powerful drug cartels which have immense power only because of the ridiculous inflated prices of the drugs they sell which is a result of prohibition. These cartels have so much power that they can buy politicians and highjack entire countries creating narco states. You take down one of these powerful cartels and they are like killing gremlins, where 10 more cartels appear in their place fighting over the available turf. You can't win against these forces because there is so much money involved and someone will always be down to get their hands dirty because of the amount of money they can make so fast. Its similar to the mess there used to in the US during alcohol prohibition with Al Capone and the Italian mafias and which only ended when alcohol was legalized. Obviously the drug war is 50 times worse but imo its a very similar problem with a similar solution.

Also by making drugs legal you take the criminal stigma out of the drug users so you can actually reach out to these people to offer help without them running away for fear of being caught. Also you can make sure they get clean and perfectly measured doses of the drugs they take, offering clean needles and brief them on the dangers and provide them access to treatment and rehab programs. Basically you start treating these people as human beings instead of criminals and the drug use as a health issue which is what it is.

Yes there are some really harmful substances out there, and making them all legal mighty seem scary but the fact is these drugs are already out there and by letting the black market control everything you make matters much worse. And what actually happens a lot of times is people often resort to cheaper and much more harmful substances because less harmful drugs have become too expensive because of prohibition. And you think illegal drugs are bad? well prescription drugs kill more people than all illegal drugs combined, so thats something to think about as well.

Look, legalization might not seem like the perfect solution but its far better than the total mess created by the drug war. So I say we follow Portugals lead on this.

Btw check out this TED talk on the issue, this guy makes some great points on why we need to end drug war:

www.youtube.com...

a reply to: Aluxe

Portugal didn't legalize anything.... they readjusted the punishment from a criminal one to an administrative one for small amounts of possession..usually anything under 10 days of use.

Large scale possession has remained prohibited by Portuguese law, and criminal penalties are still applied to drug growers, dealers and traffickers.

What Portugal REALLY did.

A2D

I know that statistics show in Canada that if you are not a drug addict when you enter the prison system, you will most likely be one when (and if) you are released.

a reply to: Agree2Disagree

Which is why I said "Just look at Portugal which decriminalized all drugs" (never said Portugal legalized anything).

Obviously from looking at Portugal decriminalization of drug possession is a step in the right direction and I think we should follow that lead, probably a good first step but as an end goal I strongly believe all drugs should be legalized and regulated like we do with alcohol, cigarettes and prescription drugs which kill way more people than illegal drugs. Prohibition just seems like a backward failed idea not grounded in reality.

a reply to: Aluxe

I realise you said decriminialized...but immediately after that everything you said was about LEGALIZATION.

Basically you had it right but then went and goobered it all up by talking about legalization instead of decriminalization. They are 2 separate things.

And again, possession is still illegal and IS a criminal act if you possess more than 10 days worth.

I say this because it's important to have all the facts. "Decriminalization of possession" and "decriminalization of less than 10 days personal possession" give two very different impressions to the uninformed. That's how fake news happens


A2D

a reply to: Agree2Disagree

yup those are fair points. And you know I think just replicating what Portugal is doing would be great step for countries like the US. Then its not as scary as legalization and we can test the waters and make sure this direction makes sense and learn a lot, but the war on drugs has got to end. So much money spent, lives lost and nothing but the worst drug problem ever to show.

There should be no crime in taking any drugs. Get rid of all enforcement, but at the same time make the punishment for distributing and dealing much much higher. I'd go with the death penalty for importing, pushing and dealing.

originally posted by: aniceday
There is no such thing as "victimless" when it comes to drugs.

Drugs are a scourge on human society. And everyone trafficking in them are guilty of bloodshed.

So how come Big Pharma and the politicians they purchase are not in prison?