The many successes of prohibition

[iustitia]

@Mac-7 (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=1014) If you would be so kind, list all the instances in which the prohibition of controlled substances has succeeded.

Please do so in a list format if possible, such as-

1.
2.
3.
And so on...

Thanks.

[Peter1469]

It made several crime families, to include the Kennedy family, very wealthy.

[Alyosha]

It will be as long as his list on the successes of the CIA.

[The Xl]

To ask someone to defend the indefensible is impossible.

That's on him for backing himself into that corner, though.

[Mac-7]

@Mac-7 (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=1014) If you would be so kind, list all the instances in which the prohibition of controlled substances has succeeded.

Please do so in a list format if possible, such as-

1.
2.
3.
And so on...

Thanks.

I'll give you one.

Imperial China.

In the 19th Century the opium trade with china was so lucrative that the great powers fought a war to maintain free access to the Chinese market.

opium lured millions of Chinese into addiction and dependency and banning it was one of the first things the communist government did after taking over in the late 1940's.

[kilgram]

It will be as long as his list on the successes of the CIA.
The list of successes of the CIA is very long

1. Overthrow the democratic Allende and change it for Pinochet

2. Help the Nicaragua's Contra trading weapons for drugs



- Prohibition of dugs

1. Give more money to the cartels to be able to corrupt

2. Give indirect benefits to politicians and other members of the high society

mmm and I don't remember more. I am little inspired.

[donttread]

@Mac-7 (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=1014) If you would be so kind, list all the instances in which the prohibition of controlled substances has succeeded.

Please do so in a list format if possible, such as-

1.
2.
3.
And so on...

Thanks.

You forgot about the all important
4...

[donttread]

I'll give you one.

Imperial China.

In the 19th Century the opium trade with china was so lucrative that the great powers fought a war to maintain free access to the Chinese market.

opium lured millions of Chinese into addiction and dependency and banning it was one of the first things the communist government did after taking over in the late 1940's.

So you admit prohibition is a "Black Boot" tactic ?

[kilgram]

I'll give you one.

Imperial China.

In the 19th Century the opium trade with china was so lucrative that the great powers fought a war to maintain free access to the Chinese market.

opium lured millions of Chinese into addiction and dependency and banning it was one of the first things the communist government did after taking over in the late 1940's.
The opium wars.

That is the best example why prohibition is wrong. And yes, many British corporations lucrated a lot from there.

[lynn]

Prohibition of drugs allowed the government to expand its powers and its prison population. Illegal drugs is a profitable business for the court system and provide millions of jobs. It is funded by the tax payers and those people unfortunate to get busted with fines and other expenses.

People that advocate for a smaller government, legalizing drugs is the quickest way to do it.

[PolWatch]

Prohibition of drugs allowed the government to expand its powers and its prison population. Illegal drugs is a profitable business for the court system and provide millions of jobs. It is funded by the tax payers and those people unfortunate to get busted with fines and other expenses.

People that advocate for a smaller government, legalizing drugs is the quickest way to do it.

If we were interested in logic, legalizing drugs for adults makes sense. However, if we let that ole-time Puritan American run things, he still wants to tell everyone else what is acceptable based on his beliefs.

[Mac-7]

People that advocate for a smaller government, legalizing drugs is the quickest way to do it.

No it isn't.

Legalizing dangerous dangerous drug creates more people who are unable to care themselves or their family.

Which in our bleeding heart wipe-every-nose welfare society leads to bigger government.

[Common Sense]

No it isn't.

Legalizing dangerous dangerous drug creates more people who are unable to care themselves or their family.

Which in our bleeding heart wipe-every-nose welfare society leads to bigger government.

So if heroin was legal you'd be high right now?

That's the only thing stopping people from doing hard drugs?

[Mac-7]

So if heroin was legal you'd be high right now?



I might.

if it was legal and my parents used it I would be more inclined to use it too, like smoking or drinking alcohol.

[Common Sense]

I might.

if it was legal and my parents used it I would be more inclined to use it too, like smoking or drinking alcohol.

Well, most people wouldn't.

People can access virtually any drug they want. It's not the legality that's stopping them.

[Mac-7]

Well, most people wouldn't.

People can access virtually any drug they want. It's not the legality that's stopping them.

Every person in society does not have to be addicted before it becomes a serious problem.

[Common Sense]

Every person in society does not have to be addicted before it becomes a serious problem.

I didn't say they did.

People are going to do those drugs regardless of legality. What the consequence is, is an overcrowded prison system, a backlogged criminal justice system and drug cartels making a shit ton of money and using violence and coercion that go along. Not to mention the associated corruption and the waste of police resources. Then there's the loss of liberty.

[Mac-7]

I didn't say they did.

People are going to do those drugs regardless of legality. What the consequence is, is an overcrowded prison system, a backlogged criminal justice system and drug cartels making a $#@! ton of money and using violence and coercion that go along. Not to mention the associated corruption and the waste of police resources. Then there's the loss of liberty.

Believe it or not some people still obey the law.

if you are a druggie, or an illegal alien, or a black kid who likes stolen cigars you might not think so.

But making addictive drugs illegal will keep them out of the hands of many potential users.

[Common Sense]

Believe it or not some people still obey the law.

if you are a druggie, or an illegal alien, or a black kid who likes stolen cigars you might not think so.

But making addictive drugs illegal will keep them out of the hands of many potential users.

The statistics and history say you're wrong.

[Mac-7]

The statistics and history say you're wrong.

You mean NO ONE obeys the law anymore?

Then why bother having stop signs or speed limits?

[PolWatch]

Alcohol is legal (it is a legal drug). Let's outlaw alcohol to protect all the citizens from themselves. Caffeine can be abused...shall we outlaw coffee or drinks like Red Bull? How many people die from diabetes? Do away with sugar? Obesity is a problem...let's lock up every fat person and force them to diet. Adults can't be trusted to make their own choices.

[Mac-7]

Alcohol is legal (it is a legal drug). Let's outlaw alcohol to protect all the citizens from themselves. Caffeine can be abused...shall we outlaw coffee or drinks like Red Bull? How many people die from diabetes? Do away with sugar? Obesity is a problem...let's lock up every fat person and force them to diet. Adults can't be trusted to make their own choices.

Adults or children?

The bad choices of adults are usually imitated by their children.

Legalizing illegal drugs only adds to the self destructive choices available to weak people.

[donttread]

Prohibition of drugs allowed the government to expand its powers and its prison population. Illegal drugs is a profitable business for the court system and provide millions of jobs. It is funded by the tax payers and those people unfortunate to get busted with fines and other expenses.

People that advocate for a smaller government, legalizing drugs is the quickest way to do it.

Yes

[lynn]

Adults or children?

The bad choices of adults are usually imitated by their children.

Legalizing illegal drugs only adds to the self destructive choices available to weak people.

American would not have a drug problem if the government prevented it from coming into the country in the first place. However, government could not expand and make such a profit if they did stop it. Government does not care about its citizens and it prefers that we make bad choices so we can be punished for it.

[Mac-7]

American would not have a drug problem if the government prevented it from coming into the country in the first place. However, government could not expand and make such a profit if they did stop it. Government does not care about its citizens and it prefers that we make bad choices so we can be punished for it.

I think government has tried to keep drugs out.

but druggies are willing to pay any price to support their addiction so cutting off the supply is difficult.

[donttread]

American would not have a drug problem if the government prevented it from coming into the country in the first place. However, government could not expand and make such a profit if they did stop it. Government does not care about its citizens and it prefers that we make bad choices so we can be punished for it.

Prevent? they are part of it! Having said that, you cannot silence demand.

[iustitia]

I'm happy to see that the only example of successful drug prohibition Mac-7 could find was of a communist government that's also responsible for the deaths of 80 million of its own people. If autocratic regimes are the standard, we can also throw in the Taliban which also suppressed opium. What's ironic is that Mac-7 supports the policies of ULTRA-LIBTARD PINKO COMMIES like Red China. Where's your ObaMao now? Seriously though, being ex-trotskyites, neocons have more in common with fucking Chinese Communists than authentic conservatism. Also ironic is that the CIA that Mac loves so much actively engaged in drug trafficking in Asia and did so with the aid of ex-Chinese Nationalists. Likewise, after the fall of the Taliban the US has protected the revived drug trade in Afghanistan which now produces 70% of the world's heroin. Our government has never been serious about stopping the drug trade, merely controlling it.

No, really though, @Mac-7 (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=1014) can you give a real example of successful prohibition that doesn't involve dictatorships?

[Mac-7]

I'm happy to see that the only example of successful drug prohibition Mac-7 could find was of a communist government that's also responsible for the deaths of 80 million of its own people. If autocratic regimes are the standard, we can also throw in the Taliban which also suppressed opium. What's ironic is that Mac-7 supports the policies of ULTRA-LIBTARD PINKO COMMIES like Red China. Where's your ObaMao now? Seriously though, being ex-trotskyites, neocons have more in common with $#@!ing Chinese Communists than authentic conservatism. Also ironic is that the CIA that Mac loves so much actively engaged in drug trafficking in Asia and did so with the aid of ex-Chinese Nationalists. Likewise, after the fall of the Taliban the US has protected the revived drug trade in Afghanistan which now produces 70% of the world's heroin. Our government has never been serious about stopping the drug trade, merely controlling it.

No, really though, @Mac-7 (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=1014) can you give a real example of successful prohibition that doesn't involve dictatorships?

China did not just go after the drug pushers but severely punished the users too.

Which is something we have not done here.

So our effort to stop drug addiction will not be as successful as theirs.

But having traffic laws that we know some citizens will disobey does don't mean that traffic laws are useless - or unconstitutional.

and neither are laws against addictive drugs.

[donttread]

I'm happy to see that the only example of successful drug prohibition Mac-7 could find was of a communist government that's also responsible for the deaths of 80 million of its own people. If autocratic regimes are the standard, we can also throw in the Taliban which also suppressed opium. What's ironic is that Mac-7 supports the policies of ULTRA-LIBTARD PINKO COMMIES like Red China. Where's your ObaMao now? Seriously though, being ex-trotskyites, neocons have more in common with fucking Chinese Communists than authentic conservatism. Also ironic is that the CIA that Mac loves so much actively engaged in drug trafficking in Asia and did so with the aid of ex-Chinese Nationalists. Likewise, after the fall of the Taliban the US has protected the revived drug trade in Afghanistan which now produces 70% of the world's heroin. Our government has never been serious about stopping the drug trade, merely controlling it.

No, really though, @Mac-7 (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=1014) can you give a real example of successful prohibition that doesn't involve dictatorships?

Yes, Afghanistan does have oil, poppy oil. And our kids are there to protect it, not destroy it

[lynn]

The U.S. also paid down some of its debt to China with Afghanistan Heroin.

[donttread]

Prohibition of drugs allowed the government to expand its powers and its prison population. Illegal drugs is a profitable business for the court system and provide millions of jobs. It is funded by the tax payers and those people unfortunate to get busted with fines and other expenses.

People that advocate for a smaller government, legalizing drugs is the quickest way to do it.

To expand on Lynn's excellent point. Prohibition has been successful ,very successful in the following ways.
1) Growing government
2) Growing the prison industrial complex
3) Keeping unemployment rates artificially low
4) Providing addicts jobs dealing when they are not in prison, after ruining all hope of a regular job
5) Keeping the poor, poor and the blacks down.
6 ) Kissing big pharma's ass
7) Keeping the large booze and tobacco producers in the politician buying mood
8) Providing distraction rhetoric for political campaigns in their ever increasing need to avoid things like truth and substance.

[decedent]

We should un-prohibit murder.

No, I changed my mind... we should fine murderers $20, otherwise we'll end up like this:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nsTrP1G1N9M

[iustitia]

China did not just go after the drug pushers but severely punished the users too.

Which is something we have not done here.

So our effort to stop drug addiction will not be as successful as theirs.

But having traffic laws that we know some citizens will disobey does don't mean that traffic laws are useless - or unconstitutional.

and neither are laws against addictive drugs.
@Mac-7 (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=1014) can you give a real example of successful prohibition that doesn't involve dictatorships?

[Mac-7]

@Mac-7 (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=1014) can you give a real example of successful prohibition that doesn't involve dictatorships?

Define successful.

[decedent]

@Mac-7 (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=1014) can you give a real example of successful prohibition that doesn't involve dictatorships?

You're right. We should ban prohibition.

[donttread]

We should un-prohibit murder.

No, I changed my mind... we should fine murderers $20, otherwise we'll end up like this:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nsTrP1G1N9M

Murder is a crime with a victim, drug use is not, making your post irrelevent

[donttread]

You're right. We should ban prohibition.

The reason the Chinese were so down on opium was because the western traders had essentially enslaved them with it.

[Captain Obvious]

Murder is a crime with a victim, drug use is not, making your post irrelevent

I don't consider drug use a victimless crime but I know many do.

Everyone I've ever met online who smokes pot is a responsible, 6-figure a year Harvard grad who coaches his kids sports teams. Which is kinda funny considering the average pot user is a burnout loser. But I don't have a problem with pot.

Meth, heroine, prescription narcotics (illicit) - those are drugs that are illegal and should be and I dare you to argue that there are no victims with this crime beyond the user. I just dare you.

[iustitia]

Define successful.

Achieving or having achieved success.

[Mac-7]

Achieving or having achieved success.

100% ?

80% ?

[iustitia]

Achieving or having achieved success.