After 5 Months of Sales, Colorado Sees the Downside of a Legal High

[Andylusion]

.

And how many had problems with Alcohol in 2012

About 10,000 innocent people were killed by drunk drivers

About 35,000 Alcohol related crashes

About 20,000 related deaths from Liver and Cancer disease

About 3,000,000 were victims of an Alcohol related Violence

.

I don't understand this comment at all. What is your point? What the purpose of this post?

It's like "this pill can cause death", and having the response "Yeah well people can die from Aspirin too!"

Yeah... that's true. Does that change ANYTHING we just said?

There are places in America today, where Alcohol is banned. If you want to have a drink, you have to drive to a different town or city to get it.

If you want to debate the pros- and cons- of that policy, feel free to do so in a thread about Alcohol.

This thread is about legalized pot. When you bring up Alcohol, you just lost the debate. We're all back in school, and you are flicking spit wads across the room, and when caught going "yeah well billy did X!" We don't care. We're not talking about alcohol.

 

[Samson]

.

And how many had problems with Alcohol in 2012

About 10,000 innocent people were killed by drunk drivers

About 35,000 Alcohol related crashes

About 20,000 related deaths from Liver and Cancer disease

About 3,000,000 were victims of an Alcohol related Violence

.

I don't understand this comment at all. What is your point? What the purpose of this post?

It's like "this pill can cause death", and having the response "Yeah well people can die from Aspirin too!"

Yeah... that's true. Does that change ANYTHING we just said?

There are places in America today, where Alcohol is banned. If you want to have a drink, you have to drive to a different town or city to get it.

If you want to debate the pros- and cons- of that policy, feel free to do so in a thread about Alcohol.

This thread is about legalized pot. When you bring up Alcohol, you just lost the debate. We're all back in school, and you are flicking spit wads across the room, and when caught going "yeah well billy did X!" We don't care. We're not talking about alcohol.

We are discussing legalized intoxicants consumed by Adults.

It is not terribly mysterious why you' d try to exclude a traditional intoxicant from a non traditional one: otherwise you have no grounds for debate.

 

[bripat9643]

.

And how many had problems with Alcohol in 2012

About 10,000 innocent people were killed by drunk drivers

About 35,000 Alcohol related crashes

About 20,000 related deaths from Liver and Cancer disease

About 3,000,000 were victims of an Alcohol related Violence

.

I don't understand this comment at all. What is your point? What the purpose of this post?

It's like "this pill can cause death", and having the response "Yeah well people can die from Aspirin too!"

Yeah... that's true. Does that change ANYTHING we just said?

There are places in America today, where Alcohol is banned. If you want to have a drink, you have to drive to a different town or city to get it.

If you want to debate the pros- and cons- of that policy, feel free to do so in a thread about Alcohol.

This thread is about legalized pot. When you bring up Alcohol, you just lost the debate. We're all back in school, and you are flicking spit wads across the room, and when caught going "yeah well billy did X!" We don't care. We're not talking about alcohol.

Any argument used to justify prohibition of pot should also be applied to alcohol. If you aren't willing to ban alcohol, then you have no business arguing to ban pot. We've seen the results of alcohol prohibition, and they aren't good.

 

[Andylusion]

Europe's Shadow

Why shouldn't American be allowed to talk about narcotics consumption more freely when the Dutch sell it openly in bars and cafes while European stewardesses involve themselves in lucrative opium-smuggling operations?

If the Colorado experiment does not work out, people just might claim that the USA is somehow culturally lagging behind Holland in the department of 'libertine consumerism.'

I don't give a crap what Europe does. Nor do I care if 'people might claim'. Are we so pathetic of a people, that all we worry about is what other people might say?

.

And how many had problems with Alcohol in 2012

About 10,000 innocent people were killed by drunk drivers

About 35,000 Alcohol related crashes

About 20,000 related deaths from Liver and Cancer disease

About 3,000,000 were victims of an Alcohol related Violence

.

I don't understand this comment at all. What is your point? What the purpose of this post?

It's like "this pill can cause death", and having the response "Yeah well people can die from Aspirin too!"

Yeah... that's true. Does that change ANYTHING we just said?

There are places in America today, where Alcohol is banned. If you want to have a drink, you have to drive to a different town or city to get it.

If you want to debate the pros- and cons- of that policy, feel free to do so in a thread about Alcohol.

This thread is about legalized pot. When you bring up Alcohol, you just lost the debate. We're all back in school, and you are flicking spit wads across the room, and when caught going "yeah well billy did X!" We don't care. We're not talking about alcohol.

We are discussing legalized intoxicants consumed by Adults.

It is not terribly mysterious why you' d try to exclude a traditional intoxicant from a non traditional one: otherwise you have no grounds for debate.

We're not excluding. If you want to debate banning alcohol, let's debate that. That saying X is bad, does not mean Y is good.

In fact, it is EXACTLY because of the alcohol problem, that I'm against legalizing this. There were people just like you, claiming that Alcohol doesn't cause crime, doesn't cause problems, and because of that we legalized Alcohol.

Now you are pointing at that, as if that's a success of your 'legalize it" past. It's not, It's exactly the proof we shouldn't legalize these drugs.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

After 5 Months of Sales, Colorado Sees the Downside of a Legal High

Whatever problems may have manifested, the 'solution' is not to make marijuana illegal again, but to address the root causes of the problems, which likely have little to do with marijuana.

 

[bripat9643]

Europe's Shadow

Why shouldn't American be allowed to talk about narcotics consumption more freely when the Dutch sell it openly in bars and cafes while European stewardesses involve themselves in lucrative opium-smuggling operations?

If the Colorado experiment does not work out, people just might claim that the USA is somehow culturally lagging behind Holland in the department of 'libertine consumerism.'

I don't give a crap what Europe does. Nor do I care if 'people might claim'. Are we so pathetic of a people, that all we worry about is what other people might say?

.

And how many had problems with Alcohol in 2012

About 10,000 innocent people were killed by drunk drivers

About 35,000 Alcohol related crashes

About 20,000 related deaths from Liver and Cancer disease

About 3,000,000 were victims of an Alcohol related Violence

.

I don't understand this comment at all. What is your point? What the purpose of this post?

It's like "this pill can cause death", and having the response "Yeah well people can die from Aspirin too!"

Yeah... that's true. Does that change ANYTHING we just said?

There are places in America today, where Alcohol is banned. If you want to have a drink, you have to drive to a different town or city to get it.

If you want to debate the pros- and cons- of that policy, feel free to do so in a thread about Alcohol.

This thread is about legalized pot. When you bring up Alcohol, you just lost the debate. We're all back in school, and you are flicking spit wads across the room, and when caught going "yeah well billy did X!" We don't care. We're not talking about alcohol.

We are discussing legalized intoxicants consumed by Adults.

It is not terribly mysterious why you' d try to exclude a traditional intoxicant from a non traditional one: otherwise you have no grounds for debate.

We're not excluding. If you want to debate banning alcohol, let's debate that. That saying X is bad, does not mean Y is good.

In fact, it is EXACTLY because of the alcohol problem, that I'm against legalizing this. There were people just like you, claiming that Alcohol doesn't cause crime, doesn't cause problems, and because of that we legalized Alcohol.

Now you are pointing at that, as if that's a success of your 'legalize it" past. It's not, It's exactly the proof we shouldn't legalize these drugs.

Nope, that isn't why people argued that prohibition should be repealed. They saw the vast increase in organized crime, murder and people going blind from drinking methyl alcohol that it became obvious prohibition caused more problems than it solved.

Alcohol consumption didn't go down during prohibition. It went up.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

For those who think making drugs legal, I suppose that means crack cocaine and heroin, there are obvious effects on society NOT just the person. But those consequences do not matter when the state wants to raise taxes. And you thought they legalized it just so people could get high and drive.

After 5 Months of Sales, Colorado Sees the Downside of a Legal High

There is the Denver man who, hours after buying a package of marijuana-infused Karma Kandy from one of Colorado’s new recreational marijuana shops, began raving about the end of the world and then pulled a handgun from the family safe and killed his wife, the authorities say. Some hospital officials say they are treating growing numbers of children and adults sickened by potent doses of edible marijuana. Sheriffs in neighboring states complain about stoned drivers streaming out of Colorado and through their towns.

[ame=[MEDIA=youtube]L1jB7RBGVGk[/MEDIA] Madness Trailer Great marijuana movie - YouTube[/ame]

The funniest part of the whole "Colorado is going to legalize weed" was all the dumb shit stoners who were all over the message boards exclaiming that they were moving to Colorado b/c there they could smoke weed and their bosses couldn't fire them.

 

[Billy000]

For those who think making drugs legal, I suppose that means crack cocaine and heroin, there are obvious effects on society NOT just the person. But those consequences do not matter when the state wants to raise taxes. And you thought they legalized it just so people could get high and drive.

After 5 Months of Sales, Colorado Sees the Downside of a Legal High

There is the Denver man who, hours after buying a package of marijuana-infused Karma Kandy from one of Colorado’s new recreational marijuana shops, began raving about the end of the world and then pulled a handgun from the family safe and killed his wife, the authorities say. Some hospital officials say they are treating growing numbers of children and adults sickened by potent doses of edible marijuana. Sheriffs in neighboring states complain about stoned drivers streaming out of Colorado and through their towns.

[ame=[MEDIA=youtube]L1jB7RBGVGk[/MEDIA] Madness Trailer Great marijuana movie - YouTube[/ame]

Accessibility certainly raises issues when you legalize a drug like this but these anecdotal cases aren't enough to whine about its legalization.

This drug is far less harmful than alcohol is. A man is much more likely to go mental while drunk than he is on marijuana. More than likely that guy had previous mental health problems so blaming the drug is kind of ridiculous.

The accessibility to kids certainly is a problem but people learn from their mistakes. I think we will see less and less of those stories in the future.

 

[Andylusion]

Europe's Shadow

Why shouldn't American be allowed to talk about narcotics consumption more freely when the Dutch sell it openly in bars and cafes while European stewardesses involve themselves in lucrative opium-smuggling operations?

If the Colorado experiment does not work out, people just might claim that the USA is somehow culturally lagging behind Holland in the department of 'libertine consumerism.'

I don't give a crap what Europe does. Nor do I care if 'people might claim'. Are we so pathetic of a people, that all we worry about is what other people might say?

.

And how many had problems with Alcohol in 2012

About 10,000 innocent people were killed by drunk drivers

About 35,000 Alcohol related crashes

About 20,000 related deaths from Liver and Cancer disease

About 3,000,000 were victims of an Alcohol related Violence

.

I don't understand this comment at all. What is your point? What the purpose of this post?

It's like "this pill can cause death", and having the response "Yeah well people can die from Aspirin too!"

Yeah... that's true. Does that change ANYTHING we just said?

There are places in America today, where Alcohol is banned. If you want to have a drink, you have to drive to a different town or city to get it.

If you want to debate the pros- and cons- of that policy, feel free to do so in a thread about Alcohol.

This thread is about legalized pot. When you bring up Alcohol, you just lost the debate. We're all back in school, and you are flicking spit wads across the room, and when caught going "yeah well billy did X!" We don't care. We're not talking about alcohol.

We are discussing legalized intoxicants consumed by Adults.

It is not terribly mysterious why you' d try to exclude a traditional intoxicant from a non traditional one: otherwise you have no grounds for debate.

We're not excluding. If you want to debate banning alcohol, let's debate that. That saying X is bad, does not mean Y is good.

In fact, it is EXACTLY because of the alcohol problem, that I'm against legalizing this. There were people just like you, claiming that Alcohol doesn't cause crime, doesn't cause problems, and because of that we legalized Alcohol.

Now you are pointing at that, as if that's a success of your 'legalize it" past. It's not, It's exactly the proof we shouldn't legalize these drugs.

Nope, that isn't why people argued that prohibition should be repealed. They saw the vast increase in organized crime, murder and people going blind from drinking methyl alcohol that it became obvious prohibition caused more problems than it solved.

Alcohol consumption didn't go down during prohibition. It went up.

There is conflicting evidence on that, depending on location. Some areas heavily enforced the law, and by any measure I personally have seen, the consumption went down, and crime did not go up as significantly as you suggest.

The problem is, there were many other areas, like New York, and Chicago, where speak speakeasy locations ran constantly, and without interference from the law.

Well of course, if you don't enforce the law, more people break the law. You had turf wars between illegal gangs trying to control a market that the law wasn't preventing.

Again, Singapore has banned drugs, and you don't see the drug gangs in Singapore, as you do in Mexico and the US.

Why? Cause they kill them. All the profitable illicit sales in the world, don't make up for you getting your butt fried.

Prison though.... sure. You walk out of prison with more connections, and more easy money than you went in with. Some drug lords walk out of parole with hundreds of thousands in the bank.

Beyond that, you may claim that crime caused by prohibition was greater than the results of drinking all over the place, but I wager that's a harder claim to make. You really think that all the crime related to alcohol was less than a few thugs killing each other? You really think some idiot drunk, going blind from bad moonshine, is worse than a drunk killing an 18-year old girl coming home from the prom?

I don't know about that. I would much rather the law breaker dying, than an innocent hit by the law breaker driving home drunk.

 

[Samson]

Europe's Shadow

Why shouldn't American be allowed to talk about narcotics consumption more freely when the Dutch sell it openly in bars and cafes while European stewardesses involve themselves in lucrative opium-smuggling operations?

If the Colorado experiment does not work out, people just might claim that the USA is somehow culturally lagging behind Holland in the department of 'libertine consumerism.'

I don't give a crap what Europe does. Nor do I care if 'people might claim'. Are we so pathetic of a people, that all we worry about is what other people might say?

.

And how many had problems with Alcohol in 2012

About 10,000 innocent people were killed by drunk drivers

About 35,000 Alcohol related crashes

About 20,000 related deaths from Liver and Cancer disease

About 3,000,000 were victims of an Alcohol related Violence

.

I don't understand this comment at all. What is your point? What the purpose of this post?

It's like "this pill can cause death", and having the response "Yeah well people can die from Aspirin too!"

Yeah... that's true. Does that change ANYTHING we just said?

There are places in America today, where Alcohol is banned. If you want to have a drink, you have to drive to a different town or city to get it.

If you want to debate the pros- and cons- of that policy, feel free to do so in a thread about Alcohol.

This thread is about legalized pot. When you bring up Alcohol, you just lost the debate. We're all back in school, and you are flicking spit wads across the room, and when caught going "yeah well billy did X!" We don't care. We're not talking about alcohol.

We are discussing legalized intoxicants consumed by Adults.

It is not terribly mysterious why you' d try to exclude a traditional intoxicant from a non traditional one: otherwise you have no grounds for debate.

We're not excluding. If you want to debate banning alcohol, let's debate that. That saying X is bad, does not mean Y is good.

In fact, it is EXACTLY because of the alcohol problem, that I'm against legalizing this. There were people just like you, claiming that Alcohol doesn't cause crime, doesn't cause problems, and because of that we legalized Alcohol.

Now you are pointing at that, as if that's a success of your 'legalize it" past. It's not, It's exactly the proof we shouldn't legalize these drugs.

Alcohol "doesn't cause crime, doesn't cause problems...and because of that we legalized alcohol?"

So I guess during prohibition, there was no crime, huh genius?

 

[Samson]

Alcohol consumption didn't go down during prohibition. It went up.

There is conflicting evidence on that, depending on location. Some areas heavily enforced the law, and by any measure I personally have seen, the consumption went down, and crime did not go up as significantly as you suggest..

Immaterial.

You've already postulated making alcohol illegal = MUCH LOWER CRIME

It was tried. It failed.

Argument over, make sure you pick up your prize at the door.

 

[Harry Dresden]

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/27/u...nabis-for-california.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

 

[Andylusion]

Europe's Shadow

Why shouldn't American be allowed to talk about narcotics consumption more freely when the Dutch sell it openly in bars and cafes while European stewardesses involve themselves in lucrative opium-smuggling operations?

If the Colorado experiment does not work out, people just might claim that the USA is somehow culturally lagging behind Holland in the department of 'libertine consumerism.'

I don't give a crap what Europe does. Nor do I care if 'people might claim'. Are we so pathetic of a people, that all we worry about is what other people might say?

.

And how many had problems with Alcohol in 2012

About 10,000 innocent people were killed by drunk drivers

About 35,000 Alcohol related crashes

About 20,000 related deaths from Liver and Cancer disease

About 3,000,000 were victims of an Alcohol related Violence

.

I don't understand this comment at all. What is your point? What the purpose of this post?

It's like "this pill can cause death", and having the response "Yeah well people can die from Aspirin too!"

Yeah... that's true. Does that change ANYTHING we just said?

There are places in America today, where Alcohol is banned. If you want to have a drink, you have to drive to a different town or city to get it.

If you want to debate the pros- and cons- of that policy, feel free to do so in a thread about Alcohol.

This thread is about legalized pot. When you bring up Alcohol, you just lost the debate. We're all back in school, and you are flicking spit wads across the room, and when caught going "yeah well billy did X!" We don't care. We're not talking about alcohol.

We are discussing legalized intoxicants consumed by Adults.

It is not terribly mysterious why you' d try to exclude a traditional intoxicant from a non traditional one: otherwise you have no grounds for debate.

We're not excluding. If you want to debate banning alcohol, let's debate that. That saying X is bad, does not mean Y is good.

In fact, it is EXACTLY because of the alcohol problem, that I'm against legalizing this. There were people just like you, claiming that Alcohol doesn't cause crime, doesn't cause problems, and because of that we legalized Alcohol.

Now you are pointing at that, as if that's a success of your 'legalize it" past. It's not, It's exactly the proof we shouldn't legalize these drugs.

Alcohol "doesn't cause crime, doesn't cause problems...and because of that we legalized alcohol?"

So I guess during prohibition, there was no crime, huh genius?

Especially when we don't enforce the law.

The argument goes on about the speed limit. We have too many speeders. Let's lower the speed limit then. Now we have even more speeders.

Removing the law doesn't make crime go away. It makes it worse.

The key is enforcement. If Chicago had ruthlessly enforced the law, Capone would never have existed. If New York had ruthlessly enforced the law, there would not have been speakeasy's all over the city.

The problem is, we don't enforce the law. That's all there is too it.

Again, Singapore does not have these problems, not because they don't have laws, but because they ruthlessly enforce the law.

You keep referring to crime during the prohibition. But the problem was, we didn't enforce the laws. In the states where prohibition was completely enforced, there were no Al Capones.

Any law that you don't enforce... is going to look like a failure.

 

[Andylusion]

Alcohol consumption didn't go down during prohibition. It went up.

There is conflicting evidence on that, depending on location. Some areas heavily enforced the law, and by any measure I personally have seen, the consumption went down, and crime did not go up as significantly as you suggest..

Immaterial.

You've already postulated making alcohol illegal = MUCH LOWER CRIME

It was tried. It failed.

Argument over, make sure you pick up your prize at the door.

Saying that, and proving that, are two different things.

Rule number one... you can't look at crime statistics in an area where prohibition was not enforced.

That's like saying the speed limit causes people to speed... just look at Chicago. Yeah, but they don't enforce the speed limit in Chicago. You can drive 100 mph, and the police will not pull you over at all.

 

[AceRothstein]

Europe's Shadow

Why shouldn't American be allowed to talk about narcotics consumption more freely when the Dutch sell it openly in bars and cafes while European stewardesses involve themselves in lucrative opium-smuggling operations?

If the Colorado experiment does not work out, people just might claim that the USA is somehow culturally lagging behind Holland in the department of 'libertine consumerism.'

I don't give a crap what Europe does. Nor do I care if 'people might claim'. Are we so pathetic of a people, that all we worry about is what other people might say?

.

And how many had problems with Alcohol in 2012

About 10,000 innocent people were killed by drunk drivers

About 35,000 Alcohol related crashes

About 20,000 related deaths from Liver and Cancer disease

About 3,000,000 were victims of an Alcohol related Violence

.

I don't understand this comment at all. What is your point? What the purpose of this post?

It's like "this pill can cause death", and having the response "Yeah well people can die from Aspirin too!"

Yeah... that's true. Does that change ANYTHING we just said?

There are places in America today, where Alcohol is banned. If you want to have a drink, you have to drive to a different town or city to get it.

If you want to debate the pros- and cons- of that policy, feel free to do so in a thread about Alcohol.

This thread is about legalized pot. When you bring up Alcohol, you just lost the debate. We're all back in school, and you are flicking spit wads across the room, and when caught going "yeah well billy did X!" We don't care. We're not talking about alcohol.

We are discussing legalized intoxicants consumed by Adults.

It is not terribly mysterious why you' d try to exclude a traditional intoxicant from a non traditional one: otherwise you have no grounds for debate.

We're not excluding. If you want to debate banning alcohol, let's debate that. That saying X is bad, does not mean Y is good.

In fact, it is EXACTLY because of the alcohol problem, that I'm against legalizing this. There were people just like you, claiming that Alcohol doesn't cause crime, doesn't cause problems, and because of that we legalized Alcohol.

Now you are pointing at that, as if that's a success of your 'legalize it" past. It's not, It's exactly the proof we shouldn't legalize these drugs.

Alcohol "doesn't cause crime, doesn't cause problems...and because of that we legalized alcohol?"

So I guess during prohibition, there was no crime, huh genius?

Especially when we don't enforce the law.

The argument goes on about the speed limit. We have too many speeders. Let's lower the speed limit then. Now we have even more speeders.

Removing the law doesn't make crime go away. It makes it worse.

The key is enforcement. If Chicago had ruthlessly enforced the law, Capone would never have existed. If New York had ruthlessly enforced the law, there would not have been speakeasy's all over the city.

The problem is, we don't enforce the law. That's all there is too it.

Again, Singapore does not have these problems, not because they don't have laws, but because they ruthlessly enforce the law.

You keep referring to crime during the prohibition. But the problem was, we didn't enforce the laws. In the states where prohibition was completely enforced, there were no Al Capones.

Any law that you don't enforce... is going to look like a failure.

You are comparing apples and oranges. Singapore is a city state of 276 sq mi with less than 5.5 million people and no land border with another country. The US is over 13,000 times larger than Singapore and 60 times the population with massive international land borders. We already spend $50 billion dollars annually in the failure that is known as the "War on Drugs". How much more do you want to spend?

 

[chikenwing]

Nope they w

.

And how many had problems with Alcohol in 2012

About 10,000 innocent people were killed by drunk drivers

About 35,000 Alcohol related crashes

About 20,000 related deaths from Liver and Cancer disease

About 3,000,000 were victims of an Alcohol related Violence

.

yep... I've yet to hear of someone in a bar fight after getting high.

they just eat your chips,have yet to see anyone grow pot muscles,beer muscles all the time.

 

[jillian]

Two wrongs make a right ? Since when ?

there is no justification for treating pot differently than alcohol.

and there is no justification for the massive expenditures on the judicial system and prisons to feed the anti-pot types.

 

[bripat9643]

Alcohol consumption didn't go down during prohibition. It went up.

There is conflicting evidence on that, depending on location. Some areas heavily enforced the law, and by any measure I personally have seen, the consumption went down, and crime did not go up as significantly as you suggest..

Immaterial.

You've already postulated making alcohol illegal = MUCH LOWER CRIME

It was tried. It failed.

Argument over, make sure you pick up your prize at the door.

Saying that, and proving that, are two different things.

Rule number one... you can't look at crime statistics in an area where prohibition was not enforced.

That's like saying the speed limit causes people to speed... just look at Chicago. Yeah, but they don't enforce the speed limit in Chicago. You can drive 100 mph, and the police will not pull you over at all.

No, isn't like saying the speed limit causes people to speed. People have very good reasons not to speed. What reason do they have for not having a beer? None that I can fathom.

 

[Samson]

No, isn't like saying the speed limit causes people to speed. People have very good reasons not to speed. What reason do they have for not having a beer? None that I can fathom.

Some may abuse EtOH (or THC), so the Theory is that if NONE is legally available, and if large expenditures of wealth and resources are made to prevent the availability of either (or both) intoxicants, then there will be NO ABUSE.

The USA has tested the theory with both EtOH, and THC, and discovered that enforcing the bans was not only impossible, but remarkably impractical. Instead, the costs of regulating either intoxicant are more than covered by the tax revenue they can produce.

However, we must recognize that EtOH IS NOT THC. While society has a long history of consuming EtOH, legal consumption of THC is a relatively new phenomena in the USA. Many municipalities in Colorado ban the sale of THC, while others only license legal sales to a very few, select merchants who are able to demonstrate an ability to provide the product under strict marketing criteria.

Finally, while consuming THC may be legal, having THC in your body may be grounds for dismissal from your employer. Unlike EtOH, which the human body rapidly metabolizes, THC remains detectable for MUCH LONGER periods. While one may avoid jail time, the risks of becoming unemployed can be just as punitive a consequence.

 

[Andylusion]

You are comparing apples and oranges. Singapore is a city state of 276 sq mi with less than 5.5 million people and no land border with another country. The US is over 13,000 times larger than Singapore and 60 times the population with massive international land borders. We already spend $50 billion dollars annually in the failure that is known as the "War on Drugs". How much more do you want to spend?

I don't want to spend a single cent more.

It's not about money. You can spend 100 Trillion dollars on 'the war on drugs'™ and still fail, if you don't enforce the law.

What do I mean by enforce the law? KILL THEIR BUTTS.

Singapore FRIES drug dealers. You go there, and sell one gram of cocain, and they KILL your butt.

SHOCKINGLY... that's a pretty big deterrent.

What do we do here? We put them in prison, where they meet up with all the other drug dealers, setup all sorts of new connections, and new markets, and new suppliers, and when they get released, they are twice the drug dealer they were when they went in.

FRY THEIR A$$. Dead drug dealers, never deal again. Singapore proves it.

This is why Asians come here, and are absolutely shocked that we let these people stay in society. I can still remember this Laotion girl talking to me, with this quizzical look, asking why we just let these criminals run around in our country. It's really sad that some foreigner has to come here to ask us why we don't have common sense anymore.