• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Mexico is just getting worse

The legalazation of something would likely peak the interested in a lot of people, especially when they are out partying on a Friday night and stop into 711 when they are drunk and high on weed and can pick up some meth and herion. There are very few meth heads, crack heads, ect that are productive in any society. We don't need to be taking hard working Americans and helping them turn into junkies. We need to be doing the opposite. The value of making these substances illegal is because they have been proven to take over a persons life even when initially used recreationally and destroy it completely. Can you name any benefits of legalizing meth?

Yes. The benefits of legalizing meth is that we will spend less money for police, prisons, and the court system. Instead, that money can be used for rehabilitating meth addicts that want it.

Because they can get rehabilitation rather than a prison sentence, they won't be considered a felon. Therefore they won't be automatically dismissed from job interviews for being an ex-convict with a felony on their record. Which will make it easier for them to get a job after they've gotten their life straight.

Because meth will be legal, companies will be in charge of providing it. As opposed to current manufacturers now - drug criminals. And because legal businesses will resolve conflicts via the court system, rather than through street violence, less drug violence overall will happen.

Because meth is legal it can be taxed, and thus is a revenue generator for the government and can be used for projects for the general beneficial use of the people. As opposed to right now in which those who sell meth pay no monies to the government, and so enjoys greater profits because of it without being required to give back to society in the form of taxes.

And those are only the benefits to legalizing meth I can think of off the top of my head. I'm sure I could think of more if I really thought about it.
 
Do people REALLY believe legalizing marijuana solves this? Hey...Im all for legalizing pot...always have been and NOT to fight the drug war. But the real money is not in pot...its in heroin, and meth, and other smaller, more easily portable drugs. One of the reasons we see reduced meth labs in America is the production and distribution from mexico has gotten so much better and more efficient. So...do we decriminalize ALL drug use? Just stop arresting people? That stops usage...how exactly?

Will marijuana legalization solve the problem? Probably not. But it will reduce the influence of cartels by robbing them of a significant chunk of their income. You're right, probably, that the profit margins are higher for meth and heroin, but there's also a much smaller market for those drugs. I've seen different estimates as to how much of cartel revenue stems from pot, but it's somewhere between 25%-60%. Even if it's the low end number, a 25% reduction in revenue is a body blow to those organizations.
 
Conversation doesnt stop there.

Since he missed Monday and was sitting home all day so he went ahead and got high again. Which screwed him over on going to work Tuesday too. That pissed his boss off who suspends him for a few days. So he decides to get high again since he is upset about the suspension. Ultimately leads to him getting fired. Which luckily for him he can fall back on our welfare system till he gets back on his feet. Which could take a while when you have a track record of poor attendance at your previous job and your piss is dirty. And in the job interview your teeth are rotting out of your head and your potentially new boss is watching your cold sweats shakes as you try to think of an answer. In hindsight offering to suck his dick for $20 probably wasnt helpful either. After a long while with this the guy will likely enroll in some type of rehab at the tax payers expense to help him clean up and get off the heroin. During that time he decides he should probably sue the manufacturer who is legally selling it for ruining his life draining our tax money and wasting a courts time. he will likely win because we always hold others accountable here in AMerica for our own failures. With that money he will "celebrate" and the cycle will start again.

As opposed to what happens to drug addicts now.

They smoke some pot and get busted for it so they go to jail on a felony drug conviction.

He's young and doesn't make a lot of money so he can't pay fees for a good lawyer so he makes a deal. Only the prosecutor wants to get elected as governor, so he's a hard ass and makes the kid do jail time.

So he's imprisoned with hardcore gang members and, just to survive, he is forced to join one. They teach him skills criminals use to make it in the world since he's got nothing better to do. He's also at risk of being assaulted, raped, or murdered.

He gets out eventually and tries to get a job somewhere. Only he's got a felony drug conviction on his record, and the biggest employers automatically disallow hiring of ex-felons. Which means it's incredibly difficult for him to get a decent basic job.

But nobody else is going to pay for him to live. He's got to earn. Which means he goes back to the gang that took care of him in prison because, hey, at least they will take care of him. So he earns his way by committing more serious crimes.

Eventually he gets caught and the cycle continues. Or he winds up dead.

Either way, it can be argued that people are less productive. But with my way at least there is less violence, especially against innocents.
 
Its not a popular message...but if you are going to combat certain groups, you have to play on their terms. You have to be ruthless, brutal, merciless. Frankly...most people dont have the stomach to accept the fact, let alone to engage.

We don't have the money either.

How much do we really want to pay in taxes to keep people from getting high?
 
By that logic if we legalize murders then hitmen would be out of a job. We could legalize rape and put prostitutes out of jobs. You could legalize every crime and then we wouldn't have criminals at all right?

Murder and rape are crimes because they are impositions of violence against other people.

When a person chooses to take a recreational drug himself there is no violence against anyone.

You cannot equate the two.

How exactly do you properly regulate a product that is so addictive people will sell their bodies, children, rob, kill, ect to get?

For one, you can limit the supply to how much people can get at a time. Now will there be people who will get a work-around on this? Yes. But there will also be less violence involved as well.

So we should help people get addicted to heroin, meth and crack then pay to help them get off it. Does that really sound productive?

Legalization of drugs isn't helping people getting addicted to drugs. Not any more than allowing tobacco to be legal to smoke helps people to become smokers. Or not any more than allowing alcohol to be drunk helps people to become alcoholics.

And treatment for those who want to get help is a more efficient use of resources that trying to stop everyone who wants to use them through the use of violence.

If criminals and the like start fighting instead of fighting back we should tuck our tails between our legs and give in? Give in to lawlessness and any resemblence of decency and hope that if we legalize everything that people will eventually grow tired it all? Seriously?

I think it is more decent to just allow people to use the recreational drugs they want to than to allow the drug trade to stay criminalized so only criminals control it and those who use drugs are put in jail with other criminals whose crimes victimize others. Especially when the latter comes out of taxes that I have to pay for.
 
Unfortunately, the general population of Mexico doesn't seem to have the backbone or the heart to fix the problems which are currently plaguing the country. As a general rule, the Mexican people are a good-natured, hard-working, simple, family-centered group of people. That being said, they don't like to face problems head-on, because they don't want the cultural disturbance it would cause. I have a lot of friends who are Mexican immigrants. Whenever I ask them questions or make observations about what is happening in Mexico, they invariably want to close their eyes to the situation, as if they can just wish it away, and they have an attitude that the people causing the problem need appeasement. It's very sad.

This is true to an extent. But I really think that the crux of the matter is that the Mexican people don't have the economy needed to police the drug trade effectively.

The drug trade is such big business that Mexico doesn't have an economy sufficient enough to compete with it. Therefore, they can't pay the monies needed to properly clamp down on it.

Afghanistan has the same problem in regards to opium. Farmers don't grow poppy because they want to be criminals - they grow poppies because it's one of the few things that thrives, and so they grow it as a cash crop to earn them some money. They do it because poppy farming is one of the few economically viable industries they have.
 
Murder and rape are crimes because they are impositions of violence against other people.

When a person chooses to take a recreational drug himself there is no violence against anyone.

You cannot equate the two.

People are far more violent on drugs. That has been shown.

For one, you can limit the supply to how much people can get at a time. Now will there be people who will get a work-around on this? Yes. But there will also be less violence involved as well.

No it wouldnt. You'd have a bunch of meth heads running around robbing and killing people for their meth. It would likely cause more violence.

Legalization of drugs isn't helping people getting addicted to drugs. Not any more than allowing tobacco to be legal to smoke helps people to become smokers. Or not any more than allowing alcohol to be drunk helps people to become alcoholics.

And treatment for those who want to get help is a more efficient use of resources that trying to stop everyone who wants to use them through the use of violence.

You have got to be kidding. This is just rediculous.

I think it is more decent to just allow people to use the recreational drugs they want to than to allow the drug trade to stay criminalized so only criminals control it and those who use drugs are put in jail with other criminals whose crimes victimize others. Especially when the latter comes out of taxes that I have to pay for.

You dont fix crime by legalizing criminal behaviors. That is completely absurd.
 
People are far more violent on drugs. That has been shown.

Depends on the drug. Meth and PCP can lead to violence. Psychedelics emphatically do not. With respect to marijuana, there have been about a dozen major studies (generally commissioned by governments) over the course of the last century or so that have universally demonstrated that marijuana does not lead to violent or aggressive behavior (or, criminal behavior of any stripe). Pretty much the only thing pot leads to is junk food and an unhealthy obsession with pink floyd.
 
Last edited:
People are far more violent on drugs. That has been shown.

Not every drug that is illegal causes violent behavior in drug users.

And most drug violence occurs for control of the drug trade. Take away that criminal impetus to control the drug trade and you take away the major cause of drug violence.

No it wouldnt. You'd have a bunch of meth heads running around robbing and killing people for their meth. It would likely cause more violence.

No it wouldn't, especially if we allowed meth addicts to hold low skilled jobs and didn't discriminate against them. Allow them to earn the money for them to feed their addictions and they will.

You have got to be kidding. This is just rediculous.

And yet you didn't address that point. So it's perfectly valid.

You dont fix crime by legalizing criminal behaviors. That is completely absurd.

Except not every behavior is worth being criminalized. And using recreational drugs isn't a behavior that is worth criminalizing. Therefore it should be legal.
 
Really to get to the root of the problem it is up to the Mexican government to have better control of their nation. There is little we can do in the way of controlling drugs ourself. In Afghanistan, creating poppy plants is a way of life; we have tried to retrain farmers out there to grow stuff like soy beans and such but it just doesn't stick. When we leave they go right back to the poppy seeds because it is much easier and profitable for them to grow.
" ".......

. Another big part could be to work with the Mexican government and deploy a couple hundred troops to Mexico.

Frankly, the Mexican government is just about as corrupt as the drug cartels. The officials are easily bought off, and answer to no one.

As for sending some of our troops- hell no.
 
You dont fix crime by legalizing criminal behaviors. That is completely absurd.

exactly - just because it's not a criminal offense doesn't mean it's not a negative blight and a problem to deal with.

We already deal with drunks and those who do dabbled in illicit drugs quite enough as it is *with* it being controlled and/or illegal . . . so increase all that? Nope - not doing it.
 
Do people REALLY believe legalizing marijuana solves this? Hey...Im all for legalizing pot...always have been and NOT to fight the drug war. But the real money is not in pot...its in heroin, and meth, and other smaller, more easily portable drugs. One of the reasons we see reduced meth labs in America is the production and distribution from mexico has gotten so much better and more efficient. So...do we decriminalize ALL drug use? Just stop arresting people? That stops usage...how exactly?

It doesn't necessarily stop usage, which is true.

But what is does do is stop violence caused by criminal organizations who seek to control the drug trade while it is criminalized.

It will also allow us to spend our tax revenue on prohibiting much more important crimes, such as human trafficking and sex slavery, which are huge problems right now. So what I would like to see is the elimination of the DEA but for the money we spent on that to prohibit the modern slave trade.

I think that is a much worse problem that trying to stop people who want to use drugs themselves.
 
This is true to an extent. But I really think that the crux of the matter is that the Mexican people don't have the economy needed to police the drug trade effectively.

The drug trade is such big business that Mexico doesn't have an economy sufficient enough to compete with it. Therefore, they can't pay the monies needed to properly clamp down on it.

They don't really collectively want to clamp down on it. They would prefer to ignore it, in the hopes that it will just go away.

You're likely right with the Afghanistan/poppy analogy, but I would think that with the level of industriousness among the Mexican people, they would be able to come up with some other industries which could enrich the country as a whole.
 
People are far more violent on drugs. That has been shown.

Depends on the drug. Meth? Maybe. Pot? No way in hell. Cocaine? Maybe, depending on the underlying personality of the individual using. Meth is often home-manufactured, so I wouldn't worry too much about Mexican meth and cartel violence issue.
 
I've never believed that - obviously: that's what I support with my stance against them.

I can see it now: we legalize one source of an illicit substance and quickly - when crime and immoral activities directly related to it increases - our government is slaughtered for it and I'm proven correct.

Now how ever much I love to be right - i'd rather not find out *that* way.

The crime and immoral activities that result from drug legalization will be far less than the crime and immoral activities that result from drug criminalization.

Take alcohol for instance. Do people still get drunk, drive drunk, and do alcohol-related violence? Yes, they do.

But what has been taken out of the equation is criminal organizations killing each other, police, and innocent citizens in controlling the alcohol trade.

And I think that that reduction in organized violence will be worth the downsides of drug legalization.
 
It doesn't necessarily stop usage, which is true.

But what is does do is stop violence caused by criminal organizations who seek to control the drug trade while it is criminalized.

It will also allow us to spend our tax revenue on prohibiting much more important crimes, such as human trafficking and sex slavery, which are huge problems right now. So what I would like to see is the elimination of the DEA but for the money we spent on that to prohibit the modern slave trade.

I think that is a much worse problem that trying to stop people who want to use drugs themselves.

so - it's a lose-lose situation.

Illegal = drug cartels, individuals and dealers are violent and dominating
Legal = drug manufacturers, individuals and dealers are violent and dominating

The % spread of who's violent and what they do - that's what changes. Aren't we tapped out with it being illegal already?
 
exactly - just because it's not a criminal offense doesn't mean it's not a negative blight and a problem to deal with.

True enough, but that doesn't mean that treating a given negative blight as a criminal offense is a particularly effective solution. The utter failure of our war on drugs pretty clearly demonstrates that such is the case.

We already deal with drunks and those who do dabbled in illicit drugs quite enough as it is *with* it being controlled and/or illegal . . . so increase all that? Nope - not doing it.

You're making the assumption that decriminalizing a drug invariably leads to increased rates of usage. That is not true. In fact the evidence from places like Portugal and the Netherlands tends to suggest exactly the opposite.
 
Not every drug that is illegal causes violent behavior in drug users.

And most drug violence occurs for control of the drug trade. Take away that criminal impetus to control the drug trade and you take away the major cause of drug violence.



No it wouldn't, especially if we allowed meth addicts to hold low skilled jobs and didn't discriminate against them. Allow them to earn the money for them to feed their addictions and they will.



And yet you didn't address that point. So it's perfectly valid.



Except not every behavior is worth being criminalized. And using recreational drugs isn't a behavior that is worth criminalizing. Therefore it should be legal.

Simply put why dont you check with the people who's lives have been affected by crystal meth use. Talk to the people trying to get off it. Talk to those who have lost everything to it. Talk to the woman letting men mutilate their bodies for a hit. Talk to the men doing the same. Talk the parents who's children are on it. Talk to the children who's parents are on it. Talk to those people and ask them if more people should be doing meth. Ask them if it should be more readily available. Let me know how that works out for you.
 
I was talking about drugs use in general, which has gone down now that resources have been diverted into rehabilitation. But yes i think legalization would certainly take away the allure for teenagers.

And education too.

Cigarette smoking has decreased dramatically since education on the bad health results of smoking cigarettes have been taught to kids.
 
Simply put why dont you check with the people who's lives have been affected by crystal meth use. Talk to the people trying to get off it. Talk to those who have lost everything to it. Talk to the woman letting men mutilate their bodies for a hit. Talk to the men doing the same. Talk the parents who's children are on it. Talk to the children who's parents are on it. Talk to those people and ask them if more people should be doing meth. Ask them if it should be more readily available. Let me know how that works out for you.

I will when you talk to the hundreds of people who have had family and friends killed in Mexico because of the cartels trying to control the illegal drug trade.
 
And education too.

Cigarette smoking has decreased dramatically since education on the bad health results of smoking cigarettes have been taught to kids.

I was watching this documentary on Portuguese drug policy some time back and they went around Lisbon asking teenagers if they smoked pot and they all said words to the effect of "No! of course not! Its bad for you!" whereas teenagers here would show of about how rebellious they where.
 
Somehow I think that cigarettes, or coffee is just a little different than heroin, and cocaine....


j-mac

Cigarettes and coffee have addictive properties too. Nicotine and caffeine are drugs too. There are adverse health effects for both nicotine and caffeine. But we allow them to be legal.
 
Simply put why dont you check with the people who's lives have been affected by crystal meth use. Talk to the people trying to get off it. Talk to those who have lost everything to it. Talk to the woman letting men mutilate their bodies for a hit. Talk to the men doing the same. Talk the parents who's children are on it. Talk to the children who's parents are on it. Talk to those people and ask them if more people should be doing meth. Ask them if it should be more readily available. Let me know how that works out for you.

Well, obviously the illegal status of the drugs did not prevent their use, and their ruination of lives.
 
Well......if the Portugal does it we should too!

We shouldn't do it just because Portugal does it.

We should do it because it will be more effective than what we're doing now, just as it is more effective in Portugal than what they were previously doing.
 
I think that the best answer would be what Auntie mentioned - let the police get everything under control. But how would they? They have Presidential elections going on right now. I haven't read up alot on the candidates, but are they corrupt, too? Is it going to be just another warm body in that position, who looks the other way while 38 people are beheaded and stuffed into a car, or 9 people are hung from an overpass?

If this was happening in America, what would we do?
Last year before deciding on San Diego for a vacation using my RCI timeshare, I was seriously looking at an all inclusive resort in Cancun. There is a reason why there are many all inclusive resorts in Mexico.... Personally, if I want to go somewhere, I want to experience that culture and see the place. It was highly advised not to go into Cancun much, definitely during the day and if going into the city to not do so alone and to stay in the main parts. Its just not worth it right now.
 
Back
Top Bottom