• 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!

Mexican Drug Cartel Allegedly Puts a Price on Arizona Sheriff's Head

Catz Part Deux said:
No. They would continue to utilize their existing personnel and networks to sell meth, cocaine, heroin, and other drugs.
Click to expand...

But there is a finite market for those products that is already being satiated. The scope of the cartels operations would be reduced, they would not be able to fill the void of lost marijuana trafficking revenue with those products.

Not to mention marijuana is the drug that has the most bulk, taking this out of the cartels hands greatly reduces the amount of goods that are smuggled across border, which also reduces illegal border crossings, and the need to entice people to mule bales of marijuana across the border in exchange for facilitating their illegal entry into the country, and also eliminating the illegal squatting and farming in our national forests that the cartels are so heavily involved in.

I do agree with you that it is not a solution to the problem, but it is a step in the right direction. I would rather all drugs be legalized and completely eradicate the cartel from drug profits altogether
 
marduc said:
But there is a finite market for those products that is already being satiated. The scope of the cartels operations would be reduced, they would not be able to fill the void of lost marijuana trafficking revenue with those products.
Click to expand...

Actually, with highly addictive drugs like meth, there is a nearly constantly expanding market.
 
Catz Part Deux said:
Actually, with highly addictive drugs like meth, there is a nearly constantly expanding market.
Click to expand...

Seriously how many people do you think would suddenly decide to start using Meth? Those who are inclined to use do, and those who know better already stay away. People are not going to suddenly decide to use meth just because the cartels try to smuggle in more.

But speaking of addictive drugs and an ever expanding market, how about that ever expanding heroin market.. the addiction rate (as a percentage of our population) has been virtually flat for over a century now, independent of legality and availability.
 
Catz Part Deux said:
No. They would continue to utilize their existing personnel and networks to sell meth, cocaine, heroin, and other drugs.
Click to expand...

But they would do so legally and with regulations, and consumers would be more prone to purchase recreational drugs from regulated businesses than from unregulated criminal businesses.
 
samsmart said:
But they would do so legally and with regulations, and consumers would be more prone to purchase recreational drugs from regulated businesses than from unregulated criminal businesses.
Click to expand...

I am sorry, there is no way in hell that the cartels should be involved in any way shape or form with distribution. any interested parties need to be thoroughly vetted legitimate business interests with full control, monitoring, and custody of the supply chain from the farm to the store.
 
Last edited:
marduc said:
I am sorry, there is no way in hell that the cartels should be involved in any way shape or form with distribution. any interested parties need to be thoroughly vetted legitimate business interests with full control, monitoring, and custody of the supply chain from the farm to the store.
Click to expand...

I have no problem with separating production of recreational drugs with distribution. I'm just saying that I believe in the legalization of recreational drugs, and it should be regulated. If such regulations call for separation of production and distribution, very well then.
 
samsmart said:
I have no problem with separating production of recreational drugs with distribution. I'm just saying that I believe in the legalization of recreational drugs, and it should be regulated. If such regulations call for separation of production and distribution, very well then.
Click to expand...

We are veering off onto a tangent now, but separation of production and distribution is not what I am advocating at all, I am advocating full custody from production to distribution with zero room for former cartel/black market criminal elements to engage in the trade at any level.

I know you are on the same page as I as advocating legalization, but I feel that one of the major reasons for legalization is to eliminate the black market and cartel involvement, they are intolerable, the cancer need to be amputated, and the cartels then should be discarded and left to kill each other off for what few scraps remain. There needs to be no trace of their infection left in the drug trade, and the wound needs to be completely cauterized. So while I agree in principle with you regarding legalization, I have major issues with the idea of "legitimizing" criminals and cartels.
 
Last edited:
marduc said:
We are veering off onto a tangent now, but separation of production and distribution is not what I am advocating at all, I am advocating full custody from production to distribution with zero room for former cartel/black market criminal elements to engage in the trade at any level.

I know you are on the same page as I as advocating legalization, but I feel that one of the major reasons for legalization is to eliminate the black market and cartel involvement, they are intolerable, the cancer need to be amputated, and the cartels then should be discarded and left to kill each other off for what few scraps remain. There needs to be no trace of their infection left in the drug trade, and the wound needs to be completely cauterized. So while I agree in principle with you regarding legalization, I have major issues with the idea of "legitimizing" criminals and cartels.
Click to expand...

OH! I misunderstood your post then. If the government deems fit to make a law that those convicted of drug crimes can't be involved in the legitimate recreational drug trade if it becomes legalized, I have no problem with that either.
 
marduc said:
Seriously how many people do you think would suddenly decide to start using Meth? Those who are inclined to use do, and those who know better already stay away. People are not going to suddenly decide to use meth just because the cartels try to smuggle in more.
Click to expand...

In the group that is 18-25 and living in rural or suburban areas? Lots.
 
samsmart said:
But they would do so legally and with regulations, and consumers would be more prone to purchase recreational drugs from regulated businesses than from unregulated criminal businesses.
Click to expand...

Your perspective on this matter is touchingly naive.
 
Catz Part Deux said:
Your perspective on this matter is touchingly naive.
Click to expand...

Yeah, because the proliferation of McDonald's and Burger King hasn't cut back at all on the illegal practice of grilling up dogs and cats for their cheaper meat.
 
Catz Part Deux said:
In the group that is 18-25 and living in rural or suburban areas? Lots.
Click to expand...

and in that group those who have a propensity to use, either use or will use.

And yes there will be exceptions and those who would be exposed and those who would use regardless, but as a whole exposure to the black market and consequently exposure to inadvertent casual first use experiences because their pot dealer, or fellow marijuana smoking friends happened to have access to meth as well would decline too. This points to pressures favorable for decreased usage, not increased.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom