To Protect and to Serve II

#13,830
#13,830
hog88 said:
Or legalize all drugs and just punish those that commit violent crimes and theft. But of course those would go way down if we ended the WoDs.
Click to expand...
How would the legalization cause thefts and violent crimes to drop? California and Colorado are great examples of this big lie. Hogg, you’re invited to the beer summit. Lol
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77
#13,831
#13,831
tim said:
Reagan recognized the problem, Clinton supplied the cops, and Bush supplied the laws and US attorneys. It was going well
Click to expand...
I don't think Reagan personally had involvement or knowledge of this, but the CIA and others helped to create the drug problem in the 1980s.

And Clinton? Really? Have you heard of Mena, Arkansas? Barry Seal?
 
#13,833
#13,833
Rasputin_Vol said:
The way drug laws are enforced, cops routinely violate the 4th Amendment and the court system violates the 8th Amendment with their ridiculous sentences for possession and distribution.

And your comment about "Arrest all the druggies" is ridiculous pre-crime talk.
Click to expand...
Examples of “4th and 8th amendment violations”?
 
#13,834
#13,834
hog88 said:
Or legalize all drugs and just punish those that commit violent crimes and theft. But of course those would go way down if we ended the WoDs.
Click to expand...
Imagine thinking that 75-80% of violence and thefts are not related to drugs and that more people using and being involved in drug dealing would reduce that #
 
  • Like
Reactions: tim
#13,835
#13,835
tim said:
How would the legalization cause thefts and violent crimes to drop? California and Colorado are great examples of this big lie. Hogg, you’re invited to the beer summit. Lol
Click to expand...
One thing that’s not a widely publicized fact that weed is legal there, it’s also highly taxed. So as a result the black market is still thriving.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NurseGoodVol, hog88 and Rasputin_Vol
#13,838
#13,838
tim said:
But possession is legal. Crime still rises. Particularly property and personal crimes.
Click to expand...
The black market is still thriving. Only weed is legal in Washington and Colorado. Think of it like an alcohol market. People who choose to use need cheaper alternatives, like the cheaper beer brands or even cheaper cigarettes. If they commit crimes of violence then charge them for those crimes. We’re literally engaged in a dog chasing his own tail scenario with the drug war. Look at what happened after prohibition ended.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NurseGoodVol and hog88
#13,839
#13,839
Rickyvol77 said:
Examples of “4th and 8th amendment violations”?
Click to expand...
4th Amendment: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Civil asset forfeiture, having no probable cause, roadside vehicle searches, DUI roadblocks

8th Amendment: Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Sentencing for drug crimes related to possession and distribution, and discrepancy in sentencing that was there between powder cocaine and crack.
 
#13,840
#13,840
DEFENDTHISHOUSE said:
The black market is still thriving. Only weed is legal in Washington and Colorado. Think of it like an alcohol market. People who choose to use need cheaper alternatives, like the cheaper beer brands or even cheaper cigarettes. If they commit crimes of violence then charge them for those crimes. We’re literally engaged in a dog chasing his own tail scenario with the drug war.
Click to expand...
1F85D2D2-0A64-4760-81C9-2504381144AE.png
 
#13,842
#13,842
Rasputin_Vol said:
4th Amendment: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Civil asset forfeiture, having no probable cause, roadside vehicle searches, DUI roadblocks

8th Amendment: Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Sentencing for drug crimes related to possession and distribution, and discrepancy in sentencing that was there between powder cocaine and crack.
Click to expand...
I don’t agree with civil asset forfeitures or roadblocks however they aren’t constitutional violations. And “roadside” vehicle searches on traffic stops have probable cause with K9 searches or other legal circumstances. If not, they would be thrown out in court.

As for your 8th amendment nonsense, the government’s three branches legally set drug laws and you can disagree with them, but it’s not “cruel or unusual” to put drug dealers in jail for their crimes regardless of what drug it is
 
#13,845
#13,845
Rasputin_Vol said:
4th Amendment: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Civil asset forfeiture, having no probable cause, roadside vehicle searches, DUI roadblocks

8th Amendment: Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Sentencing for drug crimes related to possession and distribution, and discrepancy in sentencing that was there between powder cocaine and crack.
Click to expand...
At the time, crack was responsible for gang wars and a rise in violent crime. Although Meth was added to this sentencing level for the same reasons.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77
#13,848
#13,848
Rickyvol77 said:
I don’t agree with civil asset forfeitures or roadblocks however they aren’t constitutional violations. And “roadside” vehicle searches on traffic stops have probable cause with K9 searches or other legal circumstances. If not, they would be thrown out in court.

As for your 8th amendment nonsense, the government’s three branches legally set drug laws and you can disagree with them, but it’s not “cruel or unusual” to put drug dealers in jail for their crimes regardless of what drug it is
Click to expand...

Ross Ulbricht - Wikipedia

In February 2015, Ulbricht was convicted of conspiracy to commit money laundering, conspiracy to commit computer hacking, conspiracy to traffic fraudulent identity documents, and conspiracy to traffic narcotics by means of the internet. In May 2015, he was sentenced to a double life sentence plus forty years without the possibility of parole.
Click to expand...

None of those "crimes" are remotely worthy of double life sentences...
 
  • Like
Reactions: VolStrom and DEFENDTHISHOUSE
#13,849
#13,849
tim said:
At the time, crack was responsible for gang wars and a rise in violent crime. Although Meth was added to this sentencing level for the same reasons.
Click to expand...
You mean the same crack cocaine that you willingly admit that the CIA was involved in? How many of those people at the top were given harsh sentences? Hell, how many even went to jail?
 
  • Like
Reactions: DEFENDTHISHOUSE
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top