Amanda:

While the general feeling in Mexico (and my own opinion) is that this violence wouldn't be nearly as bad as it is if the US demand for illegal drugs weren't so huge, I applaud your efforts to try and get the upper hand over the cartels. While we try to get a handle on the demand, we will also try to help you get a handle on the supply end. If we all work together hopefully we can make a difference. It may seem slow going, but we'll get there eventually.

It is the U.S. war on drugs and drug prohibition that is the root cause of the violence in Mexico. It is because of the drug war and drug prohibition we have the organized crime and violence associated with illegal drug trafficking. It is very naive to think, one day, that drug use and demand in the U.S. will magically disappear. You seem to think after 40 years and a trillion dollars spent the drug war will eventually be successful. The reality is drugs are more readily available than ever before now and drug use has not been deterred to any great extent. To say the drug war has been "slow going" has to be the understatement of the year! The drug war and drug prohibition have spectacularly failed.

Do you really expect to spend another 40 years and another trillion dollars in fighting drugs and drug demand which have proven to be a part of human culture for thousands of years? You are dreaming to say the least. Because of drug prohibition, the cartels have grown exponentially in power and their profits have only skyrocketed.

As long as your are in support of perpetuating the drug war and drug prohibition (which will never succeed) you are the ones with blood on your hands.

It really comes down to a choice between the lesser of two evils. What kind of world do you want to live in?

1. A world with drug use and drug problems and a drug war?

-OR-

2. A world with drug use and drug problems?

I know which one I would choose to live in: one without a war in it.

End the insanity! End the drug war and drug prohibition!

One Dirty Rat said:

It is the U.S. war on drugs and drug prohibition that is the root cause of the violence in Mexico. It is because of the drug war and drug prohibition we have the organized crime and violence associated with illegal drug trafficking.

The demand for drugs, period, whether legal or illegal, is the root cause of lot of Mexico's and the US's ills. If the drugs weren't illegal, wouldn't there still be a demand for them? Look at prescription meds that are used and abused by the average person--Oxycodone, Methadone, Percocet. These are legal but the demand for them and the abuse of them is still an epidemic.

It is very naive to think, one day, that drug use and demand in the U.S. will magically disappear.

Drug use and demand in the US is never going to disappear. It's not what I was saying.

End the insanity! End the drug war and drug prohibition!

I will agree with you up to a point. Almost all drugs are helpful and beneficial to a certain extent. The problem is controlling it, to harness the benefits and eliminate the harm. I will say that I am not against the idea of someone being able to go and buy marijuana from the corner store--some of my colleagues here at work took a trip last year to Amsterdam on business and it's legal over there (one coworker bought marijuana from a coffeehouse and smoked it that evening at a strip club!!!) and it doesn't seem to have hurt the Dutch people any. However, 'harder' drugs like crack/cocaine, heroin--I think the potential harm outweighs the potential benefit and should remain 'illegal'unless you have a carefully-prescribed small dose of it for addiction treatment purposes.

@OneDirtyRat,

People have been killing each other since biblical times. It hasn't stopped in thousands of years. Shall we stop enforcing the laws against murder because we can't stop it?

Amanda:

The demand for drugs, period, whether legal or illegal, is the root cause of lot of Mexico's and the US's ills.

I disagree. Do you see violence and organized crime associated with alcohol trafficking? No, because alcohol is regulated. Because of alcohol prohibition in 20s/30s we had violence and organized crime associated with illegal alcohol trafficking. It's the laws that cause the most harm. When you make something illegal that has a high demand, there will be criminals that provide that product for the demand. Drug prohibition has created the EXACT same thing. It's not the drugs that cause the violence and deaths associated with illegal drug trafficking. It is the laws and drug prohibition that create the black market and huge profits in illegal drug trafficking. It's very simple cause and effect.

If the drugs weren't illegal, wouldn't there still be a demand for them?

That's exactly my point, whether drugs are legal or illegal there will always be a demand. I never said if you legalize drugs there will never be a demand. Yes, prescription drug abuse is rampant and needs to be addressed but even their being illegal to possess hasn't curbed their abuse. Education and rehabilitation is the key. Laws will not stop people from abusing them.

Drug use and demand in the US is never going to disappear. It's not what I was saying.

But did you not post earlier:

It may seem slow going, but we'll get there eventually.

You are contradicting yourself. You implied that the drug problem would "eventually" be solved. Unless what you mean is that "eventually" drug use and demand will be reduced and not eradicated. Yes, that does seem more logical and a possibility.

I totally agree marijuana should be legalized, taxed and regulated like alcohol.

I also agree the harder drugs are dangerous and I wouldn't advocate their use. But, the reality is people will choose to use those drugs and some will become addicted and ruin their lives. I think those drugs should be decriminalized and people with addictions to those drugs should be treated as medical patients, NOT as criminals. Do we arrest alcoholics and lock them up in jail just for being an alcoholic? But to keep those drugs from being profitable in a black market they should also be legalized and sold through controlled sources. Otherwise we will be back at square one. I firmly believe education is the key to keep people from becoming addicted to such drugs. Educate them on the dangers these drugs pose. And if they get into trouble with these drugs we can have rehabilitation for them to fall back on. And please understand not everyone who does drugs has a problem or is an addict. Some would say that if you do any amount of drugs you have a problem and need to be stuck in rehab. I disagree.

One Dirty Rat said:

It's the laws that cause the most harm. When you make something illegal that has a high demand, there will be criminals that provide that product for the demand. Drug prohibition has created the EXACT same thing. It's not the drugs that cause the violence and deaths associated with illegal drug trafficking. It is the laws and drug prohibition that create the black market and huge profits in illegal drug trafficking. It's very simple cause and effect.....But to keep those drugs from being profitable in a black market they should also be legalized and sold through controlled sources.....

Theoretical situation: if we legalized ALL drugs and started manufacturing here in the US, employees staling from their employer will go up. Those employees will steal from their employer and sell their stolen goods on the street. People will buy it because it's cheaper than in the store (it's untaxed.) Different street sellers will sell at different prices, some sellers will shoot the other sellers to eliminate the competition, and next thing you know there will be gangs involved in drugs again.

The only difference is that this time the drugs themselves aren't illegal, it's the activities around the drugs that are causing the problem. People will still be committing burglaries and robberies for stuff to sell to finance their habit, and they will go to the street seller with the lowest price because they don't want to pay the taxes in the stores. An addict will still shoot a dealer and take the entire stash because, while the drugs themselves aren't illegal, the addict doesn't want to have to pay the government's taxes for what he can have for the price of one bullet.

But did you not post earlier:

It may seem slow going, but we'll get there eventually.

You are contradicting yourself. You implied that the drug problem would "eventually" be solved. Unless what you mean is that "eventually" drug use and demand will be reduced and not eradicated. Yes, that does seem more logical and a possibility.

My comment was meant to say that by collaborating, eventually Mexico AND the US working together can reduce and control the cartel violence, keep it in check so the average citizen in Mexico can feel safer. Which was, after all, the point of the article.

And please understand not everyone who does drugs has a problem or is an addict. Some would say that if you do any amount of drugs you have a problem and need to be stuck in rehab. I disagree.

I'll agree with you on that one.

denver:

People have been killing each other since biblical times. It hasn't stopped in thousands of years. Shall we stop enforcing the laws against murder because we can't stop it?

How you equate murder with drug use baffles me.

Of course, we wouldn't legalize murder because there is a victim. How does someone smoking a joint have a victim? This is an illogical argument because murder causes harm to another where as a person's drug use does not. BUT, if the drug user commits a crime which causes harm to another, then they should be charged with that crime. People should be responsible for their drug use just like people should be responsible when driving a car. Car accidents kill tens of thousands every year but I don't see driving cars being criminalized.

I understand that some drugs may cause a person to lose control and then cause someone harm. But, doesn't alcohol do the same thing? Or eating an overabundance of Twinkies? I don't see anyone rushing out to make these things illegal.

The point is, making drugs illegal isn't going to stop this activity. We are doing more damage to our, and other, societies by having these draconian policies which have failed and cost us a great deal of tax payer money. The laws do more damage than the drugs themselves.

Trust me, no one who advocates for ending the drug advocates for legalizing murder. That is just absurd nonsense.

Amanda:

Theoretical situation: if we legalized ALL drugs and started manufacturing here in the US, employees staling from their employer will go up. Those employees will steal from their employer and sell their stolen goods on the street. People will buy it because it's cheaper than in the store (it's untaxed.) Different street sellers will sell at different prices, some sellers will shoot the other sellers to eliminate the competition, and next thing you know there will be gangs involved in drugs again........

I'm sorry to say this but this is completely absurd. Again, I refer to alcohol. While there may be some illegal activity surrounding illegal alcohol sales, it's nothing on the scale that you theorize would happen with drug legalization. If people could obtain their drugs from legal sources why would they take the number of chances you have put forward? People aren't going to associate themselves with criminal activity when they can obtain it from legal sources. Sure, some hard core addicts will do anything to get their fix, but how is that a reason to continue with the same failed policies?

You are basically fear mongering, posting what-ifs and what "possibly could happen". Sure, any or all of these things might happen, especially after legalization and we still have all of these drug dealers around. This will be a problem but I don't see it as a reason to continue with the same failed policies that DO NOT WORK!

My comment was meant to say that by collaborating, eventually Mexico AND the US working together can reduce and control the cartel violence, keep it in check so the average citizen in Mexico can feel safer. Which was, after all, the point of the article.

I agree. The cartels have become so powerful now IT IS going to take U.S. military involvement (happening now) to get them under control. But, it is so out of control now it's going to get a lot worse before it gets any better.

Just think, if the U.S. had never started this drug war and drug prohibition we wouldn't be seeing the level of violence we see in Mexico today. Drug demand would still exist but there wouldn't be the huge profits to be made from an illegal black market.

OneDirtyRat,

I equate murder with drug abuse insofar as they are both crimes and they both have victims. The slippery slope fallacy doesn't hold water. People who eat too many twinkies don't prostitute their children to obtain more twinkies.

denver:

Again, someone who is selling their children to obtain drugs is committing a crime against another and should be held responsible for their crime.

Doing drugs, alone, does not have a victim.

I stand by what I said earlier.

How you can call a person who smokes weed a murderer is beyond me.

If a person who is working on a construction site drops a crane-load of steel on my head because they weren't paying attention due to smoking pot then they are a killer (courts decide murder) because they were smoking pot.

Let's suppose that I accept your premise that "Doing drugs, alone, does not have a victim". Then the solution would be to allow anyone who can show they have earned enough income to support their family (if they have one) and purchase drugs should be allowed to do so, so long as they are alone in a room from the time they ingest the drugs until the time the drugs have left their system. Are you OK with that?

One dirty rat, forget it these people are more than likely in law enforcement and would like to be able to have job security. You know don't want the the ole stoker to be able to smoke a little weed, but, has never said a thing about the pharmaceutical companies that sell and distribute every drug know to man. Yes this is ok because they said it was. Notice the double standards in our society and it speaks for itself.

Let's ask and see what their diatribe will be about the pharmaceutical companies distributing drug and very harsh ones at that and have them say their piece on that! So what say ye; Amanda and Denver bill?

darrel,

Any legitimate question deserves an answer. I think that pharmaceutical companies who distribute drugs to doctors and pharmacies for prescribable use are fine. Heroin was invented as a cure for morphine addiction. The prevention, amelioration or cure of a medical condition is a legitimate use for any drug. I have no problem with medical marijuana, for instance. I think anyone who uses drugs for recreational purposes should at least acknowledge that their choice can have adverse effects on others, and anyone who prescribes or dispenses drugs for recreational use should be punished if doing so is illegal.

denver:

Then the solution would be to allow anyone who can show they have earned enough income to support their family (if they have one) and purchase drugs should be allowed to do so, so long as they are alone in a room from the time they ingest the drugs until the time the drugs have left their system.

The problem I have with that condition is who is going to set the guidelines for what is considered "enough" income?

Also, if you are going to put these restrictions on drug users, then you would also have to include people who drink alcohol and smoke tobacco, right?

And lastly, some drugs take a long period to leave the system. Marijuana, for example, can stayi the system for up to 30 days. Are you going to keep someone locked up in their house for 30 days even thought the effects of the drug wear off in about 3-5 hours?

darrel:

Yes, I know this is a huge waste of time trying to get these people to see the light. But, my real problem is when they come on these threads and start posting lies and falsehoods and misleading those people who don't know any better and they fall for it hook, line, and sinker.

There has to be another voice out there. There are two sides (whether right or wrong) to any issue and I can't sit idly by reading some of the pure BS here on the vine and not say anything.

It really pisses me off to no end.

OneDirtyRat,

I accepted your premise and proposed a solution. Instead of poking holes in my solution, why don't you offer something better? Or, if not, then just man up and say you don't think drug use is a problem.

Well, sorry to bust your bubble Bill, but when you offer ideas they are subject to review and aren't written in stone. I was agreeing with your solution but I had to state the obvious flaws, otherwise it wouldn't be a solution.

I did offer something better: make it legal just don't hurt nobody. If you do, you pay the consequences.

But you didn't accept that cuz it would mean the hippies win.

Or, if not, then just man up and say you don't think drug use is a problem.

Sorry, I won't fall for your trap.

The fact that you said "man up" says everything to me about the kind of person you are.

Be a man! Sheesh! I think we have too many people walking around trying to "be a man" and not realizing they are just human beings like everyone else.

No, I don't think responsible drug use is a problem. The real problem lies with people like you stigmatizing drug users and creating an atmosphere of bigotry towards a group of people.

You have a nice day, now, ya hear?

OneDirtyRat,

I agree with you that responsible drug use is not a problem. Responsible drug use (or anything use)implies knowing and addressing the potential problems before you decide to embark on that particular course of action. What I am concerned about is the irresponsible drug use. And I include alcohol in the list of drugs that are used irresponsibly. You have a nice day too.

One dirty rat said:

I'm sorry to say this but this is completely absurd. Again, I refer to alcohol. While there may be some illegal activity surrounding illegal alcohol sales, it's nothing on the scale that you theorize would happen with drug legalization.

There will still be illegal activity happening around legalized drugs, but it won't be on the same scale that is happening now. I never said 'nothing is going to change' I meant that illegal activity will still go on around drugs. Legalizing is not going to get rid of ALL illegal drug activity/gang activity.

If people could obtain their drugs from legal sources why would they take the number of chances you have put forward? People aren't going to associate themselves with criminal activity when they can obtain it from legal sources.

If the government ever got around to experimenting with legalization of drugs, there will be many who will buy it legally or not at all. But the government will tax it up the wazoo and and many addicts who can't afford what the government wants (taxes) in order to feed their habit (Those who take massive huge amounts) will resort to the cheap illegal stolen stuff on the streets. In other words, they can't afford the taxes.

Sure, some hard core addicts will do anything to get their fix, but how is that a reason to continue with the same failed policies?

I never once said that we should continue criminalizing all drugs. I never said we should decriminalize all drugs. I don't know enough about the statistics behind the drug war and have no personal experience with the stuff on which to come up with or frame any kind of policy to fix the problem.

You are basically fear mongering, posting what-ifs and what "possibly could happen". Sure, any or all of these things might happen, especially after legalization and we still have all of these drug dealers around. This will be a problem but I don't see it as a reason to continue with the same failed policies that DO NOT WORK!

I kinda don't see it as fear-mongering. I see it as looking at all the possible futures which COULD arise as a result of ALL drug legalization. Playing devil's advocate. Doing a 'what if' to try and look at possible ramifications. And my mind is still made up; decriminalize some but don't decriminalize ALL drugs.

Amanda:

Legalizing is not going to get rid of ALL illegal drug activity/gang activity.

I agree. What level of gang activity is acceptable to you? Taking drugs out of the control of organized crime and the cartels can only be beneficial. I think we should redirect our law enforcement towards controlling the trafficking of drugs and leave the drug users alone. Dealing illegal drugs would still be illegal without a license of some sort. It's the user we need to stop persecuting and stigmatizing.

many addicts who can't afford what the government wants (taxes) in order to feed their habit (Those who take massive huge amounts) will resort to the cheap illegal stolen stuff on the streets.

Look, I think we can both agree there are no absolutes. There will always be a black market, there will always be cartels, there will always be gangs, and there will always be drug use and demand, etc. We could spend another 40 years and another trillion dollars of tax payer money using the same failed policies with very little effect. Or, we could eliminate the cause of it all by making a change and taking new approaches to the problem that doesn't involve incarceration and a war.

decriminalize some but don't decriminalize ALL drugs.

OK. At least we agree that some change needs to be taken. We disagree as to the cause. I believe we have come to a cross roads and because you don't have any thing else to offer as far a solution is concerned we will keep going in circles with the debate.

People are dying, and that's the best advice you have to offer? Dude. Grow up.

Not EVERY Mexican is involved in drugs and wants to kill people, just like not EVERY American uses the illegal drugs the cartels supply. The majority of Mexicans are law abiding citizens caught in the middle of an unfortunate war caused by those who demand illegal drugs, those who supply it, and those who fight against it. A lot of the drug shipping is coming from further south, from Colombia and other South American countries through Mexico.

I wish we could help the law bidding Mexicans.

Amanda:

The majority of Mexicans are law abiding citizens caught in the middle of an unfortunate war caused by those who demand illegal drugs,...

Again, the cause is not the demand for illegal drugs. The cause is drug prohibition and the failed drug war.

Jackie said:

I wish we could help the law bidding Mexicans.

We are. The Obama administration has sent teams of our military advisors over to Mexico to train the Mexican army on how to interdict the cartel smuggling, since many of the ambush tactics the cartels' militant factions use are similar to tactics our soldiers were trained to detect and avoid and thus give them some defense against the cartels.

One Dirty Rat said:

Again, the cause is not the demand for illegal drugs. The cause is drug prohibition and the failed drug war.

If the demand for drugs were not present, there would not be a need to prohibit people who will abuse them from having them, and there would be no war.

Amanda:

If the demand for drugs were not present, there would not be a need to prohibit people who will abuse them from having them, and there would be no war.

But to say "if there was no demand" is irrelevant because, as you have all ready agreed, there will ALWAYS be a demand. If drugs had never been illegal and drug prohibition had not been instituted, my question to you is this: would there be a drug war? NO! Drug demand didn't create the drug war. The drug war was created by laws passed by the U.S. making them illegal thus creating the drug war and all of the violence and organized crime associated with ILLEGAL drug trafficking. Please tell me how drug demand creates a drug war? There is a huge demand for alcohol but I don't see anywhere an alcohol war. Do you?

One dirty rat said:

Please tell me how drug demand creates a drug war?

You're looking at it. The demand by people who didn't know how to be responsible about its use led to to government laws prohibiting the drug itself. The demand didn't stop, so the black market sprang up to supply the demand.

That's how the demand created the drug war.

Amanda:

The demand by people who didn't know how to be responsible about its use led to to government laws prohibiting the drug itself.

Irresponsible drug use was not the reason for the government to pass drug laws.

The history behind the drug war and drug prohibition is extensive and has more to do with money and corporate control.

Ever heard of "Refer Madness"? Please do more research into why drugs were criminalized and you will have a better understanding. The reason why drugs have been continued to be criminalized could be chalked up to irresponsible drug use but that is really not the main reason. Follow the money.

Amanda:

The demand by people who didn't know how to be responsible about its use led to to government laws prohibiting the drug itself.

Drugs were not made illegal because of irresponsible use.

The history of drug criminalization is extensive and has more to do with money and corporate control.

Have you heard of "Refer Madness"?

Please do more research into the reasons why drugs were criminalized and you will have a better understanding. Follow the money.

Here are some links:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hqFYC8pVP0

http://www.drugpolicy.org/facts/new-solutions-drug-policy/brief-history-drug-war

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/drugs/cron/

http://civilliberty.about.com/od/drugpolicy/tp/War-on-Drugs-History-Timeline.htm

Sorry for the double post. I didn't think the first post had gone through so I wrote it again. Oops.

Allamerican13,

The problem with putting troops on the border is that for some years the cartels have been getting some of their members to join the US military for the training and combat experience. Having Cartel members guarding the border might be counterproductive.

Hi, Rat. Keep swinging, I'd chip in some, but I have to go to work now.

I'll politely beg to differ with you on this one. I wouldn't consider a car bomb 'one of the most ruthless acts of violence' out there. There are lots of things that are worse; raping, torturing and killing a child would be at the top of my list. After that, raping/torturing/killing anyone. Killing someone because they don't believe in the same things you do; keeping a human being (man, woman, child)captive and raping/abusing them over a long span of time are also similarly heinous.

I wasn't thinking along those lines Amanda..Most car bombs kill many people at a time not even to consider who would be in the area including women and children.. That was my train of thought" I guess I should of broke it down for you..When you look back on history in different parts of the world this is why its considered an act of terrorism.

Bill:

...the cartel network could be destroyed in months. It has worked in other countries where communities were fed up with drug dealers and it can work on a much larger scale in Mexico.

Even you were to be successful in wiping out the cartels, you would still have the huge demand for drugs in the U.S. which is NEVER going to disappear. Because of the huge profits to be made because of the illegality of drugs, there will always be someone to take the place of any drug cartels you eradicate. Just like the corner drug dealer you put in jail there will always be someone to take his/her place. It's a never ending cycle as long as you keep human nature illegal and there is a huge profit to be made.

Haven't we learned from history and Alcohol Prohibition from the 20s/30s?

Bill said:

The Mexican Government should use groups like blackwater or some other highly trained and highly armed vigilante group to eliminate the cartels. While there would be collateral damage it would be far less than what the cartels are inflicting every day on the mexican people. Without the beurocracy to deal with, the cartel network could be destroyed in months. It has worked in other countries where communities were fed up with drug dealers and it can work on a much larger scale in Mexico.

Have a peek at this AP article:

When a young corporal in the Mexican marines was ambushed by drug cartel gunmen in the state of Tamaulipas, his first thoughts were for his pregnant wife and unborn child.

But within a split second, he was focused on combat, as his unit took defensive positions around their convoy to return fire.

They managed to shoot dead four attackers while only suffering two injuries.

The victory — one of many by Mexico's marines — was helped largely by U.S.-supplied equipment and training with the U.S. Northern Command in Colorado.

"We have learned from American officers who have fought in Iraq and Afghanistan," said the corporal, who asked that his name not be used as he is not authorized to speak to the media.

"The Americans suffer from similar types of ambushes in their wars, and have learned how to respond to them in a tight, disciplined way. We apply those techniques to our fight here."

Extensive training of the Mexican marines is one of several ways in which the U.S. military machine has quietly escalated its role in Mexico's ultraviolent drug war in the past two years.

The U.S. has also supplied Mexico with state-of-the-art military hardware, including Black Hawk helicopters and surveillance drones.

Furthermore, CIA operatives and American military contractors were recently posted at a Mexican military base to advise directly on operations, according to The New York Times.

The question of U.S. military involvement in Mexico came into the national spotlight this week after Republican presidential hopeful Rick Perry contemplated American troops shooting it out with cartel hit squads.

"It may require our military in Mexico working in concert with them to kill these drug cartels and keep them off our border," Perry said.

The U.S.-trained marines have become the most efficient force in the Mexican military. Directed by Mexico's Navy Department, the marines have been increasingly favored by U.S. officials over the past two years.

In one diplomatic cable uncovered by WikiLeaks, former Ambassador Carlos Pascual praised the marines for their "emerging role as a key player in the counternarcotics fight."

Following training with the U.S. Northern Command, the marines have shot dead several major cartel bosses, including Arturo Beltran Leyva, alias "The Beard," and Ezequiel "Tony Tormenta" Cardenas.

On Wednesday, the marines took charge of a security operation in the port of Veracruz, where thugs dumped 35 corpses on a road during rush hour in September.

The Mexican marines are helped by the fact that most have a higher level of education than those in the Mexican army or federal police, the marine corporal said.

"We are considered to be the yuppies in the Mexican military," he said. "Me and most of my colleagues have university degrees. A lot of regular soldiers come from poor villages and left school when they were 16."

The Mexican marines are also considered much less corrupt than their counterparts, because they traditionally have been uninvolved in the drug war — and have had less contact with the tempting offers of billionaire traffickers.

the mexican government should arm the people in every neighborhood in every city to fight the druggies,its going to turn into a violent civil war reminiscing of the old days,but thats the only way,the army and police are not doing the job and in many ways they are part of the problem.the people might hold the trump card.if that does not work than its a united nations problem.

turiddhu said:

the mexican government should arm the people in every neighborhood in every city to fight the druggies

Guns are illegal in Mexico. In the entire country there are 6000 registered firearms and those are law enforcement, police and military weapons. The average citizen cannot get one.

Cartel members are crossing the border--whether legally or illegally--and buying 10, 20, 30 assault rifles and things like that from America gunshops right over the border and smuggling them back across in pieces.

A little while back President Obama tried to pass an initiative that would require firearms dealers in border states to report 'bulk sales' of heavy assault rifles and such--I think the cutoff was like, 12, if a customer bought more than 12 assault-type rifles in one transaction the dealer would be required to notify local authorities, who would then investigate where those went and who they were being sold to. The NRA shot that down saying it was a constitutional violation.

The person who was doing the documentary asked an El Paso TX gunshop owner if it bothered him at all, that someone who came in yesterday to buy 30 Bushmaster hunting rifles would probably use it to kill a child in Mexico the day after the purchase and the dealer just said it wasn't his problem, he was just there to sell them and make money. When asked if he would consider reporting that massive a30-rifle sale per the terms of the initiative, the dealer said no, it's a constitutional violation.

Yeah we know that Amanda, it's called fast and furious. where is your call to Holder and Mr. Obama on this? Yeah we're waiting. You know just one more failed policy of this administration. Never have I seen more of a blame game in all of my life. Oh and I would like to know where Bush fits into all of this cause I'm sure he does somewhere.

Darrel:

The documentary I was speaking of had nothing to do with Fast & Furious. This was a reporter walking through mexico talking to their law enforcement and other journalists about what kinds of weapons were available and since guns are illegal in Mexico, how are the cartel getting them?

That led to the discovery that people were buying 30+ guns at time from dealers in the border states and smuggling the parts to Mexico, where they were then reassembled. When President Obama requested that gun dealers report such bulk sales of heavy weaponry (who in the US needs to buy 30 heavy assault rifles at a time?) Dealers protested because it would cut into their profits (if someone smuggling illegal arms to Mexico knew it would be reported they'd buy singly or go elsewhere) and the NRA shot down the initiative.

And why are you bringing Bush into it? What's he got to do with it? I don't understand the reference.

Well Amanda, could it be the law enforcement and their military units were going over to the drug cartel, because of either being afraid or a money issue. So a lot of those weapons were from their own soldiers and that was well documented. Until they seem to need someone else to blame and of course that would be us. Some of their cartel are Colombian trained soldiers we trained, another reason not to be training anymore people from other countries.

Of course the NRA is going to oppose it what do you expect them to do! If this was not opposed then it would have led to more restrictive laws here to obtain weapons and to aquire the said license to have automatic weapons to boot. Here the 2nd amendment affords the right of every citizen to own weapons and should never be replaced with anything else.

As far as the Bush comment that was a little (sarc) on my part, I was sure someone would bring him up for the blame. Not to discredit you in any way or be disrespectful either, it is but a theory of mine and that what I stand by. I do not take everything our government tells us and say ok this is the truth.

Besides they are getting fully automatic weapons and no dealer is going to take the chance of getting 20yrs. or so behind bars as well as lose the license he took probably yrs. to get, in order to sell it to the gun runners. Most of those weapons are sks's from the documentary that I saw and can easly be bought from foreign countries.

One Dirty Rat said:

Many people believe the answer to solving our drug problem is to simply tell people to say "no" to drugs but after being in practice for decades now the evidence shows this has failed miserably. People have been doing drugs for thousands of years and it's never going to stop. There will always be people who do drugs and those who become addicted.

I grew up in school where we got that 'just say no to drugs' indoctrination. It worked on me. They showed films of what addict look like and what they do to themselves ad I have never ever been so much as tempted. My husband as a teen tried pot once and the results were so bad he has ever been tempted to try it again. The only drugs he takes now are prescriptions and he takes only what is prescribed, only what he needs. So I wouldn't say that drug education is a complete failure.

The laws have done more damage to this country than the drugs themselves. We have created more criminals out of drug users/addicts who should really be treated as medical patients. Wouldn't we be better off spending the Drug War funding on education, drug treatment and rehabilitation instead of failed law enforcement and incarceration? And not having to build more prisons?

I'll agree with you on this one.

I firmly believe we should decriminalize all drugs.

Er. I'm going to have to disagree with you on this one. If a guy has roofies in his pocket now and is caught he goes to jail. If they were decriminalized that guy would be able to buy them openly--and there would be more women trapped in drug-facilitated rape cases. The addition of other drugs could wipe out the memory of it so they would never know they were raped. Goddess forbid one of them should find out she's pregnant. Sneaking out for a night out with friends leaves her pregnant and she has no idea she even had sex and her parents kick her out for getting pregnant when it wasn't even her fault. ALL drugs should NOT be decriminalized.

Locking people up and throwing away the key is not the answer.

I agree with that one.

When someone has a real drug problem and is addicted their main focus will always be to obtain and use drugs, regardless of any law.

Absolutely.

And putting a mark on someone's permanent record that will follow them for the rest of their lives will only hinder them to become productive members in society in getting jobs, student financial aid, etc.

For the majority of people with a drug conviction on their record, depending on the severity and circumstances it may or may not hinder their future. However, for a very small portion of the US population, having a dug conviction is the end of life as they know it; there was a story in the news about a US Marine, green card holder, deported because he was caught smoking marijuana which he had a prescription for for medical purposes resulting from injury sustained during the Iraq war. For incidents like that yes, I do advocate relaxing the laws so that permanent marks don't go o their record and result in such situations.

And what are the ramifications of manufacturing, importing, and selling the drugs right here in the U.S? Wouldn't that create a new industry? Jobs? Tax revenue? And stop funding the violent cartels and eventually take away their power?

Er...we're already importing drugs--you can't 'import' something you manufacture yourself. There's already a multi-billion-dollar drug industry in the US, so it wouldn't 'create' a new industry. Yes, it will create jobs--and the number of employees who stole from their employer would skyrocket.

And there would still be a black market for drugs because the price would be above what people want to pay or what the addict can afford, and if the worker at the manufacturing plant stole from their employer and sold the stuff on the street for lower than what the manufacturer charges over the counter (because of the taxes) they'll buy it from the un-taxed street merchant rather than from the store. Which means you're still going to have gangs who are offering their drugs for cheaper than the next gang; gangs will still fight each other for the best 'sell spots', there will still be violence around drugs to avoid paying taxes and still be drug smuggling over the border for cheaper, untaxed drugs.

Amanda:

So I wouldn't say that drug education is a complete failure.

I said the war on drugs is a complete failure. Education is very important and needs to be continued. But, the problem with the drug education today is too many lies are taught to our youth about the realities of drug use. A broad paintbrush is used to demonize the many aspects of drug use and stigmatizes the drug user. A more realistic approach needs to be used in educating our youth.

ALL drugs should NOT be decriminalized.

The problem with keeping them criminalized will perpetuate the black market and funding organized crime. As long as you keep it illegal you will be funding the cartels. Do you have any ideas on solving this issue?

However, for a very small portion of the US population, having a dug conviction is the end of life as they know it;

And you don't think there is a problem with this? Do drugs, get busted, and that's it, no life for you? Do you not see how the laws do more damage than the drugs themselves?

Er...we're already importing drugs--you can't 'import' something you manufacture yourself.

But that is the point. Why are we sending billions every year to other countries, to violent cartels, when we could be keeping that money right here at home in our economy? Right now, we import the drugs and export billions in profits and tax revenue.

And there would still be a black market for drugs because the price would be above what people want to pay or what the addict can afford,

Yes, I agree, there will always be a black market for anything: alcohol, cigs, drugs, etc. But, how is that a reason to continue with the spectacularly failed and costly drug war which has lasted for over 40 years!?

Again, even if some or all of that were to be true, how is any of that a reason to continue with these draconian policies? You still haven't given me a good reason to continue this drug war and prohibition that has killed thousands of people, ruined lives, and turned Mexico into a war zone. After 40 years of failure can you, with good conscience, support laws that have done more damage than all of the drugs combined!?

Again, I ask you, do you have any ideas beyond the current policies to solve this issue?

Amanda, Your posts are longer than the articles. The simple answer is close the border, and send all illegal Mexican nationals home.

Sonar Guy:

Your post on here makes about as much sense as you posting 'deport them all and close the border' to an article about Chihuahuas ending up in animal shelters.

This article was about a car bomb at a Mexican newspaper. Nothing about illegals. Nobody set off a car bomb here in the US, and One Dirty Rat and I were having a civil discussion on our differing views on how the US's war on drugs has affected our neighbors.

Nice try Tumbleweed. You accuse the "druggies" of nitpicking and posting only those facts that support their cause.

Well, sir, you are guilty as charged.

I'll post the link to the article you are quoting from so EVERYONE can read it. Next time you might want to read the entire article before quoting it because it pretty much backs up my claim that:

...none of the nightmare scenarios touted by preenactment decriminalization opponents have become a reality.

This article in no way is ammunition for continuing the insanity of drug prohibition or a drug war.

http://fullfact.org/factchecks/Portugal_decriminalisation_drugs_effects-3276

Have a nice day!

Just the facts:

Alcohol, tobacco and mind altering drugs are NOT good for humans.

ANYONE that gets on a public forum and says they are, cares ONLY for themselves and their next "fix".

There are still some of us that care for others, and want to see our country heal from the druggie abuses.

http://norml.org/library/recent-research-on-medical-marijuana

Drug use has evolved local gangs into transnational enterprises with intricate power structures that reach into every corner of society, helping them control vast swaths of territory while gifting them with significant social and military resources.

Those responsible shall not go unpunished!

Arizona, you must build prisons on the border. You know prisons are funded by govt, right? And the govt is funded by oil and insurance companies? Insurance companies drive inflation of the health care industry. Inflation of health care insures illegal drug sales. I figured you needed help connecting the dots. None of those companies give a crap about anything but their bottom line.

Right. Let's make America less free. That's a great idea. Or maybe we quit propagating a war that has cost us thousands of lives and trillions of dollars. The Netherlands have less violent crime, less poverty, better health care and they sell "drugs". Maybe the key is to get rid of the crooked insurance companies that are driving up the cost of health care, in turn fueling illegal drug sales.