[TheeBadOne]

http://www.msnbc.com/local/KGET/M297357.asp?0LA=aam9n (http://)

Elderly woman stabbed while asleep in her home
Bakersfield, CA, May 20 - A man is under arrest on charges he broke into a south Bakersfield home and stabbed an elderly woman while she slept.

It happened just before 4:30 Tuesday morning on Loch Lomond Drive.
The 79-year-old victim told detectives she was asleep in her bed when an intruder began stabbing her. The woman stumbled into another bedroom and alerted her husband, who grabbed his shotgun.
But by then the suspect had already taken off.
Deputies located the suspect's car parked outside the couple's home, with a bloody knife inside.
An hour and a half later they arrested 35-year-old Vanoy Sutton, who was walking near the intersection of Butler Street and Belle Terrace.
Sutton, who appeared to have dried blood on his hands and shoes, told authorities he had been smoking PCP and "may have broken into the home," but didn't remember.
The elderly victim was taken to a local hospital where she is listed in good condition.
-------------------------------------
If drugs were legalized these types of things wouldn't happen...:rolleyes:

[Chris Rhines]

If drugs were legalized these types of things wouldn't happen... Says who?

Conversely, drugs being illegal doesn't seem to have stopped it from happening. Hmmm...

- Chris

[Standing Wolf]

The criminal could just as easily have been drunk on beer as high on whatever.

Pity the woman didn't have a bedside shotgun.

What's needed is a war on criminals.

[Solinvictus70]

...rather than a politicized war that places non-violent offenders in prisons so that repeat predators get to walk.

[c_yeager]

How would legal PCP have prevented this guy from taking PCP and blacking out in a violent rampage? It doesnt appear that he went there to steal money to buy drugs or anything. In fact this is a great example of why drugs like PCP should never be legalized. This action wasnt a result of his desire to obtain an illegal drug. This outburst of violence is a direct result of TAKING that drug. Legal or not the result is the same.

[Feanaro]

But he can get the drug whether it's legal or not. We spend countless man hours, tax dollars and send scores of people to prison and it doesn't really do much.

[S_O_Laban]

The topic of drug legalization is certainly open for discussion, but I fail to see how this story and especially the underlined quote proves or add evidence to the idea that drugs should be legalized:confused: :confused: If this story does anything it certainly should cause one to ponder deeply the consequence of smoking PCP.

[igor]

Theebad, If drugs were legalized these types of things wouldn't happen...
would you like to elaborate on that?

[Tamara]

Another failure on the war on drugs

Yup.

Doors getting kicked in from coast to coast, police dogs sniffing trunks at random roadblocks, people having their property stolen by the cops (hey, the junkie may take your wallet, it's the government that takes your hundred acre ranch after they plant dope in the back forty to frame you), schoolkids peeing in cups, America looking more and more like a movie set from 1930's Germany...

All this going on, all this wilful shredding of the Bill of Rights, and grandma still gets stabbed in her bed.

It amazes me that anyone thinks more draconian enforcement is somehow the answer. (They've probably had a few too many beers if they do. ;) )

[TheeBadOne]

Theebad,

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If drugs were legalized these types of things wouldn't happen...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


would you like to elaborate on that?
I was being facetious! :D

[CZ-75]

In fact this is a great example of why drugs like PCP should never be legalized.


Perhaps you don't realize it, but PCP use is a result of the WOD. People couldn't get marijuana, cocaine, and opiates, so they started substituting animal traquilizers instead. Never mind that it doesn't seem too difficult to manufacture. Druggies still break into vet's offices to get things like ketamine (special K), etc.

Same thing w/ crack. Crack was a way to "stretch" supply. Who'd have thought it was more addictive?

Sounds like "unintended consequences," no?

All the WOD does is cause substitutions, many of which are worse than the drugs that were prohibited in the first place. Drug use is up, or was as of a few years ago. Kids can still get it. Anyone with a limited knowledge of economics and history can tell you why the WOD won't work.

Meanwhile, WOD is more of a war on our rights and buying muriatic acid and strike anywhere matches (very hard to find now) can get you flagged for LE attention. I feel soooooo free.

[TheeBadOne]

Boy is that a stretch http://www.egri.co.uk/smileys/verystrange.gif

[Sir Galahad]

The problem is that the government CREATES whole new types of criminals with the stroke of a pen. Now, take a look at any antique store or museum that has pharmaceutical bottles from the late 1800s-early 1900s. You'll find things like "tincture of cannabis" was sold over the counter. Where was the mass social decay from this? Don't people refer to that era as "the good ole days"? Truth is, hysterions like Anslinger LIED to get marijuana made illegal. In the 1930s, he said it makes people turn into crazed murderers (and listen to jazz and dance with black people!) In the 1950s, he said it made people docile and susceptable to communist propaganda. Well, which was it A**linger? :rolleyes: Take a look at today. The government is whining about terrorists using bootlegged cigarettes to raise money. Well, WHO created the market in the first place? State govermments and their harrassingly high sales taxes on cigarettes. Well, you can try and "save the kids" from tobacco as an excuse to enact unConstitutional laws, but don't whine when people start buying off the black market to avoid them. Yep. Back in the "good ole days" of the 1800s, in most Western U.S. states and territories, gambling, prostitution, drugs, and free access to tobacco, firearms and alcohol was all legal. Where is the big threat to society from a weekly high-stakes poker game in someone's house? Where is the big threat from a couple people smoking a doobie in their own house? Where is the threat to society from tobacco not being taxed at like 500% mark-up? Where is the threat from a guy making his own popskull for his own consumption (you can make beer and wine, but distilling is a no-no except in certain cases.) Geeez, government and morality police, get a life! :rolleyes:

[Tamara]

Boy is that a stretch

You know what's interesting? One of the arguments against the end of Prohibition was "People will go blind from wood alcohol!", "Folks will die of alcohol poisoning from white lightning and bathtub gin!".

Instead, most people seemed happy to go back to beer & wine and the occasional mixed drink. If someone's risking jail time to get a buzz, they may as well get a good one. (Hint: Why are greater instances of EastBloc SMG's turning up with British gangs?)

[El Tejon]

Thee, how is what CZ said "a stretch"? Substitution is a well established economic principle that we utilize everyday, I did it this morning at the grocery.

As a former Drug Warrior, I saw it in action. How can you believe otherwise???:confused:

[Sir Galahad]

Funny thing about Prohibition was that alcohol was being bootlegged in from Canada and the Carribean as a legal product purchased in those locales. It was legal at purchase, but illegal to import. The Coast Guard spent lots of time and money trying to intercept the boats bringing it in (and unknowingly spawning the beginings of the modern souped-up speed boats.) Some of the distributors on the U.S. end became legitimate businesses after the end of Prohibition.

Point being, who is the government to say, "Tut-tut! That's unhealthy and we will incarcerate you to prevent you from using it, even if there is not solid, factual evidence to support the allegations. The things already legal we will tax and tax until you break the law to get the product on the black market. Then that gives us the excuse to step up federal and state level Kevlar Kop police tactics." Further, "crimes" of altering one's consciousness are de facto "thought crimes". You used a plant to alter your state of mind and, ergo, broke the law against having a mind in a certain state. A thought crime. The DEA IS the Thought Police. This is not what we're supposed to be about in America. If someone under the influence of a controlled substance commits a crime, you punish THAT person. You don't punish EVERYONE who would use controlled substances responsibly if they were legal. It basically makes the whole of the United States in army basic training where the entire company gets punished harshly for the infraction of one soldier. I donn't think that blanket punishment is what we're supposed to be about in America.

[TheeBadOne]

Perhaps you don't realize it, but PCP use is a result of the WOD. People couldn't get marijuana, cocaine, and opiates, so they started substituting animal traquilizers instead.
That is a stretch http://www.egri.co.uk/smileys/verystrange.gif

[db4]

Remember what killed George Washington? He had a respiratory infection, maybe pneumonia, and his doctors, with the best of intentions and best medical knowledge of the day...bled him to death.

I used to think that all the drug warriors were cynical JBT's, but have come to realise that many are sincere about wanting to fix the problem. They have seen the incredible ugliness that goes with drug use at its worst, and they want to stop it. Unfortunately, the standard cure is far worse than the disease.

[sctman800]

This is quite a subject, there are so many different directions that the drug war takes you need a compass. As far as i am concerned anyone that says the drug war is winnable is either highly delusional or is somehow making a ton of money of of it. They cannot keep drugs out of PRISONS. People should not go to jail for possesing drugs, but it is not unusual to read in the paper people going to jail for drugs while sex offenders, thieves get probation. I am talking about NON-VIOLENT offenders, if you steal to get drugs you should go to jail for being a thief, if you become violent after using any substance drugs or alchol then bust them for assault. There should be no defense based on being under the influence made me do it. Most people that do drugs bother no one, the only difference between them smoking a joint in the evening or drinking a beer is the joint is illegal. Actually, I always thought the liberals would end theWOD's but they haven't I think they need the violence created by the black market in drugs to help justify their more importaint adjenda, the WAR ON GUNS. They don't mention the details but a lot of the antis numbers come from street gang violence over selling drugs. You have to set priorities and if the antis can keep people scared over gun violence by the deaths of gang members and innocents in the way it is worth it if they can eventually ban guns which is their more importaint task anyway. Thanks for listening, Jim.

[CZ-75]

That is a stretch

Actually, I'll agree w/ you.

These folks COULD get marijuana, cocaine, and opiates, considering how ineffective the WOD is/was.

PCP use is a matter of PRICE substitution. Stuff that has to be grown and imported from overseas is a good bit more expensive than something you can steal from the local vet or whip up in your kitchen.

[CZ-75]

many are sincere about wanting to fix the problem.


I'm sure that Osama, the homicide bombers, et al. are sincere too. Completely and utterly wrong, but sincere.

Sincerity is no substitute for logic and reason.

the standard cure is far worse than the disease.

Yep.

[mjydrafter]

That is a stretch

I don't believe it's a stretch at all. People are going to expiriment with drugs legal or illegal. The harder it is to get pot or some of the others, the more they turn to animal tranqulizers, paint, glue, bannana peels, huffing regular household chemicals, ect.

So basically you have pot on one hand that has never directly caused even 1 human death, vs all these dangerous chemicals that kids/people substitute. Most of our modern stronger drugs come directly from prohibition.

There is a reason cocaine is around, when coca leaf tea was banned. Coca leaf tea was comparable to reglar coffee or tea, but when it was banned nobody wanted to get caught or have to haul around big bags of leaves. So they extracted the active ingrediant and now we have a much more dangerous and easier to smuggle chemical.

[Don Gwinn]

Thee Bad One, I'd love to hear your explanation as to why drug addicts decided to begin stealing and taking animal tranquilizers when such things had been almost unheard-of before the government set out to deny people the more conventional drugs. Far from being a stretch, that's the accepted reasoning on both sides of the "drug war debate." I've heard exactly the same explanation from hard-core drug warriors--only they were explaining how it was an indication of "success" in the war on some drugs that people felt the need to resort to other drugs.

Does anyone else remember a novel called Hammerheads? It was a fantasy by one of the big military novel names--Clancy, Brown, somebody--about a new unit that would use V-22 Ospreys and operate from oil platforms in the gulf of mexico to stop drug smuggling. They were wildly successful, but there were political problems plus, of course, a psychotic ex-Cuban air general who formed a fanatical smuggler air force called the "Cuchillos" complete with fighter jets to do battle with the Drug Warriors.

Even at the time, when I was still firmly in favor of wars on nouns, I was unnerved by the author's logic of "success." His characters were ecstatic not because use or addiction was down, but because they had raised the street price of cocaine and marijuana. That was it--just made it more expensive. It was assumed that from there the drug problem was sure to begin to lessen. Huh?:scrutiny:

[CZ-75]

They were wildly successful, but there were political problems plus, of course, a psychotic ex-Cuban air general who formed a fanatical smuggler air force called the "Cuchillos" complete with fighter jets to do battle with the Drug Warriors.

You know that the Cali cartel was trying to get a Russian sub armed w/ cruise missles? The DEA foiled it on the buyer's end, but merely by luck and some surveillance on the right guy.

It was assumed that from there the drug problem was sure to begin to lessen. Huh?

Cocaine has already been fabulously expensive, being over $1000/gram on the street during the '70s, when the Columbians switched from marijuana to cocaine and its use became popular. PCP pretty much came into its own during this period. Wonder why? :rolleyes:

No logic or reason need apply to be a drug cop. :scrutiny:

[mercedesrules]

(Galahad) The problem is that the government CREATES whole new types of criminals with the stroke of a pen...etc.

What he said.

All drugs should be sold over-the-counter.

MR

[TheeBadOne]

If drugs were legal all would be good....blah blah blah.
This has been repeated over and over, ad nauseam.
People seem to forget that ALL drugs were legal at one time.
EVERYTHING was legal at one time. What happens is something becomes a problem and laws are passed. From speed limits to murder, laws have been passed AFTER something caused a negative impact.
When people are talking about legalizing drugs to end the breaking of laws, all they'd be getting rid of is SELLING/POSSESION, not the PROBLEMS that come from DRUG USE itself.
Show me a heroin addict that can hold a job, even if smack was as cheap as dirt. Addicts commit violent crimes to support their habit, as that's they only way they can.
For you apples and oranges people out there, go ahead and ban alcohol too, I could care less.
Those who say alcohol and drugs are the same are WRONG.

There is a simple difference between the two. You can have 1 beer. You can't do that with drugs. The whole point of drugs is abuse/intoxication from the start. If you're getting high on alcohol that is abuse and is wrong. Alcohol can and is abused terribly, but it can also be used in a responsible manner (not getting intoxicated).

Notice I'm not promoting alcohol, merely giving my view on why it's still legal. As long as we're on the topic of alcohol I'll give my view of one basic problem with it. The problem is social in nature and will not be fixed. There is a part of society that encourges and enables irresponsible drinking, bars. Yes, bars. It's been going on for 100's of years and is ingrained in our society. (not talking about banning bars for gosh sakes people, but the attitude that goes with drinking and bars >the ole watering hole<).

[Tamara]

From speed limits to murder, laws have been passed AFTER something caused a negative impact.

Ah yes, like the banning of beer, bayonet lugs and "high capacity magazines". I get it now... ;)

(Maybe laws are passed when some special interest groups make enough noise? Like noted Republican Drug Warrior William Bennett and his minions, who made sure that imported rifles had tiny magazines and doofy-looking thumbhole stocks? Or the noted lies of Mr. Anslinger and the bleating of his followers, who wanted to ban marijuana to keep pure white virgins from being seduced by shifty black jazz musicians?)

[CZ-75]

Those who say alcohol and drugs are the same are WRONG.

We are. Alcohol causes far MORE problems than drugs and is more widely abused.

There is a simple difference between the two. You can have 1 beer. You can't do that with drugs. The whole point of drugs is abuse/intoxication from the start.

And you can have one joint and not be addicted and still be a productive citizen.

Marijuana can and is abused, but it can also be used in a responsible manner.

EVERYTHING was legal at one time. What happens is something becomes a problem and laws are passed. From speed limits to murder, laws have been passed AFTER something caused a negative impact.

I'd say that the problems, like a high murder rate and the tremendous profits that allow drug gangs to become so well armed and deadly, are far worse than the problems caused by use. As to theft, burglary, and robbery to secure funds for drugs, and violence used in the commission of those crimes, the problem could be negated by cheap/free distribution to addicts.

[TheeBadOne]

As to theft, burglary, and robbery to secure funds for drugs, and violence used in the commission of those crimes, the problem could be negated by cheap/free distribution to addicts.
a pipe dream :rolleyes:

[CZ-75]

a pipe dream

No more so than a belief that LE will ever win the WOD. :rolleyes:

Or that new laws, prohibitions, and classes of criminal will solve the problem. :rolleyes:

Or that there will be enough prisons to hold everyone convicted of one of these offenses or that we can afford to do so. :rolleyes:


Tell me who's living in a bigger fantasy world? :rolleyes:

[TheeBadOne]

No more so than a belief that LE will ever win the WOD
Zero sum arguments are flawed. The WOD is about controlling, limiting the problem.
No different than the WOM (War On Murder). Just because people are still killing people doens't mean it's a failure, and time to abandon the fight. Murder rates are down due to enforcement, and the same thing applies to the WOD.

[Tamara]

You said laws are only passed after problems caused them to be necessary, therefore the laws are good.

Could you tell us about the problems that caused the marijuana laws and the NFA to be passed in the '30s?

[TheeBadOne]

Tamara, I find these type of threads on boards to be an exercise in futility. What follows are flawed compairisons, ad hominem attacks, and emotional venting. All the info is there if you want to look at it with an open unbiased mind. That's the problem being human, it's hard to do. Are there problems with the WOD? Yes, there damn sure are. Do they override the problem of drugs, no? You and the others have your mind made up. I could reproduce volumes for you, only to be dismissed as "a pawn of the goverment", or a "sheeple", etc. Why would I waste my time? So far things have remained on a civil basis and I'd like that to stay that way. To keep going often results in a urinary contest that does no good to anyone and harms all involved (sometimes even the board). This thread has run it's course as far as I'm concerned and it's usefullness is at an end.

All the best

TBO

[Sergeant Bob]

Could you tell us about the problems that caused the marijuana laws and the NFA to be passed in the '30s?

Well, I guess you haven't seen Reefer Madness or Public Enemy have you. That's all the reason you need! ;)

[Sir Galahad]

To the saying that"...you can have one beer, but you can't do that with drugs..." Hmmm...not so for alcoholics. Addiction is addiction. But punishing the whole of society for those people who abuse a substance is no different than banning guns because some people abuse those.

Regarding laws being passed because some things "became problems". Actually, what happened is that Eastern women moved West and brought with them certain prudish moral codes and actively campaigned to stop gambling, prostitution, etc., etc. In some areas, this was the beginning of property and sales taxes. Formerly, this revenue was raised via the licensing and taxing of brothels and sporting houses, gambling establishments, and so forth. Once these sources of revenue became illegal, there had to be a new way to fund public schools and other such public institutions. Hence, property taxes and sales taxes were levied to raise money. Isn't that a nice bargain? :rolleyes: These things were not problems in some cases in the Old West because police had power to actually stop crime and people could be armed. But if cops today pull a "Wild Bill" Hickok on a bad guy, the media crucifies him. But I'm straying from the topic. How is gambling a problem? How is a regulated brothel a problem? How is personal use of cannabis a problem? Yes, it's much preferable for all that cash to be flowing into underground coffers rather than back into society. :rolleyes: The lesson should be obvious. The Neo-Puritans and health nazis raise the sales tax on cigarettes to where a pack costs $7.00 in some places. So, enterprising folks buy them in low-tax states and truck them up to high-tax states to sell at what is still an enormous profit-per-pack but still an enormous bargain-per-pack price to their customers. Everyone is happy. Except for the government, of course, who, not content with golden eggs every now and then, decided to try and cut the goose open to get them all at once and found no more golden eggs at all. Awwww...the poor state governments! They're not getting to screw the people. You think the government learns? Do they say, "Hey, we ought to be a little more realistic and lower the tobacco tax because our high taxes cause the black market to flourish." But telling them 10% of something is better than 100% of nothing is lost on state governments re-inventing the wheel, starting with the original square prototype. :rolleyes: Same with drugs. Rather than admit they're interfering with peoples' personal lives, they have to keep right on insisting that a square wheel WILL ROLL if it's greased with enough tax dollars. And we, the people, are the losers.

[CZ-75]

Murder rates are down due to enforcement, and the same thing applies to the WOD.

Is that why the price of drugs has been declining since the '70s?

Tell me how the "law of supply and demand" works differently for the controlled substances market than for every other commodity, then.

Truth is, though, the WOD has been such an abysmal failure that prices have been steadily declining since the supply has been increasing. Factor in an expanding user base, from govt. stats taken during the Klinton era, and you can see that supply obviously far exceeds demand. Logical conlusion: interdiction isn't working.

So much for LE controlling the problem. Another thing is that it isn't in LE's interest to be too effective, as that means jobs will have to be cut when there is no longer justification for the warm bodies to fill them.

[justice4all]

If we want to win the WOM (War on Murder), we need to call a truce in the WOD. We also need to realize that the gang murders caused by the WOD are destroying our gun rights, and may one day lead to an all-out WOG (War on Guns).

It is a mystery to me how anyone who supports gun rights can also support the institution most responsible for their demise, i.e., Prohibition.

[c_yeager]

So any crime commited that in any way involves drugs is a "Failure of the war on Drugs"? Sorta like any crime involving a firearm is a "gun crime" right?

I used to work nights in a gorcery store. You know what our two most stolen items were? The perfectly legal drugs of Alcohol and Cigarettes. Makes you wonder doesnt it. I mean i thought the theory here was that if its legal noone will ever commit a crime to get it. Riiiight. The people who stole alcohol and cigarettes were also the people most prone to end up fighting with us when we caught them. Seems like assault wasnt too big a crime to commit in order to get these perfectly legal drugs.

[db4]

"You know what our two most stolen items were? The perfectly legal drugs of Alcohol and Cigarettes."

The two items with:

Age restrictions on sales, and:

Prices hugely inflated by taxation.:rolleyes:

[Tamara]

Did Piggly Wiggly do a drive-by on your gang for muscling in on their turf? ;)

[Oracle]

The War on Drugs is about one thing, and one thing only: control. The government can use the War on Drugs as an excuse to do nearly anything they want to the citizens of this country. All they have to say is "well, we got a tip that this person possessed or manufactured illegal drugs", and every violation of that person's rights is suddenly "ok" and the person "deserved it". Otherwise decent people have been brainwashed into believing that simply because a person may possess "a prohibited item", in this case, "illegal drugs" that's a good enough reason to simply ignore their right to privacy and their right to be secure in their home and property. What if the "prohibited items" are guns instead of "illegal drugs"? Well, then these same people's tune changes quite rapidly, what they don't realize is that it's the same thing. If someone abuses a gun and uses it in a crime, then it's not the gun's fault, right? And, you wouldn't suggest the banning of guns simply because they are used in crime? How is it then "the drug's fault" when someone who abuses drugs commits a crime, and how can you suggest that they should all be banned because someone under their influence "might" commit a crime? If you want drugs to be banned because someone "might" commit a crime under their influence, why don't you think that alcohol should be banned as well, as many crimes are committed under it's influence?

Arguing that "murder" and "drug use and possession" are equivalent crimes is rhetorical nonsense. It's the difference between mala in se and mala prohibita. One is "evil" in and of itself, the other is "evil" simply because the government says that it is. If the use of a mind-altering substance for recreational purposes is mala in se, or evil in and of itself, isn't alcohol use just as bad? It's using a mind-altering substance for recreational purposes. But that's somehow "ok" because it has the governmental stamp of approval, and the use of other substances isn't because they don't. Riiiight.

[c_yeager]

Did Piggly Wiggly do a drive-by on your gang for muscling in on their turf?

Maybe im just dense here Tamara but, i dont get it. Care to elaborate?

DB4, is it your belief that if currently illegal drugs were made legal that they too wouldnt be subject to the same taxation and age restrictions? I mean at the currect rate marijuana is about 10 times the cost of tobacco. And thats with a free-market in place and no tax.

[Justin Moore]

It amazes me that anyone thinks more draconian enforcement is somehow the answer.

It doesn't amaze me in the slightest. :banghead:

[db4]

c yeager- The point I was trying to make is that these "perfectly legal" drugs are theft-prone because of restricted access and wildly inflated prices. This is a government-created black market that differs only in degree from the "illegal drug" market, not in kind.

[CZ-75]

Maybe im just dense here Tamara but, i dont get it. Care to elaborate?


Did the local competition (e.g., Piggly Wiggly) come shoot up your store for splitting up the sales revenue generated in that area on tobacco and alcohol?