Two Foreigners Arrested For Heroin Possession

[meom]

Prohibition does not have a successful record. It does not work. So its your side of the argument that is waving faerie wands and hoping for successful outcomes. Indeed, it is the prohibitionists who are the fuzzy-thinking social engineers. Wanting to save everybody from themselves. Our side of the argument are the true free marketers. Individual choice and responsibility.

I like the individual choice and responsibility bit but unfortunately some drugs are so powerful to some people that individual choice goes out the window the moment they take their first hit.

It's the same as with alcohol; the majority of people can enjoy their booze recreationaly while there will always be a percentage that becomes hopelessly addicted with all related problems.

Legalizing drugs might not be the solution but I don’t think things will get worse once legalized so at least it’s worth a try.

[mrtoad]

Some nice discussions on going in here.

Yes, almost, if only we could keep it based on reality and with courtesy...

Usual suspects pushing the pro-legalization of drugs, generally though they have little experience of having to deal with the effects of drugs on society as it's so peacful up in those nice ivory towers.

...and there it failed.

Ps. You and NeverDie know nothing about me or several of the other posters or our backgrounds, so please stop pretending that you do. It is just very childish. Ds.

TAWP, I have no desire to know anything about you, and have not suggested that I do.

The whole drug legalization debate is a double edged sword. There are pro and cons for both points. The big problem, is actually categorisation of such drugs - do you seriously believe that the legalisation of something such as metamphetamine would be appropriate?

There are significant differences between the behaviours and supposed criminal activities that are associated with certain drugs. Can't really compare Cannabis with Heroin, or Metamphetamine with ecstasy. Cleaerly the current laws and rules don't work - but blanket legalisation is also likely to fail. I'd be interested to hear if anyone who is from the pro side can actually come up with a workable solution, other than total legalisation.

[Credo]

I am pretty liberal in my views, but highly addictive substances are best left out of the hands of the public. It seems there is enough problems with them when they are controlled by the gov't and the medical field.

However, if they were legalized in Thailand, they work like most things work here.

They wouldn't be allowed to sell them within 50 meters of a temple or a school.  Oh, and they would fuzzy them out on TV shows.   

Edited December 23, 2009 by Credo

[meom]

As you are well aware there are millions of results from the efforts of law enforcement officers around the world when it comes to dealing with Drug related crime. What exactly do you want me to look at? i agree with you that the job has not been always effictively handled, there have been mistakes and much could be done to improve the situation, first of all the laws definately need to be addressed but in the exact opposite direction to what you are suggesting. The laws an ass, thats for sure, the community expects results but often as I said before, law enforcement officers have many hurdles to negotiate to get the results they acheive.

It's time to end the war on drugs

It is time to free ourselves once more from an impractical and misguided "war on drugs" of punitive federal and state laws. It should be replaced by legalization and careful public regulation of mind-altering drugs

By Neal Peirce

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...n14peirce.html

WASHINGTON — Are we ready to repeat repeal?

Dec. 5 marked the 75th anniversary of America's decision, in 1933, to re-amend the Constitution and set ourselves free from alcohol prohibition, a 13-year failed experiment.

So is it time to free ourselves once more from an impractical and misguided prohibition effort — the ill-starred "war on drugs" of punitive federal and state laws passed since the 1970s? Yes, argued two groups — Law Enforcement Against Prohibition and the Criminal Justice Policy Foundation — at a press event here last week. They are urging, instead, legalization and careful public regulation of mind-altering drugs.

The parallels — our situation today and in 1933 — are intriguing.

Americans disobeyed alcohol prohibition by the millions. Booze even got tied to a rebellious, adventurous lifestyle appealing to young people. Before Prohibition, New York City had 15,000 saloons; five years into prohibition, it had about 32,000 speakeasies.

Today, surveys show 35 million Americans use marijuana yearly, and 114 million have in their lifetimes. Addicts to prohibited drugs, notes Eric Sterling of the Criminal Justice Policy Foundation, "are famous radio personalities, spouses of major candidates, corporate America, Hollywood and your neighbors."

Under Prohibition, hard liquor — more potent and compact, more profitable to ship illegally — largely displaced beer and wine. With government quality controls gone, thousands of Americans were blinded or killed by "bathtub gin" and its equivalents. Today it is similar: Drug buyers purchase without knowledge of substances' purity or safety, leading to many accidental deaths.

Then crime. Gangster syndicates were born in the 1920s as Al Capone and his ilk struggled (and killed) for control of the alcohol trade. As with drugs now, disputes about quality, delivery or price weren't resolved in courts but at the point of a gun.

Today's prohibition-triggered terrorism is even worse. Violence and official corruption have deeply wounded Mexico, Colombia and other nations with drug rings that feed the U.S. market. This year alone, 4,000 police, prosecutors, journalists, drug cartel members and innocent bystanders have been slaughtered in Mexico, imperiling the nation's very stability.

Prohibition always imperils civil society. In the '20s, our courts were clogged with alcohol cases and alarming corruption of public officials. Today it's the same for drugs, exacerbated by escalating criminal penalties our lawmakers approve.

Our drug-related arrests are rising yearly — 1.8 million last year. The nation has been building more than 900 prison beds every two weeks for about 20 years, the huge costs trumping higher education and other crucial investments. Our 2.3 million prisoner count is the highest of any nation on Earth.

Yet many drug cases are for mere possession. Marijuana, for example, is less dangerous than alcohol. And for truly addictive drugs such as heroin, why not work out a safe supply linked to treatment?

Today, advocates of drug prohibition repeal have a new argument — economic. We are clearly in the worst economic and fiscal crisis since the Great Depression. The downturn will inevitably shrink budgets, trigger layoffs for schools, police, transit, child protection and more.

In the early 1930s, it was the same — economic crisis with unemployment spreading. Repeal of alcohol prohibition created tens of thousands of new legal, taxpaying jobs. Repeal of drug prohibition could do the same now.

In fact, legalizing drugs would save roughly $44.1 billion yearly in government prohibition enforcement for arrests, prosecutions, court and incarceration costs, according to a fresh study by Harvard economist Jeffrey Miron. About $30 billion of the savings would be made by state and local governments.

Plus, Miron estimates, legalizing drugs would yield taxes of $32.7 billion, assuming taxation of drugs at rates comparable to those now levied on alcohol and tobacco.

"We can repeal prohibition to restore the economy and pay for vital public services. We can do it again," argues Sterling.

Finally, no one expects the new Obama administration to risk its early momentum on the drug issue — it's clearly too "hot." Yet Obama has expressed concern about our world-leading incarceration rates, about burdening youthful drug offenders with lifelong felony records, about "the devastating impact of the drug trade in the inner cities."

And there's the disturbing statistic: 13 percent of African Americans are drug users, but blacks are nearly 60 percent of drug offenders in federal prisons.

Could the new administration tap the big Obama Internet networks for thoughts on drug reform? Who better to start forming a grass-roots constituency for "the change we need"?

[neverdie]

Some nice discussions on going in here.

Yes, almost, if only we could keep it based on reality and with courtesy...

Usual suspects pushing the pro-legalization of drugs, generally though they have little experience of having to deal with the effects of drugs on society as it's so peacful up in those nice ivory towers.

...and there it failed.

Ps. You and NeverDie know nothing about me or several of the other posters or our backgrounds, so please stop pretending that you do. It is just very childish. Ds.

TAWP, Don't flatter yourself, I'm very chosey about who I get to know, I doubt you would qualify.

[neverdie]

I REPEAT, its very difficult to win the war on drugs when the legislation provided does not go far enough. How bout we change a few laws, give it a couple of more years with some DECENTLY BACKED ENFORCEMENT before we go transforming the world into a haven for junkies.

I really like the people that go on about legalising drugs and then in the same breath they start talking about having heavy regulated controls over the use of them......COME ON, Give me a break (thats just your way of saying lets legalise it and let someone else worry about the effects that flow on from there).

Great plan.

[meom]

I think it is impossible to win the war on drugs even with a change of law and the best law enforcement money can buy people will still be using drugs.

Maybe you should try some yourself first to understand the allure of drugs.

[neverdie]

Thanks but no thanks. If you like I can arrange for the BIB to kick your door in and confiscate your drugs & place you in a cell for 20 to 30 years, would you care to send me your address? (Of course I am sure you will find this as alluring as I did your suggestion to take drugs)

[bobbin]

I REPEAT, its very difficult to win the war on drugs when the legislation provided does not go far enough. How bout we change a few laws, give it a couple of more years with some DECENTLY BACKED ENFORCEMENT before we go transforming the world into a haven for junkies.

Translation:

Give me a few years of a free hand and I'll kill and terrorize so many of the "enemy" that it will be generations before they challenge us again.

I'm sure this is the approach the KGB and all other oppressive forces have used in the past.

Dispute my translation? You can't be talking about more severe "legal" penalties as they are already in place.

neverdie, you are playing a losing hand and history will show this to be so.

[neverdie]

^Legislation that isnt so restrictive.

Ohh and your translation is partly accurate, I let you figure which part.

[elliss]

on tele last night in UK.

british man , in china ,

found guilty of drug dealing .

he,s due for execution ..very soon .

british family , want chinese goverment , show mercy ...{whats that }

they say the accused man ,is mentally ill..{ not for long .}

[elliss]

on tele last night in UK.

british man , in china ,

found guilty of drug dealing .

he,s due for execution ..very soon .

british family , want chinese goverment , show mercy ...{whats that }

they say the accused man ,is mentally ill..{ not for long .}

[bobbin]

^Legislation that isnt so restrictive.

Ohh and your translation is partly accurate, I let you figure which part.

Murderer or terrorist?

I know you think you are right. I think I am right.

The side you support has had 70+ years to show they were right. They have failed and continue to fail. Russia, China and Iran all have drug problems spiraling out of control. I'm sure ( with their human rights record ) that they are already using some version of your plan. Guess what? It's not working for them either. Can't you see that? Is your mind so closed that you see only one solution?

[neverdie]

^Legislation that isnt so restrictive.

Ohh and your translation is partly accurate, I let you figure which part.

Murderer or terrorist?

I know you think you are right. I think I am right.

The side you support has had 70+ years to show they were right. They have failed and continue to fail. Russia, China and Iran all have drug problems spiraling out of control. I'm sure ( with their human rights record ) that they are already using some version of your plan. Guess what? It's not working for them either. Can't you see that? Is your mind so closed that you see only one solution?

No. (to your last question). I see your side of the equation, however I dont understand all the talk of failure, its just not the case, unless of course you are talking about a 100% success rate, which in case you are, do you honestly think doing things your way is going to solve the problem 100% (No kick on problems).

I do enjoy communication with you personally though, its a pleasure to deal with someone like yourself who isnt just 'flaming' to get heard, I hear you clearly and its a breath of fresh air after communication with a couple of the other twattttz off this forum .

If you like you can submit a detailed outline of your plan and I will discuss it with world leaders next time they're over at my place for a shing ding

[TAWP]

TAWP, Don't flatter yourself, I'm very chosey about who I get to know, I doubt you would qualify.

Don't bother, you are already disqualified.

[Bottlerocket]

Here some good stats on what kills how many:

http://drugwarfacts.org/cms/?q=node/30

According to the groundbreaking 2003 medical report Death by Medicine, by Drs. Gary Null, Carolyn Dean, Martin Feldman, Debora Rasio and Dorothy Smith, 783,936 people in the United States die every year from conventional medicine mistakes.

Death by Medicine PDF

Edited December 24, 2009 by Bottlerocket

[zigistar]

Seems that the most of the people who reply on this thread are"experts"on drugs transport use or disrribution......yes true thailand was ones a heaven for heroin.....i can tell you that since the great Thaksin started his "war on drugs"that the price of heroin is almost 10 times as high as it use to be just before he became prime minister. Altough the amount of heroin sold is lower then before he achieved nothing it is the same story with jaba and other shit...the only thing achieved is that the criminality rate is now much much higher then pre-Thaksin,people who live here long enough will sure agree with that few years ago it was no problem to go walk streets with golden chains etc.now they(thai junks)grab it day or night if they have the chance..i wonder why?Anyway back to the "experts" bringing heroin to thailand is bringing sand to the beach...forget it,thats no longer the case...and thats why its now big business for the ones that are willing to take the risk...

A little note for the ones that love to see people hanging or deadpenalty's just move your ass and go living in China or stay in the U.S because i am sure most of the pro dead penalty posters are U.S idiots who dont know any better ...God bless America <<<<< LOL ironic if you think about that.......btw,no i dont hate us citizens actualy i have friends all over the world and all kind of race so please dont take it personal its just that my experience shows that only brainles people support the system of killing people as a punishement.....

[Colabamumbai]

So let me see if I understand this. although the supply of heroine locally is tragically huge and the prices low, they are bringing it into the country, running the risk of discovery both in Pakistan and in Thailand and than they sell it in BKK?

Makes good business sense, or should he have mistaken Bangkok for Singapore?

As someone much wiser than me once said 'Some people don't have the brains they were born with'.

I also read recently that there are more Nigerians in Thai jails than any other foriegners.

They have a better life in a Thai jail than they did at home.

[hughben]

Put these people out of business and legalise it.

I support legalisation of drugs as the current method isn't working for 'ordinary people'.

The current method favours business cartels (increased prison populations = increase in funding/profits etc.) and gangsters (including the likes of the CIA who are known drug runners).

But most of the drug dealers (at all levels) won't be enrolling in their local college to take up Peruvian Knitting classes, they'll move onto another form of crime - staying in business.