News Forum - How can Thailand win its war on drugs?

[Soidog]

17 hours ago, MrNovax said:

that some dude decided your not allowed to have

Some dude? Would that be the elected representatives of the people? The people who make laws? It’s not the guy from down the pub. It’s the government that make these rules. It’s how a civilised society works. 

[Marc26]

4 hours ago, longwood50 said:

I think there is a world of difference between someone who has a few pills in their possession versus someone who is in possession of 100,000 pills or worse yet enough fenanyl to kill 100,000 people.   The users may be rehabilitated or punished if they fail to stop their habit.  However the real problem is those that prey on society by poisioning it with drugs. 

For those people I have no empathy.  Consider in the USA 107,000 people died just last year from opiod overdose.  Those people were murdered.  That says nothing of the ancillary crime that comes from rival drug gangs waring with each other, or addicts who commit crime to support their habit.  

In ancient times enemies were placed on sharpened poles inserted in their rectum and put on display for others to fear.  Its time we stop coddling those that peddle death and put the fear of justice in them.  Only when their fear of punishment exceeds their greed will they stop. 

I have huge empathy for those that the drug dealers prey on and it is to those victims that society should be responsive.  Repeated slaps on the wrist for known drug dealers only emboldens others to enter the trade. 

Well a lot of Doctors and Pharma reps in the US would be on sharpened poles then!

[MrNovax]

5 hours ago, Soidog said:

Some dude? Would that be the elected representatives of the people? The people who make laws? It’s not the guy from down the pub. It’s the government that make these rules. It’s how a civilised society works. 

that "elected representative" has no special knowledge or abilities over the guy in the pub.  in many cases its the same guy from the pub.  

[MrNovax]

12 hours ago, Soidog said:

Because the guy was rumoured to be using drugs at the time. That’s how it’s relevant 

He drove to the school too, so by your method of connecting things that dont connect we should take a look at drivers licensing laws as well i guess.  

[Faz]

1 hour ago, MrNovax said:

that "elected representative" has no special knowledge or abilities over the guy in the pub.  in many cases its the same guy from the pub.  

Now you're just being ridiculous.

1 hour ago, MrNovax said:

He drove to the school too, so by your method of connecting things that dont connect we should take a look at drivers licensing laws as well i guess.  

If you can't see the connection between gun crimes and drugs, then you're discombobulated.
@Soidog original comment was relevant to the topic.

[Soidog]

2 hours ago, MrNovax said:

that "elected representative" has no special knowledge or abilities over the guy in the pub.  in many cases its the same guy from the pub.  

But he’s been elected. That’s how democracy works. If you don’t like it, stand yourself. You are typical of someone who comes fro ma democracy that’s doesn’t understand or appreciate the value of it. Incredible !!

[Soidog]

2 hours ago, MrNovax said:

He drove to the school too, so by your method of connecting things that dont connect we should take a look at drivers licensing laws as well i guess.  

Yes that right mate. The two are connected

[longwood50]

14 hours ago, Marc26 said:

Well a lot of Doctors and Pharma reps in the US would be on sharpened poles then!

Yes there have been instances where Doctors have prescribed opiods way in excess of what they should have.  Pharma reps have induced the doctors to increase the usage of their products. 

No question that if you have a Doctor in effect distributing drugs by writing prescriptions they should be treated no differently than someone who crosses the border in the middle of the night carrying a backpack of drugs. 

However, I would hazzard to guess that if the doctor was caught, licensed revoked and sent to prison for an extended period of time they would not re-offend.  They couldn't.  They no longer have the power to dispense.  That is not true for the drug dealer who is caught repeatedly selling smuggled drugs only to be let go with a light sentence to go back to his drug sources to begin his drug smuggling operation over again. 

One way or another the USA has paid "lip service" to the war on drugs.  So long as the drug dealer has a higher attraction to greed than a fear of punishment it will continue.   

The drug cartels when they encounter someone interfering with their business cut their heads off to their rivals.  That is the mentality you are dealing with.  Only when the drug dealer fears the punsihment more than the cash will the routes shrivel up.  The USA sent hundreds of thousands of soldiers to Afghanistan in retaliation to the loss of 3,000 lives because they supposedly were harboring terrorists that contributed to the 9/11 attack.  But somehow we can't enlist the Mexican government to allow the USA to send in special forces to hunt down and eradicate drug cartels.  

Nothing will ever be totally effective, but we sure could put a dent in it. 

[Marc26]

39 minutes ago, longwood50 said:

Yes there have been instances where Doctors have prescribed opiods way in excess of what they should have.  Pharma reps have induced the doctors to increase the usage of their products. 

No question that if you have a Doctor in effect distributing drugs by writing prescriptions they should be treated no differently than someone who crosses the border in the middle of the night carrying a backpack of drugs. 

However, I would hazzard to guess that if the doctor was caught, licensed revoked and sent to prison for an extended period of time they would not re-offend.  They couldn't.  They no longer have the power to dispense.  That is not true for the drug dealer who is caught repeatedly selling smuggled drugs only to be let go with a light sentence to go back to his drug sources to begin his drug smuggling operation over again. 

One way or another the USA has paid "lip service" to the war on drugs.  So long as the drug dealer has a higher attraction to greed than a fear of punishment it will continue.   

The drug cartels when they encounter someone interfering with their business cut their heads off to their rivals.  That is the mentality you are dealing with.  Only when the drug dealer fears the punsihment more than the cash will the routes shrivel up.  The USA sent hundreds of thousands of soldiers to Afghanistan in retaliation to the loss of 3,000 lives because they supposedly were harboring terrorists that contributed to the 9/11 attack.  But somehow we can't enlist the Mexican government to allow the USA to send in special forces to hunt down and eradicate drug cartels.  

Nothing will ever be totally effective, but we sure could put a dent in it. 

I agree with all of that 

 

But just like wars

 

The war on drugs is big business 

And all goes back to the corruption in the US govt

 

Big business for companies that own jails

And big business for defense contractors 

[longwood50]

7 hours ago, Marc26 said:

I agree with all of that 

But just like wars

The war on drugs is big business 

And all goes back to the corruption in the US govt

Big business for companies that own jails

And big business for defense contractors 

As Reagan said " The closest thing to eternity on earth is a government program" 

Anytime you have unlimited amounts of money being spent with little to no oversight there will be those who exploit it.  I have no doubt that if the US government wanted to make a serious dent in the drug trade it could.  Instead it pays lip service to true enforcement and punishment.  When someone is repeatedly arrested and found guilty of drug trafficking the answer is not incarceration but elimination.  They won't do that even for the most henious crimes let alone someone who "potentially" killed dozens of people with drugs that cant really be traced to them. 
 

It is reported that our spy sattelites can spot an item on the ground only 5 - 6 inches square.  If they have that sort of detail, I have no doubt they could locate the labs where the drugs are being manufactured, trail those involved back to their homes and send them all a welcoming gift from an overhead drone.  But they don't 

[MrNovax]

20 hours ago, Soidog said:

But he’s been elected. That’s how democracy works. If you don’t like it, stand yourself. You are typical of someone who comes fro ma democracy that’s doesn’t understand or appreciate the value of it. Incredible !!

How has it "worked"???  Its two lambs and a lion voting on whats for dinner.  In many cases 49% (or more) of the population lives under a government they dont want which enacts rules they dont agree with.  

[MrNovax]

20 hours ago, Faz said:

Now you're just being ridiculous.

If you can't see the connection between gun crimes and drugs, then you're discombobulated.
@Soidog original comment was relevant to the topic.

No, im not being "ridiculous."  Politicians are known to be the most corrupted and ignorant individuals on the planet.  Just because 100,000 idiots got together and deemed them their "representative" doesnt magically give them special abilities. 

relevant because one person who committed a mass shooting is "suspected" to have had drugs in his system?  Even stretch Armstrong cant reach that far

[MrNovax]

50 minutes ago, longwood50 said:

As Reagan said " The closest thing to eternity on earth is a government program" 

Anytime you have unlimited amounts of money being spent with little to no oversight there will be those who exploit it.  I have no doubt that if the US government wanted to make a serious dent in the drug trade it could.  Instead it pays lip service to true enforcement and punishment.  When someone is repeatedly arrested and found guilty of drug trafficking the answer is not incarceration but elimination.  They won't do that even for the most henious crimes let alone someone who "potentially" killed dozens of people with drugs that cant really be traced to them. 
 

It is reported that our spy sattelites can spot an item on the ground only 5 - 6 inches square.  If they have that sort of detail, I have no doubt they could locate the labs where the drugs are being manufactured, trail those involved back to their homes and send them all a welcoming gift from an overhead drone.  But they don't 

Not that i completely agree with your point but it doesnt help with the US government actually participating in the drug trade.

As with most things, the government use these laws to enrich certain people while removing other less desirables from the public sphere.  

[Soidog]

52 minutes ago, MrNovax said:

How has it "worked"???  Its two lambs and a lion voting on whats for dinner.  In many cases 49% (or more) of the population lives under a government they dont want which enacts rules they dont agree with.  

But that means the majority voted for someone else. That is democracy in action. What other system would you prefer or think would work better? 

[Soidog]

47 minutes ago, MrNovax said:

No, im not being "ridiculous."  Politicians are known to be the most corrupted and ignorant individuals on the planet.  Just because 100,000 idiots got together and deemed them their "representative" doesnt magically give them special abilities. 

relevant because one person who committed a mass shooting is "suspected" to have had drugs in his system?  Even stretch Armstrong cant reach that far

Well if you would like me to post each and every day when there is a drug related serious crime, I’m happy to do so. Drugs and violent crime go hand in hand.  
 

It isn’t a stretch to say there is a link between the mass killings of children and drugs 

https://www.thaipbsworld.com/thailands-mass-murderer-had-unhappy-childhood-family-problems-and-history-of-drug-abuse/

 

[MrNovax]

4 hours ago, Soidog said:

But that means the majority voted for someone else. That is democracy in action. What other system would you prefer or think would work better? 

Yea, youre 100% correct that this is how democracy works which is why i dont like democracy.  id rather that the 49% can live how the 49% want to live, and the 51% can live how the 51% want to live.  

some people shouldnt be telling others how they need to live.  i dont care how many people agree or disagree, people should make their own decisions.  

[MrNovax]

4 hours ago, Soidog said:

Well if you would like me to post each and every day when there is a drug related serious crime, I’m happy to do so. Drugs and violent crime go hand in hand.  
 

It isn’t a stretch to say there is a link between the mass killings of children and drugs 

https://www.thaipbsworld.com/thailands-mass-murderer-had-unhappy-childhood-family-problems-and-history-of-drug-abuse/

This article makes more of a case against his mental well being than his use of drugs.  Caught with a single meth tablet and "alleged" drug abuse.  Did you even read the article you quoted? 

If anything it shows that had he got proper counseling the whole situation could have been avoided.  

[Vigo]

On 10/24/2022 at 10:19 PM, Marc26 said:

But they aren't victimless crimes

This is what happens when you allow drugs unfethered

And all those people come into neighborhoods and steal and intimidate moms and kids

Dirty needles all over the place where your kids and dogs play

They take valuable resources away from law abiding citizens

The Vancouver city scene you show is repeated in large western cities around the world and is preventable. Most of the people on the street are not from Vancouver. They are pushed/pulled to Vancouver by social policy. Smaller communities outside the city do not have the necessary resources or budgets to deal with druggies, social misfts, the poor mentally ill etc., so they eventually move to Vancouver. The poor are encouraged to go to the larger cities where there are more extensive social assistance facilities. There wouldn't be an issue if the vagrants were moved along as soon as they set up camp or started their panhandling. Vancouver, like Portland, Seattle etc. won't do that, so they get the tent cities.

[Marc26]

1 hour ago, Vigo said:

The Vancouver city scene you show is repeated in large western cities around the world and is preventable. Most of the people on the street are not from Vancouver. They are pushed/pulled to Vancouver by social policy. Smaller communities outside the city do not have the necessary resources or budgets to deal with druggies, social misfts, the poor mentally ill etc., so they eventually move to Vancouver. The poor are encouraged to go to the larger cities where there are more extensive social assistance facilities. There wouldn't be an issue if the vagrants were moved along as soon as they set up camp or started their panhandling. Vancouver, like Portland, Seattle etc. won't do that, so they get the tent cities.

Yup

And they seem to have more rights than law abiding citizens

[Soidog]

7 hours ago, MrNovax said:

Yea, youre 100% correct that this is how democracy works which is why i dont like democracy.  id rather that the 49% can live how the 49% want to live, and the 51% can live how the 51% want to live.  

some people shouldnt be telling others how they need to live.  i dont care how many people agree or disagree, people should make their own decisions.  

So how does society ever function in a law abiding way. What happens if some of that 49% want to open up brothels where you can have sex with a 10 year old girl? Where exactly does the free spirit world you think can exist draw the line? What system of control and governance do you propose where laws are made and society has boundaries. How is that decided in your model? 

[Faz]

8 hours ago, MrNovax said:

some people shouldnt be telling others how they need to live.  i dont care how many people agree or disagree, people should make their own decisions.  

That's a brazen and contradictory statement coming from you.
Practice what you preach.

[Chaimai]

9 hours ago, MrNovax said:

Yea, youre 100% correct that this is how democracy works which is why i dont like democracy.  id rather that the 49% can live how the 49% want to live, and the 51% can live how the 51% want to live.  

 

 

 

Absolutely ridiculous statement.

 

[longwood50]

18 hours ago, MrNovax said:

Not that i completely agree with your point but it doesnt help with the US government actually participating in the drug trade.

Now I am not sure I understand you comment that it participates in the drug trade unless you are referring to the fact it has an open border policy.  That certainly facilitates both drugs, drug smugglers and personnel inside the USA to distribute. 

I think in many cases it is like the dematologist who doesn't want his patient to be either cured or die.  The drug enforcement agencies really don't want to eradicate drug trade they want to manage it.  That way it is job security in perpetuity. 

[longwood50]

18 hours ago, MrNovax said:

How has it "worked"???  Its two lambs and a lion voting on whats for dinner.  In many cases 49% (or more) of the population lives under a government they dont want which enacts rules they dont agree with.  

Thomas Jefferson said that a democracy is really mob rule.  If you want the best case for not having a democracy the crowd voted to save Barrabas and crucify Jesus.  Just because the majority voted for it, does not make it correct or righteous. 

[MrNovax]

11 hours ago, Chaimai said:

Absolutely ridiculous statement.

Why?  because some cant control others?