U.S. Cautious About Mexico Drug Measure

advertisement
This article is over 14 days old and has been removed by requirement of the Associated Press.
  • 8 Votes
  • Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.

Back To Top

Published to:

What's this?
Who's leading the conversation?
This visualization below allows you to see the impact that each user has on the current conversation. The top row contains the group of users who have had the most impact, the 2nd row the group of users who have had the 2nd most impact (et cetera). Users with similar impact are grouped together, and the average score of the group is shown to the left of the group. The author of the article is also shown on the left, in their corresponding group. Each user's score is based on the number of comments the user has made plus the number of votes their comments have received. The scores are calculated relative one another, so while their absolute value is not particularly important, their relative difference does indicate a larger difference in impact on the conversation.
4.0
1.9
{"commentId":111729,"authorDomain":"chinawatcher"}

This is a welcome move; it's impossible to catch all casual users and the limited resources of the Mexican government should not be used for this purpose.

In order to prevent a flood of Americans to Mexico to buy and use these drugs, the US should introduce the same measures in the US, decriminalizing use by end users. These drugs should be monopolized, sold and taxed by the federal government; this would allow the government to make tax cuts in other areas permanent.

{"commentId":111729,"threadId":"6425","contentId":"182593","authorDomain":"chinawatcher"}
    Reply#1 - Sat Apr 29, 2006 9:24 PM EDT
    {"commentId":112032,"authorDomain":"mimizhusband"}

    I have little faith that our elected leader even all know where Mexico is on a world map, let alone much about the subtleties of drug enforcement policy.

    One of the two California legislative bodies just voted to officially support the boycott on May 1 by immigrant groups, thus declaring that they have no clue what their roll even is as elected officials.

    {"commentId":112032,"threadId":"6425","contentId":"182593","authorDomain":"mimizhusband"}
      #1.1 - Sun Apr 30, 2006 10:14 AM EDT
      Reply
      {"commentId":111743,"authorDomain":"sims"}

      Chinawatcher, I disagree with you. The point of criminalizing the sale of drugs serves as a deterrent. Although many are not caught, some would-be drug users do not use drugs because of the potential to get caught. As you state though, the only safe way to do this is with strict government regulation. Keep in mind the troubles that the US currently has with cigarettes and the tobacco lobby's power in Washington. The drug business would have to be nationalized, and the government would have to decide on strict policies for the amount of consumption and the age to do so. Either way, this bill seems like a moral misstep, but a step in the right direction for law enforcement.

      {"commentId":111743,"threadId":"6425","contentId":"182593","authorDomain":"sims"}
        Reply#2 - Sat Apr 29, 2006 9:55 PM EDT
        {"commentId":112034,"authorDomain":"mimizhusband"}

        1. The results of drug use aren't deterrent enough?

        2.

        Either way, this bill seems like a moral misstep

        When the government is the arbiter of morals we are all doomed to live by the morals of whomever happens to be in charge today.

        {"commentId":112034,"threadId":"6425","contentId":"182593","authorDomain":"mimizhusband"}
          #2.1 - Sun Apr 30, 2006 10:17 AM EDT
          Reply
          {"commentId":111754,"authorDomain":"daksya"}

          List of maximum allowable drug quantities approved for personal use by Mexico's Congress:

          Opium: (raw, to be smoked): 5 grams

          Heroin: 25 milligrams

          Marijuana: 5 grams

          Cocaine: 500 milligrams

          LSD: .015 milligrams

          MDA: 200 milligrams

          MDMA (Ecstasy): 200 milligrams

          Mescaline: 1 gram

          Peyote: 1 kilogram

          Psilocybin (concentrate, pure, active ingredient): 100 milligrams

          Hallucinogenic mushrooms (raw, off the farm): 250 milligrams

          Amphetamines: 100 milligrams

          Dexamphetamines: 40 milligrams

          Phencyclidine (PCP, or Angel Dust): 7 milligrams

          Methamphetamines: 200 milligrams

          Nalbuphine (synthetic opiate): 10 milligrams

          SOURCE: Associated Press

          {"commentId":111754,"threadId":"6425","contentId":"182593","authorDomain":"daksya"}
          • 3 votes
          Reply#3 - Sat Apr 29, 2006 10:06 PM EDT
          {"commentId":111824,"authorDomain":"vincentgrayson"}

          I wonder what that boils down to, for the LSD. A few hits?

          I know what country my next vacation is going to involve.

          {"commentId":111824,"threadId":"6425","contentId":"182593","authorDomain":"vincentgrayson"}
          • 2 votes
          #3.1 - Sun Apr 30, 2006 12:13 AM EDT
          {"commentId":111833,"authorDomain":"daksya"}

          Actually, the LSD figure seems suspect. 0.015 milligrams is 15 micrograms. Typical blotter in the 90s had average of 60 micrograms, and that was considerably lower than the 200-300 mics in the 60s.

          {"commentId":111833,"threadId":"6425","contentId":"182593","authorDomain":"daksya"}
          • 1 vote
          #3.2 - Sun Apr 30, 2006 12:29 AM EDT
          Reply
          {"commentId":111784,"authorDomain":"chinawatcher"}

          ZDS, the problem with the deterrent is that it doesn't work, as any honest law enforcement officer will tell you. Sure, it makes the voters feel better to keep it illegal, and the elected officials pander to get the vote, but this is democracy at its worst. Billions of tax dollars are wasted, and there is no lasting solution. In the meantime, the large drug dealers prosper while the small guys get caught and do their time in jail. When they are released, it all starts all over again.

          It's far better to have government-owned companies sell these drugs at regulated prices and use that money to fund the budget. You might ask if I think that the government should own the tobacco, liquor, gambling and prostitution businesses and use that income to fund the budget? My answer would be an emphatic YES! The income from that should be used to fund our fire and police departments, schools and teachers, so that everyone can benefit from society's vices and our own weaknesses.

          {"commentId":111784,"threadId":"6425","contentId":"182593","authorDomain":"chinawatcher"}
          • 1 vote
          Reply#4 - Sat Apr 29, 2006 10:51 PM EDT
          {"commentId":111876,"authorDomain":"formula1"}

          You seem to only think about the incoming money associated with the legal sales of drugs. How about the COST?

          America currently pays a great deal of money related to unhealthy foods, alcohol, and tobacco. The cost of health-care is at an all-time high causing a strain in business profits and consequently the economy. Legalizing people's 'vices' will lead not only social implications, but also a surge in costs that will put the federal drug program deep in the red.

          Socially, families already suffer a great deal when members fall victim to alcohol or drug addiction as the law currently stands, to further make these substances readily available would only further increase the number of broken homes and prevent a lot of children from realizing their potential.

          I would think a little more before emphatically agreeing to things.

          {"commentId":111876,"threadId":"6425","contentId":"182593","authorDomain":"formula1"}
          • 1 vote
          #4.1 - Sun Apr 30, 2006 1:29 AM EDT
          {"commentId":112037,"authorDomain":"mimizhusband"}

          It should be assumed that most substances are available in every town in America. If we have, for example 8% (I think that the number I saw recently) of Americans that have used Cocaine in the last 12 months, do you think that the other 92% didn't use Cocaine just because it was illegal? Or perhaps there are more powerful negatives that limit use and that the drug war is really just a jobs bill for the corrections industry.

          {"commentId":112037,"threadId":"6425","contentId":"182593","authorDomain":"mimizhusband"}
            #4.2 - Sun Apr 30, 2006 10:22 AM EDT
            {"commentId":112076,"authorDomain":"formula1"}

            There are a lot of people that don't do things because they are illegal. You are also forgetting the people that don't try drugs simply because they don't want to. When the drugs become a commodity like a new alcoholic drink however, they will be sure to try it.

            {"commentId":112076,"threadId":"6425","contentId":"182593","authorDomain":"formula1"}
              #4.3 - Sun Apr 30, 2006 11:28 AM EDT
              {"commentId":112103,"authorDomain":"mimizhusband"}

              And it would be so bad for people to try drugs? Of course there is a big negative with personal freedom, it is called responsibility. Some will abuse it, but you are forgetting that some actually turn to drugs because they are "forbidden fruit." Tobacco companies are quite happy to maintain the image of the use of their product as rebellion.

              You're assumption is that without the illegality many more would try drugs. I don't think human nature is like that.

              {"commentId":112103,"threadId":"6425","contentId":"182593","authorDomain":"mimizhusband"}
                #4.4 - Sun Apr 30, 2006 12:24 PM EDT
                Reply
                {"commentId":111875,"authorDomain":"vulgrin"}

                From the article:

                News of the decriminalization did not make the front pages of any major Mexico City newspaper, nor was it discussed in editorials. It was slightly better publicized in the north of the country, where turf wars between rival drugs gangs have caused hundreds of killings along the Mexico-U.S. border, but was still overshadowed by news about immigration.

                Of course it made the news here and not there. We're a bunch of Puritan descendants that have to be in each other's business all the time.

                I guarantee you that, if the World were high school, we'd be the kid that gets the eye-rolls between the other students every time we turn our backs to them. And the only reason we wouldn't get more wedgies for being the "nerd" is because our butt's too big to lift thanks to our "diet."

                {"commentId":111875,"threadId":"6425","contentId":"182593","authorDomain":"vulgrin"}
                • 2 votes
                Reply#5 - Sun Apr 30, 2006 1:26 AM EDT
                {"commentId":112039,"authorDomain":"mimizhusband"}

                Good analogy.

                {"commentId":112039,"threadId":"6425","contentId":"182593","authorDomain":"mimizhusband"}
                  #5.1 - Sun Apr 30, 2006 10:23 AM EDT
                  Reply
                  {"commentId":111878,"authorDomain":"vulgrin"}

                  Oh, even better:

                  under a bill approved by lawmakers that some worry could prove to be a lure to young Americans

                  Uh, I guess "Alan Clendenning" of the AP doesn't get to many raves, clubs, back alleys behind mini-marts then I take it? Or, you know, live in this world? Note the use of the qualifier "some". That means, "I made this up."

                  {"commentId":111878,"threadId":"6425","contentId":"182593","authorDomain":"vulgrin"}
                    Reply#6 - Sun Apr 30, 2006 1:31 AM EDT
                    {"commentId":111910,"authorDomain":"softfacts"}

                    Let's face it: Mexico is a $#!%hole. Oh, it's got some nice places for wealthy white people to visit, but it's still a $#!%hole. If it was awesome then we wouldn't be busy trying to keep them down there. If it was awesome then the US government would be bombing us a fifty-first state right now. Decriminalizing these drugs eases the pain of living in a $#!%hole. It may even serve as an incentive to stay. What's the problem?

                    {"commentId":111910,"threadId":"6425","contentId":"182593","authorDomain":"softfacts"}
                    • 2 votes
                    Reply#7 - Sun Apr 30, 2006 2:36 AM EDT
                    {"commentId":112040,"authorDomain":"mimizhusband"}

                    Interesting point. It reminds me of the China opium dens in the 1830's. They fell out of favor not because of laws, but because people rationally decided life was better outside of the life that the dens represented, even though at the moment they felt very good.

                    {"commentId":112040,"threadId":"6425","contentId":"182593","authorDomain":"mimizhusband"}
                      #7.1 - Sun Apr 30, 2006 10:25 AM EDT
                      Reply
                      {"canLink":false,"threadId":"6425","isPrivate":false}
                      Leave a Comment:
                      You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead.
                      As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.
                      {"threadId":"6425","contentId":"182593"}
                      Start TrackingStart Tracking
                      Stop TrackingStop Tracking