Posts Tagged crime
How does law enforcement get away with tasting the cocaine at the crime scene?
Posted by admin in Drug & Alcohol Laws on July 26, 2010
Question by shlomogon: How does law enforcement get away with tasting the cocaine at the crime scene?
I see this in movies. I don’t know if it is true. I would dare to say that an officer of the law would not actually taste the drug to verify it is actually an illicit drug, i.e. cocaine. I believe there would have to be lab tests. Otherwise the officer would pop positive on a drug test.
Best answer:
Answer by FootballFan52670
that only happens in movies…
Add your own answer in the comments!
Does the “WAR ON DRUGS” actually create MORE CRIME, cause MORE PROBLEMS, and FURTHER INFLATE the GOVERNMENT?
Posted by admin in Uncategorized on July 7, 2010
Prohibition only creates crime and related social harms. This was the case in the 1920s with alcohol, and it is the case now with currently illegal drugs. It does not matter if you are for or against people using drugs. Prohibition does NOT WORK, and it costs far too much to continue.
I never really thought it through when I was younger. It was very simple to me: Drugs are bad, therefore they should be illegal. That was all of the thought I put into it, because I did not think beyond the propaganda that I heard every day in school. I did not think about all of the problems that prohibition causes (even though I had studied prohibition at one point), and I think that most people are pretty much brainwashed by the same propaganda, so most of us don’t bother to think about the negative impact that the “WAR ON DRUGS” has on our society.
If you do not think we should change the laws, then you support drug UNcontrol. Prohibition means NO regulation, and NO control because drugs are pushed underground into criminality. Prohibition does not stop people from making, selling, buying or using drugs. All it does is make drugs impossible to control. The most optimistic reports show that we only interdict 10-15% of drug traffic. That means that prohibition is 85% to 90% ineffective. That also means that we have NO control over recreational substances.
It does not matter if you are for or against drug use. Prohibition is an abject failure. If we put a stop to this irresponsible and detrimental “WAR”, our country could experience a huge DECREASE in:
-Crime (Crime is higher as a result of the war on drugs. In particular, homicides have skyrocketed – 10 per 100,000 – the only other time the homicide rate was so high was during alcohol prohibition. After prohibition, the murder rates dropped by more than HALF)
-Disease and,
-Government Spending (A RAND corporation study showed that each dollar spent on education and treatment is 7 times more effective than a dollar spent on criminal interdiction, yet we spend more than 45 BILLION DOLLARS per year on criminal interdiction and incarceration costs, and less than 4 billion dollars on education, treatment, and prevention.
),
-Prison Population (According to the American Corrections Association, the average daily cost per state prison inmate per day in the US in 2005 was $67.55. That means it costs states approximately $16,948,295 per day to imprison drug offenders, or $6,186,127,675 per year),
http://www.drugwarfacts.org/prison.htm
-Gangs and Organized Crime (gangs are a product of drug prohibition),
-Corrupt Police (Who wants to live in a police state?),
-Drug Trafficking (obvious reasons),
-Drugs Use among Teens (Drug use INCREASED 7 fold among 12-17 year olds after the modern War on Drugs started. The economics of prohibition favors the targeting of youths. Drug dealers don’t ask for ID),
-Graffiti (Gang tagging creates an enormous graffiti problem causing millions of dollars in damage every year. The gangs are a product of drug prohibition)
-Deaths due to overdose,
-car accidents caused by high speed chases (Where a driver is afraid of being caught with illegal drugs),
-divorce rate (parents would not be separated from the family due to petty possession convictions),
-GUN CONTROL – we have increasingly strict gun control laws because the crime wave that rides on prohibition has caused huge public outcry. Rather than focus on the cause of crime (socioeconomic factors of the drug war are a major component), the public and legislators lash out at gun owners. This would practically REMOVE the government’s pretext to ban guns!
Since Nixon started the modern war on drugs, use among teens is up 7 times. This is because the black market created by prohibition makes underage teens a very easy target. The result is that illegal drugs run rampant through every high school in America. But alcohol, as a legal drug, is much harder for a minor to obtain.
We must remove the profit incentive in the black market for recreational substances – the only way to do that is to end prohibition and replace it with regulation. Congress is granted the power to “regulate commerce”. “Regulate”, to the writers of the Constitution, meant to facilitate the proper functioning of, as when someone regulates a clock to keep proper time, or the barrels of a double rifle to hit the same point of aim
The Rand corporation’s study showed that every dollar spent on education or treatment programs is 7 times more effective that a dollar spent on criminal interdictions. If recreational substances were made available through a regulated and taxed means, just like alcohol, we could focus far more money on education and treatment and as a result, lower drug use and provide for a healthier society. The resultant reduction in crime will provide safer streets for police and citizens, and allow the police to concentrate on real crimes, such as violent crimes. This was one of the rationales behind the repeal of Alcohol Prohibition, and it is still a good idea.
In Holland where both Marijuana and Heroin are legally available, they have HALF the percentage of Marijuana users as in the US, and a THIRD the percentage of heroin users. If heroin were legal tomorrow would you shoot up? No, neither would I. The people that would use heroin already use it, and obtain it through the black market. Available through regulated channels, it would simply end the crime ridden black markets, and promote a healthy environment free of HIV, AIDS, Hepatitis and overdoses.
Prohibition policies are based on fiction. They destroy society by creating an environment of crime and corruption, as well as giving government “Big Brother” powers over the lives, recreational habits, and choices of all citizens.
And prohibition policies create vast bureaucracies. And the lies and propaganda which these bureaucracies must create and disseminate, in order to prop up their fiction, can cause aware and thinking people to develop a tragic deep and permanent distrust of the government, of the hardworking people in law enforcement, and of the political process.
Prohibition and the forces that support it are enemies of liberty and domestic tranquility. While there may be issues with the use, and sometimes abuse, of various recreational drugs like alcohol, those issues and those people that abuse should be dealt with directly, instead of creating an unregulated black market that feeds the mouth of crime. That is all prohibition has ever done, and will ever do.
http://www.drugwarfaq.com/
http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-157.html
http://www.drugwarfacts.org/prison.htm
The first web site is very informative about the considerable number of problems that the “WAR ON DRUGS” has given us. I recommend that you read it in its entirety. I do not agree with everything he says, but there is a lot of good info there.
Why is alcohol illegal and marijauna not when Alcohol is the cause of much more deaths and crime. Stupid?
Posted by admin in Uncategorized on June 29, 2010
Some studies suggest that near 50% of inmates in prison were intoxicated at the time they commited their crime.
Obviously drunk driving is a leading killer.
I’m not saying that alcohol should be illegal but since it is known to be much much more detrimental and harmful it’s unusual that marijuana is the one that is illegal.
Do you feel sorry for drug users who end up in prison who did a violent crime instead of a rehab centre?
Posted by admin in Uncategorized on June 29, 2010
what happens if they hate it and have withdrawals so hard they want to die? they may die without drugs?
You opinion Federal trial set for Shenandoah men charged with hate crime?
Posted by admin in Uncategorized on April 26, 2010
Two Shenandoah-area men now know when and where their federal hate-crime trial will begin in connection with the fatal beating of an illegal Mexican immigrant.
Derrick M. Donchak, 20, of Shenandoah, and Brandon J. Piekarsky, 18, of Shenandoah Heights, must appear at 9:30 a.m. Oct. 4 in Courtroom 3 of the Max Rosenn United States Courthouse, Wilkes-Barre, for the start of their trial, which could put each behind bars for life.
U.S. District Judge A. Richard Caputo, who is presiding over the case, issued an order Thursday in which he scheduled the start of the trial and gave each defendant until May 15 to file pretrial motions and supporting briefs.
Caputo ruled the interests of justice justified extending the time for filing such motions and briefs.
The federal trial will represent the second time the men will have faced charges resulting from the beating of Luis Eduardo Ramirez Zavala.
Donchak and Piekarsky are each charged with a hate crime in connection with the fatal beating of Ramirez, 25, of Shenandoah, on July 12, 2008, on a borough street. Donchak also faces charges of obstruction of justice in connection with the beating.
Ramirez died two days after the beating in Geisinger Medical Center, Danville.
A Schuylkill County jury convicted Donchak and Piekarsky on May 1, 2009, of simple assault and alcohol-related offenses, while acquitting both of more serious crimes, including third-degree murder in Piekarsky’s case.
Schuylkill County President Judge William E. Baldwin, who presided over that five-day trial, on June 17 sentenced Donchak to seven to 23 months in prison and Piekarsky to six months and seven days to 23 months behind bars. Each man has been paroled from Schuylkill County Prison and both are on home detention, which restricts them to their residences except for work, education, church, medical treatment, lawyer visits, court appearances and other approved activities.
Three former Shenandoah police officers, Matthew R. Nestor, William Moyer and Jason Hayes, also face charges in connection with allegedly obstructing the investigation of Ramirez’s beating. Nestor, Moyer and Hayes were police chief, lieutenant and officer, respectively.
In an unrelated case, Nestor and former Shenandoah police captain Jamie Gennarini are charged with extorting money from illegal gambling operations in the borough.
All four former police officers have resigned their positions with the borough. Like Donchak and Piekarsky, they are on home detention pending the starts of their trials; Caputo, who also is presiding over those cases, has not scheduled their trial dates
http://republicanherald.com/news/federal-trial-set-for-shenandoah-men-charged-with-hate-crime-1.701138
Almost all crime in the Scandinavian states is committed by atheists – is there a connection?
Posted by admin in Uncategorized on April 26, 2010
Both there and in Denmark and Holland they artiifically created a low official crime rate by legalizing drugs and prostituion,also citing figures based on number of violent crimes ( numerical),which would obviously be low given their small size. Per capita figures do not seem to be available,which would afford the only standard of comparison with a larger society. I ask because we have this Dutch man on board who keeps pushing the idea of a link between Christianity and crime. He also points to Holland as a model state when it’s a culturally non-fecund state with sky-high heroin addiction and juvenile prostitution. He tirelessly reiterates that most American prison inmates cite a religious denomination,therefore most criminals are Christian. His logic,not mine. i say,if that is so,then would not the fact that almost all crime in Holland is committed by atheists “prove’ a relationship between atheism and crime/ Opinions?
It is atheists who claim a correlation between religion or lack of it and crime,not I; I think the religious background or lack of one in a criminal population is merely a reflection of the religious character of the society. I note many atheists employing the old urban liberal stunt of using factoids – stats derived from an obviously biased web-site or “study” – their favorite justification for everything is “studies have shown…” Then you check out the source,and it’s some lobby-type org. By the way,how is legalizing crime like narcotics not artifically creating a seemingly lower crime rate? We have many drug dealers in our prisons which is exactly where they should be. It’s easy to have a “low crime rate” when you keep legalizing crime.

Recent Comments