F**k It, I Quit...

[djAdvocate]

Sept 27, 2014 21:35:48 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

Sept 27, 2014 20:20:17 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

no, it will double if it goes up 0%.  read again.  carefully.

edit: i gave you an assist by bolding the key word.

I did read it. Quite carefully.

awesome.  then why did you suggest that i was saying the budget was being increased in the absolute sense?

I understood your point. I just think it's flawed, because anti-pot enforcement is NOT half of the budget of the DEA.

half of all incarcerations, arrests, and people serving in jail are pot convictions, Richard.  this equates to half the resources to me.  and it is not just the DEA.  i put that in to save me from having to type ILLEGAL in every sentence. 

edit: i just looked it up, an the estimates are $10.7B for pot enforcement, and $25B for all illegal drugs including pot in 2013.  that is 43%.  so, i will use 7/16 from now on, if you would like. 

[djAdvocate]

Sept 27, 2014 21:35:48 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

And your statement wasn't limited to the DEA, your statement (in it's entirety) was:

when that happens, the budget for enforcement of the remainder of drug laws will double.

that's right.  i thought i would focus on the DEA just to help narrow the discussion, but i stand by the original point.  half the people incarcerated for illegal drug use/distribution/possession, for example, are incarcerated for pot.  half of the illegal drug arrests made are for pot.  half of all asset forfeitures for illegal drigs involve pot.  that sounds like half of resources to me- so, what am i missing Richard?

[djAdvocate]

Sept 27, 2014 21:26:55 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

Sept 27, 2014 19:48:53 GMT -5 Shooby said:

And we will have more stoned people driving cars. Nice.

Given the option... I'd rather have someone stoned behind the wheel than someone drunk behind the wheel.

Q: You know what a stoned person does at a stop sign?
A: Waits for it to turn green.

this is about half the reason why i don't care about this argument.

the other half is that driving while impaired is already a crime.  nobody is suggesting we change that.  that goes for cough syrup, heroin, pot, alcohol, and sleep deprivation. 

[Deleted]

Sept 28, 2014 0:03:33 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Sept 27, 2014 21:35:48 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

And your statement wasn't limited to the DEA, your statement (in it's entirety) was:

that's right.  i thought i would focus on the DEA just to help narrow the discussion, but i stand by the original point.  half the people incarcerated for drug use/distribution/possession, for example, are incarcerated for pot.  half of the illegal drug arrests made are for pot.  i am having a hard time imagining how that doesn't equate to half the resources, but you are way brighter than me, so why don't you help me out of my ignorance, rather than just laughing off the claim?

See my "ETA" that was posted LONG before your rebuttal.

[djAdvocate]

Sept 28, 2014 0:18:51 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

Sept 28, 2014 0:03:33 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

that's right.  i thought i would focus on the DEA just to help narrow the discussion, but i stand by the original point.  half the people incarcerated for drug use/distribution/possession, for example, are incarcerated for pot.  half of the illegal drug arrests made are for pot.  i am having a hard time imagining how that doesn't equate to half the resources, but you are way brighter than me, so why don't you help me out of my ignorance, rather than just laughing off the claim?

See my "ETA" that was posted LONG before your rebuttal.

i deleted that bolded comment out.  and i already responded to your "ETA", whatever that means.

[ՏՇԾԵԵʅՏɧ_LԹՏՏʅҼ]

half of all incarcerations, arrests, and people serving in jail are pot convictions, Richard. this equates to half the resources to me. and it is not just the DEA.

Have you got a link or statistics to back that up? I think the MAJORITY of impaired driving convictions, vehicular homicides, etc are more alcohol-related than pot-related.

[djAdvocate]

Sept 28, 2014 0:26:55 GMT -5 ՏՇԾԵԵʅՏɧ_LԹՏՏʅҼ said:

half of all incarcerations, arrests, and people serving in jail are pot convictions, Richard. this equates to half the resources to me. and it is not just the DEA.

Have you got a link or statistics to back that up? I think the MAJORITY of impaired driving convictions, etc are more alcohol-related than pot-related.

i already corrected it to ILLEGAL drug arrests.    but just to be clear, i am not talking about legal drugs, here.  i have no issue with legal drugs. 

[Deleted]

Sept 28, 2014 0:21:07 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Sept 28, 2014 0:18:51 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

See my "ETA" that was posted LONG before your rebuttal.

i deleted that bolded comment out.  and i already responded to your "ETA", whatever that means.

"ETA" is board shorthand for "Edited To Add"

[Deleted]

Sept 28, 2014 0:03:33 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Sept 27, 2014 21:35:48 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

And your statement wasn't limited to the DEA, your statement (in it's entirety) was:

that's right.  i thought i would focus on the DEA just to help narrow the discussion, but i stand by the original point.  half the people incarcerated for illegal drug use/distribution/possession, for example, are incarcerated for pot.  half of the illegal drug arrests made are for pot.  half of all asset forfeitures for illegal drigs involve pot.  that sounds like half of resources to me- so, what am i missing Richard?

You are "missing" that it's not half.

Just out of curiosity... where are you getting your "half" information? You stated that it was half... prove it.

(since it's actually not... this MIGHT take a while)

[djAdvocate]

Sept 28, 2014 1:57:14 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

Sept 28, 2014 0:03:33 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

that's right.  i thought i would focus on the DEA just to help narrow the discussion, but i stand by the original point.  half the people incarcerated for illegal drug use/distribution/possession, for example, are incarcerated for pot.  half of the illegal drug arrests made are for pot.  half of all asset forfeitures for illegal drigs involve pot.  that sounds like half of resources to me- so, what am i missing Richard?

You are "missing" that it's not half.

i agree.  it is 7/16.  my apologies.

Just out of curiosity... where are you getting your "half" information? You stated that it was half... prove it.

(since it's actually not... this MIGHT take a while)

it took 5 mins, after i saw your post.

i get it all over the damned place.  last night, i got the $10.7B enforcement figure HERE:

www.mpp.org/media/op-eds/the-war-of-pot-americas-42.html

and the $25B total budget figure here:

www.drugpolicy.org/sites/default/files/DPA_Fact_sheet_Drug_War_Budget_Feb2014.pdf

[djAdvocate]

incidentally, Richard, i have been reading about this for over a decade.  everything i have read has said the same thing.  if things have changed in the last 10 years, i would be very surprised.  "about half of all arrests for illegal drugs are for pot". "over 100M Americans have tried pot at some point in their lives", "pot is the least harmful and the most widely used of all recreational drugs"....i have a million of these little phrases that i have memorized over the years.  you are welcome to challenge any of them you like. 

edit:  i found this at another site this morning:

Do people in the US still get arrested for marijuana?
Although the intent of a 'War on Drugs' may have been to target drug smugglers and 'King Pins,' according to the FBI's annual Uniform Crime Reports, of the 1,552,432 arrests for drug law violations in 2012, 82.2% (1,276,099) were for mere possession of a controlled substance. Only 17.8% (276,333) were for the sale or manufacturing of a drug. Further, nearly half (48.3%) of drug arrests in 2012 were for marijuana -- a total of 749,825. Of those, an estimated 658,231 arrests (42.4% of all drug arrests) were for marijuana possession alone. By contrast in 2000, a total of 734,497 Americans were arrested for marijuana offenses, of which 646,042 (40.9%) were for possession alone. - See more at:

www.drugwarfacts.org/cms/Marijuana#sthash.HZAshpGd.dpuf

this number is pretty stable over time.

[djAdvocate]

Sept 28, 2014 1:53:58 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

Sept 28, 2014 0:21:07 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

i deleted that bolded comment out.  and i already responded to your "ETA", whatever that means.

"ETA" is board shorthand for "Edited To Add"

thanks.  never could figure it out.

[ZaireinHD]

the best part of the video clip I watched was after she walked off - the camera went to the lady  behind the desk and she was totally shocked, unprepared (not that she could have been prepared) and speechless!

[Deleted]

Sept 28, 2014 10:48:42 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

incidentally, Richard, i have been reading about this for over a decade.  everything i have read has said the same thing.  if things have changed in the last 10 years, i would be very surprised.  "about half of all arrests for illegal drugs are for pot". "over 100M Americans have tried pot at some point in their lives", "pot is the least harmful and the most widely used of all recreational drugs"....i have a million of these little phrases that i have memorized over the years.  you are welcome to challenge any of them you like. 

edit:  i found this at another site this morning:

Do people in the US still get arrested for marijuana?
Although the intent of a 'War on Drugs' may have been to target drug smugglers and 'King Pins,' according to the FBI's annual Uniform Crime Reports, of the 1,552,432 arrests for drug law violations in 2012, 82.2% (1,276,099) were for mere possession of a controlled substance. Only 17.8% (276,333) were for the sale or manufacturing of a drug. Further, nearly half (48.3%) of drug arrests in 2012 were for marijuana -- a total of 749,825. Of those, an estimated 658,231 arrests (42.4% of all drug arrests) were for marijuana possession alone. By contrast in 2000, a total of 734,497 Americans were arrested for marijuana offenses, of which 646,042 (40.9%) were for possession alone. - See more at:

www.drugwarfacts.org/cms/Marijuana#sthash.HZAshpGd.dpuf

this number is pretty stable over time.

The number of arrests made does not have any direct link to the expense incurred in enforcement. So that could easily be higher than any other drug without an increase in cost of enforcement.

[djAdvocate]

Oct 2, 2014 22:53:13 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

Sept 28, 2014 10:48:42 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

incidentally, Richard, i have been reading about this for over a decade.  everything i have read has said the same thing.  if things have changed in the last 10 years, i would be very surprised.  "about half of all arrests for illegal drugs are for pot". "over 100M Americans have tried pot at some point in their lives", "pot is the least harmful and the most widely used of all recreational drugs"....i have a million of these little phrases that i have memorized over the years.  you are welcome to challenge any of them you like. 

edit:  i found this at another site this morning:

Do people in the US still get arrested for marijuana?
Although the intent of a 'War on Drugs' may have been to target drug smugglers and 'King Pins,' according to the FBI's annual Uniform Crime Reports, of the 1,552,432 arrests for drug law violations in 2012, 82.2% (1,276,099) were for mere possession of a controlled substance. Only 17.8% (276,333) were for the sale or manufacturing of a drug. Further, nearly half (48.3%) of drug arrests in 2012 were for marijuana -- a total of 749,825. Of those, an estimated 658,231 arrests (42.4% of all drug arrests) were for marijuana possession alone. By contrast in 2000, a total of 734,497 Americans were arrested for marijuana offenses, of which 646,042 (40.9%) were for possession alone. - See more at:

www.drugwarfacts.org/cms/Marijuana#sthash.HZAshpGd.dpuf

this number is pretty stable over time.

The number of arrests made does not have any direct link to the expense incurred in enforcement. So that could easily be higher than any other drug without an increase in cost of enforcement.

i think it is safe to assume that it is proportional, but if you don't, i will abandon the point rather than spending 2 weeks doing a "meta analysis".