Being a mailman is a good job (tough work, but good job).

Now there's a position open for a person who hopefully won't abuse it. Two awards can be given as a result. A Darwin award goes to Mr. Hunt for getting fired from a good job. The award of a good job goes to the new guy they hire. You can bet the new guy getting hired is way happy. He should send a Thank You card to Mr. Hunt.

The answer to the drug problem is to end the spectacularly failed costly Drug War.

They say the Drug War is over. Don't be fooled. As long as drugs remain criminalized the Drug War will never be over.

When is the U.S. government going to finally realize that it can't legislate morality? Many people believe the answer to solving our drug problem is to simply tell people to say "no" to drugs but after being in practice for decades now the evidence shows this has failed miserably. People have been doing drugs for thousands of years and it's never going to stop. There will always be people who do drugs and those who become addicted.

Didn't we learn from the mistakes of Alcohol Prohibition in the 1920s/30s? It didn't work then, and drug prohibition certainly isn't working now. The failed Drug War has cost the U.S. taxpayers over a trillion dollars and has been in force for over seven decades. And the real tragedy here is all of the violence that has been associated with the Drug War and illegal drug trafficking. Drugs are more readily available and the Drug War has created a black market, gangs in every U.S. state, and powerful violent cartels south of the border and in other countries.

The laws have done more damage to this country than the drugs themselves. We have created more criminals out of drug users/addicts who should really be treated as medical patients. Wouldn't we be better off spending the Drug War funding on education, drug treatment and rehabilitation instead of failed law enforcement and incarceration? And not having to build more prisons?

We need to reevaluate our position on drug use in this country. I firmly believe we should decriminalize all drugs. Legalize marijuana and regulate it like alcohol in regards to the law, and create an atmosphere that doesn't stigmatize the drug user. Please understand there is a difference between decriminalization and legalization. I would never advocate anyone use dangerous hard drugs like meth, cocaine, heroin, etc. But the fact of life remains people will choose to use such drugs and become addicted. Countries in Europe have tried different strategies that have reduced the problems associated with drug use. Why can't the U.S. take these same approaches? We should adopt programs for hard drugs (meth, coke, heroin,etc.) like the Swiss heroin program (where addicts can get their drugs from medically supervised clinics) which has shown positive results in reducing violent crime and HIV infections and helps drug addicts to become stable and productive members of society.

Locking people up and throwing away the key is not the answer. When someone has a real drug problem and is addicted their main focus will always be to obtain and use drugs, regardless of any law. And putting a mark on someone's permanent record that will follow them for the rest of their lives will only hinder them to become productive members in society in getting jobs, student financial aid, etc.

There are many people against legalizing and/or decriminalizing drugs and have expressed many fears and dooms day scenarios but evidence has revealed this would simply NOT be the result. Portugal decriminalized drugs in 2001 and none of the nightmare scenarios touted by preenactment decriminalization opponents have become a reality.

And what are the ramifications of manufacturing, importing, and selling the drugs right here in the U.S? Wouldn't that create a new industry? Jobs? Tax revenue? And stop funding the violent cartels and eventually take away their power?

These are questions that I think once answered, will solve our drug problems and the days of the Drug War will be history.

I firmly believe we should decriminalize all drugs.

Yes, because there should be a place in every society for crack cocaine and meth.

If they legalize, monitor and tax drugs one of three things will happen:

1) Abusers will overindulge and die, removing them from the system (and I don't feel bad about this because it's not like the dangers of drug use are a secret. Don't start using and you're fine)

2) Casual users will contribute to the tax coffers and no longer risk a 'bad batch'

3) 'Rebel' users, those who do it just because it's illegal, won't see the trill and stop using

You miss the point Skup. There is all ready a place in our society for crack and cocaine. The point you are missing is by making them illegal we give rise to organized crime. We funnel billions of dollars to violent cartels.

But, I guess you just glazed over those points and focused on the decriminalization part. Also, about the part where I said there is a difference in decriminalization and legalization, right?

I don't advocate for anyone to do hard drugs, but, I guess you missed that point, too.

Sorry Rat, not going to happen no matter how much sense it may or may not make. The subject can't even be opened for debate because the "war on drugs" is such an ingrained industry in this country. Alternatives cannot be discussed or debated, much less attempted. There is too much money involved in the fallacy that drug use can be completely eradicated. Dollars trump common sense on issues such as these.

roy:

I'm afraid you are correct, to a point.

But, with the passage of time and the dieing off of people with old ideas, it will eventually happen. Maybe not in our life times, but eventually.

Modern day 'pony express'? Sad state of affairs.

OneDirtyRat - are you out of your stupid mind? I'm sorry, you have to have a mind to be stupid. Have the drugs that you want so bad to be legalized burn all your brain cells up? Drugs continue to ruin the kids and so called adult minds. All drugs do is make the pusher (who should be shot) richer and you poorer!! Argue that point if you can!

Okie:

The only one "stupid" here is the one who supports the perpetuation of a failed and costly drug war and drug prohibition. Didn't we, or more particularly, YOU learn anything from the alcohol prohibition in 20s/30s? Apparently not!

Have the drugs that you want so bad to be legalized burn all your brain cells up?

LOL You assume I do those drugs which you are very sadly mistaken.

Here's a thought: can you possibly contribute anything constructive to the debate without resorting to personal attacks? You do realize that exposes your true mentality and that you really have no ground to stand on, don't you?

Drugs continue to ruin the kids and so called adult minds.

Well, yes I agree that drugs MAY ruin some lives and drugs should be better regulated so kids can't get them so readily from their neighborhood dealer who doesn't give a rats ass who he's selling to.

All drugs do is make the pusher (who should be shot) richer and you poorer!! Argue that point if you can!

OK. Gladly. You are supporting my point, which is with making drugs illegal you are supporting the funneling of billions of dollars to organized crime. Thanks for that support which you obviously didn't realize you were doing.

Oh and BTW: you supporting the murder of drug dealers basically speaks VOLUMES about your mentality and yet your have the audacity to criticize me for offering a solution to the failed and costly drug war?!!!! PRICELESS!

NEXT!

Lets legalize crack on a limited basis. Anyone who supports legalizing drugs can recommend their town be the first "case study City" . We will watch from a distance and if it works for you gladly jump on board. Do I hear a dirty rat naming his city??? No, No, not here Chucky Cheese says........

You are full of BS and talk in theory. Try putting your hand on the hot stove before you jump in the oven........

Seven:

Lets legalize crack on a limited basis

Apparently you didn't read very closely or otherwise you would have noticed I said DECRIMINALIZE all drugs and I also said there is a difference between that and legalization. Maybe if you could possibly read a little closer you would have the right to criticize me and my ideas, huh?

Anyone who supports legalizing drugs can recommend their town be the first "case study City"

What you have failed to realize is that we all ready have drugs in this country so why would we need a city for a case study? And if you really did your research you would know there is all ready a country that has decriminalized drugs without any of the dooms day scenarios prohibitionists tout that never materialized.

We will watch from a distance and if it works for you gladly jump on board. Do I hear a dirty rat naming his city??? No, No, not here Chucky Cheese says........

LOL You make a funny! Here's a suggestion: could you possibly contribute constructively without resorting to insults? It would be refreshing for a change. Try it. You might like it.

You are full of BS and talk in theory.

Theory yes. BS? Naw. Again, try not resorting to personal attacks as that just takes away from YOUR credibility.

Have a nice day!

You can't regulate cocaine, meth or opiates. Class A substances are classified as such for a reason. They are extremely addicitve and demand usage in greater and greater quantities. Before I get regaled with tales of heroin users who are able to get high and hold down two jobs while still performing admirably at their jobs, remember that (unlike alcohol) the majority of regular users of these substances don't use at the equivalent of a two drink daily quota, nor can they go 20 years at that rate. I suspect that those who claiming to be "libertarians", who claim to have the answers and who want to legalize all drugs are just marijuana users who still have hurt feelings.

The Prohibition analogy is the most overused and tired example. Why don't we take a look at the issue of alcohol use from a slightly different perspective? Let's look at what happened to Britain in the last few years since they did the opposite and tried to introduce a "Cafe Culture" of 24 hour alcohol sales and a relaxation of the Licensing Laws (booze in every shop at lower prices). Relaxing laws did not translate into a well behaved populace who no longer had to worry about drinking outside of legal posted hours (no more illegal nightclubs after hours or smuggled, cut rate hooch). It has led to an increase in drunkenness, anti-social behavior, crime, hospital visits, and poorer work performance). The same type of behavior can be seen in Canada, Australia and New Zealand. Our American culture and heritage is more akin to these countries than Continental Europeans and even farther from Asians, Africans etc., who may have stronger cultural norms when it comes to drug and alcohol use. Legal drug use just means more people stoned. The Netherlands got tired of all the pot tourists going to Amsterdam, because the only thing more obnoxious than a bunch of dreadlocked Dutch people are stoned British and American college aged students.

In the last ten years we have witnessed the introduction of Oxycontin and Oxycodone to the general public as a legal, prescribed, socially acceptable product. How well has that worked? Even if we decriminalized the recreational usage of Oxy, we would still have millions zonked out and either not contributing to society, or contributing at a level far below their potential.

The most tiresome examples from the pro-drug community are of the "everyone else is doing it" variety. I hear that Man has gotten high for 10,000 years or that animals in the wild get high or that Native Americans use Peyote or Amazonians drink vine juices. Whatever. If we are socially evolving past racism, greed, sexism etc., then we should aspire to not spend our lives in a drug induced haze, potentially putting ourselves and others at risk. Drug use is not a "victimless" endeavor, as noone on any recreational substance is giving their kids 100% of their attention. As for personal development, when you are high, you are like a car in neutral. You contribute nothing to the advancement of civilization and are a burden. Carl Sagan and the five other people who smoked pot regularly and did "amazing" things are exceptions to drug usage and not proof; and I have heard that refrain ad nauseum.

Lastly, it doesn't matter if that money is going to the cartels or to a government head shop. That is money that isn't going to your family or for improving your position in life. It's just money squandered. If work to get money to spend on getting high and then do the same thing everyday until you die, are you no better than livestock?

jimb:

You can't regulate cocaine, meth or opiates. Class A substances are classified as such for a reason.

Says who? You? And don't you mean Schedule I drugs? Do you really think marijuana should be in the same class as meth, coke, or heroine?

...remember that (unlike alcohol) the majority of regular users of these substances don't use at the equivalent of a two drink daily quota, nor can they go 20 years at that rate.

Um, no, I don't remember any of the tripe you just posted. Two drink daily quota?! Not go 20 years? Where are you getting your information from or is this just a personal opinion? I don't think alcohol drinkers keep to a 2 drink daily quota. Maybe you do, but, from my experience people I've known people, who aren't alcoholics, drink more than 2 drinks. And what does any of this have ANYTHING to do with what I propose? i.e. How is any of this to support the perpetuation of a failed and costly drug prohibition?

I suspect that those who claiming to be "libertarians", who claim to have the answers and who want to legalize all drugs are just marijuana users who still have hurt feelings.

First, I never claimed to be a Libertarian. Secondly, if you had read my post carefully, I NEVER advocated for the legalization of all drugs. I think I was pretty clear on that. Lastly, "hurt feelings"? Really? WTF are you talking about? You make no sense what so ever.

The Prohibition analogy is the most overused and tired example.

Maybe to you. But, it certainly does apply. You know how that saying goes? Doomed to repeat history if you don't learn from it? Apparently you want to.

It has led to an increase in drunkenness, anti-social behavior, crime, hospital visits, and poorer work performance...

Legal drug use just means more people stoned.

The Netherlands got tired of all the pot tourists going to Amsterdam, because the only thing more obnoxious than a bunch of dreadlocked Dutch people are stoned British and American college aged students.

Gee, this sounds more like a personal opinion to me. Especially when you knock people with dreadlocks; you aren't a racist now are you? Do you have any data or sources to back up your claims?

BTW- As far as the Dutch goes, please read:

The three coalition parties in the government have long disagreed about the overhaul of the drug policy. Christian democrat CDA had called for an end to the tolerance policy and the orthodox Christian ChristenUnie agreed, but the Labour party PvdA believes banning coffeeshops will not solve the problems of crime, nuisance and health and wants to legalise the whole chain of supply."

The problems Holland have are not with the drug, marijuana, itself, but they are having problems with the supply of the product which is in control of illegal drug traffickers. The problem does not lie with legalization of marijuana and the people who partake of the drug. And here are more excerpts from another article on Sept. 6th, 2010 (I can give source if needed):

"The Dutch government has announced that it does not have enough prisoners to fill its prisons, and as a result is closing down 8 prisons. ...The shutting down of these prisons are being attributed to an ever decreasing crime rate in the Netherlands.

These laws are a clear indication that the current drug-related legal system in most countries today is completely incorrect and could stand to see serious reform in the coming months and years.

There is a bad side to this action however – 1,200 prison workers will unfortunately see themselves being let go due to cutbacks."

You are basically a fear mongering Prohibitionist.

Even if we decriminalized the recreational usage of Oxy, we would still have millions zonked out and either not contributing to society, or contributing at a level far below their potential.

You are missing the point. The laws do not work. Why keep these laws on the books when they cost tax payers billions? People are going to do these drugs regardless of any law but yet you want to keep with the same failed policies. Education and rehabilitation are the keys to success. We need to treat people with serious drug addictions as medical patients, not criminals. And since when is it against the law to "contribute far below your potential"? Are we joining your private @!$%#ing army to "be all you can be"? How is any of this a reason to perpetuate a spectacularly failed and costly drug war that has killed thousands and ruined the lives of countless more?

If we are socially evolving past racism, greed, sexism etc., then we should aspire to not spend our lives in a drug induced haze, potentially putting ourselves and others at risk.

Again, where do you come up with this tripe? How does drug use lead to racism, greed, sexism, etc.? Can you please stop with the fear mongering? So what are you, some kind of Puritan who thinks people should live their lives completely sober? People like you make me sick to my stomach because you want to control people and how they live their lives. People should have the FREEDOM to chose what they do with their own lives and what they put into their own bodies. People \have been using drugs responsibly for a LONG time. And if someone cause another person harm then they should be held accountable for their actions. That is true with anything in life be it driving a car or owning a gun, etc. If you want to make anything and everything illegal that MIGHT cause someone harm then MAY AS WELL OUTLAW LIVING!!!!

Drug use is not a "victimless" endeavor, as noone on any recreational substance is giving their kids 100% of their attention.

And you have proof for this statement where? Again, sounds like a personal opinion to me.

As for personal development, when you are high, you are like a car in neutral. You contribute nothing to the advancement of civilization and are a burden.

More lies. Sure, that may apply to SOME people, but not the majority.

Carl Sagan and the five other people who smoked pot regularly and did "amazing" things are exceptions to drug usage and not proof; and I have heard that refrain ad nauseum.

Actually, I have a list of at least 200 famous people who did drugs but were contributors to society. If you want to ignore the facts, that is your problem.

Lastly, it doesn't matter if that money is going to the cartels or to a government head shop.

Many people would beg to differ. Especially in these hard economic times.

If work to get money to spend on getting high and then do the same thing everyday until you die, are you no better than livestock?

Who the @!$%# are you to tell anyone how to live their lives? Who died and made you ruler of the universe and to pass judgement on others in how they live their lives? You live your life the way you want to and leave others to live their lives they want to. It's called freedom. Remember that little word that's in our Constitution?

Nothing you have posted has changed my mind about my position that the drug war is a huge waste of tax payer dollars and has failed miserably in controlling the drug problem, the laws are nothing about public safety but ALL about greed and profits for the anti-drug entities such as the prison industrial complex, for example, and drug prohibition is more about controlling people and eroding our civil liberties.

Sorry this post is so long but I had to answer the fear mongering prohibitionist.

Ratman, your name suits you well. You post in circles to decriminalize/legalize/do it up, blah blah blah. Actually you write a ton of drool that is meaningless.

Put down the crackpipe or what is left of you brain is gone. Crack kills......

Mexicans named Robert Hunt?

We do have to remember not every Hispanic person is illegal. Many were born and raised here before the country began hating and blaming them for all their problems.

You mean like the other foreigners did when they took it from the Natives, bringing in customs from England and Spain? This isn't a race thing, this is a criminal thing. Why do people always have to make it about race? Criminals come in all colors. Robert Hunt was not a "foreigner."

ROBERT HUNT WASN'T a foreigner...but HE DELIVERED to Mexicans, The Mexicans Paid him $800 Dollars to deliver Drugs, they imposed a deal, and the "Mailman went for it, to get a few dollars."

If you can't see that, you need insight.

Drugs are delivered, from our Post Office, the Mexicans knew it was coming, they had no way of getting them, they needed someone to BRING THEM.

Drug handlers was waiting for their Drug Packages to arrive, figure it out.

The mailman was only a go between person, his only involvement was make the delivery, and the delivery wasn't to White, or Blacks, it was to Mexicans.

linda:

To many people from foreign countries are coming over here and taking over, and our Government is permitting it and allowing it to happen, on the grounds of a law we impose "You are Welcome to come and take over America" "Eat our food" "Burn Our Flag" "Hate our God" "hate the people who try to help them" and Enjoy our Money and Land" and tell us to take a walk.

Paranoid much? You do realize our country is made up of nothing but foreigners, right? Unless you can prove you came from a native American Indian tribe that has been here for thousands of years, STFU!

BTW- "Hate our God"???!! Your God, not mine.

lindabew3540 - "Another Problem for United States of America, Mexicans living in America, finding ways and loopholes to bring Drugs here, while living here."

Hey Miss Intelligent,

Did you miss the part where it was shipped from Puerto Rico? A US territory? last I checked, Puerto Rican citizens were, you guessed it, US citizens. You bloody racist, right-wing, head-in-the-sand lemmings need to use your brain and stop simply believing anything you're told

Also...

lindabew3540 -"The mailman was only a go between person, his only involvement was make the delivery, and the delivery wasn't to White, or Blacks, it was to Mexicans."

Did you miss this? "According to the newspaper, he was then handed $800 by Rodriguez-Jimenez"... yeah, he was PART of it. If you're just doing your job, you'll ask questions when handed $800 in cash. He didn't

Sounds like I hit a Homerun, you know the names, you can spell, you know your people, you know the game.

This country was founded upon the "Holy Bible"

Our Government put it on Our Dollar Bill. Our Courts are Sealed with "IN GOD WE TRUST"

When you came over HERE, you had to make a Pledge to OUR FLAG, and AGREE that YOU WOULD abide by the LAWS OF THIS UNITED STATES of AMERICA.

Bite it, shew it, and eat it, or leave the country.

WE DON'T WANT YOUR gods or idols.

We have Our GOD, who has BLESSED this Country, and kept us safe.

It is your gods, who are causing all these problems on the earth, and You denying the "EVERLASTING HEAVENLY FATHER."

linda: "This country was founded on the Holy Bible." Really? If that was true, why did they try to kill all the Natives and treat everyone who wasn't Christian like animals?

That Bible and that God of yours does not teach the hate you are spewing. Hmmm.... better read that book AGAIN.

Stop using religion to justify your hate.

WWJD

According to the Founders the United States is in no way a christian nation. In fact President John Adams stated in the Treaty of Tripoli that the US was in no way founded as a Christian Nation. Many were Deists and a couple were pretty much Atheist or Agnostic. In God We Trust and the line under God in the Pledge weren't added until the mid 1950's. And there is no God or Gods. They are all human constructs created for power and greed. Someday the present religomythology will be on the same shelf as Zeus and all the other failed Gods.

linda:

This country was founded upon the "Holy Bible"

WRONG!!!! This country was founded on freedom. Freedom of and from religion. Learn your history, PLEASE!

...and AGREE that YOU WOULD abide by the LAWS OF THIS UNITED STATES of AMERICA.

Which obviously you have no frickin' clue of.

WE DON'T WANT YOUR gods or idols.

Well, I certainly don't want any of yours.

Bite it, shew it, and eat it, or leave the country.

Yes, please do at your earliest possible convenience.

We have Our GOD, who has BLESSED this Country, and kept us safe.

Tell that to the victims of Pearl Harbor and 9/11.

Sounds like I hit a Homerun,...

No, you've totally struck out.

Rat and Stephen: NICE JOB!! Well done! Game over!

lindabew,

"This country was founded upon the "Holy Bible"

Our Government put it on Our Dollar Bill. Our Courts are Sealed with "IN GOD WE TRUST""

"In God we trust" did not become the official motto of the United States until the 1950's. Prior to that, the unofficial motto had been "E Pluribus Unum", "One out of many" which I think is a better motto than "In God we trust" and should have become our official motto. Somehow I feel the sly and cunning hand of the churches was at work in the 1950's decision. And I'm afraid Stephen Coder beat me to the punch on this one.

Shelly:

Rat and Stephen: NICE JOB!! Well done! Game over!

Thanks! You Too!

It's nothing really when they make it so easy, huh?

Not much research going on from the right.......How unusual is that???

The parcels were addressed from Puerto Rico not Mexico. According to the Orlando Sentinel.

Rat: Love it when it is easy. Logic and intelligence always help.

One of my favorite quotes is from Albert Einstein:

The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits. :)

There's a better solution that doesn't involve drugs: Let Jehovah's Witnesses deliver the mail.

LMFAO!

I notice you left out cops. lmao

Candida: Thank you, one of the problems with prejudiced bigots is they can't keep their racial slurs straight.

Another problem would be reading comprehension...