Welcome to Detroit Sports Forum!

By joining our community, you'll be able to connect with fellow fans that live and breathe Detroit sports just like you!

Get Started
  • If you are no longer able to access your account since our recent switch from vBulletin to XenForo, you may need to reset your password via email. If you no longer have access to the email attached to your account, please fill out our contact form and we will assist you ASAP. Thanks for your continued support of DSF.

Finally! A list of BLM demands!

If you think that addiction is a conscious choice and people want to be junkies then we really can't have much of a discussion.

You don't believe they choose to put a needle in their veins, smoke crack, do coke etc? I mean...not all drug users are really addicted...are they? Do you know what percentage of drug users are really addicted? How did they catch this "disease"? Did someone tie them down and make them take drugs or did they choose to do so? Every morning they have a choice...they can continue to buy drugs or they can do something to quit. They choose to not quit. Wouldn't it be nice if a cancer patient could just decide to quit buying cancer and be healed?

Labeling drug users as "diseased" is an insult to everyone that has a real disease.
 
You don't believe they choose to put a needle in their veins, smoke crack, do coke etc? I mean...not all drug users are really addicted...are they? Do you know what percentage of drug users are really addicted? How did they catch this "disease"? Did someone tie them down and make them take drugs or did they choose to do so? Every morning they have a choice...they can continue to buy drugs or they can do something to quit. They choose to not quit. Wouldn't it be nice if a cancer patient could just decide to quit buying cancer and be healed?

Labeling drug users as "diseased" is an insult to everyone that has a real disease.

drug/alcohol addiction is a disease. people are genetically predisposed to it. and beyond that, in some cases it masks other psychological diseases like bi-polarism, depression, mania, etc.

I do believe there's such a thing as willpower, but I'm not foolish enough to believe my own experience is representative of others or the people who study this are just making shit up.
 
You don't believe they choose to put a needle in their veins, smoke crack, do coke etc? I mean...not all drug users are really addicted...are they? Do you know what percentage of drug users are really addicted? How did they catch this "disease"? Did someone tie them down and make them take drugs or did they choose to do so? Every morning they have a choice...they can continue to buy drugs or they can do something to quit. They choose to not quit. Wouldn't it be nice if a cancer patient could just decide to quit buying cancer and be healed?

Labeling drug users as "diseased" is an insult to everyone that has a real disease.

my god, it's not simply a matter of willpower. I don't think you really understand how the brain works and that drug usage changes the structure of the human brain. in case you don't want to read the whole thing

http://www.webmd.com/mental-health/addiction/drug-abuse-addiction



Drugs are chemicals that tap into the brain's communication system and disrupt the way nerve cells normally send, receive, and process information. There are at least two ways that drugs are able to do this: by imitating the brain's natural chemical messengers, and/or overstimulating the "reward circuit" of the brain.

Some drugs, such as marijuana and heroin, have a similar structure to chemical messengers, called neurotransmitters, which are naturally produced by the brain. Because of this similarity, these drugs are able to "fool" the brain's receptors and activate nerve cells to send abnormal messages.

Other drugs, such as cocaine or methamphetamine, can cause the nerve cells to release abnormally large amounts of natural neurotransmitters, or prevent the normal recycling of these brain chemicals, which is needed to shut off the signal between neurons. This disruption produces a greatly amplified message that ultimately disrupts normal communication patterns.

Nearly all drugs, directly or indirectly, target the brain's reward system by flooding the circuit with dopamine. Dopamine is a neurotransmitter present in regions of the brain that control movement, emotion, motivation, and feelings of pleasure. The overstimulation of this system, which normally responds to natural behaviors that are linked to survival (eating, spending time with loved ones, etc), produces euphoric effects in response to the drugs. This reaction sets in motion a pattern that "teaches" people to repeat the behavior of abusing drugs.
 
my god, it's not simply a matter of willpower. I don't think you really understand how the brain works and that drug usage changes the structure of the human brain. in case you don't want to read the whole thing

http://www.webmd.com/mental-health/addiction/drug-abuse-addiction



Drugs are chemicals that tap into the brain's communication system and disrupt the way nerve cells normally send, receive, and process information. There are at least two ways that drugs are able to do this: by imitating the brain's natural chemical messengers, and/or overstimulating the "reward circuit" of the brain.

Some drugs, such as marijuana and heroin, have a similar structure to chemical messengers, called neurotransmitters, which are naturally produced by the brain. Because of this similarity, these drugs are able to "fool" the brain's receptors and activate nerve cells to send abnormal messages.

Other drugs, such as cocaine or methamphetamine, can cause the nerve cells to release abnormally large amounts of natural neurotransmitters, or prevent the normal recycling of these brain chemicals, which is needed to shut off the signal between neurons. This disruption produces a greatly amplified message that ultimately disrupts normal communication patterns.

Nearly all drugs, directly or indirectly, target the brain's reward system by flooding the circuit with dopamine. Dopamine is a neurotransmitter present in regions of the brain that control movement, emotion, motivation, and feelings of pleasure. The overstimulation of this system, which normally responds to natural behaviors that are linked to survival (eating, spending time with loved ones, etc), produces euphoric effects in response to the drugs. This reaction sets in motion a pattern that "teaches" people to repeat the behavior of abusing drugs.

Who makes them take the drugs in the first place? Don't they choose to take them?
 
It's not obvious that fighting the demand side is better. it hasn't worked in the Netherlands.

that's news to me.

portugal also decriminalized drugs, BTW. I was under the impression more countries were doing it because it worked.
 
that's news to me.

portugal also decriminalized drugs, BTW. I was under the impression more countries were doing it because it worked.

we have 698 people in jail per 100,000, higher than any other country with more than 100k citizens.

Just a sentencing example, a conviction for selling a kilo of heroin carries a mandatory 10 year sentence in federal court, in the UK, it's 6 months.

I'm sure with that kind of punishment, it deters people from using and selling heroin, right? I mean, heroin usage has to be down.


Prison population by country

http://www.prisonstudies.org/highest-to-lowest/prison_population_rate?field_region_taxonomy_tid=All

Sentencing

78 Marc Mauer, ?The Hidden Problem of Time Served in Prison,? Social Research 74, no. 2 (Summer 2007): 701, 703.
 
we have 698 people in jail per 100,000, higher than any other country with more than 100k citizens.

Just a sentencing example, a conviction for selling a kilo of heroin carries a mandatory 10 year sentence in federal court, in the UK, it's 6 months.

I'm sure with that kind of punishment, it deters people from using and selling heroin, right? I mean, heroin usage has to be down.


Prison population by country

http://www.prisonstudies.org/highest-to-lowest/prison_population_rate?field_region_taxonomy_tid=All

Sentencing

78 Marc Mauer, ?The Hidden Problem of Time Served in Prison,? Social Research 74, no. 2 (Summer 2007): 701, 703.

so you think lowering the sentence to 6 months will help?
 
so you think lowering the sentence to 6 months will help?

If you allocate more money to treatment and rehab as opposed to locking someone up for 10 years, yes, 100%. I don't think we're doing any good by keeping non violent drug offenders locked up for decades, it doesn't keep drugs off the street and doesn't keep people from dealing. It's the demand that keeps the industry alive.
 
If you allocate more money to treatment and rehab as opposed to locking someone up for 10 years, yes, 100%. I don't think we're doing any good by keeping non violent drug offenders locked up for decades, it doesn't keep drugs off the street and doesn't keep people from dealing. It's the demand that keeps the industry alive.

And I keep telling you...the demand isn't going to go away if you try to treat people that don't want to quit. Correct me if I'm wrong...but aren't there treatment options available right now for those who want to quit?
 
And I keep telling you...the demand isn't going to go away if you try to treat people that don't want to quit. Correct me if I'm wrong...but aren't there treatment options available right now for those who want to quit?

yes, there are public options that are underfunded and private ones that are too expensive. I know your solution, more cops, more prisons, etc. It hasn't worked.

Though you think that addiction isn't a disease, despite what Neuroscience says about it, therefore it's tough to carry on a conversation about this if you don't accept widely accepted scientific truths.
 
Last edited:
Right, the voting rights act hurts minorities, allowing early voting helps minorities, arresting them at 3x the rate of whites for drug possession helps them, right? You are such a defender of the poor and unfortunate in this country. You can't honestly say that these voter ID laws and ending early voting aren't targeted at poor blacks to keep them from voting for democrats, I guess you could say it, you'd simply be wrong or just trying to be a huge prick. You care so much about minorities that you want to make it more difficult for them to vote because you're worried about these people getting back in line and voting multiple times? Give me a fucking break with that shit. I don't specifically think they're targeted because they're black, it's that they're poor and vote for democrats, it's easy to put up roadblocks to stop poor people from getting out to vote. Blacks are arrested for possession at 3x the rate of whites, but of course you're ok with that too, you defend that disparity when it's blatant injustice. When police go looking for drug arrests they find easy targets in highly populated urban centers. What do you think would be the case if whites were incarcerated at 3x the rate of blacks for the same crime that they commit at similar rates? I'm sure you just like being an asshole though, I'm not sure you really even believe the positions you take, you just want to argue. You're just a selfish wall street asshole, I'm not characterizing all of them, just you.

Here are some links for the stats that I just used so you can scour the internet for a counter argument

white vs black drug use

http://www.samhsa.gov/data/sites/default/files/NSDUHresultsPDFWHTML2013/Web/NSDUHresults2013.pdf

blacks more likely to be in jail for drug charges

http://www.pewtrusts.org/~/media/le...ts/sentencing_and_corrections/onein100pdf.pdf


http://www.naacp.org/pages/criminal-justice-fact-sheet

I have never once in my life said anything about limiting early voting - but please, continue to put words in my mouth so you can be right about something. Thanks for the links to studies to the numbers we've already explained to you are misleading and why they are misleading. if it helps, here it is again - possession is usually a secondary charge where cops make a stop for something else and low and behold, someone's holding. minorities get charged with it more often because they tend to live in high crime communities that require greater police presence where police make more stops for other crimes, like dealing drugs out in the open, breaking and entering, stealing cigars from convenience stores, etc, etc.
 
Last edited:
yes, there are public options that are underfunded and private ones that are too expensive. I know your solution, more cops, more prisons, etc. It hasn't worked.

Though you think that addiction isn't a disease, despite what Neuroscience says about it, therefore it's tough to carry on a conversation about this if you don't accept widely accepted scientific truths.

We don't put people in prison to cure addiction, we do it to prevent crime and in that regard, it's been wildly successful so lets not say stupid things like we need to to let people out of jail because it hasn't worked. You're talking about 2 different problems, they require 2 different solutions.
 
If you allocate more money to treatment and rehab as opposed to locking someone up for 10 years, yes, 100%. I don't think we're doing any good by keeping non violent drug offenders locked up for decades, it doesn't keep drugs off the street and doesn't keep people from dealing. It's the demand that keeps the industry alive.

Most people caught dealing in kilos aren't addicts, they're distributors. Drug distribution is an inherently violent enterprise so being caught with that amount of deadly drugs should carry a huge sentence. If you think 10 years isn't going to deter dealing, what do you think 6 months is going to do? Stop dealers and cure addiction? You need to think about these things before you make such outrageous claims.
 
I have never once in my life said anything about limiting early voting - but please, continue to put words in my mouth so you can be right about something. Thanks for the links to studies to the numbers we've already explained to you are misleading and why they are misleading. if it helps, here it is again - possession is usually a secondary charge where cops make a stop for something else and low and behold, someone's holding. minorities get charged with it more often because they tend to live in high crime communities that require greater police presence where police make more stops for other crimes, like dealing drugs out in the open, breaking and entering, stealing cigars from convenience stores, etc, etc.

You didn't say that limiting early voting was an attempt to stop black people from voting for democrats, just like you said that these attempts to enact voter ID laws weren't but they clearly are, as the courts are finding in their decisions. You are correct in that minorities are more likely to use and purchase drugs out in the open. Poor people lack access to private space, that makes them convenient and easy targets due to hypersegregation. It's a lot easier to go hunting for convictions than to put effort into areas where there are potentially wealthy and powerful people. Also, keep in mind that these racially segregated areas were deliberately created by federal housing policy, not market forces or individual choice. Of course you can somehow explain how colorblind the system is, right? Blacks and whites use and sell drugs at the same rates but you couldn't tell that by looking at the prison population. So you really don't understand or empathize with their anger with law enforcement and the criminal justice system? really?
 
We don't put people in prison to cure addiction, we do it to prevent crime and in that regard, it's been wildly successful so lets not say stupid things like we need to to let people out of jail because it hasn't worked. You're talking about 2 different problems, they require 2 different solutions.

You paint with a broad brush when you mention crime, are we talking about violent crime or drug possession? I have no problem with locking up violent offenders for relatively lengthy sentences, but putting drug users in jail for possession when they should be in rehabilitation, that's the problem I'm concerned with.
 
Most people caught dealing in kilos aren't addicts, they're distributors. Drug distribution is an inherently violent enterprise so being caught with that amount of deadly drugs should carry a huge sentence. If you think 10 years isn't going to deter dealing, what do you think 6 months is going to do? Stop dealers and cure addiction? You need to think about these things before you make such outrageous claims.

Do I think 10 years will deter dealing? not really, it's a next man up mentality. After locking up such a high percentage of our population, wouldn't you think people wouldn't be able to score drugs? We have high usage rates and high incarceration rates, wouldn't you think that if lengthy sentences were a deterrent those numbers would be different?

Keep fighting that supply side, it's working out great for everyone!
 
You didn't say that limiting early voting was an attempt to stop black people from voting for democrats, just like you said that these attempts to enact voter ID laws weren't but they clearly are, as the courts are finding in their decisions. You are correct in that minorities are more likely to use and purchase drugs out in the open. Poor people lack access to private space, that makes them convenient and easy targets due to hypersegregation. It's a lot easier to go hunting for convictions than to put effort into areas where there are potentially wealthy and powerful people. Also, keep in mind that these racially segregated areas were deliberately created by federal housing policy, not market forces or individual choice. Of course you can somehow explain how colorblind the system is, right? Blacks and whites use and sell drugs at the same rates but you couldn't tell that by looking at the prison population. So you really don't understand or empathize with their anger with law enforcement and the criminal justice system? really?

I didn't say anything of the sort. I said voter ID laws did not pose an undue burden. I didn't defend the NC law at all - although I suppose I did indirectly defend the voter ID portion.

Poor blacks aren't convenient targets for arrest and prosecution to feed the prison industrial complex. They live in high crime areas where drugs are dealt in the open and people are robbed, beaten and murdered and other property crimes occur at alarming rates. The police aren't there to feed the system. They are there trying to make those neighborhoods safer. But when SJW idiots like BLM and leftist morons tell these people they are victims of a biased system, instead of telling them they are just as responsible as the police for making their neighborhoods safe, you feed a mentality that makes it impossible for progress.

Nobody is saying don't do anything to help addicts - we need that. But we also need more policing in these neighborhoods, not less. Again, the laws you're talking about weren't designed to curb addiction rates, they were designed to curb crime rates and in that regard they are working - and they are not racially biased - they're biased toward crime and the crime data matches up nearly perfectly with arrest and conviction data by ethnicity. Period.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top