Good Job U.S. Customs and Border Protection!

IT,
I guess I should go back to school and take a chemistry class." Harmless Drugs" what was anybody thinking. According to the msnbc report law enforcement found 142 Ecstasy Pills, 3Grams of methamphetamine, small quantity of Ketamino, and $51,000.00 in CASH. It's alledged that he is a DRUG DEALER. BTW Ecstasy is a Neurotoxic Drug how did you arrive that Alcohol is more toxic than E. He is being charged for selling drugs" drug dealer" I couldn't find the Gay charge:S

Although I am not a VI resident (visiting in July with the idea of relocating) I enjoy getting to know the VI people, your culture and attitudes through this forum. On the topic of illegal drugs and drug enforcement (which triggers such strong opinions everywhere) there is nothing like good information and open-mindedness to facilitate rational policy approaches whether in VI or anywhere else. I recently watched the 2007 documentary film, "The Union: The Business Behind Getting High" directed by Brett Harvey. While the film's focus is primarily on the 7 Billion per year marijuana trafficking in British Colombia (where 1% of each and every household is growing pot), the eye-opening insights presented in the film have universal application into all illegal drugs everywhere. I commend the film, particularly to those who have expressed strong convictions about what needs to be done to protect our society and our young people from an insidious folly.

Stiphy,
Only time will tell what your song will sound like regarding Zombie Land in the future. Constitutional Rights of the innocent. If you partake in illegal drugs as a seller or buyer you're not innocent. That's the best one yet:@). Maybe you and NoOne should get together and do your thing for new laws and tax.

What about the people who don't partake in illegal drugs but get caught up as "collateral damage" in the war on drugs?

http://www.drugwarrant.com/articles/drug-war-victim/

Sean

Hey NoOne.
Your News Flash talks about confiscated sub, sunk sub etc., Looks like the War on Drugs is in fact doing something. So you can preach for your Zombie like existence to the current legislatures. Oh and the subs were not captured by US Tax Dollars.:P

Yeah it is doing something, which is wasting money while being almost entirely ineffective - losing 25% of your cargo for a product with such a huge markup is part of the business, and does not faze these people:

"Rodriguez estimates that perhaps as few as 25 percent of all semi-submersibles leaving Colombia are seized."

Not paid for by US tax dollars? You are really dumb. The latest estimated statistics for financial aid we gave to Columbia strictly for military aid (and note that it is the military that is fighting the drug war in Columbia) in 2006 is $641 million - that comes strait out of the pockets of the taxpayers of the USA.

"This funding was earmarked for training and equipping new Colombian army counternarcotics battalions, providing them with helicopters, transport and intelligence assistance, and supplies for coca eradication."

wikipedia on US aid to Columbia

Say 8 tons of cocaine, that this supposed sub carried, brought in $145 million directly to the drug lord/gang that orchestrated this. This does not count as to what it will make on the streets of the US - after it has been stepped on and brought down to about 25% purity, making it 32 tons, and say priced up to $40 a gram, it will make about $1.2 BILLION. Say it costs them $2 million for the sub, another $5 million for the rest of the costs, like greasing politicians, police, military, paying the farmers, the simple procedure of refining it, transporting it to and from the sub, etc. Call it $7 million in total costs, plus one year from seed to product being on the streets of the USA. That is a 17,140% ROI in one year. I'd like a 401k that offered me $17,140 for ever $1 I invested in the span of one year! I do realize that a lot of that money is distributed among the people involved, but still, money is why the drug war is not winnable.

Stiphy,
Only time will tell what your song will sound like regarding Zombie Land in the future. Constitutional Rights of the innocent. If you partake in illegal drugs as a seller or buyer you're not innocent. That's the best one yet:@). Maybe you and NoOne should get together and do your thing for new laws and tax.

Yeah keep buying that disposing of the US Constitution is a good thing. People like you are actively destroying this country. Here is something for you to think about, but I doubt you have the capacity to think about it:

"So that December, the agency tried something it had never done before. It sought permission from a judge to search anyone and everyone who parked or set foot in the apartment complex parking lot.

During the two-hour raid, a dozen people were searched and, even though officers justified the wide search by telling a judge no "innocent persons" congregated in the abandoned lot, only four people were charged with drug crimes. An 80-year-old man was among those detained, then released, during the operation."

"At least four people, including an 80-year-old man, were briefly detained and let go without a search. Five people were searched, as were two vehicles, and officers did not find drugs or evidence that they were involved in the narcotics trade."

Yeah that was reeeeeaaaalllllly effective and worth disposing of the 4th Amendment, wasn't it Lizard?

Herald Tribune "Warrant To Search 'All Persons' Questioned"

IT,
BTW Ecstasy is a Neurotoxic Drug how did you arrive that Alcohol is more toxic than E.

Do you even know what Google is?

"How many people die from using ecstasy? Isn't it very risky?

Statistics culled from the United States and the United Kingdom report only 7 ecstasy-related deaths per million users of the drug. This is an interesting figure when compared to the 625 alcohol-related deaths per million drinkers that occur each year."

Ecstasy Facts

"In the United States, a study published in the journal of the American Medical Association in 2000 shows that 95 percent of drug-related deaths in the United States are from alcohol and tobacco use. "

Discovery Health

"Most ecstasy-related deaths are caused by an increase in body temperature, or hyperthermia, which leads to organ failure."

medbook.md

...I recently watched the 2007 documentary film, "The Union: The Business Behind Getting High" directed by Brett Harvey. While the film's focus is primarily on the 7 Billion per year marijuana trafficking in British Colombia (where 1% of each and every household is growing pot), the eye-opening insights presented in the film have universal application into all illegal drugs everywhere. I commend the film, particularly to those who have expressed strong convictions about what needs to be done to protect our society and our young people from an insidious folly.

I've watched "The Union" more than once, it is an excellent documentary - even if you don't like its premise, it is worth watching.

If you haven't watched the 2007 documentary film "The Union: The Business Behind Getting High" you are missing eye-opening insights into the pervasive drug trade - presented by such unlikely folks as former mayors, narcotic officers, recent college graduates who can't pass up lucrative opportunities, etc.). Primarily focusing on the 7 Billion Dollar a year marijuana business in British Colombia where 1% of "all" households are growing pot for sale, the film takes aim at the billions spent on US drug enforcement (which has not only resulted in increased criminal violence but also is a major factor behind the #1 growth industry in the US - building and maintaining private prisons). Isn't it time (long overdue, in fact) for each of us to re-examine for ourselves the question of whether the policy of "prohibition" is exacerbating violent criminal behavior and increasing drug "abuse," however that abuse is defined? Does anyone out there actually believe, in the face of a totally failed, farcical policy of prohibition and drug enforcement over the last 40 years, that governments should continue with such a policy? Does anyone out there actually believe that prohibition is going to radically limit the usage of a substance, whatever it is, if people want it and are determined to get it? If anyone wants to make the case for continuation of such a failed policy I'm all ears-but watch the film first.

NoOne,
What and Where do you think the money confiscated from the arrest of Drug Dealers and supplies, Boats,Planes.Cars, Real estate goes.
Doe's it go in the General fund? You have this thing about alcohol and tobacco use (It's legal). You say it's people like me that are destroying this country. I have never been arrested for illegal drugs, alcohol related motor vehicle, fighting etc. and I don't smoke. I think you have fried your brain, you have threatened people on this forum, and spent a little time in jail for drugs by your own admission. You also admitted alcohol made you go a little crazy . So I'M destroying this Country.:@):@):@)

NoOne,
What and Where do you think the money confiscated from the arrest of Drug Dealers and supplies, Boats,Planes.Cars, Real estate goes.

OK lets look into this:

"Criminal forfeiture is an action brought as part of the criminal prosecution of a defendant that includes the forfeiture of property used or derived from the crime. If the defendant is convicted, the judge or the jury may find that the property is forfeitable. Forfeiture is limited to the property interests of the defendant and only to property involved in the particular counts on which the defendant is convicted. Only the defendant’s interest can be forfeited in a criminal case because criminal forfeiture is part of the sentence in the criminal case.

"...civil forfeiture is a legal fiction that enables law enforcement to take legal action against inanimate objects for participation in alleged criminal activity, regardless of whether the property owner is guilty or innocent—or even whether the owner is charged with a crime. Civil forfeiture actions are in rem proceedings, which means literally “against a thing”—the property itself is charged with a crime."

"We did not seek to determine whether forfeiture activities ultimately reduce crime or affect drug-related arrest patterns. However, we found some evidence that police agencies engage in forfeiture practices that maximize their potential for revenue generation. Specifically, we found that significantly fewer equitable-sharing payments are collected in generous forfeiture states, which is consistent with the policing-for-profit allegation put forth by forfeiture's critics."

"Asset forfeiture has a long and troubling history in drug cases and has been frequently and thoroughly assailed by critics. But it has a unique application in the case of paramilitary raids. SWAT teams are typically expensive to maintain. Federal grants and free equipment get them up and running, but local departments are often then forced to foot the costs of keeping members up to date on tactics and weapons training as well as the upkeep of equipment. Because the more traditional uses of SWAT teams—emergency situations like barricades, hostage takings, and bank robberies—don’t bring lucrative forfeiture opportunities (or federal funding), police officials feel increasing pressure to send SWAT teams out on drug assignments, where the assets seized come back to the department and can help offset the costs of having a SWAT team in the first place."

"According to a 1998 article published in the University of Chicago Law Review, the ability of law enforcement agencies to financially benefit from forfeited assets, and the provision of large block grants from Congress to fight the drug trade "have distorted governmental policy making and law enforcement." The authors believe that "the law enforcement agenda that targets assets rather than crime, the 80 percent of seizures that are unaccompanied by any criminal prosecution, the plea bargains that favor drug kingpins and penalize the 'mules' without assets to trade, the reverse stings that target drug buyers rather than drug sellers, the overkill in agencies involved in even minor arrests, the massive shift in resources towards federal jurisdiction over local law enforcement - is largely the unplanned by-product of this economic incentive structure."

State data reveal that state and local law enforcement also use forfeiture extensively: From 2001 to 2002, currency forfeitures alone in just nine states totaled more than $70 million. This measure excludes cars and other forfeited property, as well as forfeitures from many states that did not make data available for those years, and so likely represents just the tip of the forfeiture iceberg.

Asset Forfeiture

So essentially the money went right back into the system, to help perpetuate the system without coming near to fully paying for the system, never minding the tax dollars that go to other countries as financial "aid" for fighting the drug war. Lets be generous and say the total was $5 billion that was taken in 2008, which is a drop in the bucket for the actual cost, and does NOTHING for the citizens of the US. One sub can bring in an easy $1 billion for all the criminals involved in a year, so 8 subs a year can easily cover expenses and losses, and there are a whole lot more subs than 8 a year coming, never mind more traditional smuggling.

You have this thing about alcohol and tobacco use (It's legal).

Yes, and so should all drugs be legal. Do you think the Oxycontin Rush Limbaugh shopped doctors for (while poppin them pills while calling for the execution of drug users) is any less dangerous than heroin? By your logic, we should go back to Prohibition and make alcohol and tobacco illegal because they cause 95% of the drug related deaths in the USA.

You say it's people like me that are destroying this country. I have never been arrested for illegal drugs, alcohol related motor vehicle, fighting etc. and I don't smoke. I think you have fried your brain, you have threatened people on this forum, and spent a little time in jail for drugs by your own admission. You also admitted alcohol made you go a little crazy . So I'M destroying this Country.

Yep, people like you are destroying the country - you're the type that makes me see how generally stupid, arrogant, lying and hypocritical the bulk of humanity is - and I will admit I have become arrogant from seeing this.

NoOne,
Seek Help!:-(

NoOne,
Seek Help!:-(

For what? Seeing what most people can't or don't want to see? No thanks, I like having objective knowledge. BTW, my friends come to me when they want the unvarnished truth - they know I will tell them exactly what I think strait to their face, whether or not they like it. Usually they only ask me when something serious is going on in their lives.

Noone, if you haven't followed other discussions on this board, when Lizard percieves that he/she is losing a debate he/she just starts trying to piss people off. It's a shame because he/she can often start thought provoking discussions but unfortunately they all end with him/her behaving like a child when his/her's views have been logically countered by others.

I'd suggest ignoring Lizard...its what I end up doing once he/she starts behaving in a way that I wouldn't even tolerate from my children.

Sean

Hey Stiphy.
losing a debate? Ha ha you have a reading/comp problem:@) you're funny!

Ah! Freedom of speech! Gotta love this forum. Be careful what you reveal, because the Lizard doesn't forget!

Diamond, thanks for the film recommendation. I have added it to my Netflix que, so I should get it next week.

I had the opportunity to witness the War on Drugs Caribbean style a few weeks ago at the little KMart on STT. The security guards were struggling with a shoplifting suspect, and it got kind of physical. The security guards emptied his backpack, and the suspect had what must have been the entire stock of KMart OTC medications that could be used for crystal meth. I'm pretty sure that suspect won't visit that KMart again any time soon, and I feel as though justice was done without the judicial system. From what I hear, these incidents are fairly common.

We al pay for illegal drug activity whether we realize it or not. Now I realize why those OTC cold medications at KMart are so expensive!

Hey Stiphy.
losing a debate? Ha ha you have a reading/comp problem:@) you're funny!

Thanks for proving my point...checkmate!

Sean

IT,
I guess I should go back to school and take a chemistry class." Harmless Drugs" what was anybody thinking. According to the msnbc report law enforcement found 142 Ecstasy Pills, 3Grams of methamphetamine, small quantity of Ketamino, and $51,000.00 in CASH. It's alledged that he is a DRUG DEALER. BTW Ecstasy is a Neurotoxic Drug how did you arrive that Alcohol is more toxic than E. He is being charged for selling drugs" drug dealer" I couldn't find the Gay charge:S

Yep, you should.

Here's a recent study showing that "[t]aking Ecstasy did not decrease mental ability compared with with those who did not use the drug which researchers say runs contrary to earlier studies.

In one of the largest studies on the cognitive effects of the illegal party drug, U.S. researchers started with a pool of 1,500 potential participants.

...

Participants were tested several times to check they were telling the truth about their drug and alcohol use.

Ecstasy users showed no signs of cognitive impairment attributed to drug use, Dr. John Halpern of McLean Hospital in in Belmont, Mass., and his co-authors concluded in Tuesday's issue of the journal Addiction."

Can't say that about yer Cruzan Rum.

Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2011/02/15/ecstasy-mental-cognitive.html#ixzz1E6QamM6Q

Cheers,
IT

p.s. Regarding the "gay charge", the initial post in this thread said the man was arrested "on board the Allure of the Seas in St. Thomas .... The ship had just come from the Bahamas on a charter billed as the 'world's largest gay cruise.'"

I worked in the bar industry for years, and I've known a lot of drunks and I've known a lot of gay men who use E as a party drug, and I'd rather suffer the E users than the drunks any day of the week. Anecdotal, for sure, but I'll lay my law degree on odds that there are legit statistics out there which back me up on dangerousness and toxicity.

Debate ecstasy all you want, but the guy also had methamphetamine, for which there is no redemption.

Ugh, meth is horrible. Phoenix has a massive problem with it. I haven't seen much evidence of it here on STX, and I hope it never arrives here. I'm sad to see that there's some meth manufacturing happening on STT.

$51,000 in cash was found amongst a stock of illegal drugs, and yet some of you insist the suspect was just a harmless innocent caught up in the war on drugs. What a load of BS.

Good bust by the U.S. CBP - keep up the good work.

I am a non-violent person. By my definition, anyone who faces violence without perpetrating violence of their own is a victim. Locking someone in a cage is a violent act. When the government uses its legal monopoly on violence against non-violent individuals it should be cause for concern. There is the practical argument I made against the drug war in my previous posts, this is the principled argument against it.

Was their any evidence here that this particular man ever committed a violent act against anyone? If so lock him up and throw away the key (you'll have room in jail to do this if you make room by clearing out all the non-violent offenders). But if not, how the hell can any peaceful person support violently incarcerating him? Before you say "it's the law" remember that in the 1940's blacks couldn't ride in the front of the bus...that was the law too.

Do I wish we lived in a utopian world where everyone was so happy that they didn't feel the need to put chemicals in their body to alter their state of mind? Absolutely. But I can wish in one hand and crap in the other and see which one fills up first (to quote Walter Mathieu in Grumpy Old Men).

Sean

If you don't like the law fight to change it.

But to insult law enforcement for doing their job is not merely petty. They do not get to pick and choose which laws they enforce. Justice is blind. These may have been a relatively small bust but these officers put their lives at risk to protect day in and day out. The way some of you are talking about them show how sad a country this has become.

If you don't like the law fight to change it.

But to insult law enforcement for doing their job is not merely petty. They do not get to pick and choose which laws they enforce. Justice is blind. These may have been a relatively small bust but these officers put their lives at risk to protect day in and day out. The way some of you are talking about them show how sad a country this has become.

Hiya,

Are you referring to me? Where did I insult law enforcement in any of my posts?

I think a lot of very good people go into law enforcement wanting to get truly violent people off the streets to make this world safer. It's unfortunate that they instead must spend their time locking up non-violent people, turning themselves into the perpetrator's of violence. It's a horrible moral dilemma and is another reason I'm against the drug war along with other laws that seek to punish non violent acts.

Sean

Yeah I feel safer too :S

What a waste of time and money.

Sean

You may feel it's a waste and time and money to fight drug criminals but they are usually some of the most dangerous criminals out there. The amount of intel and the incredible violent things they do are disgusting. So these guys do risk their lives and to make petty and belittling comments are insulting. Again they have to catch the big guys and the little guys, ie all the guys that are breaking the law.

We understand you don't like it, so fight. We are a country that started a revolution over taxes, freedom of religion, etc and now we just whine about things we don't like.

Iris Tram,
The Question was "How did you arrive that Alcohol is more Toxic". Oh and "One study is not conclusive" and where did this study say alcohol was more toxic.:P
Double Cheers,
Lizard
P.S. I Know what the OP referenced about the Gay Cruise, however that was the news statement, if anyone has grief about how it was reported complain to msnbc not the authorities.

If you take into account the negative impact to the lives of the individual consumers (admittedly by choice) of these illegal substances, and their families and communities, then yes - trafficking/dealing drugs could very well be considered violent.

I'm not suggesting anyone give up your rights to free speech, or a desire to alter existing law. And I may not be a supporter of every aspect of our nations drug policy either. Heck if someone wants to grow a bit of weed on their own property for personal consumption or medicinal reasons then so be it. It's still illegal (for now) but this is where the grey area exists, and there are degrees of offences/punishment to account for this in our legal system.

In this instance the guy was no innocent. He was a significant player. You're suggesting either because of location, or type of drug, that he is more of a 'white collar criminal' who should not be subjected to incarceration. That I cannot condone.

If VIPD pulled over a car in downtown C'sted and found all of these drugs and $51k in cash would you also think the person apprehended was a harmless innocent caught up in the war on drugs? It's the consumers/dealers of these substances that are causing a significant amount of the violence in our society. An individual dealer himself may not be committing violent offences directly, but is culpable to some degree in contributing to source.

I stand by my statement - Well done by the U.S. CBP and keep up the efforts.