HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Poll: Are all illegal dru...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 12:08 AM

Poll: Are all illegal drug users responsible for drug gang violence?

More than a few posts over the past week hold non-criminal gun owners responsible for
enabling criminal use of guns.

I was reminded of this by my memories of a certain Canadian ex-DUer that would
occasionally remind us that the Canadian wholesale cannabis business is dominated
by violent biker gangs, so those who chose 'hydro' instead of Mexican for ethical reasons
(as opposed to taste) were only fooling themselves.
Said ex-DUer was/is also virulently antigun.

(Note: this does NOT include those who use it for medical reasons and get their supplies
from legal dispensaries)


10 votes, 1 pass | Time left: Unlimited
Yes, as their demand enables such folk as bikers and narcotraficantes
0 (0%)
Yes- but not if they grow their own cannabis, and strictly limit themselves to the same.
5 (50%)
No
4 (40%)
Other (please explain)
1 (10%)
No Opinion
0 (0%)
Show usernames
Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

21 replies, 1775 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 21 replies Author Time Post
Reply Poll: Are all illegal drug users responsible for drug gang violence? (Original post)
friendly_iconoclast Dec 2012 OP
BainsBane Dec 2012 #1
MrSlayer Dec 2012 #2
Live and Learn Dec 2012 #6
NYC Liberal Dec 2012 #3
marybourg Dec 2012 #4
Kurska Dec 2012 #18
Comrade Grumpy Dec 2012 #21
cheapdate Dec 2012 #5
letemrot Dec 2012 #9
cherokeeprogressive Dec 2012 #11
friendly_iconoclast Dec 2012 #12
cheapdate Dec 2012 #13
friendly_iconoclast Dec 2012 #17
99Forever Dec 2012 #7
letemrot Dec 2012 #10
BainsBane Dec 2012 #8
closeupready Dec 2012 #14
RomneyLies Dec 2012 #15
HereSince1628 Dec 2012 #16
Kurska Dec 2012 #19
HereSince1628 Dec 2012 #20

Response to friendly_iconoclast (Original post)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 12:11 AM

1. Yes, just as you are responsible for child labor

If you purchase goods made with it. That goes for any trafficked drug, regardless of type.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to friendly_iconoclast (Original post)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 12:13 AM

2. No. Prohibition is responsible for the gangs.

 

And by extension the violence is as well.

End prohibition and the gangs disappear.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MrSlayer (Reply #2)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 12:32 AM

6. +1 nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to friendly_iconoclast (Original post)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 12:19 AM

3. No, the drug war is.

The drug war has created the black market that allows criminals and gangs to reap enormous, tax-free profits instead of legitimate, regulated businesses.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to friendly_iconoclast (Original post)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 12:23 AM

4. If ALL drug users stopped using, would drug-trafficking violence

end? Of course it would, so the answer seems self-evident to me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marybourg (Reply #4)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 01:39 PM

18. If all people stopped breathing, all genocide would end.

Fucking ridiculous, blame the drug war not the drugs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marybourg (Reply #4)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 01:58 PM

21. If ALL countries ended drug prohibition, would drug trafficking violence end?

Well, yes, yes, it would.

When was the last time you saw Coors and Budweiser shooting it out?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to friendly_iconoclast (Original post)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 12:27 AM

5. Bullshit.

Name one post that purports to "hold non-criminal gun owners responsible for enabling criminal use of guns".

Arguing for regulations on the sale, possession, or use of firearms as a way to stem the onslaught of mass shootings is not at all the same thing as "hold(ing) non-criminal gun owners responsible for enabling criminal use of guns".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cheapdate (Reply #5)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 12:42 AM

9. Are you kidding?

 

All the "you have blood on your hands" threads..etc. there are quite a large number and have been all over GD since Friday.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cheapdate (Reply #5)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 12:44 AM

11. Wow, you must not have been reading much. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to friendly_iconoclast (Reply #12)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 10:14 AM

13. I stand corrected. I feel stupid, and contagious.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cheapdate (Reply #13)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 01:34 PM

17. ...Here we are now, entertain us!...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to friendly_iconoclast (Original post)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 12:33 AM

7. Reach much?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99Forever (Reply #7)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 12:43 AM

10. About as much as the anti-gun people are..

 

N/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to friendly_iconoclast (Original post)


Response to friendly_iconoclast (Original post)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 10:15 AM

14. not 100%, but culpability is shared.

That's why I voted yes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to friendly_iconoclast (Original post)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 10:17 AM

15. Most RIDICULOUS Post of the year. n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to friendly_iconoclast (Original post)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 10:25 AM

16. No, but they contribute to acceptance of the illicit drug market

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HereSince1628 (Reply #16)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 01:40 PM

19. The only thing that does that is prohibition. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kurska (Reply #19)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 01:44 PM

20. By definition, of course. That's what makes the market illicit.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread