How Anonymous is Threatening a Mexican Drug Cartel

Phoenix333 said:
Any time anything comes up about Mexican drug cartels - and Steve will say this is only on the page because Anonymous is involved, and thus there's a tech element to the story - the druggies use the thread as a soapbox for legalization. Therefore, it is still a troll post. He's using it to start a legalization argument, which people fell for and fed said troll. You're just under the same bridge so you're coming to his defense by attacking me.



The United States is a nation of laws. Disapproval of a law is not a reason to break it, and the fact that people break laws is not grounds to invalidate them, otherwise there's no point to having laws at all. If you live in the United States then it is your DUTY under the constitution to obey the law, and it is the DUTY of the government to enforce existing laws, whether you like them or not. You want the rights guaranteed in the constitution? Then uphold your responsibilities, otherwise you deserve nothing. If you want the laws changed, then work within the system to elect people that agree with your position. Just don't expect everyone to agree with you and don't be surprised if you don't get your way.



Stop throwing the justifications around and just out with it: You want to be able to use whatever drugs you want without fear of prosecution. If that's what you want then be honest about it and stop trying to rationalize it.

If you're not a dopehead then you're approaching this from the libertarian standpoint, which is just plain lunacy, but if so... do you want to solve the drug problem? Here, I'll solve it for you without having to legalize anything. Here's how.Wow! here I go arguing on the internet and probably setting this up to go to the soapbox. I do not get to see the ending but it should be fun anyways.

1) Build the border fence. This will be two fences, topped with concertina wire, 100 feet apart, with the area between the fences mined. The fence will be sunk 50 foot deep with vibration sensors to detect tunneling. Armed guard towers will be placed within line of sight with each other, with infrared motion sensors along the fence and rapid response vehicles in range of any tower calling out for a need for extra manpower. Anyone crossing both fences successfully and not going boom gets shot on sight - either from the tower, of from the mounted machineguns on the rapid response vehicles. If it is a war on drugs, then fight it like a real war.

Congratulations! The border is1969 miles long. So you want to burrow a 50*20 ft channel then top it with another 20ft in concrete fence and concertina wire, then top it with electronics. Pretending everything works perfectly it is already coming to a project size and price that combines every other public works project ever erected in the history of the United States. Now not mentioning that the last time a project like this was undertook it was constructed over six centuries and a few dynasties.

Now you made your wonderful wall in ... six months. let's staff it.

1969/ 4 (miles (average) for the best equipment to see in the worst conditions for your line of sight manned posts idea).. 492 stations manned by at least one person 24 hours a day - seven days a week. at a loyal teaparty employee rate (7.85/hr) would be 100K a day for people to sit on it. And be able to do nothing if they are assaulted.

BTW Russian submarine design is now the new cocaine smugglers vogue. Your fence is helping.

2) Mandatory death sentence for convicted drug dealers and smugglers, with execution to be carried out no later than one year from sentencing, maximum two appeals fast tracked prior to this date. This includes doctors illegally peddling pharmaceuticals. This also includes anyone caught laundering money for drug dealers.

Constitutional rights of representation tells me that you want to expand every trial to a death sentence trial for drugs. So you, and me, and everyone else here pays a bigger lump of money to the Justice department and we all get to serve on jurys for two weeks every year. Maybe we can consider it a second vacation from work?

P.S. Do not sell anything used. EVER. it might be getting bought with drug money. You might end up on the wrong end of your firing squad. Again though its up to a jury to decide. I might be on your jury - seeings you want to make our countries familiarity with courtrooms a priority.

3) Mandatory incarcerated detox and reeducation for anyone caught with illegal drugs the first time, with regular weekly tests for one year after release. Second offense same as above, with forcible relocation in a managed community separated from society for five years. Third offense mandatory death sentence as in point #2.

Again who pays for this? The crack head who has as much money as he/she has teeth?

4) Any nation caught aiding and furnishing drug dealers with means and material to attempt to defeat the anti-drug measures will suffer immediate and permanent regime change in the form of a tactical nuke dropped on their central governmental facilities.

I have no respectful response. I am not saying I have no respect for you. Very little, I am giving you a pass - you are literate you must be worth something to someone.

Sound a bit harsh? Foolish It is, but if it were actually enforced it will solve the drug problem because the dealers all die or are too scared to sell their poison and can't smuggle it in, and the users get the treatment they need and if they can't hack it they're removed from society permanently. Mexico's drug problem becomes Mexico's problem and not the United States' problem. Who do we get more oil from, Mexico or Saudi Arabia? I feel safe to assume that you do not know. See, there are solutions other than legalization, but society is just too full of gutless wimps that are afraid of getting a little blood on their hands to actually do what would work. Or sociopaths with agenda that are so extreme it should warrant a mental examination. It would be bloody and ugly in the short term but after the initial culling it would leave the country without a drug problem and without an illegal immigration problem as well.

Oh don't worry though. Such a plan will never see the light of day, thank god. nor will legalization either. There are too many politicians with too much to gain from maintaining the status quo to allow either to ever happen. Enough that are not insane. Michelle Bachman would call your remarks crazy. We'll both just have to go away from this disappointed that our own ideas won't ever be used, and somewhat relieved that the opposing views' plans won't either. You read too many "end of times" books. At least I get the pleasure of knowing that at the end of the day you will feel quite disturbed at my bloodthirsty yet pragmatic approach to problem solving.
Click to expand...
Yep, disturbed enough to wonder what happened in your life to warrant as much hatred as you do towards 1 out of every 9 people. I suggest reexamining your life and coming up with more useful things to do than fantasizing about killing 10 or 20 million Americans, and uncountable others who cross your path.

PS.

I do not think you understand the definition of pragmatic; unless your post was a satirical joke and over my head.
 
Phoenix333 said:
Right, people are going to do it anyway, so let's not even bother trying. Well, you just rationalized every crime on the books. By this logic, murder, rape, extortion, assault, genocide... and every other crime should be allowed because people are going to do it anyway. After all, it's a part of being human, isn't it? Can't just legislate it away, now can we?
Click to expand...

Doing drugs only hurts the user. If they THEN commit a crime afterwards, charge them for that crime. Not the "pre-crime".

You state there is no proof? Our own country, nearly 100 years ago - look at prohibition. The same arguments were advanced, "OMG it would be nothing but a nation of drunks!" and the same problems surfaced. It's amazing that we think ourselves a capitalist nation, yet try to overcome the most basic laws of supply and demand when it comes to drugs; making them illegal only makes it more profitable.
 
Argh, one more point - California tried to legalize pot the last general election. Guess who voted against it? All the current drug dealers and pot growers who run grow houses all over the place. It would kill their business. An acquaintance of mine may or may not have been an ex-dealer, and may or may not still have connections, all of whom voted to keep it illegal.
 
TwistedAegis said:
Argh, one more point - California tried to legalize pot the last general election. Guess who voted against it? All the current drug dealers and pot growers who run grow houses all over the place. It would kill their business. An acquaintance of mine may or may not have been an ex-dealer, and may or may not still have connections, all of whom voted to keep it illegal.
Click to expand...
Not just that but also because of the shady business Richard Lee and affiliates were trying to pull with Agrimed LLC. 58 lbs dry per day?! :eek:

P.S. Your OP was spot on.
 
DarkStar02 said:
So you're admitting to arguing about something you know nothing about. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
You know nothing about what I do and do not know. If you're going to accuse me of ignorance, you might look in the mirror first. Furthermore, it is a logical fallacy to assume that one must participate in an act to understand the consequences of it. However, if you wish to rely on this manner of thinking, then perhaps you should consider becoming a suicide prevention counselor. Perhaps after you've killed yourself you'll be able to understand it better and then be qualified to discuss the topic. Well, if you weren't dead that is. Let's try a bit harder next time, shall we?

Watch the documentary I posted. Educate yourself. Ignorance isn't always bliss.
Click to expand...
I am quite educated. Thanks for asking. As for the video, no thanks. I'm far from ignorant of such propaganda.

M1ster_R0gers said:
Yep, disturbed enough to wonder what happened in your life to warrant as much hatred as you do towards 1 out of every 9 people.
Click to expand...
Ahh, yes, we must accuse people of hatemongering when we disagree with someone, now don't we? No discussion can exist without poorly veiled recriminations. However, you might want to reconsider pointing that finger of yours at dangerous creatures in the future. You might end up losing it and we wouldn't want you getting hurt, now would we?

As for your inserting your pretty red text in the middle of what I posted, allow me to address the few relevant points. Cost has never been an obstacle for the Federal Government since they've already spent a few trillion dollars bailing out largely foreign owned banking institutions. I don't think spending money on the border would be much of a problem since they're willing to spend money on just about everything else. And what's this about submarines? Surely you're joking... with the best submarine fleet in the world, sinking a few Russian-made subs would not be very much of a challenge, and after a few million kilos of cocaine has made its way to the ocean floor, then the dealers will begin looking to less costly markets, or did you forget that crucial element of the supply and demand equation?

One more thing. Do not alter what I say. Let my words be mine and your words be yours.

TwistedAegis said:
Doing drugs only hurts the user. If they THEN commit a crime afterwards, charge them for that crime. Not the "pre-crime".
Click to expand...
You are assuming that people live in a vacuum. It does not hurt only the user, it hurts their families, their friends, their neighbors, and their coworkers as well. Perhaps you've not seen the effect on the family of a loved one dying from the effects of drugs? How many cultural icons have died from drugs recently? But that only hurt the user.... I think the damage extends much further than you could possibly know. Are people not supposed to try to prevent people they care about from hurting themselves and others? Oh, but I forgot. According to M1ster_R0gers I hate 1 out of 9 people, so then why should I be caring about whether anyone gets hurt? I can see that you're obviously oozing with concern yourself.

You state there is no proof? Our own country, nearly 100 years ago - look at prohibition. The same arguments were advanced, "OMG it would be nothing but a nation of drunks!" and the same problems surfaced. It's amazing that we think ourselves a capitalist nation, yet try to overcome the most basic laws of supply and demand when it comes to drugs; making them illegal only makes it more profitable.
Click to expand...
Yes, prohibition failed because the "system" caved to the people that wanted their alcohol. Yet, they were honest in what they wanted. They paraded around with signs saying "we want beer", and look at society now. Seen any alcohol-related highway statistics lately? And isn't it ironic that so many times I hear the argument from people that support legalization of marijuana that alcohol is soooo much more dangerous yet it's permitted, so their drug should be permitted too. Yes, the "people" spoke on prohibition because they cared more about getting drunk than having concern about the well being of others. If there is no greater form of hatred then selfish apathy I have yet to see it, but then, after all, I am sooo full of hatred now aren't I? Still, it is the law of the land that people are allowed to drink alcohol, along with all the consequences that result from that.

No, my goal would be to destroy the supply so the demand would evaporate enough that the suppliers would look elsewhere, where the risk is not so great to them and their profits, and by destroy I mean it literally. If people want it so bad that they're willing to die for it... well then who am I to stand in their way?

LeninGHOLA said:
I thought the point was that you wanted a bunch of people dead for lifestyles you don't agree with.
Click to expand...
Hardly. My point was to illustrate that solving the drug problem could be possible if people would be willing to take hard and decisive measures. It was to illustrate an alternative, if a brutal one, and also to speak to how society has become too soft and too tolerant of destructive behavior. If people had any sense of honor they would hold themselves to the highest standards and choose not to pollute themselves with such things. Sadly, they do not, but then... perhaps others are right. Humans will be humans, and maybe I simply expect too much of them. My standards and expectations, after all, are extremely high.

To me, laws are not the problem and never have been. Lack of obedience to the law is the problem, and this is rooted in a lack of respect and understanding of why laws are important. Without law, there is no order, and without order, there can be no civilization. A lawless nation is a doomed nation, and without respect and obedience to the law - whether you disagree with it or not - then you are betraying the very foundation upon which the nation was founded and the rights of other citizens. If people are to be above the law, or laws are to be meaningless and obeyed selectively, then you have no rights because it is only through the law that rights are guaranteed and protected. People who willingly and knowingly break the law hurt society as a whole because they are taking away from those that do obey the law and saying that they feel that they are more important, that they should have more rights than their fellow man. If you disagree with the law then work to change it, but obey it as best as possible until it is changed.

As for legalization, I will say no more except for this. If by some freak chance it becomes the law of the land, then as much as I disagree with and abhor the behavior of those who willingly use drugs, I will then be obliged to defend their right to do so and I will do so with my every breath, no matter how much it may disgust me in the process. Judge me how you will.
 
Phoenix333 said:
You are assuming that people live in a vacuum. It does not hurt only the user, it hurts their families, their friends, their neighbors, and their coworkers as well. Perhaps you've not seen the effect on the family of a loved one dying from the effects of drugs? How many cultural icons have died from drugs recently? But that only hurt the user.... I think the damage extends much further than you could possibly know. Are people not supposed to try to prevent people they care about from hurting themselves and others? Oh, but I forgot. According to M1ster_R0gers I hate 1 out of 9 people, so then why should I be caring about whether anyone gets hurt? I can see that you're obviously oozing with concern yourself.
Click to expand...

So does not going to college or just being a lazy jackass - should we throw them in jail if they sit around in their underwear playing xbox all day? And really, throwing them in prison is a better alternative? What about the many, many users who actually successfully manage their habit? Yes it hurts their family - so let their family attempt to deal with it, and deal with it through medical and therapy/counseling, NOT law enforcement and prison.

And yes, look at all the cultural icons dying lately - despite drugs being illegal! So right now, drugs are being done anyway - all statistics I have seen, from the Office of National Drug Control Policy to the UN, shows that drug usage is incredibly stable, it isn't being decreased by any policies. As a result of these policies, we give all of the money to incredibly bad people. There are currently tens of thousands of people dead in Mexico just so people can play the moral police in the US and elsewhere. What about their families, friends, and loved ones?



Phoenix333 said:
Yes, prohibition failed because the "system" caved to the people that wanted their alcohol. Yet, they were honest in what they wanted. They paraded around with signs saying "we want beer", and look at society now. Seen any alcohol-related highway statistics lately? And isn't it ironic that so many times I hear the argument from people that support legalization of marijuana that alcohol is soooo much more dangerous yet it's permitted, so their drug should be permitted too. Yes, the "people" spoke on prohibition because they cared more about getting drunk than having concern about the well being of others. If there is no greater form of hatred then selfish apathy I have yet to see it, but then, after all, I am sooo full of hatred now aren't I? Still, it is the law of the land that people are allowed to drink alcohol, along with all the consequences that result from that.

No, my goal would be to destroy the supply so the demand would evaporate enough that the suppliers would look elsewhere, where the risk is not so great to them and their profits, and by destroy I mean it literally. If people want it so bad that they're willing to die for it... well then who am I to stand in their way?
Click to expand...

You have it all backwards here. Prohibition failed because of the huge violence it perpetrated due to the mob coming in to meet the demand of the populace for alchohol. Destroying the supply does absolutely nothing to the demand and the fact that you think it does is frankly dangerous ignorance. Destroying the supply only increases the price for what remains, because the demand is the same, there is just less product.


Phoenix333 said:
Hardly. My point was to illustrate that solving the drug problem could be possible if people would be willing to take hard and decisive measures. It was to illustrate an alternative, if a brutal one, and also to speak to how society has become too soft and too tolerant of destructive behavior. If people had any sense of honor they would hold themselves to the highest standards and choose not to pollute themselves with such things. Sadly, they do not, but then... perhaps others are right. Humans will be humans, and maybe I simply expect too much of them. My standards and expectations, after all, are extremely high.

To me, laws are not the problem and never have been. Lack of obedience to the law is the problem, and this is rooted in a lack of respect and understanding of why laws are important. Without law, there is no order, and without order, there can be no civilization. A lawless nation is a doomed nation, and without respect and obedience to the law - whether you disagree with it or not - then you are betraying the very foundation upon which the nation was founded and the rights of other citizens. If people are to be above the law, or laws are to be meaningless and obeyed selectively, then you have no rights because it is only through the law that rights are guaranteed and protected. People who willingly and knowingly break the law hurt society as a whole because they are taking away from those that do obey the law and saying that they feel that they are more important, that they should have more rights than their fellow man. If you disagree with the law then work to change it, but obey it as best as possible until it is changed.

As for legalization, I will say no more except for this. If by some freak chance it becomes the law of the land, then as much as I disagree with and abhor the behavior of those who willingly use drugs, I will then be obliged to defend their right to do so and I will do so with my every breath, no matter how much it may disgust me in the process. Judge me how you will.
Click to expand...

History shows you to be wrong. Look at the Arab Spring - when the demand is there, people eventually get what they want. And I just don't understand how you possibly think you're protecting people by meting out punishment 10x harsher than what the initial crime would have caused.

And finally, no where do drug legalization advocates say that someone doing drugs gets a free pass on all other laws. If someone does drugs and breaks a law - harms someone, property damage, whatever - they get in trouble for that! There is no reason to lock them up preemptively.

What if, in a few decades from now, science definitely proves via improved brain scanning, that playing FPS games causes a significant raise in aggression levels? Should FPS thus be banned and anyone playing them locked up, so they don't harm their family/friends/neighbors?
 
I would do drugs but they're too expensive and drug dealers never have what I want. Legalize so I can afford to buy shit through Amazon.
 
Phoenix333 said:
snip
...As for your inserting your pretty red text in the middle of what I posted, allow me to address the few relevant points. Cost has never been an obstacle for the Federal Government since they've already spent a few trillion dollars bailing out largely foreign owned banking institutions. I don't think spending money on the border would be much of a problem since they're willing to spend money on just about everything else. And what's this about submarines? Surely you're joking... with the best submarine fleet in the world, sinking a few Russian-made subs would not be very much of a challenge, and after a few million kilos of cocaine has made its way to the ocean floor, then the dealers will begin looking to less costly markets, or did you forget that crucial element of the supply and demand equation?
Click to expand...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narco_submarine

I suggest an economics and writing class. Maybe take some drugs and try getting laid.
 
I don't do drugs at all, not even alcohol. But I'm all for legalization.

why? I live in a "third world shithole". You talk about it, we see it. Legalize that stuff. Collect taxes, treat the addicted, and send to prison the ones who do bad stuff, intoxicated or not. Not that hard.

But here I guess they think it's better to spread FUD so they can get elected again to "protect the people". Yeah.
 
GORANKAR said:
It's not like the Mexican Mob has a website they can hack. They could go after known kingpins and harass them with identity theft or deface their Facebook page. The people they are targeting tend to live under the radar a deal in cash. Not sure anon could do more than annoy any of them anyway.
Click to expand...

That's what I'm curious about. I wonder that they plan on doing that would make any real impact.
 
TwistedAegis said:
History shows you to be wrong.
Click to expand...
History shows man to be nothing but a fool who is too stupid to listen to those who know better. You do very little to alter that picture.

M1ster_R0gers said:
I suggest an economics and writing class. Maybe take some drugs and try getting laid.
Click to expand...
I suggest you join the Army and volunteer for mine sweeping duty. Perhaps then your head can serve a useful purpose: as a doorstop once it's been blown clear from your body since it is obviously not good for much of anything else.
 
Phoenix333 said:
History shows man to be nothing but a fool who is too stupid to listen to those who know better. You do very little to alter that picture.

I suggest you join the Army and volunteer for mine sweeping duty. Perhaps then your head can serve a useful purpose: as a doorstop once it's been blown clear from your body since it is obviously not good for much of anything else.
Click to expand...

:rolleyes: Well, you sure showed us the logic of your position.
 
Phoenix333 said:
You know nothing about what I do and do not know. If you're going to accuse me of ignorance, you might look in the mirror first. Furthermore, it is a logical fallacy to assume that one must participate in an act to understand the consequences of it. However, if you wish to rely on this manner of thinking, then perhaps you should consider becoming a suicide prevention counselor. Perhaps after you've killed yourself you'll be able to understand it better and then be qualified to discuss the topic. Well, if you weren't dead that is. Let's try a bit harder next time, shall we?


I am quite educated. Thanks for asking. As for the video, no thanks. I'm far from ignorant of such propaganda.
Click to expand...

Pull your head out of your ass and watch the fucking video. :eek:
 
Phoenix333 said:
History shows man to be nothing but a fool who is too stupid to listen to those who know better. You do very little to alter that picture.


I suggest you join the Army and volunteer for mine sweeping duty. Perhaps then your head can serve a useful purpose: as a doorstop once it's been blown clear from your body since it is obviously not good for much of anything else.
Click to expand...


been there civilian.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W2YK7pADmWU
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top