Saturday, June 16, 2007
partnership for a drug free america
I have a two complaints about this partnership. 1-All they do is advertising campaigns. They make sure people get information about drugs. woohoo there are a million other sources for this information. 2- There is nothing on their website saying they actually help in treatment centers in any way. Why not make a drug free america by helping those who are unable to reach or afford a treatment center get the help they need.
Thursday, June 14, 2007
war on drugs
Due to some of my research the past few days I have come to some conclusions.
One.
The use of methamphetamines is on the rise. I get this conclusion from the increase in the amount of labs in the past years, even though all the numbers people have is a few years old. One is that federal and state prisoners reported use was somewhat higher as seen in this report. Which data is a little bit old but it shows the increase. It also shows some other things which I'll get to later.
Everyone thinks that due to the new law on the sale of pseudophedrine and ephedrine containing substances is now limited and monitored, that this slows down the production of amphetamines. Well it does, but it does not hinder the production of meth. Especially methamphetamine hydrochloride, also known as 'ice'. This speculation goes against the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration but I really don't know how they get their numbers, so I really don't take their numbers into account. For if they do surveys how do they pick who to survey? And who would really answer truthfully on the matter of doing illegal drugs?
Two.
There are cheaper ways to fight the war on drugs then through interdiction efforts, and trying to destroy them at their source. As this list of facts shows in relation to cocaine. The second item states that at least 75% of all shipments must be intercepted in order to make the trafficking of cocaine non-profitable. And seeing as how there still seems to be enough cocaine to go around I do not think that is happening. Even better yet is the sixteenth item on the list which states that instead of trying to eradicate it at the source, which would cost 783 million. The US could spend 34 million on treatment centers and eradicate the demand for the drugs. Which is an interesting item I'll come back to in my next point. Now these numbers only refer to cocaine, however I feel the principle is valid for all drugs that we are attempting to stop from entering our country. And that idea is the idea of spending money to provide treatment to people so that they won't want the drugs instead of spending all our money trying to eradicate the drug itself and failing miserably. Here is the current cost. What better way to have spent that money then wasting it away. When you could lower the demand for drugs at a much lower cost.
Three.
In my previous point I made the point that it was cheaper to set up treatment centers then try to fight the war on drugs the way it has been going. But it would be cheaper and probably to the betterment of our society if treatment centers were used in another way. According to this same report as earlier, around half of the prisoners in State and Federal lockup in 2004 met the criteria for substance dependence. And around 50% State prisoners had at least three prior sentences. And in fact nearly half of them were on payrole or probation when they got arrested.
What this says to me is that they were addicted to whatever, and so therefor kept doing the things that got them in trouble. That report states that around 45% took part in drug classes. But what if they were sentenced to a thirty day facility for their first drug charge? I don't know if it would work, and thats why I'm only saying for the first charge, after that they can go to jail like everyone else. But wouldn't that be cheaper in the long run if it did work for say only 50%. That would mean 50% less people to have to pay for their stay in jail or prison.
So there are my conclusions, if anyone even reads this leave a comment.
One.
The use of methamphetamines is on the rise. I get this conclusion from the increase in the amount of labs in the past years, even though all the numbers people have is a few years old. One is that federal and state prisoners reported use was somewhat higher as seen in this report. Which data is a little bit old but it shows the increase. It also shows some other things which I'll get to later.
Everyone thinks that due to the new law on the sale of pseudophedrine and ephedrine containing substances is now limited and monitored, that this slows down the production of amphetamines. Well it does, but it does not hinder the production of meth. Especially methamphetamine hydrochloride, also known as 'ice'. This speculation goes against the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration but I really don't know how they get their numbers, so I really don't take their numbers into account. For if they do surveys how do they pick who to survey? And who would really answer truthfully on the matter of doing illegal drugs?
Two.
There are cheaper ways to fight the war on drugs then through interdiction efforts, and trying to destroy them at their source. As this list of facts shows in relation to cocaine. The second item states that at least 75% of all shipments must be intercepted in order to make the trafficking of cocaine non-profitable. And seeing as how there still seems to be enough cocaine to go around I do not think that is happening. Even better yet is the sixteenth item on the list which states that instead of trying to eradicate it at the source, which would cost 783 million. The US could spend 34 million on treatment centers and eradicate the demand for the drugs. Which is an interesting item I'll come back to in my next point. Now these numbers only refer to cocaine, however I feel the principle is valid for all drugs that we are attempting to stop from entering our country. And that idea is the idea of spending money to provide treatment to people so that they won't want the drugs instead of spending all our money trying to eradicate the drug itself and failing miserably. Here is the current cost. What better way to have spent that money then wasting it away. When you could lower the demand for drugs at a much lower cost.
Three.
In my previous point I made the point that it was cheaper to set up treatment centers then try to fight the war on drugs the way it has been going. But it would be cheaper and probably to the betterment of our society if treatment centers were used in another way. According to this same report as earlier, around half of the prisoners in State and Federal lockup in 2004 met the criteria for substance dependence. And around 50% State prisoners had at least three prior sentences. And in fact nearly half of them were on payrole or probation when they got arrested.
What this says to me is that they were addicted to whatever, and so therefor kept doing the things that got them in trouble. That report states that around 45% took part in drug classes. But what if they were sentenced to a thirty day facility for their first drug charge? I don't know if it would work, and thats why I'm only saying for the first charge, after that they can go to jail like everyone else. But wouldn't that be cheaper in the long run if it did work for say only 50%. That would mean 50% less people to have to pay for their stay in jail or prison.
So there are my conclusions, if anyone even reads this leave a comment.
Monday, June 11, 2007
i just hope
I just hope the day comes soon when I look back on all this and laugh. I am really tired of the way these things keep going. And theres not a fucking thing I can do to change it.
Friday, June 8, 2007
haha
Well I'm just happy Paris got sent back to jail. I mean fuck what did she expect. I knew when I got arrested that I had broken the law and was on my way to jail. Why should she get special treatment. Honestly its not like county jail is that bad, and jail is where she is going not prison like some of the news people have said, her sentence isn't long enough for her to get transferred to a prison. So I hope she enjoys her stay.
Wednesday, June 6, 2007
Global Warming
The NASA chief gets in trouble which I think is ridiculous, he says it himself, the debate has become more political than technical. And at the very end of the article it talks of climate scientists claiming he's ignorant, but I know for a fact that not all the scientists agree with the theory that is global warming. They don't mention what they have to say. The media happens to be biased in the fact that it only reports stories and opinions in favor of global warming when there are large amounts of scientists that just plain don't agree. I think its a bunch of crap that both sides are not being viewed in the media. Of course I also get my views from a Michael Crichton novel, or however you spell his name.
Tuesday, June 5, 2007
paris fucking hilton
Every direction you turn its Paris Hilton did this, or she did that, and omg shes going to jail. She is only famous for being famous and the news community continues her fame by broadcasting every little thing that she does. This recent story is enough to make me sick. It wasn't newsworthy enough to post that their was rampant staph infections before she was there. But all of a sudden sense someone famous has to be treated the way the rest of the world does, then its news. And its not like shes even going to be in gen pop as the story itself says at the end. This whole situation shows no respect to the millions of people who have been jailed as common criminals, which Paris undoubtedly is now.
10 inconvenient truths about file sharing?
truths
check it out
and a few points
Is it about file sharing or pirating they mention both?
1. About Pirate Bay, maybe the music industry should try the same thing, they might make some money.
5. Aren't there studies that prove the drop in sales has nothing to do with file sharing. So why not spend the money to find new artists instead of pouring money into the fight against filesharing.
6. Of course they facilitate it, they provide the fucking access to the internet. This is the most meaningless statement.
7. Lawrence Lessig, does he not know what hes talking about. Just because there is alot of people disagreeing with you there is no need to call them stupid.
8. Glad to hear this has nothing to do with file sharing whatsoever.
9.Why should they stop, whats the alternative pay $18 for a cd. I don't know about you but I don't have that kind of money to spend on music.
10. Thats because the vast majority are little teenagers who like their music spoon fed to them, but there is a minority that likes to hunt new music and uses file-sharing for such purposes.
check it out
and a few points
Is it about file sharing or pirating they mention both?
1. About Pirate Bay, maybe the music industry should try the same thing, they might make some money.
5. Aren't there studies that prove the drop in sales has nothing to do with file sharing. So why not spend the money to find new artists instead of pouring money into the fight against filesharing.
6. Of course they facilitate it, they provide the fucking access to the internet. This is the most meaningless statement.
7. Lawrence Lessig, does he not know what hes talking about. Just because there is alot of people disagreeing with you there is no need to call them stupid.
8. Glad to hear this has nothing to do with file sharing whatsoever.
9.Why should they stop, whats the alternative pay $18 for a cd. I don't know about you but I don't have that kind of money to spend on music.
10. Thats because the vast majority are little teenagers who like their music spoon fed to them, but there is a minority that likes to hunt new music and uses file-sharing for such purposes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
