Terrorism-Drug Money Commercials

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by trebblekicked, Jan 4, 2003.

  1. macrumors 6502a

    trebblekicked

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2002
    Location:
    Chicago, IL, USA
    #1
    Few things in this world anger me as much as simplistic propaganda propogating under a blanket-power conservative government. Witness these anti-drug commercials:

    DRUG MONEY SUPPORTS TERROR!!!!


    a paraphrase:

    kid a: I was just having some fun.

    kid b: i help terrorists kill children

    kid c: some harmless fun.

    HOW DOES THIS ENCOURAGE FREE THOUGHT AND DEBATE ON THE ISSUE?
    This ad campaign is doing more harm than good. It is sealing the door on the issue of drug decriminalization by infecting youth with a black and white image of this issue. Any intelligent person knows there is far more to the subject than 'drugs are bad'. These ads push conservative ideology on the subject leaving no option for rebuttal. It's like taking half of the debate to the public and leaving the opposition powerless. And when the opposition is progressive thought, i tend to get my knickers in a bunch.

    Here's a way to ensure and i mean GUARUNTEE that terrorists will not benefit from drug sales in the US:

    decriminalize and regulate!

    it's that simple. US Government sells marijuana to legal aged adults (18, 21, whatever). US Government sells marijuana at prices that make black market sales unattractive. Drug dealers go out of business. Terrorists get no money (Since these ads specifically target young kids and marijuana, i'm just talking about teens and pot.) Decreminalize other drugs and run ads based on factual evidence (of which there is plenty) that prove drugs are bad.

    Of course this is overly simplistic and ultra-progressive, but what do you think?

    BTW: the only governor in the US to support drug decriminalization was the governor in New Mexico. And he was Republican. Does anyone know what happened to him or his drug plan? Thanks.
     
  2. macrumors 68020

    alex_ant

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2002
    Location:
    All up in your bidness
    #2
    Fool, everybody knows drug money supports terror. Drugs are un-American, illegal, and probably communist. So if you want to fight terror, don't buy drugs - buy a big Ford SUV instead. You'll be fighting terror, AND supporting the American economy! You'll even be given tax cuts so you can afford to buy more gas.
     
  3. macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2001
    #3
    My favorite ad is this one:
    Guy A: Why should I believe drug money supports terror?
    Guy B: Because it's true

    That's it, no fine print, no sources. The whole ad, right there.
     
  4. macrumors G5

    Sun Baked

    Joined:
    May 19, 2002
    #4
    You smoke this legal and highly addictive drug and there's a chance you will die someday. Though there's little chance that you'll kill someone today in a DUI accident because you just smoked it.

    You have one heck of a dangerous drug legal in the US (cigarettes) and people would be happy if the govt took it off the street.

    ---

    You can drink this legally, but there's a good chance you'll kill someone when you get behind the wheel.

    Alchohol and driving kills.
    ---

    Legalize marijuana, crack, heroin, oxycontin, etc and you'll have more DUIs driving around than you do now.

    It'll get very dangerous to walk or drive around, watch COPS and how many idiots do you see with drugs in the car now. Now imagine if drugs were legal.
     
  5. macrumors 65816

    Nipsy

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2002
    #5
    Okay, follow me:

    If there are 10,000 drug related murders, 20,000 drug related taxpayer 3-5 year
    "hotel" stays, 250,000 taxpayer funded court appearances, and 5,000 alchohol related vehicular homicides today, and we legalize drugs tomorrow, what will happen?

    Say next year there are 500 drug related homicides, 2,000 drug related prison stays, 40,000 drug related taxpayer funded court appearances, and 7,500 alchohol related vehicular homicides.

    Notice we've gone from 15,000 to 8,000 deaths, greatly reduced the prison population, and cleared the court system to prosecute more serious crimes like file sharing or reading an e-book you didn't pay for?

    Futhermore, in a legalized system, there is an initial spike in drug use, but not a proven overall increase. In Holland, PER CAPITA crime is lower ACROSS the board, even though pot is legal, and hard drugs are treated like San Francisco treats pot.

    Furthermore, if drugs were legal, and regulated, people would take them from Walgreens to where they planned to use them, and not be driving around inner city gang turf to procure them. Gangs would get pretty bored when the drug sales market collapses. Inner cities would become safer, etc.

    And the gov't coud tax everything!


    The above numbers are FICTITIOUS and to illustrate a point. These are not actual statistics.
     
  6. macrumors 65816

    Nipsy

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2002
    #6
    I should mention that while I do drink and do smoke, I very seldom (6 times in 3 years) do any illegal drugs, so I should not be discounted as a pothead, druggie, etc.

    It just seems obvious that decriminalization of drugs is the easiest way to reduce serious urban crime, reduce the taxpayer burden, increase revenue to the military industrial complex, and give people some freedom of choice.

    Remember, folks, that most drug overdoses result from badly mixed/unknown/variable strength drugs, not the drugs themselves. So, additionally, we would likely see a lesser number of overdoses.

    We allow people the freedom to kill themselves with tobacco, and alcohol, but not pot induced Twinkie eating?

    Get over it...~90% of the country would continue living in a drug legal America just as they do today. ~8% would greatly reduce their exposure to crimnal danger, and ~2% would have to get real jobs, because gang banging/drug dealing no longer paid.
     
  7. macrumors 6502a

    Juventuz

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2002
    Location:
    Binghamton
    #7
    I believe that we should legalize marijuana. I myself don't smoke it, but I know a lot of people (people you'd never think either) who smoke it. My old housemates used to smoke it and all they'd do is sit and watch tv and eat. They always tried to get me to smoke, but I never had the money to waste on it. I struggled with paying my tuition and rent too much to waster it on weed. They never went out driving or did anything else stupid when they smoked up.

    There are two reasons I believe we should legalize it, first is because it's nowhere near as dangerous as alcohol and secondly because it's a great source of taxes. Marijuana was the US' biggest cash crop last year, with estimates of 32 billion of it being sold in the US. Imagine if it were legal and we taxed it at a 10-15% level, that would be a nice source of income for the government.

    Now my future brother-in-law is a State Trooper in VT and he works in narcotics, he's firmly anti-legalization of marijuana because he says it leads to the harder drugs. Does it? I believe in does in some cases, but in the GREAT majority I don't believe it. I think the police are afraid that they will loose a lot of their funding, but I think they could gain some by the new taxes. Not to mention how much they wouldn't be wasting on the arresting and processing of people growing or selling weed.
     
  8. macrumors 68020

    alex_ant

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2002
    Location:
    All up in your bidness
    #8
    Has anyone seen that commercial where the two guys are smoking weed in a bathroom stall at a concert, a cop comes in and busts them, and then it changes to a shot of the dropped joint in front of the urinal next to a one-word message that I forget but that's supposed to send some kind of ominous and foreboding message to drug users and would-be drug users everywhere? I wonder if any ad like this has ever, in the history of the world, affected one single person.

    "Yeah, I used to smoke put, but then I found out that it was illegal, you know, so I quit."

    "I was thinking about taking up heroin, but then I saw this commercial that said 'Drugs kill. Brought to you by the Partnership for a Drug-Free America' and I was like, 'Whoa, you've gotta be kidding me! Drugs kill??? What was I thinking?!?!'"

    What's funny is that conservatives think that drugs being illegal = drug use ceasing, and that in any instance where this doesn't hold up, the solution is to enact even harsher penalties for drug use. Because of course, "Statistics show that the threat of a strong punishment is a strong deterrent." So we start giving potheads 5 year sentences for possession, and then we wonder why people still smoke pot - so we increase the sentence to 10! DUH.

    The drug problem can be solved by applying simple psychology. Why do so many people do drugs? Because they're mysterious and alluring and because they offer entry into desirable cliques. They do this, of course, because they're illegal and forbidden. People want what they can't have. If we want 99% of all drug use in the U.S. to cease, the solution is to legalize them all - from pot to crack to meth - and sell them at every 7-11 in the nation to absolutely anyone who wants them, from children to adults. The solution to the drug problem is to treat drugs like Liquid Drano, because treating them as such removes all desirable and "cool" peripheral properties from them and makes them precisely as desirable to use as Drano. Why don't people sit around their houses drinking Drano? Because it's utterly stupid!

    Alcohol is available to all ages in France. Why aren't the French a bunch of raving drunks? I remember being in French class in high school when this question was posed to my teacher:

    "Why isn't there a minimum drinking age in France? Don't kids get drunk a lot?"
    "No."
    "Why not?"
    "Do you ever sit around drinking milk until you throw up?"
    "No."
    "There you go then."

    In short, America's drug problem is sustained by a self-defeating culture of drug-phobia.
     
  9. macrumors 65816

    Nipsy

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2002
    #9

    There is so much truth in the above post that it completely overwhelms the biting sacrasm...
     
  10. macrumors 603

    rainman::|:|

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2002
    Location:
    iowa
    #10
    i am so angered by these commercials that i can't think straight. First off, that one where the car full of (black) guys run over a kid because they're stoned... Well i think people that drive stoned are morons, but not that stupid. Think of it this way: You get the same penalties for getting caught smoking pot in your house, or walking around, or at a party, that you do in the car. If it were legal, there would be DUI laws for pot, and consequences might make people think about it. Imagine a stoned-test you have to take, and can get thrown in jail for... it'd certainly make me think twice about driving around stoned. And let me say this. Yeah, i get stoned a lot. Once a month or so, i get a bag, and for a week, when i get home from work, i sit around and enjoy myself. Mostly play video games. it's a huge stress reliever and helps me get through the day. But i DO NOT drive stoned.

    Secondly, as for these "drugs support terrorism" ads-
    a: The initial commercial was such a flop, they felt inclinded to make two more, to make people actually believe it- then,
    b: they make one that has a bad actor realizing it actually DOES support terrorism, simply because this other guy tells him so. THEN
    c: in the third commercial, they move on, and just pretend we all believe it, to debate how MUCH goes to terrorism.

    Like we're just going to gloss over the fact that they haven't proven a thing.

    Also, lets face it, kids smoke pot, and they know that the Partnership's ads are lies. People don't shoot each other when they're stoned, they don't run kids over, POT DOESNT KILL YOU. So kids automatically think that the Partnership is full of it. What's a kid going to think when he hears the partnership saying that harder drugs are bad? They're going to think they're lying there, too. And i would very much like to see the X epidemic get stifled, because that stuff can be dangerous.

    The Partnership shoots itself in the foot, and then promptly ignores it.

    i always supported the Partnership, because they have benevolent aims. But this whole marijuana targeting campaign is a joke. I wish they'd go away. And to think, my tax dollars are going to spreading unbelievable uneffective propoganda.

    :mad:
    pnw
     
  11. macrumors 603

    rainman::|:|

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2002
    Location:
    iowa
    #11
    And don't get me started on that gateway-drug theory. Simply because people do something to begin with, doesn't mean that's what leads them on. Pot's just the easiest to get, i mean some people are determined to get really messed up, and they start with weed. Then they discover the other things (that the dealers themselves have, which would not be an issue if you bought weed at gas stations) and move on. No gateway, just first step. If pot didn't exist, there'd be some other first step.

    pnw
     
  12. thread starter macrumors 6502a

    trebblekicked

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2002
    Location:
    Chicago, IL, USA
    #12
    i don't know what it will take...

    this war on drugs has been a proven failure. The drug policies of more progressive nations (read: holland) have been much more effective in erradicating illicit underage drug use, yet we refuse to even open a public debate on the issue. Ignorance truly is the enemy of progressive drug legislation, and the deck is stacked so heavily against it, those who support decriminalization face a long, lonley, and difficult road. If the political consequences of supporting drug reform weren't so dire, this would be a moot point. Sensibility would have gotten the debate going years ago. Unfortunately, conservatives feed off the fear among people, and instead of disussing the facts, are plenty happy to use drugs as another easy in to the 'average american's' vote. Just another pitfall in this dangerously one-sided society we live in today...
     
  13. macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #13
    Look at it another way: if drugs were legal and taxed, and if the US government is the world's largest terrorist organization, then DRUGS would AID TERROR....;)
     
  14. macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #14
    Ooops! Did I say that out loud? :rolleyes:
     
  15. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2003
    Location:
    Lawrence, KS
    #15
    i choose to join this forum just becuase of this thread, ive always loved macrumors, ive visisted for a year. but this subject made me reply... you are all very informed and intelegent. its been proven that mac users are smarter and more sucessful then the average pc user.

    i can try and bring to you a few more facts that are first hand. as a person i am:
    16 years old
    pot user for 3 years
    dealer for 1
    layed back midwest college town

    ive meet alot of drug people, its what i do so everyday i meet some new pot head kid, gangster, or college prep. all of these people just want to have some fun and relax with their friends, not one of them... well besides the gansters... have a gun or participate in gang related activities, they are all really good people who love everything.

    i will say that my drug use will definatly adversly affect my development as an adult. my case is more server then the average,
    -most teenage pot smokers dont actualy buy pot-

    pot does lead to other drugs, but only because drug dealers have many different drugs.

    smoking weed dosnt not encurage crime, all the kids i sell to work hard hours at honest jobs to buy there sack, they work hard at school to get their good grades, and live a life under very high stress..

    i would rave and rant more but i dont have a real direction with this post, i just feel pasionate about it....

    if you have a question or coment id love to hear it
     
  16. macrumors G5

    Sun Baked

    Joined:
    May 19, 2002
    #16
    Is this decriminalization of marijuana, or ALL drugs?
     
  17. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2001
    #17
    Wait a minute

    Ok... first of all let's talk about the whole terrorism thing. Marijuana doesn't support terrorism, OIL SUPPORTS TERRORISM. Where do terrorists get their money? From two places: 1. Terrorist States like Iraq and Iran. Whose number one export is oil. These people hate us because they know the only reason we really care about them is their Oil. 2. Terrorists get money from corrupt charities. These are the charities we have been seeing on the news who collect money for supposedly humane purposes, but actually send it to groups like Hamas and Islamic Jihad.

    This whole drugs support terrorism thing is just some b-s, that they thought would be a good way to fight the "war" on drugs and the war on terrorism at the same time. They might as well have commercials that say "Don't do drugs, cuz Hitler would be happy if you did cuz he is bad and drugs supported Hitler." Ignorance and Oil support terrorism. Drugs support some 21 year old kid, trying to buy himself a car. Until he gets arrested. And who is he supporting? Some sleazeball gang member who gets their drugs smuggled into the country.

    Second, with the whole legalization thing. People say drugs are responsible for so many crimes. They're not. The crimes people refer to when they talk about drugs are things like murders, extortion, and the distribution and consumption. The reason there are murders is because drug users and dealers steal from eachother and rip eachother off all the time. And the extortion comes from gangs and mob's whose number one source of income is drug money. That is where the drug money really goes. But without the ability to sell drugs these gangs would have nothing to live on.

    Also, people say "if we legalize drugs, that's just an excuse for users to be able to get them anywhere, anytime". This is the biggest joke of them all. I used to smoke, and I did a couple other drugs like Ecstacy, Oxycontin, Mushrooms. I have seen many drug deals, many drug arrests, and many addicts. I was smart enough to stop, but don't believe that a real addict can not get the drug they want at anytime they want it with the right amount of money. You might live in a nice rural or suburban area, but I guarantee you that if an addict came to your town they could find drugs right away. Drugs are everywhere, and the spectrum of users is wide. From poor, black, welfare recipients, to rich, white, businessmen.

    And you can all say you just want legal drugs cuz you used to do them. No, I am for legalization of marijuana so we can tax the hell out of it and it can be regulated. Don't call former weed-smokers unpatriotic either, I just enlisted in the United States Marine Corps and I leave for Parris Island July 11. And besides, George Washington had a hemp farm on his estate.
     
  18. macrumors 68030

    medea

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2002
    Location:
    Madison, Wi
    #18
    Hey there is another way to make sure terrorists don't make illegal money from the selling of illegal drugs, don't do them.....dumbass.....
    It's like saying, sure I had to buy these nukes off a terrorist organization, but if the government just made it legal to own your own nukes I would'nt have had to support them.....
     
  19. macrumors 603

    rainman::|:|

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2002
    Location:
    iowa
    #19
    LISTEN TO ME. My grandmother is a dealer. i know where i get my stuff from. i know where she gets her stuff from, and where he gets HIS stuff from. Like many users, i can trace the stuff all the way back to a field in mexico. AND THERE ISN'T A TERRORIST ANYWHERE. The point of this whole thread has been that NO ONE believes this crap, because it's not even worth believing. Terrorists have plenty of money, they don't need to do petty **** like selling nickel bags to kids... there's no real money in selling pot. Satanicpoptart can back me up on this one, if they were going to make money, there are better drugs. Meth, for example, still sells for pretty good prices, and you can make it yourself. But they don't say that METH supports terrorism, just pot. Why? because pot is widely used and in danger of being legalized. And there are real reasons not to use meth, but no good reasons not to use pot.

    If someone told you, without even claiming to be able to back it up, that buying Macs support terrorism, would you stop buying them? No, because you're not stupid. Neither are we.

    pnw
     
  20. macrumors 65816

    arogge

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2002
    Location:
    Tatooine
    #20
    I've seen that one too; if that is supposed to convince the general public, then this might also work:

    Induhvidual: "Why should I believe that spending money on Microsoft software is bad?"
    Anti-Microsoft individual: "Because it's true."
     
  21. macrumors 603

    rainman::|:|

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2002
    Location:
    iowa
    #21
    Well it's my opinion that other drugs aren't ready for decriminalization, some will never be. Pot and "magic mushrooms" (as well as peyote), i think, should be done immediately, and cocaine maybe someday. A lot of people want acid legalized, too. I'm against the harder stuff like meth, crank, etc being legalized in any way. they are unnatural drugs that must be synthesized, can can often do real harm to the user as well as society. Heroin is the one natural drug that i think should remain illegal, because of it's terrible potency.

    But i think in this thread, we're just discussing marijuana, lightly touching on other things occasionally...

    :)
    pnw
     
  22. macrumors 65816

    Roger1

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2002
    Location:
    Michigan
    #22
    When the cops shut down illegal meth labs, they have to go in with hazmat suits, because of all the chemicals.

    As for drugs supporting terrorism, for a while, the Taliban was harvesting their poppy fields for export. They quit doing it when the U.S. (or U.N?) pointed out that it was against their religion to do so.
     
  23. macrumors 603

    rainman::|:|

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2002
    Location:
    iowa
    #23
    Umm, Afghanistan itself relied on poppys for a cash crop long before the taliban came into power. it's one of the only things that will grow there. True, the taliban took advantage of it, but it wasn't their idea or grand scheme.

    And poppy fields in afghanistan are a far cry from marijuana growing in college kid's dorm rooms...

    not sure what the point of the meth comments was, because the only meth-related comments in this thread have been anti-meth... and the hazmat thing is a well-known fact. Lithium batteries are used and can become very volitile, as well as the anhydrous ammonia which can easily destroy bodily tissue, blind a person, and explode.

    :)
    pnw
     
  24. macrumors 68000

    3rdpath

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2002
    Location:
    2nd star on the right and straight till morning
    #24
    actually, the people of afghanistan temporarily stopped harvesting poppies when the US payed them in cash and weapons not to grow it...

    what is and isn't in line with their religion is reinterpreted by them on a daily basis based upon their capitalistic needs...much like many US religious philosophies.
     
  25. macrumors 65816

    Roger1

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2002
    Location:
    Michigan
    #25
    I put the meth comment in there for no particular reason. :)



    ...much like many US religious philosophies.
    I don't understand this comment.
     

Share This Page