beckenba@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu (Joe Beckenbach) (04/22/88)
In article <8804151639.aa22746@note.nsf.gov> Fred Baube (fbaube@NOTE.NSF.GOV) answered an article spinning off from a NSA discussion: >Earlier in the 80's analysts/pundits/etc were predicting a wave >of terrorism in the US, and certainly the conditions motivating >terrorists have not changed, but this "wave" never materialized. >How come ? (I'm not complaining, mind you.) I think that the anticipated terrorists were going to be foreign- born, foreign citizens with ideological axes to grind against US involvement in foreign countries' affairs. True, this wave has not happened, thank goodness. But the internal source of terrorism, outside the focus of the analysts' eyes, has not been touched. I'm not talking about the neo-whoevers who want to jump into their own private adventure against Nicaragua or other foreign countries, though such people do occasionally cause problems. Nor am I referencing actions by the military at various levels of commitment, such as Vietnam, Korea, Panama, Grenada, et al. I'm talking about Miami, Los Angelos, Minneapolis, New York, and countless other cities and towns in at least 47 states. The problem is rival gang-like drug organizations. Hardly a week goes by without Los Angelos learning of yet another set of gang-related, drug-related shootings. I have heard that Miami is much worse, being the supposed port of choice for incoming cash crops of illegal drugs. The LA Times has been reporting stories of note for several years, though the last year has seen a jump in drug-related deaths, mainly armed battles over territory-- in LA at least a third of the deaths I have seen reported in the papers have been innocent bystanders, innocent relatives of targets, or members from the the right gang being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Entire neighborhoods live under the reach of such guns. These are the same ones which live within reach of the profitable drug trade. Where there are potential customers, those looking to expand into a new market go. Where they go, the potential customers begin buying; the business expands into the new market. And the rules, customs, and regulations of the business go with it. The big difference between this business and any which offer stock on the Big Board is that the products are very illegal, and more profitable than anything else available to those in a position to invest. Where does terrorism fit in, you ask? Take a look at the gun in the hand of the passenger of that car driving by, the one that just put bullets into two gang-colored youths and one's young sister. Take a look at the Minneapolis (or Los Angelos, or New York, or Miami, or ...) neighborhood, with the nondrug-using construction worker who cannot be sure he will live to see the next sunset when he heads off to work, or if he will live to see the next sunrise when he gets home: he lives next to a couple which deals in crack and heroin, and who could be targets for little or no reason. Take a look at the high school kid who drives to school in his new Porshe, with flashy threads and shiny jewelry: his parents eke by on two meager salaries, and question themselves on their failure to keep him from dealing drugs to his friends. This is America? -- The gunfire cuts the night with staccato stiletto stabs, The wars continue: Ethiopia, the Gulf, Panama, Los Angelos, Pakistan, ....
kenf@aplcen.UUCP (7784) (04/24/88)
In article <6218@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu> beckenba@cit-vax.UUCP (Joe Beckenbach) writes: > > I think that the anticipated terrorists were going to be foreign- >born, foreign citizens with ideological axes to grind against US involvement >in foreign countries' affairs. True, this wave has not happened, thank >goodness. But the internal source of terrorism, outside the focus of the >analysts' eyes, has not been touched. >New York, and countless other cities and towns in at least 47 states. > The problem is rival gang-like drug organizations. Hardly a week >goes by without Los Angelos learning of yet another set of gang-related, >drug-related shootings. I have heard that Miami is much worse, being the >supposed port of choice for incoming cash crops of illegal drugs. >stock on the Big Board is that the products are very illegal, and more >profitable than anything else available to those in a position to invest. > etc..... > > This is America? I have read and heard on National Public Radio that some in the Latin American countries that produce these drugs view them as their ultimate wepon against the USA. I suspect the only way to deal with the problem will be semi legalization of drugs, and strong eductation against their use. by semi-legalization I mean make posession and importation for personal use legal, make sale a misdemoner (this keeps corporate America such as RJ Reynolds out and prevents advertising) and make being under the influence (ie driving, running a train) illegal. with no profit motive, the big bucks people give up, and the whole thing becomes a cottage industry. With costs down, drug related crimes against property get reduced to nil. There is at least one high up in the NYCPD drug division who agrees with this. Ken Firestone
JPLILER%SIMTEL20.ARPA@BU-IT.BU.EDU (John R. Pliler) (04/26/88)
Drug use in the United States has reached alarming numbers. It has been stated that at least 40% of all crimes committed today are drug related. There are not enough jails to hold these criminals. The distribution of illegal drugs should be considered an act of terrorism. People shouldn't have to worry about drug-crazed zombies walking the streets. But this is reality. There are many parts of this city, El Paso, which I wouldn't dare go into and it shouldn't be like that. I don't blame the police or the Judicial System. Courts are backlogged years in many places with drug-related crimes. I believe the way the United States should tackle the problem is at the source. We have to *stop* the flow of illegal drugs into this country. The use of the military would be an effective way to curtail this problem. The introduction of drugs into this country should be considered an act of war against the United States and those countries should pay the price, both militarily and economically. This is particulary true if these introductions are supported by the foreign governments themselves, such as Panama. The penalty for the distribution and use of *illegal* drugs should be very stiff. Major drug dealers and distributors should, in my opinion, face the death penalty. There is good justification for this penalty. These dealers are inflicting alot of pain to society with the increase in serious crimes against innocent people. Currently the prison system is in a shambles. Rehabilitation does not work. Prisoners should not lead the life of luxury at the taxpayers expense. Prisoners should be out in the fields busting rocks and not watching cable television in "color". If people understood the penalties for serious crimes this would be a good deterrent. Right now criminals ignore the Justice System. I don't agree with the "semi-legalization" of drugs, including the use of marijuana. Drugs pose a serious threat to society and should not be tolerated... John Pliler -------
dan@WILMA.BBN.COM (04/26/88)
> Drug use in the United States has reached alarming numbers... > ... We have to *stop* the flow of illegal drugs into this > country [and get the sea to stop making all those messy tides, too]. I object to this "discussion" appearing in info-futures, which is for speculation about future computer technology and related issues. Anyone wishing to discuss the drug problem should subscribe to the USENET alt.drugs newsgroup and leave this group alone. Dan Franklin
tom%phoenix@BU-CS.BU.EDU (Thomas C Hajdu) (04/27/88)
>> Drug use in the United States has reached alarming numbers... >> ... We have to *stop* the flow of illegal drugs into this >> country [and get the sea to stop making all those messy tides, too]. >I object to this "discussion" appearing in info-futures, which is >for speculation about future computer technology and related issues. >Anyone wishing to discuss the drug problem should subscribe to the >USENET alt.drugs newsgroup and leave this group alone. > Dan Franklin I agree with Dan. SHUT UP!
jackson@esosun.UUCP (Jerry Jackson) (04/29/88)
In article <12393408775.18.JPLILER@SIMTEL20> JPLILER%SIMTEL20.ARPA@BU-IT.BU.EDU (John R. Pliler) writes:
Path: esosun!seismo!uunet!husc6!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!mit-eddie!ll-xn!ames!pasteur!ucbvax!BU-IT.BU.EDU!JPLILER%SIMTEL20.ARPA
From: JPLILER%SIMTEL20.ARPA@BU-IT.BU.EDU (John R. Pliler)
Newsgroups: comp.society.futures
Date: 26 Apr 88 02:27:42 GMT
References: <293@aplcen.UUCP>
Sender: usenet@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 41
Drug use in the United States has reached alarming numbers. It has
been stated that at least 40% of all crimes committed today are drug
related. There are not enough jails to hold these criminals.
The distribution of illegal drugs should be considered an act of
terrorism. People shouldn't have to worry about drug-crazed
zombies walking the streets. But this is reality. There are
many parts of this city, El Paso, which I wouldn't dare go into
and it shouldn't be like that. I don't blame the police or
the Judicial System. Courts are backlogged years in many places
with drug-related crimes.
I believe the way the United States should tackle the problem is at
the source. We have to *stop* the flow of illegal drugs into this
country. The use of the military would be an effective way to
curtail this problem. The introduction of drugs into this country
should be considered an act of war against the United States and
those countries should pay the price, both militarily and
economically. This is particulary true if these introductions
are supported by the foreign governments themselves, such as
Panama.
The penalty for the distribution and use of *illegal* drugs should
be very stiff. Major drug dealers and distributors should, in my
opinion, face the death penalty. There is good justification for
this penalty. These dealers are inflicting alot of pain to society
with the increase in serious crimes against innocent people.
Currently the prison system is in a shambles. Rehabilitation does
not work. Prisoners should not lead the life of luxury at the
taxpayers expense. Prisoners should be out in the fields busting
rocks and not watching cable television in "color". If people
understood the penalties for serious crimes this would be a
good deterrent. Right now criminals ignore the Justice System.
I don't agree with the "semi-legalization" of drugs, including
the use of marijuana. Drugs pose a serious threat to society and
should not be tolerated...
John Pliler
-------
I am constantly amazed at the attitudes of many Americans who probably
would claim to support a "free" society --
Drug use in the United States has reached alarming numbers. It has
been stated that at least 40% of all crimes committed today are drug
related. There are not enough jails to hold these criminals.
Yes, it's hardly unexpected that when you define a commonly practiced
act as criminal, large numbers of crimes will be related to that
act... Or, was this intended to refer to the "killings and robberies
associated with drugs?" How many killings are associated with the
delivery of beer? Not many?... Is this because alcohol is not a
dangerous drug? No, it is because it is LEGAL...
The penalty for the distribution and use of *illegal* drugs should
be very stiff. Major drug dealers and distributors should, in my
opinion, face the death penalty. There is good justification for
this penalty. These dealers are inflicting alot of pain to society
with the increase in serious crimes against innocent people.
The death penalty? Surely that is somewhat extreme.. What serious
crimes against innocent people?
If people understood the penalties for serious crimes this would be a
good deterrent. Right now criminals ignore the Justice System.
It's fairly well established that the death penalty is no more
effective as a deterrent than a long prison term.
By the way, I consider organized religion as practiced in this country
a form of near-criminal brainwashing that does serious harm to
society... Does this mean that churches should be forced to close
down and their ministers killed? Though I dislike what they do, I
have to acknowledge the fact that the victims *volunteer* to be fed
mind-numbing drivel just as the drug users do. I certainly would not
want to live in a country where a person like me could shut down a
church because he didn't like it and I think the analogy holds...
However, if you can show me a case where someone was *forced* by a
dealer to buy or ingest drugs then I will admit he should be punished,
but as long as customers come to him, I think it's hard to point a
finger.
*FLAME ON*
Also, it's pretty clear that Mr. Pliler belongs to that unique minority in
America -- The Always Right Minority -- How wonderful it must be to have
absolutely no self doubt -- to feel perfectly justified in sentencing
someone you've never met to death and to know deep in your heart that the
country could be made great again if people would only listen to you...
Unfortunately, I don't belong to that minority and I'm afraid that even
the extreme callousness which Mr. Pliler has exhibited in passing a blanket
death sentence is *probably* not enough reason to lock him up.
*FLAME OFF*
--Jerry Jacksonjosh@klaatu.rutgers.edu (J Storrs Hall) (04/29/88)
This sort of article has no place on comp.society.futures. --JoSH
joe@tekbspa.UUCP (Joe Angelo) (05/01/88)
in article <141@vor.esosun.UUCP>, jackson@esosun.UUCP (Jerry Jackson) says:
:
:
:
: The penalty for the distribution and use of *illegal* drugs should
: be very stiff. Major drug dealers and distributors should, in my
: opinion, face the death penalty. There is good justification for
: this penalty. These dealers are inflicting alot of pain to society
: with the increase in serious crimes against innocent people.
:
.
.
.
(any paragraph from the above article, not just this one...)
Cc: Your Congress-person.
--
"I'm trying Joe Angelo -- Senior Systems Engineer/Systems Manager
to think at Teknekron Software Systems, Palo Alto 415-325-1025
but nothing
happens!" uunet!tekbspa!joe -OR- tekbspa!joe@uunet.uu.netnelson_p@apollo.uucp (05/03/88)
> Drug use in the United States has reached alarming numbers. It has > been stated that at least 40% of all crimes committed today are drug Will you stop posting articles on this &*^$!! subject to comp.society.futures??!! What the HELL does this have to do with computers? I've been trying to raise some issues having to do with the way advances in technology may affect the way we use computers and the limitations that lack of vision, standards, and imagination impose on computer use even when the technology makes huge leaps. There has also been a discussion going on about whether the govern- ment is using (or is capable of using) computers to monitor private communication of its citizens. I think these topics are relevant to the newsgroup. Let's get back to the subject. --Peter Nelson
ins_atge@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU (Thomas G Edwards) (05/06/88)
In article <141@vor.esosun.UUCP> jackson@esosun.UUCP (Jerry Jackson) writes: > >Yes, it's hardly unexpected that when you define a commonly practiced >act as criminal, large numbers of crimes will be related to that >act... Or, was this intended to refer to the "killings and robberies >associated with drugs?" How many killings are associated with the >delivery of beer? Not many?... Is this because alcohol is not a >dangerous drug? No, it is because it is LEGAL... I'll point directly to the number of americans killed on our roads by drunk drivers. I'll point directly to the number of assults and murders commited by people under the influence of alcohol. I'll also point to the lives ruined by alcoholism. Prohibition didn't work because the US was addicted to alcohol. Gangsters were our withdrawl symptoms. >The death penalty? Surely that is somewhat extreme.. What serious >crimes against innocent people? Drug dealers misrepresent their products with deadly results. >By the way, I consider organized religion as practiced in this country >a form of near-criminal brainwashing that does serious harm to >society... Does this mean that churches should be forced to close >down and their ministers killed? Though I dislike what they do, I >have to acknowledge the fact that the victims *volunteer* to be fed >mind-numbing drivel just as the drug users do. I certainly would not >want to live in a country where a person like me could shut down a >church because he didn't like it and I think the analogy holds... The free flow of information is important in this country (see Soviet science). Religion very rarely kills (unlike crack). People don't kill others driving under the influence of religion (though I'm sure its happened once or twice). >However, if you can show me a case where someone was *forced* by a >dealer to buy or ingest drugs then I will admit he should be punished, >but as long as customers come to him, I think it's hard to point a >finger. I guess we differ on what is freedom and what is criminal. I see no redeming factors to addictive recreational drugs. I feel the freedom to fry your mind using addictive recreational drugs should not be provided for. (words of a man who watched 30% of his high school buddies get hooked, fry off the college path, and now have to sell their own daemon to inocent youngsters who don't believe that drugs are bad for you). >*FLAME ON* > >Also, it's pretty clear that Mr. Pliler belongs to that unique minority in >America -- The Always Right Minority -- How wonderful it must be to have >absolutely no self doubt -- to feel perfectly justified in sentencing >someone you've never met to death and to know deep in your heart that the >country could be made great again if people would only listen to you... Although I'll let Mr. Pliler defend himself, I'll state that I am part of a majority of Americans who believe that drugs should remain illegal. I'm not part of a minority who believe that magazines should be pulled off shelves or that peaceful demonstrators should be shot. Yet I am not going to let my "liberal" vigor get ahead of me and pass over the obvious facts--drugs kill and maim minds. We need good minds for the future. -Thomas Edwards
ok@quintus.UUCP (Richard A. O'Keefe) (05/09/88)
In article <6372@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU>, ins_atge@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU (Thomas G Edwards) writes: > I'll point directly to the number of americans killed on our roads by > drunk drivers. I'll point directly to the number of assults and murders > commited by people under the influence of alcohol. I'll also point to the > lives ruined by alcoholism. Prohibition didn't work because the US was > addicted to alcohol. Gangsters were our withdrawal symptoms. Oddly enough, prohibition _worked_ (that is, achieved most of its stated goals). For example, the _total_ rate of murders and suicides went down quite a bit (I've lost the reference, but it should be possible to check from official statistics if anyone seriously doubts it).
bowles@LLL-CRG.LLNL.GOV (Jeff Bowles) (05/09/88)
Please stop this discussion, and if the mailing list coordinator would please delete, for a couple of weeks, all people conversing on this topic! This is foolish. You are having a possibly interesting discussion on an unrelated list. Jeff Bowles
rupp@cod.NOSC.MIL (William L. rupp) (05/20/88)
In article <952@cresswell.quintus.UUCP> ok@quintus.UUCP (Richard A. O'Keefe) writes: > >Oddly enough, prohibition _worked_ (that is, achieved most of its stated >goals). For example, the _total_ rate of murders and suicides went down >quite a bit (I've lost the reference, but it should be possible to check >from official statistics if anyone seriously doubts it). It seems to me that I once heard that alcohol consumption actually went down during Prohibition. That would not surprise me, since even energetic bootlegging and moonshining strike me as being totally unable to replace the supply of alcoholic beverages available in a free market (i.e., legal) situation. Of course, lowering the amount of alcohol available to Americans was the main goal of Prohibition, and in that sense it probably was a success. Whether it was a good idea is another matter. Still, as I consider what that "good ole boy" did to the 27 bus riders in Tennessee while totally plastered by alcohol, I wonder if we might not be able to sell the parents of those kids on the virtues of Prohibition. I wonder. Bill (These thoughts are totally my own and do not necessarily represent those of my employer.)
hollombe@ttidca.TTI.COM (The Polymath) (05/21/88)
In article <1094@cod.NOSC.MIL> rupp@cod.nosc.mil.UUCP (William L. rupp) writes: }... Still, as I consider what }that "good ole boy" did to the 27 bus riders in Tennessee while totally }plastered by alcohol, I wonder if we might not be able to sell the }parents of those kids on the virtues of Prohibition. Last I heard, that "good ol' boy" is facing 27 murder counts with a possible death penalty on every one. I hope they've got good prosecutors. -- The Polymath (aka: Jerry Hollombe, hollombe@TTI.COM) Illegitimati Nil Citicorp(+)TTI Carborundum 3100 Ocean Park Blvd. (213) 452-9191, x2483 Santa Monica, CA 90405 {csun|philabs|psivax|trwrb}!ttidca!hollombe