Limassol Police Chase Drug Dealer

[Umfriend]

If you would allow dealers to sell to mature people then I could find one that would not sell to kids. The fact that all are illegal sorta cuases you to find only bad apples. Similarly, the illegality of drugs renders them expensive. Most drug-related crime stems from the legal persecution. Put the blame where the blame lies. I'll submit that the first action taken in this is the prohibition of grown people to trade and use what they choose. It is a limitation of freedom and more issues arise because of the limitiation that of what is limited.

I have used drugs and well, I pay more to social security than most here. It is not a by definition that drug use causes destitution.

I wonder why a person using a drug is not mature anymore? How would you define drug in this sense? Including tobacco, alcohol, TV?

[ZokesPro]

And where would that mature individual get his stuff? From a dealer, of course. And to whom would the dealer to sell? Only to mature individuals, of course, at Havenaart (sp?) prices, to boot? Personally, I have no issue if a mature individual wishes to compromise his mental stability with a dose or two of meth, but he will be on a downward spiral towards destitution. However, I consider that it is unethical if that previously "mature" individual has to rely on my social security costs to remain alive. Then there is the question that said dealer would incite schoolkids and other who are not mature individuals to get hooked, and that is ethical, isn't it?

In fact, I would go so far as to say that any person using a drug is not mature, at the time. Therefore your statement becomes a paradox.

Drugs are therefore unethical because they prey on the weak, not on the mature. I therefore prone hefty prison sentences, if only to keep the dealers off the road, either because they are locked away or because their clients are. Not to mention all the other crime committed to allow addicts to keep their habit going.

So, frankly, to hell with your argument of ethics. Drugs are not ethical, period, full stop.

There are dealers that promote their warez, but seeing as it's illegal, most of them don't advertise because that means they are advertising to the people they are trying to hide from. Usually people go to them or go through people who already know someone who sells. Having said that, if kids are going to dealers and buying drugs then it's not necessarily the dealer who incited them to take the drugs, you very rarely see that in reality, but you often see that on tv. And even if the dealer did incite them to take drugs, you have to remember that the kid made a conscious decision themselves, unless the dealer pointed a gun at his head and told him that if he didn't take the drug he he'd shot dead.

As far as drugs being unethical, let me ask you this. For those who can't live a normal life or function like a normal person without taking morphine, for example someone who's been hit by a drunk driver, are they immature? Should they be condemned and jailed forever and be considered criminals?

Drugs don't prey on the weak. Drugs are inanimate objects and cannabis is a plant. It's the weak who take drugs to escape from reality and it's the weak who get hooked on drugs. I also remind you that no one is forced to take drugs, so the addict you see begging on the street for cash, took the substance because he/she made the conscious desicion to do so.

[Brian Ellis]

There are dealers that promote their warez, but seeing as it's illegal, most of them don't advertise because that means they are advertising to the people they are trying to hide from. Usually people go to them or go through people who already know someone who sells. Having said that, if kids are going to dealers and buying drugs then it's not necessarily the dealer who incited them to take the drugs, you very rarely see that in reality, but you often see that on tv. And even if the dealer did incite them to take drugs, you have to remember that the kid made a conscious decision themselves, unless the dealer pointed a gun at his head and told him that if he didn't take the drug he he'd shot dead.

As far as drugs being unethical, let me ask you this. For those who can't live a normal life or function like a normal person without taking morphine, for example someone who's been hit by a drunk driver, are they immature? Should they be condemned and jailed forever and be considered criminals?

Drugs don't prey on the weak. Drugs are inanimate objects and cannabis is a plant. It's the weak who take drugs to escape from reality and it's the weak who get hooked on drugs. I also remind you that no one is forced to take drugs, so the addict you see begging on the street for cash, took the substance because he/she made the conscious desicion to do so.

Give me air: I did say "recreational drugs", not pharma drugs duly prescribed. Stop trying to weasel out of it. And, more often than not, those getting hooked are those who think that will never happen to them. And does not weak equate to immature? And certainly the kid coming out of school into a the arms of a friendly dealer is still a kid, but one who may be a pushover after a couple of freebie doses (conscious decision? My eye, it's just bravado). You have no kids; I have, and grandkids, but I'm damned if I would want that to happen to them just because society is permissive enough (or cops are crooked enough) that that dealer is plying his trade outside a school. I would much rather that these dealers (who are probably selling the shit to pay for their own habit, after being caught in the same gearwheels) were out of harm's way.

I stand by my point that if all dealers and users were put away for long terms, there would be no more illicit drug use and MUCH less crime. Yes, nature abhors a vacuum and others would take their place, but after a few years, the vacuum would simply disappear when a few generations of replacement dealers and their clients went the same way.

[Umfriend]

I don't think you read my post and in any case did not address it. I also wonder whether you can think of examples where rather severe repression (not indiscriminate repression) has solved any comparable issue (regardless of whether it would be desirable in this case). The War on Drugs in the US is a failure and it serves to enrich criminals.

P.S. I do have kids.

[ZokesPro]

Give me air: I did say "recreational drugs", not pharma drugs duly prescribed. Stop trying to weasel out of it.

You mentioned "morphine" in your post and I used "morphine" drug as a reference. You obviously did not read my post or yours for that matter otherwise you would not have said that.

And does not weak equate to immature?

Definitions of weak on the Web:

* having little physical or spiritual strength; "a weak link"
* watery: overly diluted; thin and insipid; "washy coffee"; "watery milk"; "weak tea"
* unaccented: used of vowels or syllables; pronounced with little or no stress; "a syllable that ends in a short vowel is a light syllable"; "a weak stress on the second syllable"
* fallible: having the attributes of man as opposed to e.g. divine beings; "I'm only a fallible human"; "frail humanity"
* tending downward in price; "a weak market for oil stocks"
* deficient or lacking in some skill; "he's weak in spelling"
* decrepit: lacking physical strength or vitality; "a feeble old woman"; "her body looked sapless"
* (used of verbs) having standard (or regular) inflection
* not having authority, political strength, or governing power; "a weak president"
* faint: deficient in magnitude; barely perceptible; lacking clarity or brightness or loudness etc; "a faint outline"; "the wan sun cast faint shadows"; "the faint light of a distant candle"; "weak colors"; "a faint hissing sound"; "a faint aroma"; "a weak pulse"
* likely to fail under stress or pressure; "the weak link in the chain"
* deficient in intelligence or mental power; "a weak mind"

Definitions of immature on the Web:
# characteristic of a lack of maturity; "immature behavior"
# lacking in development; "immature plans"; "an unformed character"
# young: (used of living things especially persons) in an early period of life or development or growth; "young people"
# green: not fully developed or mature; not ripe; "unripe fruit"; "fried green tomatoes"; "green wood"
# not yet mature
# unfledged: (of birds) not yet having developed feathers; "a small unfledged sparrow on the window sill"

So no, weak does not equate to immature.

And certainly the kid coming out of school into a the arms of a friendly dealer is still a kid, but one who may be a pushover after a couple of freebie doses (conscious decision? My eye, it's just bravado). You have no kids; I have, and grandkids, but I'm damned if I would want that to happen to them just because society is permissive enough (or cops are crooked enough) that that dealer is plying his trade outside a school. I would much rather that these dealers (who are probably selling the shit to pay for their own habit, after being caught in the same gearwheels) were out of harm's way.

Wether I have kids or not is irelevant. If kids today are not informed about drugs then they did not do any research on the subject, their parents have not informed them or they do not go to school because they are taught everything they need to know about drugs, I should know I went to school and was taught just that. They also teach you in shcool about how dealers can be friendly and offer you a free sample etc.. etc.. so kids ARE informed, and if they are consuming drugs, they made a conscious decision to do so, no one forced them even if the dealer was nice and peer pressure and whatever BS argument you want to come up with.

I stand by my point that if all dealers and users were put away for long terms, there would be no more illicit drug use and MUCH less crime. Yes, nature abhors a vacuum and others would take their place, but after a few years, the vacuum would simply disappear when a few generations of replacement dealers and their clients went the same way.

There's no proof that eliminating drug users and dealers will reduce crime, that is just your opinion.

[NetSnake]

I stand by my point that if all dealers and users were put away for long terms, there would be no more illicit drug use and MUCH less crime. Yes, nature abhors a vacuum and others would take their place, but after a few years, the vacuum would simply disappear when a few generations of replacement dealers and their clients went the same way.

Maybe, but I wouldn't want to live in a world like that.
First you put away the "users" and then what? the alchoholics maybe? they're just as "bad".
and the next thing you know you get put away for anything that doesn't conform with specific "behaviour" rules.
and that is HELL in my book

[az]

We're gearing towards a world like that, I think, with ubiquitous surveillance etc. the infrastructure for a truly orwellian world is being built as we speak.

[Brian Ellis]

http://www.cyprus-mail.com/news/main.php?id=30474

20 years for a cocaine dealer Maybe it should have been life, which means until death here.

[Dr Mordrid]

Same in Michigan, and if you're a big enough dealer you might end up in the Ionia SuperMax for life: solitary confinement + 23/24 lockdown 7/365. 1 hour/day in a 10' x 15' "courtyard" with 20' walls.

Unfortunately there are many states where "life" still means 7-10 years after "good time" etc.