GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-01-2013, 08:31   #201
Bren
NRA Life Member
 
Bren's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 33,422
Quote:
Originally Posted by BicycleDay43 View Post
Mhmm...

And when was the last time you smoked a bowl of crystal? Took adderall?

You must have at least SOME personal experience with BOTH drugs to back up your disbelief, correct?
Nope - years of experience with the losers who use them is more than enough. I don't have to get a lobotamy to know it doesn't make you smarter.
__________________
Open carry activists are to gun rights what the Westboro Baptist Church is to free speech.

Last edited by Bren; 02-01-2013 at 08:32..
Bren is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2013, 09:17   #202
Breadman03
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Luzerne County, PA
Posts: 1,761
Send a message via Skype™ to Breadman03
Quote:
Originally Posted by certifiedfunds View Post
You're obviously a bright guy with the kind of intellect one doesn't encounter every day....well, I guess unless they're an inmate. I've been asking a couple of questions in these threads and have never, ever found anyone who could answer them. Maybe you can give it a whirl?

1. What portion of the Constitution gives the federal government authority to regulate narcotics, marijuana or any other illegal drug?

2. If the government required a Constitutional Amendment to prohibit the sale and consumption of alcohol, from where did it derive the authority to regulate drugs?

If you can answer this I would be most grateful. No one has ever been able to.
1. authority to regulate interstate trade.

2. Same reason I can buy raw milk in PA, from PA. I'd get hung out to dry for crossing a state line, though. It can be produced, distributed, sold, and consumed within a state, thus not falling under federal authority. At least that's my opinion.
__________________
Advanced Google search help
Wants a G41

Last edited by Breadman03; 02-01-2013 at 09:18..
Breadman03 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2013, 10:09   #203
certifiedfunds
Platinum Membership
Tewwowist
 
certifiedfunds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: NYC
Posts: 39,708


Quote:
Originally Posted by Breadman03 View Post
1. authority to regulate interstate trade.

2. Same reason I can buy raw milk in PA, from PA. I'd get hung out to dry for crossing a state line, though. It can be produced, distributed, sold, and consumed within a state, thus not falling under federal authority. At least that's my opinion.
1. Unlike whiskey? The IC clause is part of the original text. Under that logic the fed didn't need an amendment to prohibit alcohol.

2. My point being its a progressive bastardization of the IC clause. Those who support the federal WOD support empowering the state via Progressive interpretations of the COTUS. They should not be surprised when it comes back to haunt them.
certifiedfunds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2013, 10:16   #204
mrvtwin80
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 36
Wow, Quite Shocking!!
mrvtwin80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2013, 10:19   #205
certifiedfunds
Platinum Membership
Tewwowist
 
certifiedfunds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: NYC
Posts: 39,708


Quote:
Originally Posted by series1811 View Post
Chemically, that's fairly accurate. In fact, legal meth (methamphetamine) is actually prescribed for some of the same things that adderall (amphetamine and dextroamphetamine) is prescribed for (like ADHD, for instance).

And, both have extremely high rates of abuse and addiction.
Adderall (L&D amphetamine) is not the same as methamphetamine is not the same as methylphenidate. Same class different effects in the brain, both vastly different than crystal. Hence the reason methamphetamine is only available in the time release matrix.

Agreed all high potential for abuse obviously. I'm not sure I'd call it addiction. Withdrawal symptoms for adderall and Ritalin are a couple days of drowsiness.
certifiedfunds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2013, 11:27   #206
series1811
CLM Number
Enforcerator.
 
series1811's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Retired, but not expired.
Posts: 14,311
Quote:
Originally Posted by certifiedfunds View Post
Agreed all high potential for abuse obviously. I'm not sure I'd call it addiction. Withdrawal symptoms for adderall and Ritalin are a couple days of drowsiness.
You would if you had seen people do the things to get adderall and methamphetamine I have seen them do.
__________________
I sure miss the country I grew up in.

Last edited by series1811; 02-01-2013 at 11:28..
series1811 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2013, 14:44   #207
certifiedfunds
Platinum Membership
Tewwowist
 
certifiedfunds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: NYC
Posts: 39,708


Quote:
Originally Posted by series1811 View Post
You would if you had seen people do the things to get adderall and methamphetamine I have seen them do.
I believe you. Do they smoke the adderall or something? Take huge doses? Inject?

I've taken it everyday for a month recently and maybe it just doesn't agree with me but I couldn't see wanting to rob someone to get more unless I was doing it to sell it on the street.

I've also taken ritalin for 20 years, off and on. It agrees with me very well but I couldn't see committing a crime to get more either. I could see preferring to have it vs not having it but not to that extreme. Nothing a lazy weekend wouldn't take care of. In fact, I'm going through that at the moment.

I know you know that the two above are among the most widely used and abused drugs on college and medical school campi yet I've never heard of some kid having to leave college to attend rehab for either. I have heard of it for alcohol, heroin and pain killers.

Neither compare to methamphetamine or even d-amphetamine. I had a roommate in college who would bump meth sometimes. I could always tell when he did because the apartment would be spotless when I woke up. Neither adderall or ritalin do that.

It would be interesting for a pharmacist to chime in on this.

Last edited by certifiedfunds; 02-01-2013 at 17:24..
certifiedfunds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2013, 19:07   #208
glock1911revolver
Vice-Emperor
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: State
Posts: 464
Quote:
Originally Posted by countrygun View Post
Cigarettes are cheap to manufacture, it's the taxes on them that make them expensive, people don't pay taxes on illegal products. Legalize and it will become regulated, hence taxed.
I'm not sure I'm understanding you. Are you suggesting that the amount of taxes added to legal products like cigarettes are more than the cost added to an illegal product by forcing it into a black market?
glock1911revolver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2013, 19:33   #209
countrygun
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 17,068
Quote:
Originally Posted by glock1911revolver View Post
I'm not sure I'm understanding you. Are you suggesting that the amount of taxes added to legal products like cigarettes are more than the cost added to an illegal product by forcing it into a black market?
Yes.

Take a look at history. Look at the end of prohibition. The ATF (Now BATFE) was encouraged by the Distilleries themselves. For the cost of collecting the taxes from the consumer and passing them on they got a law enforcement agency to try and put their cy-rate bootlegging competition out of business. In case you haven't noticed Government agencies grow and don't get smaller. Then you have local taxes added in for schools roads and various other things. known as "Sin Taxes".

If you think there is any way that drug companies are not going to do what the distilleries did, with all the profit to be made you are living in a pipe dream. There is nothing you can put in your body or on it that doesn't eventually end up be inspected, tested, and taxed. It's funny, "legalizers" want to claim the WOD is all about money, but what is the WOB (war on bootlegging) all about? Did re-legalizing alcohol keep the Government out of it? Did alcohol get cheaper with Govt regulation? (I can tell you it didn't because my Grandfather made good money up until WWII )

This society is not going to let these substances go un regulated when you can't even move raw milk across State lines, gimme a break, not going to happen. Where would the drugs come from? Do you think the cartel members are going to drop their prices when they already own much of the Law Enforcement in their Countries? The only way they can keep the income would be by volume and the legalizers swear there won't be more users so volume is out. They will still get their prices. Then there will be our Governments percentage at the Federal level, there will be the cost of fighting the smuggling of untaxed product and the State and local Sin Taxes. Are you really expecting cocoa and poppy fields to be opened up in the US without the FDA and Dept of AG getting involved?

You just tell me how tobacco is cheaper and alcohol got cheaper when the Government got involved
countrygun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2013, 20:40   #210
glock1911revolver
Vice-Emperor
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: State
Posts: 464
Quote:
Originally Posted by countrygun View Post
Yes.

Take a look at history. Look at the end of prohibition. The ATF (Now BATFE) was encouraged by the Distilleries themselves. For the cost of collecting the taxes from the consumer and passing them on they got a law enforcement agency to try and put their cy-rate bootlegging competition out of business. In case you haven't noticed Government agencies grow and don't get smaller. Then you have local taxes added in for schools roads and various other things. known as "Sin Taxes".

If you think there is any way that drug companies are not going to do what the distilleries did, with all the profit to be made you are living in a pipe dream. There is nothing you can put in your body or on it that doesn't eventually end up be inspected, tested, and taxed. It's funny, "legalizers" want to claim the WOD is all about money, but what is the WOB (war on bootlegging) all about? Did re-legalizing alcohol keep the Government out of it? Did alcohol get cheaper with Govt regulation? (I can tell you it didn't because my Grandfather made good money up until WWII )

This society is not going to let these substances go un regulated when you can't even move raw milk across State lines, gimme a break, not going to happen. Where would the drugs come from? Do you think the cartel members are going to drop their prices when they already own much of the Law Enforcement in their Countries? The only way they can keep the income would be by volume and the legalizers swear there won't be more users so volume is out. They will still get their prices. Then there will be our Governments percentage at the Federal level, there will be the cost of fighting the smuggling of untaxed product and the State and local Sin Taxes. Are you really expecting cocoa and poppy fields to be opened up in the US without the FDA and Dept of AG getting involved?

You just tell me how tobacco is cheaper and alcohol got cheaper when the Government got involved
Good points. I'm not saying I agree or disagree with you. What I'm wondering is whether or not legalizing and taxing a product could outweigh the costs of smuggling.

I have a job that takes me all over the country. I must look like a pothead because I have people trying to sell me weed almost everywhere I go. The cost was a hell of a lot lower in Mendocino County, CA, than in Chicago. BTW, I didn't buy any.

With that principle in mind, I wonder how much cheaper the product would be if the cocoa and poppy fields you mentioned were in Nebraska. Sure the state, feds, and locals would tax the hell out of it, but the costs associated with the risky transportation wouldn't be there.

Comparing it to alcohol post-prohibition seems like an apples to oranges comparison because the supply was always here. If the only supply of unregulated booze was from some moonshiners in South America, I'd bet the legal stuff would be cheaper.

For the record, since I"m relatively new here, I'm not a drug user. But I think it is pretty crazy that somebody who gets caught with a bag of weed for recreational use gets prison time.

But like I said, I don't know the answer to where the cost would fall. And until the cartels open their books to show transportation costs, I'm not sure anybody does.
glock1911revolver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2013, 20:49   #211
certifiedfunds
Platinum Membership
Tewwowist
 
certifiedfunds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: NYC
Posts: 39,708


Quote:
Originally Posted by countrygun View Post
Yes.

Take a look at history. Look at the end of prohibition. The ATF (Now BATFE) was encouraged by the Distilleries themselves. For the cost of collecting the taxes from the consumer and passing them on they got a law enforcement agency to try and put their cy-rate bootlegging competition out of business. In case you haven't noticed Government agencies grow and don't get smaller. Then you have local taxes added in for schools roads and various other things. known as "Sin Taxes".

If you think there is any way that drug companies are not going to do what the distilleries did, with all the profit to be made you are living in a pipe dream. There is nothing you can put in your body or on it that doesn't eventually end up be inspected, tested, and taxed. It's funny, "legalizers" want to claim the WOD is all about money, but what is the WOB (war on bootlegging) all about? Did re-legalizing alcohol keep the Government out of it? Did alcohol get cheaper with Govt regulation? (I can tell you it didn't because my Grandfather made good money up until WWII )

This society is not going to let these substances go un regulated when you can't even move raw milk across State lines, gimme a break, not going to happen. Where would the drugs come from? Do you think the cartel members are going to drop their prices when they already own much of the Law Enforcement in their Countries? The only way they can keep the income would be by volume and the legalizers swear there won't be more users so volume is out. They will still get their prices. Then there will be our Governments percentage at the Federal level, there will be the cost of fighting the smuggling of untaxed product and the State and local Sin Taxes. Are you really expecting cocoa and poppy fields to be opened up in the US without the FDA and Dept of AG getting involved?

You just tell me how tobacco is cheaper and alcohol got cheaper when the Government got involved
http://www.albany.edu/~wm731882/future1_final.html

http://www.pbs.org/kenburns/prohibit...-consequences/

http://www.johndclare.net/America5_Poholek.htm

I've not found a single source backing up the claim that liquor got cheaper with prohibition. It also defies the economics of black markets and current observations of legal drugs sold on the black market.

While the government always makes things more expensive, your point is unsound. Taxing something has far less effect on price than making it illegal. Prohibition is taking government involvement in the market to the maximum, and therefore its effect on price to the maximum.

Legal products are always cheaper than illegal ones:

*Machine guns prior to the NFA
*Vicodin purchased at a pharmacy vs the street
*Glock magazines in 1996 vs 2006
*Cuban cigars after embargo vs before
*High flow plumbing fixtures from Canada
*Current guns under THREAT of possible ban

If drugs were decriminalized most states would maintain state level prohibition. If they didn't, the cartels would either go out of business or become legitimate businesses with pharmaceutical companies producing certifiable high quality products for importation. To argue otherwise is plain foolish and contradictory to the experience the nation had with alcohol prohibition.

I'd be interested in reading a credible source that suggests that liquor got more expensive after prohibition was repealed. I can't find one.

Last edited by certifiedfunds; 02-01-2013 at 20:52..
certifiedfunds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2013, 20:52   #212
jsg34
Blade Runner
 
jsg34's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: New Orleans, LA
Posts: 799
Read Thomas Malthus. This is how a population regulates itself.
jsg34 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2013, 21:04   #213
countrygun
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 17,068
Quote:
Originally Posted by glock1911revolver View Post
Good points. I'm not saying I agree or disagree with you. What I'm wondering is whether or not legalizing and taxing a product could outweigh the costs of smuggling.

I have a job that takes me all over the country. I must look like a pothead because I have people trying to sell me weed almost everywhere I go. The cost was a hell of a lot lower in Mendocino County, CA, than in Chicago. BTW, I didn't buy any.

With that principle in mind, I wonder how much cheaper the product would be if the cocoa and poppy fields you mentioned were in Nebraska. Sure the state, feds, and locals would tax the hell out of it, but the costs associated with the risky transportation wouldn't be there.

Comparing it to alcohol post-prohibition seems like an apples to oranges comparison because the supply was always here. If the only supply of unregulated booze was from some moonshiners in South America, I'd bet the legal stuff would be cheaper.

For the record, since I"m relatively new here, I'm not a drug user. But I think it is pretty crazy that somebody who gets caught with a bag of weed for recreational use gets prison time.

But like I said, I don't know the answer to where the cost would fall. And until the cartels open their books to show transportation costs, I'm not sure anybody does.

There was a heck of an alcohol smuggling racket going on down on the Border. Read some Charles Askins and IIRC Bill Jordan touched on it. But the fact is gallon jug-sized container of cocaine will always have a greater value in this Country than gallon of alcohol. Smugglers will go where the profit is. There will always be some way to make money smuggling something into a relatively rich Country like the US.

The profits of the out of the country growers and manufacturers won't change. The growers get squat. The middlemen get the profit and they don't care that much bout the smuggling or dealing dangers.

The pharmaceutical companies are going to take control via the FDA. The Department of Agriculture will have control, probably with the BATFEN in the middle of it. Will the tobacco, pharm,and alcohol companies stand by if recreational drugs aren't taxed as high as their products? That would be discrimination.

Really, do some research on the cost of a pack of cigarettes as the come off the line and see the price in various parts of the Country. Oh and lets not forget the interstate smuggling of untaxed cigarettes which organized crime has finger in.

There are NO "simple solutions" and there are none that solve one problem without creating another. Recreational drugs create problems no matter how they are handled, there are no "trouble free way" of getting around it.

Last edited by countrygun; 02-01-2013 at 21:05..
countrygun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2013, 21:13   #214
certifiedfunds
Platinum Membership
Tewwowist
 
certifiedfunds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: NYC
Posts: 39,708


Quote:
Originally Posted by countrygun View Post
There was a heck of an alcohol smuggling racket going on down on the Border. Read some Charles Askins and IIRC Bill Jordan touched on it. But the fact is gallon jug-sized container of cocaine will always have a greater value in this Country than gallon of alcohol. Smugglers will go where the profit is. There will always be some way to make money smuggling something into a relatively rich Country like the US.

The profits of the out of the country growers and manufacturers won't change. The growers get squat. The middlemen get the profit and they don't care that much bout the smuggling or dealing dangers.

The pharmaceutical companies are going to take control via the FDA. The Department of Agriculture will have control, probably with the BATFEN in the middle of it. Will the tobacco, pharm,and alcohol companies stand by if recreational drugs aren't taxed as high as their products? That would be discrimination.

Really, do some research on the cost of a pack of cigarettes as the come off the line and see the price in various parts of the Country. Oh and lets not forget the interstate smuggling of untaxed cigarettes which organized crime has finger in.

There are NO "simple solutions" and there are none that solve one problem without creating another. Recreational drugs create problems no matter how they are handled, there are no "trouble free way" of getting around it.
Your logic on this is convoluted to say the least.
certifiedfunds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2013, 21:19   #215
glock1911revolver
Vice-Emperor
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: State
Posts: 464
Quote:
Originally Posted by countrygun View Post
There was a heck of an alcohol smuggling racket going on down on the Border. Read some Charles Askins and IIRC Bill Jordan touched on it. But the fact is gallon jug-sized container of cocaine will always have a greater value in this Country than gallon of alcohol. Smugglers will go where the profit is. There will always be some way to make money smuggling something into a relatively rich Country like the US.
That money you are referencing is exactly what I'm talking about. Big risk = big reward. How much of the price of a "gallon jug-sized container" of cocaine is a result of that risk?

Quote:
Originally Posted by countrygun View Post

Really, do some research on the cost of a pack of cigarettes as the come off the line and see the price in various parts of the Country. Oh and lets not forget the interstate smuggling of untaxed cigarettes which organized crime has finger in.
As I said, I travel for work. I'm well aware of the fact that a pack of Camels cost over twice as much in New York compared to Idaho.
glock1911revolver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2013, 21:25   #216
countrygun
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 17,068
Quote:
Originally Posted by glock1911revolver View Post
That money you are referencing is exactly what I'm talking about. Big risk = big reward. How much of the price of a "gallon jug-sized container" of cocaine is a result of that risk?



As I said, I travel for work. I'm well aware of the fact that a pack of Camels cost over twice as much in New York compared to Idaho.
The "risk" isn't the problem of the folks who make the big profits and therefore set the prices.

This Country will never let something "go by" without everyone getting involved, especially when it comes to health issue. Obamacare should be proof of that. If these drugs are legalized we will all get stuck with the medical costs. Junkies just wont die quietly as people predict.

Eta:

The "money men" in the drug trade pay squat for the product from the growers. When you hear of a 5 mill drug bust they didn't have ten cents on that street value, to the dollar in it. They can afford to lose a shipment now and then. They only lose "potential value".

The business has a loss margin written in. They will still charge the sme for the product. There is no incentive to drop it, unless they make it up in volume, which our "experts" claim won't happen.

Last edited by countrygun; 02-01-2013 at 21:30..
countrygun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2013, 21:34   #217
certifiedfunds
Platinum Membership
Tewwowist
 
certifiedfunds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: NYC
Posts: 39,708


Oh good Lord. This is getting thicker by the post.
certifiedfunds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2013, 21:41   #218
*ASH*
Senior Member
 
*ASH*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: nc
Posts: 22,000
Quote:
Originally Posted by certifiedfunds View Post
Oh good Lord. This is getting thicker by the post.


__________________
???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
*ASH* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2013, 21:44   #219
countrygun
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 17,068
Quote:
Originally Posted by certifiedfunds View Post
Oh good Lord. This is getting thicker by the post.
Something useful to add or just as usual?
countrygun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2013, 21:48   #220
certifiedfunds
Platinum Membership
Tewwowist
 
certifiedfunds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: NYC
Posts: 39,708


Quote:
Originally Posted by countrygun View Post
Something useful to add or just as usual?
Where to start? You're making this crap up as you go along.
certifiedfunds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2013, 21:51   #221
certifiedfunds
Platinum Membership
Tewwowist
 
certifiedfunds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: NYC
Posts: 39,708


Quote:
Originally Posted by countrygun View Post
The "risk" isn't the problem of the folks who make the big profits and therefore set the prices.
Take this for example. I bet if you smell the display it smells like it came right out of your butt.
certifiedfunds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2013, 21:53   #222
glock1911revolver
Vice-Emperor
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: State
Posts: 464
Quote:
Originally Posted by countrygun View Post
The "risk" isn't the problem of the folks who make
the big profits and therefore set the prices.
The people taking the biggest risks are getting a lot of money. I'm not saying they make the most, but they have to get rewarded handsomely, or they simply wouldn't do it. Any "occupation" that involves risk pays well. Red Adair didn't pay minimum wage.

Quote:
This Country will never let something "go by" without everyone getting involved,
especially when it comes to health issue. Obamacare should be proof of that. If
these drugs are legalized we will all get stuck with the medical costs. Junkies
just wont die quietly as people predict.
We are already paying for medical treatment of junkies. If you are suggesting that by legalizing something like heroin would result in the entire population becoming junkies, I would re-think that if I were you. I don't use heroin, and I'm sure you don't either. If it were available at Walgreens, that wouldn't change.
glock1911revolver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2013, 21:57   #223
certifiedfunds
Platinum Membership
Tewwowist
 
certifiedfunds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: NYC
Posts: 39,708


Quote:
Originally Posted by glock1911revolver View Post
The people taking the biggest risks are getting a lot of money. I'm not saying they make the most, but they have to get rewarded handsomely, or they simply wouldn't do it. Any "occupation" that involves risk pays well. Red Adair didn't pay minimum wage.


No, no, no. You have it all wrong. The big money folks buy this stuff for pennies and don't take any risk. They just set the prices. If it were made legal, they'd just keep the prices high. The kilo of cocaine they send north doesn't have any value, just "potential value".

You see, narcotics are completely immune from market forces and all other economic principles.
certifiedfunds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2013, 22:01   #224
certifiedfunds
Platinum Membership
Tewwowist
 
certifiedfunds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: NYC
Posts: 39,708


Quote:
Originally Posted by glock1911revolver View Post


We are already paying for medical treatment of junkies. If you are suggesting that by legalizing something like heroin would result in the entire population becoming junkies, I would re-think that if I were you. I don't use heroin, and I'm sure you don't either. If it were available at Walgreens, that wouldn't change.
During prohibition, alcohol consumption actually rose sharply and spending on alcohol increased dramatically.

People want what they can't have. When they can have it it isn't as desirable.

Consider the AR15. It wasn't until we thought we might lose them that everyone and their brother had to buy one and prices doubled. 2 weeks before people walked past racks full of them at Academy sports.
certifiedfunds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2013, 22:03   #225
glock1911revolver
Vice-Emperor
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: State
Posts: 464
Quote:
Originally Posted by certifiedfunds View Post
No, no, no. You have it all wrong. The big money folks buy this stuff for pennies and don't take any risk. They just set the prices. If it were made legal, they'd just keep the prices high. The kilo of cocaine they send north doesn't have any value, just "potential value".

You see, narcotics are completely immune from market forces and all other economic principles.
HOLY CRAP!! I GOT QUOTED BY CF!!!

I've been lurking on this forum for a long time, so I am familiar with a few members and their personalities.

This is a rite of passage comparible to driving a car for the first time, shooting a gun for the first time, or losing one's virginity (okay, forget that last one, you already had a "bromance" thread).
glock1911revolver is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:12.



Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 1,127
352 Members
775 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,244
Nov 11, 2013 at 11:42