100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Drugs target audience, Inner cities? | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
Handing someone a gun doesn't mean they will go kill someone. Even if they did push drugs into inner cities, the people are still responsible for what happened and what is still happening. There is so much drug abuse around the country from all walks of life, it makes it hard for me to believe inner cities were targeted. I could see the gov pushing drugs into inner cities but I don't think thats exactly how it happened. For poor people drugs bring 2 things they feel they cannot get without them, relief and money. When life sucks we want an escape and drugs provide that to an extent and we all know there is a lot of money to be made in selling drugs. That is why I think inner cities became a drug capital, fast easy money and relief from the stress of being poor. The introduction of crack is where it took off. I believe that was the first cheap, very addictive, and easy to make drug. It has stayed in the inner city because it is cheap, people with money will just buy cocaine. Drugs bring money, money brings power, power brings corruption. It comes down to money being the root of all evil to me. They brought it in themselves for the money, and when the money came, hell broke loose. I don't think they would start murdering each other over it. They would abuse it, but they wouldn't try making a business of it since they have easier legal ways of making money. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I've discussed this before in another thread. Yes! It's no accident. Addiction is just another form of control. Who else does the govt. want to control more than the poor? Uh.....that's right. I said it....... It's a way to distract people from actually thinking or organizing anything....... oh sorry, it keeps coming up in my prison thread, so i moved this to another topic...aside from that... How do you feel about METH LABS, they seem to be popping up everywhere. is this something that originally spawned from trailor parks and have moved into high end cul de sacs, (suburbs) and what not? I think meth didnt necessarily span from trailer parks, I think its only becoming more POPULAR and more RECOGNIZED, but I dont think it began as a poor persons drug because it comes from a PRESCRIPTION medication that treats 'illnesses' that are probably more often treated in middle to upper class communities, ,, particularly 'depression' It doesn't have to be prescription. It just has to have ephedrine, that's why they put an age and quantiy restriction on things like Sudafed. Ephedrine is usually found in congestion medication or diet pills. It's only occationally used for depression but not long term. A major problem is that Mexico is getting into meth production and they are smuggling large amounts of ephedrine into Mexico from China and mass producing. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Handing someone a gun doesn't mean they will go kill someone. Even if they did push drugs into inner cities, the people are still responsible for what happened and what is still happening. There is so much drug abuse around the country from all walks of life, it makes it hard for me to believe inner cities were targeted. I could see the gov pushing drugs into inner cities but I don't think thats exactly how it happened. For poor people drugs bring 2 things they feel they cannot get without them, relief and money. When life sucks we want an escape and drugs provide that to an extent and we all know there is a lot of money to be made in selling drugs. That is why I think inner cities became a drug capital, fast easy money and relief from the stress of being poor. The introduction of crack is where it took off. I believe that was the first cheap, very addictive, and easy to make drug. It has stayed in the inner city because it is cheap, people with money will just buy cocaine. Drugs bring money, money brings power, power brings corruption. It comes down to money being the root of all evil to me. They brought it in themselves for the money, and when the money came, hell broke loose. I don't think they would start murdering each other over it. They would abuse it, but they wouldn't try making a business of it since they have easier legal ways of making money. I think I see what you are getting at now. A vicious cycle kind of thing? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Handing someone a gun doesn't mean they will go kill someone. Even if they did push drugs into inner cities, the people are still responsible for what happened and what is still happening. There is so much drug abuse around the country from all walks of life, it makes it hard for me to believe inner cities were targeted. I could see the gov pushing drugs into inner cities but I don't think thats exactly how it happened. For poor people drugs bring 2 things they feel they cannot get without them, relief and money. When life sucks we want an escape and drugs provide that to an extent and we all know there is a lot of money to be made in selling drugs. That is why I think inner cities became a drug capital, fast easy money and relief from the stress of being poor. The introduction of crack is where it took off. I believe that was the first cheap, very addictive, and easy to make drug. It has stayed in the inner city because it is cheap, people with money will just buy cocaine. Drugs bring money, money brings power, power brings corruption. It comes down to money being the root of all evil to me. They brought it in themselves for the money, and when the money came, hell broke loose. I don't think they would start murdering each other over it. They would abuse it, but they wouldn't try making a business of it since they have easier legal ways of making money. I think I see what you are getting at now. A vicious cycle kind of thing? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ha, war on drugs, thats a good one...It's one of the largest economic contributors we have. Cops dont target dealers, they target customers, they generate more money that way. To take it a step further, the government is the biggest drug pusher of them all, with all the different crap they peddle at us on a daily basis. What's the difference between what we do and what they do? For them it's legal. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Dict8
on
Thu 06/09/11 01:09 PM
|
|
I honestly don't see the difference between yr street pusher on the corner.....or yr Dr. in a lab coat with a script pad. Only difference is that one is legitimized.......
In fact....people prefer the Dr. It absolves them of responsibility.....and feeds their denial. The pharmaceutical co. gets paid by insurance.....the Dr. is happy......and the patient gets drugs....... See? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Handing someone a gun doesn't mean they will go kill someone. Even if they did push drugs into inner cities, the people are still responsible for what happened and what is still happening. There is so much drug abuse around the country from all walks of life, it makes it hard for me to believe inner cities were targeted. I could see the gov pushing drugs into inner cities but I don't think thats exactly how it happened. For poor people drugs bring 2 things they feel they cannot get without them, relief and money. When life sucks we want an escape and drugs provide that to an extent and we all know there is a lot of money to be made in selling drugs. That is why I think inner cities became a drug capital, fast easy money and relief from the stress of being poor. The introduction of crack is where it took off. I believe that was the first cheap, very addictive, and easy to make drug. It has stayed in the inner city because it is cheap, people with money will just buy cocaine. Drugs bring money, money brings power, power brings corruption. It comes down to money being the root of all evil to me. They brought it in themselves for the money, and when the money came, hell broke loose. I don't think they would start murdering each other over it. They would abuse it, but they wouldn't try making a business of it since they have easier legal ways of making money. I agree, addiction will oversee all logic and yes murder and violence are no exception to those who fall at the hands of addiction, whether it be drugs, gambling or clothes, people who become addicted also become broke, even the wealthy...often leading to theft and violence....hence the whole theory that the govt was hoping the inner city habitants would destroy each other and no longer be a drain on society, ----clearly this was not the outcome, but may have been a motive.. this is a statement not necessarily something i whole heartily back. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Handing someone a gun doesn't mean they will go kill someone. Even if they did push drugs into inner cities, the people are still responsible for what happened and what is still happening. There is so much drug abuse around the country from all walks of life, it makes it hard for me to believe inner cities were targeted. I could see the gov pushing drugs into inner cities but I don't think thats exactly how it happened. For poor people drugs bring 2 things they feel they cannot get without them, relief and money. When life sucks we want an escape and drugs provide that to an extent and we all know there is a lot of money to be made in selling drugs. That is why I think inner cities became a drug capital, fast easy money and relief from the stress of being poor. The introduction of crack is where it took off. I believe that was the first cheap, very addictive, and easy to make drug. It has stayed in the inner city because it is cheap, people with money will just buy cocaine. Drugs bring money, money brings power, power brings corruption. It comes down to money being the root of all evil to me. They brought it in themselves for the money, and when the money came, hell broke loose. I don't think they would start murdering each other over it. They would abuse it, but they wouldn't try making a business of it since they have easier legal ways of making money. I agree, addiction will oversee all logic and yes murder and violence are no exception to those who fall at the hands of addiction, whether it be drugs, gambling or clothes, people who become addicted also become broke, even the wealthy...often leading to theft and violence....hence the whole theory that the govt was hoping the inner city habitants would destroy each other and no longer be a drain on society, ----clearly this was not the outcome, but may have been a motive.. this is a statement not necessarily something i whole heartily back. |
|
|
|
|
