Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

I love the colloquial drug experts act as if the deadliest drug of all isn't legal.  I doubt they'd have such ire towards moonshiners and speakeasies.  We won't mention why, because that would be impolite.

The merits of a wall depend of course on the wall and its intended use.  Many walls are effective for their intended use.  They won't be effective at everything.

The oft maligned Maginot Line (not a wall) was effective.  The Great Wall of China was of limited effectiveness.  Hadrian's Wall was probably somewhat effective even thought you can traverse it at many points rather easily.  The walls of Constantinople were effective for centuries.  Walled towns are much harder to assault that those without walls.

The ancients didn't put all that energy into walls and walled cities because they were pretty.

Portugal is running an interesting experiment with their drug decriminalization, and they are being reasonably successful.  And the percentage of people addicted hasn't gone up.

I don't know why it doesn't get more attention.

https://www.statista.com/chart/20616/key-developments-since-portugal-decriminalized-drugs/

https://www.drugpolicy.org/resource/drug-decriminalization-portugal-learning-health-and-human-centered-approach

The money from people who would hype it (people who could legally make money off drugs) doesn't exist, because there is no entrenched industry and very few of them want to put their names on it. The organized folks who would hype it (libertarian think tanks and publications) are few and far between enough that nobody listens to them. 

The money from people who would want to kill this, i.e. the police unions (who want more police for more union dues so want things illegal), the private prison lobby (who want more prisoners to fill their prisons), the politicians (who want to be seen as "tough on crime"), and the private prohibitionists (oh, won't someone think of the CHILDREN?!?!) are organized and highly motivated to see nothing change. 

The merits of a wall depend of course on the wall and its intended use.  Many walls are effective for their intended use.  They won't be effective at everything.

The oft maligned Maginot Line (not a wall) was effective.  The Great Wall of China was of limited effectiveness.  Hadrian's Wall was probably somewhat effective even thought you can traverse it at many points rather easily.  The walls of Constantinople were effective for centuries.  Walled towns are much harder to assault that those without walls.

No one is assaulting the walls.  They're sneaking a package through/over/under.  They're sneaking 130 lb people through, 1 at a time.  
I mean, all this money we're spending on a piecemeal, ineffective wall....we could be giving a tax break to the extremely wealthy!

No one is assaulting the walls.  They're sneaking a package through/over/under.  They're sneaking 130 lb people through, 1 at a time. 
I mean, all this money we're spending on a piecemeal, ineffective wall....we could be giving a tax break to the extremely wealthy!

oh, don't worry, there's plenty of money left for that!

The new boss, Superintendent Brown, came to Chicago from Dallas. I wonder if he's thought about going back? He's also got a State's Attorney and judges working against him. Tough job.


While Brown spent much of his news conference calling for stricter enforcement of gun and drug laws — repeatedly referring to shooters as “evil bastards” — he also acknowledged how hard it is to police the problem away.

“That’s why they’re there — to feed their families,” he said. “It’s a bad choice. But without the help of mentors in my neighborhood, I would have been one of these kids.”

Brown called himself a “community policing person,” and said he believes officers who arrest young people need to use the ride to jail as an opportunity for mentoring. “We have to offer them options,” he said. “If we say, ‘Get off the corner and stop the behavior of selling drugs, carrying a gun,' we have to be able as a city to say, ‘And let me introduce you to an option that will help you provide for your family.‘”

Still, Brown said he believes too many people arrested on drug and gun charges are being released on low bonds or on electronic monitoring — a criticism several of his predecessors regularly voiced. He called drug dealing and possessing guns “precursors to violence.”


“When they have no consequence, violence continues,” he said. “Our endgame is arrest. … Every day we’re going to be clearing corners, every day we’re going to be clearing these drug corners to protect these young people from violence.”

That quote reminds me of much of the plot of a TV show in the early 2000s based on the experience of a person in the early 1990s. Clear corners, arrest, arrest, arrest, et al.

Seems to do little to either help neighborhoods  or lower murder rates.

I don’t have a good answer for the ills of poverty (If I did, I’d have a more important job of saving the world). But at best, I can say this approach likely keeps us at the status quo. Creating opportunities and socialization are both tremendously tall tasks and in a world where incarceration is common, the penalties for violence to get a little more probably don’t seem all that high.

No one is assaulting the walls.  They're sneaking a package through/over/under.  They're sneaking 130 lb people through, 1 at a time. 
I mean, all this money we're spending on a piecemeal, ineffective wall....we could be giving a tax break to the extremely wealthy!

I was commenting on the assertion that walls don't work, as a blanket statement.

If you want to amend that to assert "Walls are not very effective at interdicting drugs", I wouldn't have an issue.