The War on College Students
POSTED BY: SergeantX
UPDATED: Sunday, June 28, 2026 20:30
VIEWED: 8520
PAGE 1 of 12
http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/front/la-me-drugbust7-2008may
07,0,1445478.story
Protecting us from dangerous criminals.
SergeantX
"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SergeantX:
http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/front/la-me-drugbust7-2008may
07,0,1445478.story
Protecting us from dangerous criminals.
They were drug dealers.
I think they'll do well in prison...its just like being in a frat (only with fewer women).
H
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:Quote:
Originally posted by SergeantX:
http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/front/la-me-drugbust7-2008may
07,0,1445478.story
Protecting us from dangerous criminals.
They were drug dealers.
I think they'll do well in prison...its just like being in a frat (only with fewer women).
H
Thanks Hero. That really underlines the idiocy of the whole thing. You obviously assume that because they were dealing drugs, they were dangerous criminals.
From what I can tell, they weren't accused of any violent crimes. They weren't dealing to children. They weren't robbing convenience stores to finance a habit. Just college kids entertaining themselves without government approval. Regardless they're treated as violent criminals, kicked out of school, kicked out of their homes. Many will likely end up in jail where they'll have ample opportunity to become the violent criminals the cops ought to be going after in the first place.
Some kinda backasswards society we've created, eh?
SergeantX
"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3025396475247394113
SergeantX
"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SergeantX:
Thanks Hero. That really underlines the idiocy of the whole thing. You obviously assume that because they were dealing drugs, they were dangerous criminals.
From what I can tell, they weren't accused of any violent crimes. They weren't dealing to children. They weren't robbing convenience stores to finance a habit. Just college kids entertaining themselves without government approval. Regardless they're treated as violent criminals, kicked out of school, kicked out of their homes.
As someone who has done drugs, dealt with the consequences, and watched several very good friends ruin their lives with them, I can honestly say I have no sympathy for those idiots.
It's not like what happens to people who do this stuff and get caught is some big secret. Everyone knows that it's against the law, most people, by the time they get to college, know the physical risks involved, and schools almost always have a readily available list of their policies in regards to drug use. They chose to ignore all of that, and so they pay the price.
----------------------------
"O' course, ya couldn't buy an invite with a diamond the size of a testicle, but luckily I got my hands on a couple." -Badger
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
It's not about sympathy, Reaverman, it's about intelligent government policy. Did you watch the video?
SergeantX
"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SergeantX:
You obviously assume that because they were dealing drugs, they were dangerous criminals.
Yeah, I kinda put those two together. I think its because of all the dangerous criminals who deal drugs...gives drug dealers a bad name. You should take it up with them, I've heard they take criticism really well.
I note for the record that there is no legal distinction between dangerous criminals and the other kind. I also note that the whole reason the investigation kicked off was due to the overdose of a freshman the previous year.
Quote:
From what I can tell, they weren't accused of any violent crimes. They weren't dealing to children. They weren't robbing convenience stores to finance a habit. Just college kids entertaining themselves without government approval.
I don't think you can trivialize drug use. This is more then just a couple guys smoking a little weed in their dorm room. This was a large scale drug dealing operation. Personally I find your comments racist (or elitist). You want special treatment for these poor rich frat boys then what we'd give a couple gangbangers pushing drugs on a street corner.
Quote:
Regardless they're treated as violent criminals, kicked out of school, kicked out of their homes. Many will likely end up in jail where they'll have ample opportunity to become the violent criminals the cops ought to be going after in the first place.
Hmm...these folks are in college, you'd think they would have considered this possibility. Perhaps the University could include this in their mandatory drug/alcohol education they give freshman. A simple "you might go to jail" should do it".
I note for the record that most will get deals, probation, and/or diversion programs. Only multiple offenders, ringleaders, and folks caught with large amounts of drugs will do prison time.
They will likely get kicked out of school and be forced to find alternatives to financial aid and that's just so sad. Oh well, more money for kids who decided NOT to deal drugs.
You know, I see this a lot this time of year. We get kids busted at local concerts or summer parties for underage consumption and possession. They cry and moan and are shocked and I remind them they are the smart kids with lots of breaks in life and no lack of opportunity...they should have known better. I don't give the pretty white honor-student-girl any different treatment then the high school dropout can't-hold-a-job types I see. First offense gets you diversion program...second gets you jail or house arrest. Third...jail.
My policy makes me unpopular with the drug abusing kids, their permissive parents, and hired gun defense lawyers...but oddly, I'm also unpopular with the 'dangerous criminals', their permissive parents, and their hired gun lawyers.
Its a burden, but I carry it for the good of all mankind.
H
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I think our drug policy is bass-akwards. MJ is trivial. It should be legalized.
AFA other drugs are concerned... I read an interesting opinion that the dose makes the drug. Poor Andean farmers chew coca leaves like poor farmers in the Horn of Africa chew khat like we drink coffee. And they don't become raving drug addicts anymore than coffee drinkers. (Except me. If I don't get my coffee I get very very focused on finding some. 
) The problem is that when you raise the concentration and find a way of giving a bolus (inhaling or injecting) you get SO high that some susceptible people get hooked. Instantly. So it seems to me that low-grade drugs in oral form could be legalized but not other drugs.
AFA the freedom to use drugs is concerned... if it only affected the drugee that would be okay. But usually a lot of other people get sucked into addiction nightmare (and that includes alcoholism) because they are the children, spouses, parents and co-workers of the addict. I've seen whole families get sucked down the drain due to addiction. The idea that "It's my body and I can do what I want with it" only works if you have no responsibilities and commitments to others, and I know very few people who are SO isolated that nobody depends on them. Sarge, for a person who espouses libertarianism based on indiviudal responsibility you seem to have lost sight of that important concept.
AFA no "legal" distinction between serious and violent criminals... Hero, you mean to say your criminal code doesn't distinguish the levels of violence of a particular crime?
---------------------------------
Let's party like it's 1929.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
AFA no "legal" distinction between serious and violent criminals... Hero, you mean to say your criminal code doesn't distinguish the levels of violence of a particular crime?
Generally there is no distinction in level of violence for a crime. In many examples, however, various factors can 'enhance' offenses. These include using weapons, using guns (which is different then just another 'weapon'), injury, and intent.
But thats about the crime, not the criminal and a person is a criminal if they break the law...regardless of being 'dangerous'.
There is no difference, for example, between a raving psycho who murders someone and some otherwise nice fella who murders someone (I'm talkin actual murder, not self defense or anything silly like that).
Likewise there is no distinction between a person with 20 traffic violations who speeds and a person who is cited for the first and only time.
Those factors go to sentencing...not guilt.
These young folks were caught dealing and using and possessing and trafficking in drugs. If found guilty their relative 'dangerousness' will be a factor in sentencing...bearing in mind that the crime they have CHOSEN to commit often carries harsh mandatory penalties duly enacted by the legislature for the purpose of ensuring meaningful punishment and deterence.
H
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
History.
Prohibition.
Mafias.
Nuff said ?
-F
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME