- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: CNN Can Not Understand Why We Can Not Arrest The Drug Runners and Bring Them to Trial.
Posted on 12/8/25 at 9:31 am to CapnKangaroo
Posted on 12/8/25 at 9:31 am to CapnKangaroo
quote:
Once they reach our border the constitution applies and it becomes a law enforcement action and the perpetrators need to be given the protections and guarantees provided by the constitution.
Prior to that they’re fair game for drones and bombs and missiles.
Yes, and we're specifically talking abut people who have reached our border.
0
Posted on 12/8/25 at 9:34 am to Neutral Underground
quote:and there it is.
you defending narco terrorists who smuggle drugs into America.
The MENSA candidate who cannot seem to grasp that insistence upon the US government following its own laws constitutes “defending narco terrorists.“
Posted on 12/8/25 at 9:34 am to ChineseBandit58
quote:
'citizens'
They aren't 'citizens.' They are citizens. Just like you and I.
quote:
Do we monitor him while he decides to try and sneak across the border? - and then 'read him his rights' the moment we arrest him?
Yes.
quote:
and then pay for a defense attorney to 'defend' him? and then go thru months if not years of defense objections to every step in the process?
Yes.
quote:
At some point we have to employ COMMON SENSE to obviously intractable problems
Yes we do. And pissing on the constitution is not common sense.
Posted on 12/8/25 at 9:37 am to CapnKangaroo
quote:
1) It’s not about ending demand, it’s about disrupting supply. They are separate issues.
The Trump administration disrupted the supply of Opioids, and we ended up getting more Fentanyl.
You have good intentions, but your methods are nothing more than a waste of money.
Posted on 12/8/25 at 9:40 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
The Trump administration disrupted the supply of Opioids, and we ended up getting more Fentanyl. You have good intentions, but your methods are nothing more than a waste of money.
It’s only a waste of money if we don’t kill enough of them.
Posted on 12/8/25 at 9:42 am to CapnKangaroo
quote:
It’s only a waste of money if we don’t kill enough of them.
Posted on 12/8/25 at 9:43 am to Bunk Moreland
quote:I sense a certain level of sarcasm in your post, but that is exactly the position that many of our posters seem to be taking.
So, every country now has the green light to drone civilians near another continent by labeling them terrorists?
“Oh, oh, oh. See that boat about 2 miles away on the horizon? It doesn’t have a flag. I get to blow it up for no reason other than the lack of a flag. Big fun!!!”
This post was edited on 12/8/25 at 9:48 am
Posted on 12/8/25 at 9:45 am to ChineseBandit58
quote:translation: “Ignore the constitution, because it is too inconvenient and expensive.”
Do we monitor him while he decides to try and sneak across the border? - and then 'read him his rights' the moment we arrest him? and then pay for a defense attorney to 'defend' him? and then go thru months if not years of defense objections to every step in the process? (all the while having to tip-toe over each and every step in the 'process' --- compare that to the idiocy now being employed in the trial of that assassin of the insurance exec)
Posted on 12/8/25 at 9:48 am to CapnKangaroo
quote:
The simple FACT is that the drug trade is much more harmful to the American society and economy than brown people in the ME or Russians invading Ukraine.
1. False dilemma. The US can handle multiple operations at once. There's no reason that we have to choose between those options.
2. The other simple FACT is that an actual war in the ME or Russia continuing into other nations after Ukraine would be much more harmful to the American society and economy than the drug trade.
We're not involved in the ME and Ukraine because of what's happening now. We're involved for what could be if we withdraw aid.
You isolationist morons had your way in the early to mid 20th century. It didn't work out so well.
You can whine and cry about American interventions since WWII, but the simple FACT (since we're posting simple FACTS here) is that since America decided to police the world, we haven't had another world war. After having had two in quick succession—one that involved fricking nuclear weapons—while the US was playing turtle.
But that's a bit of a sidebar.
Back to this populist temper tantrum y'all are throwing. Just because something is harmful to the US doesn't mean it's time to throw out the constitution and declare martial law.
250,000 people die every year from fentanyl poisoning. O.k. Almost a million people in the US die of heart disease every year.
McDonald's knows this, yet they keep selling their products. Bomb Ray Croc's family? Make fast food and processed food illegal? Tax meat so that people could only afford to eat it once a week? Monitor the BMI of every citizen and sentence people to weight loss Gulags if the BMI gets too high?
There are a lot of "common sense" things that we could do that would cut that number down.
Should we do them?
If not, why not?
This post was edited on 12/8/25 at 9:50 am
Posted on 12/8/25 at 9:54 am to wackatimesthree
quote:
Back to this populist temper tantrum y'all are throwing. Just because something is harmful to the US doesn't mean it's time to throw out the constitution and declare martial law.
Who’s talking about doing this?
quote:
250,000 people die every year from fentanyl poisoning. O.k. Almost a million people in the US die of heart disease every year. McDonald's knows this, yet they keep selling their products. Bomb Ray Croc's family? Make fast food and processed food illegal? Tax meat so that people could only afford to eat it once a week? Monitor the BMI of every citizen and sentence people to weight loss Gulags if the BMI gets too high?
If you can’t tell the difference between fatasses and drug addiction I don’t know what to tell you. Drug addiction ruins entire families and leads to more crime and more homelessness. A fatass can still get a job, pay taxes and generally can still contribute to society.
What we should do about heart disease and obesity should be a discussion for another thread. It’s in now way related to the drug trade.
Posted on 12/8/25 at 9:56 am to MoarKilometers
quote:
There are in fact tens of thousands incarcerated in the war on drugs.
And the victims are the addicts
Posted on 12/8/25 at 9:58 am to ksayetiger
quote:
And the victims are the addicts
Theyre not the victims.
Users drive the market. Not the supplier.
Posted on 12/8/25 at 9:59 am to RogerTheShrubber
Posted on 12/8/25 at 10:11 am to CapnKangaroo
quote:Neither is bombing random boats. If you think this is going to so much as make a dent in a billion dollar a year industry, then I don't what what else to tell you.
It’s in now way related to the drug trade.
Posted on 12/8/25 at 10:15 am to Timeoday
I posted this in another thread but got no response. Is this rational?
The first questions about the bombings were whether or not these were extra-legal actions. As they were no longer seen as drug smugglers, they were labeled narco-terrorists in international waters, making them enemy combatants of the United States. This would perhaps satisfy that question.
Granted that I am not familiar with maritime law but if we can bomb them could we not also stop and capture them? It would follow the MO of how we have dealt with terrorists before, and it seems beneficial if there was a goal of finding the source or terrorist network.
Any terrorist captured would presumingly be subject to appearing before a military tribunal. In my opinion, it would at least lay to rest who and what we are blowing up.
The first questions about the bombings were whether or not these were extra-legal actions. As they were no longer seen as drug smugglers, they were labeled narco-terrorists in international waters, making them enemy combatants of the United States. This would perhaps satisfy that question.
Granted that I am not familiar with maritime law but if we can bomb them could we not also stop and capture them? It would follow the MO of how we have dealt with terrorists before, and it seems beneficial if there was a goal of finding the source or terrorist network.
Any terrorist captured would presumingly be subject to appearing before a military tribunal. In my opinion, it would at least lay to rest who and what we are blowing up.
Posted on 12/8/25 at 10:16 am to phutureisyic
quote:What happened to "No new wars."
It’s called the WAR on drugs. There are no POW’s in this one.
Just another lie from the Deep State spokesperson?
Posted on 12/8/25 at 10:25 am to CapnKangaroo
quote:
Drug addiction ruins entire families and leads to more crime and more homelessness.
So it's not about deaths at all, then. Noted. I'll expect to stop seeing 250,000 deaths a year from here on out, then.
quote:
What we should do about heart disease and obesity should be a discussion for another thread. It’s in now way related to the drug trade.
Yep. It's a hypothetical designed to show the flaw in your logic. That's the relationship. Previously the premise was that unconstitutional acts were justified due to the fact that people selling drugs were causing 250,000 deaths a year. The hypothetical pointed out that people selling other products were responsible for 4 times as many deaths per year and asked why those things were legal still.
Now you've moved the goal posts, so it's not about deaths anymore, it's about homelessness and crime.
Just remember what it's about now going forward.
quote:
Who’s talking about doing this?
Every person on this thread advocating moronic things like bombing drug smugglers 100 yards on the other side of the border instead of arresting them when they cross with illegal substances.
Posted on 12/8/25 at 10:32 am to Timeoday
quote:
CNN Can Not Understand Why We Can Not Arrest The Drug Runners and Bring Them to Trial.
Because they are not in the USA or American territorial waters.
Posted on 12/8/25 at 10:35 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
the difference between an actual terrorist kingpin vs run of the mill drug runners.
run of the mill drug runners have just as much a right to vaporization as a kingpin…
Posted on 12/8/25 at 10:35 am to TX Tiger
quote:
Neither is bombing random boats.
Bombing drug boats isn’t related to the drug trade?
quote:
If you think this is going to so much as make a dent in a billion dollar a year industry, then I don't what what else to tell you.
Agreed. We need to be bombing a lot more boats. Also we should be seizing all their money.
Page 9 of 15
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News