You act like you know step 1 and step 2. I'm asking questions and giving my opinion and perspective on what I feel the outcome will be.

 

The worst part about your post is if Trump did send in death squads and left you'd still applaud that. Sad.

 

I don't know where you get that idea. That's rude. So you're going to join the crowd and start saying personal things about me and I'd be ok with murder? Up until this point it has been point counter point on facts and ideas. I'm not playing the personal attack game. Peace out.

Off the top of my head, I would stop all imports from known countries that are drug havens. I would also strengthen up the DEA so they can have better resources to stop the high level drug dealers.

 

I would need to know what we are doing currently and need understanding as to why it isn't working to give a more informed answer.

 

If the answer is ultimately that it can't be stopped then we need to take a long hard and serious look and legalizing drugs and taking the crime out of the equation.

 

I agree with most all of this...not sure about legalization though, that's just me.

 

I think as posted earlier, criminals will be criminals. They will still commit crimes to get the easy dollar. That's all they know, you have to break that cycle with the kids. I've seen generations of criminals in this community...grandpa was a criminal, son/daughter were criminals and now the grandkids are getting arrested...that's the life they know. Some communities it's dealing drugs and in some it's stealing everything that isn't locked up. Most non-drug related crimes are committed to feed someones craving for drugs, making them legal won't stop the demand and those wanting them continuing to steal and rob to pay for them.

 

Drug dealers currently send more drugs through our ports and airports than can be caught, they lose some from time to time but while one load is being processed 15 more slide through. I saw a case a day or two ago where cocaine was sewn into the lining of children's jackets, trying to smuggle it into the country. One drug dealer even had his own submarine, heck you've watched Narcos...you see how hard it would be to stop it all.

Off the top of my head, I would stop all imports from known countries that are drug havens. I would also strengthen up the DEA so they can have better resources to stop the high level drug dealers.

 

I would need to know what we are doing currently and need understanding as to why it isn't working to give a more informed answer.

 

If the answer is ultimately that it can't be stopped then we need to take a long hard and serious look and legalizing drugs and taking the crime out of the equation.

 

So to the bolded, you would agree building a wall is key, to stop the importing from Mexico of imports (illegals) that are drug havens, correct?

The Feds come in only when requested or federal laws are broken, not just waltz in like big brother is here.

 

You said it was an "Abuse of Power", it's not in any way. If he sent the military (not the National Guard) in it would be an abuse, but directing the Justice Department to go in and help Chicago clean up their mess is not an "Abuse of Power".

So to the bolded, you would agree building a wall is key, to stop the importing from Mexico of imports (illegals) that are drug havens, correct?

 

I shouldn't try to speak for Purple Pride but I think he's more than once declared his support of the wall. :thumb:

In most claims of "Over Reach" it is when there is already something working in place and the Administration just doesn't like it and decides to change it. In this case even Chicago admits what they are doing isn't working.

 

Most claims of over reach (historically speaking) seem to me when the locals don't like the Federal government providing muscle to regulations and laws that are on the books but not being enforced by the locals or the states.

 

(i.e. desegregation, use of federal lands, etc.)

Most claims of over reach (historically speaking) seem to me when the locals don't like the Federal government providing muscle to regulations and laws that are on the books but not being enforced by the locals or the states.

 

(i.e. desegregation, use of federal lands, etc.)

That's what has happened in some cases in Chicago as a sanctuary city, failing to prosecute some gun crimes an unrealistic mandates being placed on police. Maybe it's time the Justice Department focused on protecting the rights of the law abiding citizens instead of the criminals. Just seems in some cases it's been "Criminals First" when came to who the Justice Department was looking out for.

That's what has happened in some cases in Chicago as a sanctuary city, failing to prosecute some gun crimes an unrealistic mandates being placed on police. Maybe it's time the Justice Department focused on protecting the rights of the law abiding citizens instead of the criminals. Just seems in some cases it's been "Criminals First" when came to who the Justice Department was looking out for.

 

You get no argument on that from me. I just find it interesting when some who decried Federal over reach in some issues, seem to not mind in others.

You get no argument on that from me. I just find it interesting when some who decried Federal over reach in some issues, seem to not mind in others.

 

They aren't perfect and it's not a zero sum game. Federal Government can absolutely trample on any of us, but there are also times that they need to intervene and take action. It's not a all or nothing proposition. If the President decides that I can only own two guns and both have to be shotguns...that is over reach. If a Tornado tears through Somerset and the President sends in disaster relief that is not over reach.

You get no argument on that from me. I just find it interesting when some who decried Federal over reach in some issues, seem to not mind in others.

 

One of the responsibilities of the federal government enumerated in the constitution is defense of the citizenry.

They aren't perfect and it's not a zero sum game. Federal Government can absolutely trample on any of us, but there are also times that they need to intervene and take action. It's not a all or nothing proposition. If the President decides that I can only own two guns and both have to be shotguns...that is over reach. If a Tornado tears through Somerset and the President sends in disaster relief that is not over reach.

 

I think you're approaching it rationally. But I also think you know what I'm driving at. Who determines when it is an over reach and when it is not. :thumb:

One of the responsibilities of the federal government enumerated in the constitution is defense of the citizenry.

 

Who decides when the citizenry needs defending? And from whom?

 

Is it only when "my ox is being gored?"

So to the bolded, you would agree building a wall is key, to stop the importing from Mexico of imports (illegals) that are drug havens, correct?

 

I don't have a problem with the wall. So yes, I'd agree.

I don't know where you get that idea. That's rude. So you're going to join the crowd and start saying personal things about me and I'd be ok with murder? Up until this point it has been point counter point on facts and ideas. I'm not playing the personal attack game. Peace out.

 

Forgive me. I kept playing when I felt your posts were rude. Guess it is all about perspective. Peace.

No it won't completely fix anything, but as some are quick to retort on similar topics..."If it saves just one life, it's worth it"

 

Chicago isn't even the worst in the country as far as per capita murders go...but feel the scorn from most due to the restrictions put in place to infringe upon their citizens, hamper police and give sanctuary to criminals.

 

But back to my question, how do you stop the flow of drugs?

 

I would start by legalizing as many as we can. and then controlling and regulating. There's my start.

 

I guarantee you go in with force or perceived force, people are going to die needlessly. The people will take the risk when you get rid of one gang and another will step up if there is a market for the drugs. You will not punish these folks out of this behavior. DJT is wanting people to just sit down and do what he says/wants, it won't work. Complete misunderstanding of the problem.

 

Right now the reward is MUCH greater than the risk.

 

This is no different than the terrorism problem. If we get rid of ISIS, others are already lined up to begin again. It is like starfish, they can just regenerate forever. Force may get rid of one problem but it will not solve the root problem.