Mexican army seizes 25 tonnes of cannabis after truck topples over https://t.co/MM0EH4j6BA pic.twitter.com/tK3gW3fUcW— Daily Mail Online (@MailOnline) May 6, 2016
A truck in Mexico that swerved onto a dirt track to try and avoid a military checkpoint ended up losing control and tipping over - revealing a huge stash of drugs that then came tumbling out.
The incident occurred close to the border between the states of Sinaloa and Sonora in western Mexico.
39 comments:
Any way we can get that pot on welfare and a Democrat voter registration card?
Wasn't this in an old John Wayne movie, except it was a mule loaded with dynamite?
Good to know that those dangerous drugs are now safe with the Mexican Army.
"Dangerous drugs." LOL. Legalize cannabis here and you put a big dent in the cartel and illegal immigration. Hopefully Trump, the businessman, understands this basic point. This is where edutcher starts lecturing about evil weed.
"16 tons and what you get, another day older" and high as a mofo.
El Chapo takes a little time off and everything goes to hell.
Weed is evil. Just because some people like to get whacked on it doesn't make it any less evil.
And it might be a good idea to wait and see how things go in CO long run before making it legal.
And shutting down the damned border may put a real dent in the cartel and illegals. But that would mean actually doing something.
“Weed is evil. Just because some people like to get whacked on it doesn't make it any less evil.”
I have to disagree with you and say a good word for the herb. I’m not sure what evil scale you are using but if one was to go by health effects, I think booze has put more people in the hospital, and if we include drunks on the road, there has been a million more deaths from hootch than from pot.
I agree it will be interesting to see CO, (and others) about how weed can fit into our free society.
I also agree that our swiss cheese border needs to be fixed.
"El Chapo takes a little time off and everything goes to hell."
You the man, Lem.
Doesn't anyone know you lead the truck with another vehicle that can detect and help the truck avoid these checkpoints. There have been a few movies on the subject involving a black trans-am.
Jim in St Louis said...
Weed is evil. Just because some people like to get whacked on it doesn't make it any less evil.
I have to disagree with you and say a good word for the herb. I’m not sure what evil scale you are using but if one was to go by health effects, I think booze has put more people in the hospital, and if we include drunks on the road, there has been a million more deaths from hootch than from pot.
Don't count on it. Marijuana is a worse carcinogenic than tobacco and its chromosome damage is well-documented. Then, of course, there are all those people who started out looking to get high and kept moving on up.
As you are new here, you have never been exposed to the wisdom of The Blonde, nurse of almost 50 years, and nobody is as much against it as she, as she's seen not only its effects in the hospital, but also knows a lot about the research involved.
PS Her ex, the one who tried to kill her, was/is a drunk, so she has no particular brief with booze, either.
For that matter, neither do I.
When you delete your comment like that it makes me wonder what I missed. Me and everyone. Everyone's going, I wonder what I missed. You can fake us all out into not missing anything by selecting "remove forever" as you do delete. It' s two click thing, goes, boink boink, instead of the usual one click boink delete that leaves your name up there for all to see, oh, so-and-so deleted a message. He musta checked hizself before he reked hizself. Or else just went, aw fukit.
Misspell?
Comment deleted
This comment has been removed by the author.
Ed - would you still be against marijuana even if it was lacking a psychoactive element so that it would be used for medical treatments?
"a million more deaths from hootch than from pot.
Don't count on it."
Are you really saying more people die from marijuana than alcohol? Or just that it isn't a hyperbolic one million more?
What about vaping? No combustion, no carcinogens. Tadaa!!
I just wish regulations would focus on violence, not inanimate objects.
I was curious so I did a lazy google about pot killing your genes. I found an interesting list of studies, here is one:
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Simona_Pisanti/publication/24199873_Use_of_cannabinoid_receptor_agonists_in_cancer_therapy_as_palliative_and_curative_agents/links/0fcfd4fcdbf8ccc3b1000000.pdf
The list came from the comments here:
http://www.livescience.com/3688-marijuana-damages-dna-cancer.html
It occurs to me- that if a substance were not illegal, it could be pinched and prodded in the labs to do something useful without worry about the authorities swooping in and shooting you because of a plant.
Marijuana seems to be an innocuous drug as far as drugs go.
Carcinogen, chromosome damage. It's still something you don't want. And the painkiller thing is a dodge, you get the same result by using a legal painkiller IV push (Herself is an expert on this).
As for booze, a million is a big estimate, but why not toss in all the deaths that result from people who started on marijuana and wanted something bigger - heroin, cocaine, name it? And all the people who die in the trafficking?
One other thing, I know there's a lot of "research" underwritten lately by people who want to prove it's OK. I tend to regard a lot of that the same way I do "research" on "climate change".
Jim in St. Louis and Steg, Don't waste your time. He is a real Reefer Madness dude. His wife is an "expert." He claims it's about "facts" but an analysis of his comments shows it's mostly emotion.
LOL! You guys wound up J Edgar. Carry Nation was his great grandma. It's a waste of time, but it's fun to goof on him.
Steg, Most of the medical cannabis research is done overseas, a lot in Israel. And as we know, those Jews are smart.
I think the million number was just hyperbole to illustrate that the deaths from marijuana are a small percent of those caused by alcohol. Even if you do factor in all deaths that result from the illegal trafficking trade, you have a good argument for legalization.
Keeping yourself healthy is an individual prerogative, and I try my best for myself. I do not look forward to the day when it is illegal to enjoy X substance, because you are a doctor and therefore your responsibility is to everyone who could possibly need your treatment so you are disallowed from all vices, courtesy of the state(because you could hurt your brain, and your skills and brainpower belong to the state, just like your body). I do not wish to dictate how other people live, however. I do wish them the best of luck in their endeavors, and to remember that if you try to eat someone's face off, you should be shot. Dead.
Smoking is bad for you. It is not OK. I do not think it should be illegal, and it should be an individual choice. Education by health professionals will help people make informed decisions, and many will still opt to not be educated.
My mother is a nurse. She lectures many diabetics on the proper use and regulation of their medication. Most of them disregard her instruction and are back in the ER a couple months down the line. Some people can not be helped.
I am of the opinion that our enforcement arms should focus on violent crime, not inanimate objects (drugs, guns, cash). There clearly is a market for people to want to get effed up, no matter what. There was a Simpson's episode where Homer couldn't drink (maybe the helicopter pilot one?) and instead gave blood, then drove to a high point and breathed deeply, and maybe some other stuff.
People will always find a way to get altered if they want to. Like someone committed to suicide will find a way. All the laws do is encourage the black market operators to expand their size and scope.
With respect but who ends up in the hospital from smoking dope? Seriously. I’ve smoked and been around smokers for almost as long as your big blonde has been a nurse and I’ve never seen a hospitalizations from the effects of pot.
Ah, nick, I didn't know that about the research. I don't know most things, like most people. :P
I have benefited from ed's comments, and I have agreed with him more often than not. This whole drug war is a big freedom and economic issue for me, and I think that is what a lot of this country is about. The freedom to make good and bad choices. The freedom to not have to pay for your neighbors bad choices.
I think economic policy is inseparable from politics. Every choice is an economic choice, even if all you are dealing with is time.
Who benefits from keeping grass illegal? You and your blonde do not partake, but you sure pay taxes for massive enforcement/prohibition.
The users who smoke are dragged into being a cog in a massive criminal enterprise and made into criminals themselves- so they are not gaining an advantage.
I would suggest that society is worse off from the prohibition of pot.
However the drug suppliers do like keeping the prices high cause the risks are nominal as our truck driver today illustrates. Who else benefits? I would throw in a snarky knock on authoritarian police who just like thumping stoners on the head, but that is changing too- cops would rather be out after the bad guys.
Steg, "There is NO freedom w/o choice." Milton Friedman Nobel Laureate in Economics. You are absolutely correct about freedom. And, the efficacy of this INSANE war on drugs can be determined by the number of addicts[up annually] and cost of imported drugs[declining annually]. The duopoly LOVE the war on drugs, keeps taxes up and patronage jobs booming.
Acapulco Gold is bad ass weed
Gee, just recount how marijuana isn't quite as innocuous as some claim and I'm Carry Nation.
And it was nd that got the ball rolling.
Jim in St Louis said...
Who benefits from keeping grass illegal? You and your blonde do not partake, but you sure pay taxes for massive enforcement/prohibition
You tell me.
The public, maybe?
We seemed to do a lot better when it wasn't in use (and, yes, there was a time people had better sense).
Funny how drugs became a pert of the scene the same time as a lot of other Commie-inspired movements - feminism, black power, same sex anything, Give Peace A Chance.
Funny how things ended up worse, rather than better.
In a country where individuality and freedom paired with responsibility are championed by the (I believe) righteous conservatives, how come you would deny people the freedom to make bad choices?
As it stands, we are technologically better than any society we have ever been aware of. Our goods and service choices are ever expanding despite government intervention.
If you use a blanket term 'drugs', how about all the drugs your body manufactures naturally? Adrenaline junkies never get people killed? Freedom is a double edged sword, and you've got the best chance of wielding it well when people are actually free.
Although there is another economic argument in the hemp trade. Hemp plants, the male of the marijuana, are used in a lot of high tech things. There's also rope, shirts, paper, and other totally innocuous products to be made when the plant is not outlawed.
You could be a hemp tycoon and a teetotaler.
It is not like people were not aware of marijuana before 1950. It has been known in old cultures for thousands of years. Somewhere around 1937 or so it became illegal here, and the drug war has grown so out of proportion and away from the grand idea of individual sovereignty of the American Citizen.
You can be stripped of your rights and liberty, all because the King says you cannot smoke this plant. Citizens or subjects?
Ah, a Libertarian speaks.
One of those who talks freedom, but really means no rules, especially for them.
Who love passing themselves off as Conservatives when it suits their advantage, but are Lefty Democrats at heart. And when a real Conservative speaks of the necessity of rules, they make their bold pronouncements of freedom when what they really want is license.
Spare me the posturing.
"In a country where individuality and freedom paired with responsibility are championed by the (I believe) righteous conservatives, how come you would deny people the freedom to make bad choices?"
Only a minority percentage of the population actually lives the dream of individual responsibility and freedom. That's the problem. I don't care if you smoke. It's not my life, not my body, not my responsibility. I used to smoke (tobacco) so I'm not puritanical about smoking. I just don't anymore. I have good friends who smoke various forms of mj. Again, not my biz. (Don't kid yourselves about the carcinogenic, and mental, longterm negative effects, though.) My only real problem with legalization is that most people who smoke weed (grass? really, are you from 1972?) are generally not all that responsible, don't really give a shit about "freedom" other than freedom from cops, work and other hassles that get in the way of getting stoned all the time. Then there's the government which has to involve itself in every aspect of our lives. The Pot Bureaucracy will make weed way more expensive with taxes and fees. Also, we will end up paying for other peoples' weed. We already pay for other peoples' alcohol so it's not a big jump from there. And these people DO cause problems for other people (I've had at least two cases of people driving while high), but I take the point that alcohol is much worse over time. Still, why pile on? Just asking.
ed- you may well have a point there. But I'm always more suspicious when the federal government is telling me something is forbidden because it is for my own good.
An army can always use more money to buy more army stuff so I'm wondering what the Mexicans are going to do with that little windfall.
Friday [to a drug dealer who is trying to pass drugs off as similar in effect to alcohol]: I'll tell you what I know. I know in fact too many kids that begin with pot end up in heroin, then onto LSD. I know if you drink you suffer a loss of judgment if you drink to excess, but I also know that judgment returns when you sober up. I know, and so do you, that when you flip out on an acid trip you never know when you're gonna slip out again. This is now, Bentley, not a couple of years ago. We've had time now to see and study the effects of LSD. People who haven't had a dose in weeks sail out on another trip, they never know when. The minute they've dropped one acid capsule or ingested it in any way, they bought the farm. They've lost the chance to depend on or even restore that most precious of all inner senses, judgment. And in my way of thinking, without judgment you might as well be dead. Your brain is, so why not the rest of you?
Bentley, the drug dealer: We were talking about marijuana.
Friday: We still are; marijuana is the flame, heroin is the fuse, LSD is the bomb. So don't you try to equate liquor with marijuana, mister, not with me. You may sell that jazz to another pothead but not to somebody who spends most of their time holding some sick kid's head while he vomits and retches sitting on a curb stone at four o'clock in the morning. And when his knees get enough starch back in them so he can stand up and empty his pockets, you can bet he'll turn out a stick or two of marijuana. And you can double your money that he'll be holding a sugarcube or a cap or two. So don't you con me with your mind expansion slop, I deal with kids every day. I try to clean up the mess people like you make out of them. I'm the expert here. You're not.
(Dragnet The Big Prophet January 11, 1968)
Jack Webb was a jazz music nut. He grew up in LA, and would hang out @ the jazz clubs from the time he was a young man. I would bet a few c-notes he smoked cannabis.
"Ah, a Libertarian speaks.
One of those who talks freedom, but really means no rules, especially for them.
Who love passing themselves off as Conservatives when it suits their advantage, but are Lefty Democrats at heart. And when a real Conservative speaks of the necessity of rules, they make their bold pronouncements of freedom when what they really want is license.
Spare me the posturing."
Is that your counter argument? That I'm just simply not serious? I think I have put forth some good economic and freedom arguments that people would either agree with, or not, and pick them apart with their facts and logic. Or you could agree with it and pick it apart with facts and logic. I am willing to learn why I am mistaken, but nobody has yet given me a good answer.
You have ignored my arguments or just written me off as a hopeless? Not worth the time and explanation?
Steg said...
In a country where individuality and freedom paired with responsibility are championed by the (I believe) righteous conservatives, how come you would deny people the freedom to make bad choices?
Because the problem with making bad choices are legislatively tied to everyone being responsible for those individuals bad choices. I have no problem if you want to make bad choices, but they should be divested from me and the rest of society being financially responsibility for your bad choices. Do you agree or not?
Jack Webb only played a humorless pompous pedantic detective on TV.
Meth, I agree with that.
I think the federal government should stick to its constitutionally enumerated limits. States have the power granted them that the citizenry of each state can vote how they want that to be- and that is the level I'd prefer the argument be on.
The welfare state is a horrible pox on the American people. My base position is that man is fallen, and everyone is capable of evil. Most of us hold it in check, some people really need religion to keep themselves right, and some people will never be helped. Everyone has a purpose, some serve as a bad example.
At our most basic, if we would acknowledge human nature and create strong incentives that make us really consider our course of action.
Trooper- For the children! Why did the children turn to drugs? It was because they likely did not have a positive father figure in their lives. What enables that? The welfare state! Big daddy government creates the incentives for pregnant women to remain single and unwed, because they rake in the benefits.
This creates a cycle of dependency, and in turn sucks the productive substance of most normal people in the form of redistribution.
The drug ware enables proponents of big government to add more programs, surveillance, ever expanding their reach into each of our lives. The fanaticism carries over into things like where the garbage men had to be sued to not go through your trash to make sure you weren't committing a recycling crime.
The IRS setting 10,000 as an arbitrary number for suspicious deposits- and if you do less than that it is suspicious because you avoided their arbitrary number. Mamamia!
Meth - I saw a righteous rant somewhere that is exactly what you are saying. Hey, I found it:
http://www.zombietime.com/zomblog/?p=1224
"Now, I really don’t care if you overeat, smoke like a chimney, hump like a bunny or forget to lock the safety mechanism on your pistol as you jam it in your waistband. Fine by me. And as a laissez-faire social-libertarian live-and-let-live kind of person, I would never under normal circumstances condemn anyone for any of the behaviors listed above. That is: Until the bill for your stupidity shows up in my mailbox. Then suddenly, I’m forced to care about what you do, because I’m being forced to pay for the consequences."
Post a Comment