Jump to content

The Myth of the “Black Market”


Recommended Posts

But most importantly, we must learn to overcome our own misconceptions of the problem. As Kairys writes, “the common image of an underground, illegal market is largely fictional.” The ability of dangerous people to easily obtain guns is the result of our weak gun laws, which do little to regulate the firearms industry. The good news? Significant progress can be made in reducing gun violence as soon as our elected officials are made to realize that “the loss of life, the economic and social costs, and the undermining of the safety and the quality of life in America are unacceptable.”https://www.csgv.org/myth-black-market/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, guilluamezenz said:

But most importantly, we must learn to overcome our own misconceptions of the problem. As Kairys writes, “the common image of an underground, illegal market is largely fictional.” The ability of dangerous people to easily obtain guns is the result of our weak gun laws, which do little to regulate the firearms industry. The good news? Significant progress can be made in reducing gun violence as soon as our elected officials are made to realize that “the loss of life, the economic and social costs, and the undermining of the safety and the quality of life in America are unacceptable.”https://www.csgv.org/myth-black-market/

 

 

What a load of crap.

 

Remember Prohibition?

 

You make something illegal and you create a black market for it.  When the majority of the American people support the ownership of something that is banned, the law itself becomes unenforceable.

 

Connecticut and New York enacted so-called "assault" weapon bans, and grandfathered in weapons that were to be registered.  To this point, they have a noncompliance rate exceeding 90%, and the officials are whimpering about it.

 

Your position is one of self-delusion and intellectual cowardice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Spartan said:

 

 

What a load of crap.

 

Remember Prohibition?

 

You make something illegal and you create a black market for it.  When the majority of the American people support the ownership of something that is banned, the law itself becomes unenforceable.

 

Connecticut and New York enacted so-called "assault" weapon bans, and grandfathered in weapons that were to be registered.  To this point, they have a noncompliance rate exceeding 90%, and the officials are whimpering about it.

 

Your position is one of self-delusion and intellectual cowardice.

i lived in Toronto , in the late 70s i wrote a book about this in graduate school from my life experiences in California and Ontario in the late 70s early 80s and my experiences with the drugs trade and with illegal weapons, the stricter gun laws are the harder time we had procuring them, difficult but not impossible granted. but i know first hand stricter laws in Canada made it harder to get handguns and automatic weapons, we had to settle for sawed off shot guns and the hunting rifle, i know that stricter laws can reduce illegal guns, i know that for a fact, i wrote a parer and a book about it, the book was fiction but it was based on my personal experience

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, guilluamezenz said:

i lived in Toronto , in the late 70s i wrote a book about this in graduate school from my life experiences in California and Ontario in the late 70s early 80s and my experiences with the drugs trade and with illegal weapons, the stricter gun laws are the harder time we had procuring them, difficult but not impossible granted. but i know first hand stricter laws in Canada made it harder to get handguns and automatic weapons, we had to settle for sawed off shot guns and the hunting rifle, i know that stricter laws can reduce illegal guns, i know that for a fact, i wrote a parer and a book about it, the book was fiction but it was based on my personal experience

 

5 hours ago, Spartan said:

 

 

What a load of crap.

 

Remember Prohibition?

 

You make something illegal and you create a black market for it.  When the majority of the American people support the ownership of something that is banned, the law itself becomes unenforceable.

 

Connecticut and New York enacted so-called "assault" weapon bans, and grandfathered in weapons that were to be registered.  To this point, they have a noncompliance rate exceeding 90%, and the officials are whimpering about it.

 

Your position is one of self-delusion and intellectual cowardice.

yes i do remember prohibition , i did a thesis paper in that back in the 80s too 

About 33,500,000 results (0.76 seconds) 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Search Results

Featured snippet from the web

 
The amendment prohibited the commercial manufacture and distribution of alcoholic beverages; it did not prohibit use, nor production for one's own consumption. ... Second, alcohol consumption declined dramatically during Prohibition. Cirrhosis death rates for men were 29.5 per 100,000 in 1911 and 10.7 in 1929.Oct 16, 1989
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Spartan said:

 

 

What a load of crap.

 

Remember Prohibition?

 

You make something illegal and you create a black market for it.  When the majority of the American people support the ownership of something that is banned, the law itself becomes unenforceable.

 

Connecticut and New York enacted so-called "assault" weapon bans, and grandfathered in weapons that were to be registered.  To this point, they have a noncompliance rate exceeding 90%, and the officials are whimpering about it.

 

Your position is one of self-delusion and intellectual cowardice.

Second, alcohol consumption declined dramatically during Prohibition. Cirrhosis death rates for men were 29.5 per 100,000 in 1911 and 10.7 in 1929. Admissions to state mental hospitals for alcoholic psychosis declined from 10.1 per 100,000 in 1919 to 4.7 in 1928.

Arrests for public drunkennness and disorderly conduct declined 50 percent between 1916 and 1922. For the population as a whole, the best estimates are that consumption of alcohol declined by 30 percent to 50 percent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Phoenix68 said:

 

I was thinkin' the same thing......

 

 

 

March 20, 2017

 

and you think legalization will make this problem and it is a problem better or worse? Marijuana Is More Dangerous Than You Think  

As legislation spreads, more Americans are becoming heavy users of cannabis despite its links to violence and mental illness.

Over the past 30 years, a shrewd and expensive lobbying campaign has made Americans more tolerant of marijuana. In November 2018, Michigan became the tenth state to legalize recreational cannabis use; New Jersey and others may soon follow. Already, more than 200 million Americans live in states that have legalized marijuana for medical or recreational use. Yet even as marijuana use has become more socially acceptable, psychiatrists and epidemiologists have reached a consensus that it presents more serious risks than most people realize.

Contrary to the predictions of both advocates and opponents, legalization hasn’t led to a huge increase in people using the drug >casually<. About 15% of Americans used cannabis at least once in 2017, up from 10% in 2006, according to the federal government’s National Survey on Drug Use and Health. By contrast, almost 70% of Americans had an alcoholic drink in the past year.

 

But the number of Americans who use cannabis >heavily< is soaring. In 2006, about 3 million Americans reported using the drug at least 300 times a year, the standard for daily use. By 2017, that number had increased to 8 million—approaching the 12 million Americans who drank every day. Put another way, only one in 15 drinkers consumed alcohol daily; about one in five marijuana users used cannabis that often

 

And they are consuming cannabis that is far more potent than ever before, as measured by the amount of THC it contains. THC, or delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol, is the chemical responsible for the drug’s psychoactive effects. In the 1970s, most marijuana contained less than 2% THC. Today, marijuana routinely contains 20–25% THC, thanks to sophisticated farming and cloning techniques, and to the demand of users to get a stronger high more quickly. In states where cannabis is legal, many users prefer extracts that are nearly pure THC.

 

 

 

Some population-level data does exist, though. Research from Finland and Denmark, two countries that track mental illness more accurately, shows a significant increase in psychosis since 2000, following an increase in cannabis use. And last September, a large survey found a rise in serious mental illness in the U.S. too. In 2017, 7.5% of young adults met the criteria for serious mental illness, double the rate in 2008.

None of these studies prove that rising cannabis use has caused population-wide increases in psychosis or other mental illness, although they do offer suggestive evidence of a link. What is clear is that, in individual cases, marijuana can cause psychosis, and psychosis is a high risk factor for violence. What’s more, much of that violence occurs when psychotic people are using drugs. As long as people with schizophrenia are avoiding recreational drugs, they are only moderately more likely to become violent than healthy people. But when they use drugs, their risk of violence skyrockets. The drug they are most likely to use is cannabis.

The most obvious way that cannabis fuels violence in psychotic people is through its tendency to cause paranoia. Even marijuana advocates acknowledge that the drug can cause paranoia; the risk is so obvious that users joke about it, and dispensaries advertise certain strains as less likely to do so. But for people with psychotic disorders, paranoia can fuel extreme violence. A 2007 paper in the Medical Journal of Australia looked at 88 defendants who had committed homicide during psychotic episodes. It found that most of the killers believed they were in danger from the victim, and almost two-thirds reported misusing cannabis—more than alcohol and amphetamines combined.

The link between marijuana and violence doesn’t appear limited to people with pre-existing psychosis. Researchers have studied alcohol and violence for generations, proving that alcohol is a risk factor for domestic abuse, assault and even murder. Far less work has been done on marijuana, in part because advocates have stigmatized anyone who raises the issue. Still, there are studies showing that marijuana use is a significant risk factor for violence.

A 2012 paper in the Journal of Interpersonal Violence, examining a federal survey of more than 9,000 adolescents, found that marijuana use was associated with a doubling of domestic violence in the U.S. A 2017 paper in the journal Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, examining drivers of violence among 6,000 British and Chinese men, found that drug use was linked to a fivefold increase in violence, and the drug used was nearly always cannabis.

Before states legalized recreational cannabis, advocates predicted that legalization would let police focus on hardened criminals rather than on marijuana smokers, and thus reduce violent crime. Some advocates even claim that legalization has reduced violent crime: In a 2017 speech calling for federal legalization, Sen. Cory Booker (D, NJ) said that “these states are seeing decreases in violent crime.”

But Mr. Booker is wrong. The first four states to legalize marijuana for recreational use were Colorado and Washington in 2014 and Alaska and Oregon in 2015. Combined, those four states had about 450 murders and 30,300 aggravated assaults in 2013. In 2017, they had almost 620 murders and 38,000 aggravated assaults—an increase far greater than the national average.

Knowing exactly how much of that increase is related to cannabis is impossible without researching every crime. But for centuries, people all over the world have understood that cannabis causes mental illness and violence—just as they’ve known that opiates cause addiction and overdose. Hard data on the relationship between marijuana and madness dates back 150 years, to British asylum registers in India.

Yet 20 years ago, the U.S. moved to encourage wider use of cannabis and opiates. In both cases, we decided we could outsmart these drugs—enjoying their benefits without their costs. And in both cases, we were wrong. Opiates are riskier than cannabis, and the overdose deaths they cause are a more imminent crisis, so public and government attention have focused on them. Soon, the mental illness and violence that follow cannabis use also may be too widespread to ignore.

Footnotes

 

Alex Berenson is a former New York Times reporter and author of 12 novels. This essay is adapted from his new book, “Tell Your Children: The Truth About Marijuana, Mental Illness and Violence.”

Contact: moc.liamg@rohtuanosnerebxela

Reprinted with permission Wall Street Journal.

 

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc. Object name is ms116_p0088f1.jpg

 

 

 

Editor’s Note

See “The Cardiovascular Effects of Marijuana: Are the Potential Adverse Effects Worth the High?” on page 146 of this issue.

 


Articles from Missouri Medicine are provided here courtesy of Missouri State Medical Association
 

Formats:

Recent Activity

See more...
 
 
 
 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m not a fan of the idea of having the agents of the state (the cops) being better armed than the rest of the public. So unless your ideas of gun control will affect the police equally, no deal. Yes, I am talking about the same police the left protest for being trigger happy and dangerous, yet want those same police to have better guns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am glad you bring up weed. The left legalizes that in blue states at the state level in face of federal laws, which trump state laws. The reason I point that out, is red states will do the same in the face of any new federal democrat gun laws. They will make any guns banned remain legal in their state and not allow local and state police to enforce anything; just like the left does with federal immigration laws. Red states will be SANCTUARIES for guns.

 

See how that works? If one side gets to ignore the laws they don’t like, then the other side will as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Old Mack said:

 

Any update on violence against babies in the womb ? 

in the womb they arent babies they are a fetus and even in the old testement a fetus was considered property not human it had the same value as a goat or a pig if you wrongfully killed a fetus you paid a fine you did not ay with your life, that was the law, read the bible

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, guilluamezenz said:

i lived in Toronto , in the late 70s i wrote a book about this in graduate school from my life experiences in California and Ontario in the late 70s early 80s and my experiences with the drugs trade and with illegal weapons, the stricter gun laws are the harder time we had procuring them, difficult but not impossible granted. but i know first hand stricter laws in Canada made it harder to get handguns and automatic weapons, we had to settle for sawed off shot guns and the hunting rifle, i know that stricter laws can reduce illegal guns, i know that for a fact, i wrote a parer and a book about it, the book was fiction but it was based on my personal experience

 

 

Everything you write is fiction.  Washington D.C. passed gun control in the mid-70's and banned guns in condition for self-defense... and their homicide rate grew 300% over the next decade while the homicide rates in the surrounding areas dropped.

 

In the UK, criminals tended to use crap .22's and .25s, plus the occasional .32 until the massive bans hit.... after which the criminals were armed with 9mm's and Italian SMG's.  And this was an ISLAND, which Canada isn't.

 

Oh, and the AK-toting terrorists in France apparently didn't have a problem getting the guns they wanted either.

 

5 hours ago, guilluamezenz said:

Second, alcohol consumption declined dramatically during Prohibition. Cirrhosis death rates for men were 29.5 per 100,000 in 1911 and 10.7 in 1929. Admissions to state mental hospitals for alcoholic psychosis declined from 10.1 per 100,000 in 1919 to 4.7 in 1928.

Arrests for public drunkennness and disorderly conduct declined 50 percent between 1916 and 1922. For the population as a whole, the best estimates are that consumption of alcohol declined by 30 percent to 50 percent.

 

ROFLMAO!!  Oh, wow, you REALLY don't know what you're talking about.

 

I had relatives directly involved in Prohibition; some were cops, some smugglers, and your statistics aren't worth boiled bovine excrement.  They don't have any relationship with reality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, guilluamezenz said:

But most importantly, we must learn to overcome our own misconceptions of the problem. As Kairys writes, “the common image of an underground, illegal market is largely fictional.” The ability of dangerous people to easily obtain guns is the result of our weak gun laws, which do little to regulate the firearms industry. The good news? Significant progress can be made in reducing gun violence as soon as our elected officials are made to realize that “the loss of life, the economic and social costs, and the undermining of the safety and the quality of life in America are unacceptable.”https://www.csgv.org/myth-black-market/

Sorry. Constitution is the Supreme law of the land. Don't like our countries foundation?

 

Leave. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, DeepBreath said:

Sorry. Constitution is the Supreme law of the land. Don't like our countries foundation?

 

Leave. 

basically your constittutional argument is, well i know i lost the debate, your right on everything but the magic book says i can have a bazzoka

i may well leave most of the reason i stay is just to piss people like you off

i hate americans you sicke me your selfish your greedy and for no excusable reason you are unbelievably stupid

so no i wont leave

your constitution gave states the right to form militias, no where does it grant an individual the right to individuals to own military weapons outside the authority of the government (a well regulated militia) sorry about that , and the constitution can be changed the second amendment can be abolished, which it should be , you little bitchhttp://nymag.com/intelligencer/2018/03/2nd-amendment-hasnt-always-guaranteed-the-right-to-own-guns.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, guilluamezenz said:

basically your constittutional argument is, well i know i lost the debate, your right on everything but the magic book says i can have a bazzoka

i may well leave most of the reason i stay is just to piss people like you off

i hate americans you sicke me your selfish your greedy and for no excusable reason you are unbelievably stupid

so no i wont leave

your constitution gave states the right to form militias, no where does it grant an individual the right to individuals to own military weapons outside the authority of the government (a well regulated militia) sorry about that , and the constitution can be changed the second amendment can be abolished, which it should be , you little bitchhttp://nymag.com/intelligencer/2018/03/2nd-amendment-hasnt-always-guaranteed-the-right-to-own-guns.html

https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/what-does-it-take-to-repeal-a-constitutional-amendment

 

Changing the actual words of the Constitution does take an amendment, as does actually deleting, or repealing, an amendment. Including the first 10 amendments, the Bill of Rights, which were ratified in 1789, the Senate historian estimates that approximately 11,699 amendment changes have been proposed in Congress through 2016. Only one amendment, the 18thAmendment that established Prohibition, was later repealed by the states.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...