Trump Makes Yuge Deal w China to Reclassify Fentanyl Variations

[presence]

My sibling was destroyed by heroin.

Users are rarely if ever on clean 100% poppy sourced heroin;
since the 90's most of the junk on the streets is at least cut with synthesized "research".

There are are thousands of known fentanyl analogues; perhaps 100,000's more unknown opiods:

https://isomerdesign.com/PiHKAL/tabl...anyl&sort=name

The same is true in mj, cocaine, meth, and psychedelic markets; times have changed. The research spectrum is very broad and its market penetration deeper than one would think; the streets are full of unknowing - I got it from a friend - test subjects who believe they're taking established, well known substances.

As they say,

"Moonshine production shot up in the 1920s,
with many of the new cooks having no idea what they were doing.
As a result, some of the product contained toxic compounds."

[dannno]

As long as we have a welfare state, we need MOAR government to stop immigration.

I wouldn't say that is always true, but a quick analysis of our current situation would indicate that in order to preserve our FREEDOMS in the future, as a society, it is currently necessary to secure our borders... because the way things are setup now, the rights violations that occur due to unfettered immigration vastly outweighs the rights violations that occur from protecting the border.

In addition, we are letting in people who want to violate the rights we still have even further.

63% of Non-Citizen Households Access Welfare Programs
Compared to 35% of native households

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...ive-households

As long as we have blowback, we need a bigger military.

Wrong. The large military expenditures causes the blowback.

As long as other countries tax their citizens, we need to raise our tariffs.

In order to negotiate lower tariffs with other countries, sometimes leverage is needed.

Trump got China to eliminate their 40% tariff on imported cars.

As long as government is involved in Health Care, we need MOAR government to manage it better...

Wrong and irrelevant. China doesn't even need a bigger government, they already have their apparatuses setup to deal with trade, it is just a matter of changing how they deal with this particular item.

[CaptUSA]

Wrong.

It's all the same, Dannno. You recognize big government is bad, and yet when government causes a problem, you want even MOAR government to fix the problem.

As to this topic, you correctly identified the problem, but your solution is just MOAR of what caused the problem in the first place. By taking your approach (and the Orange conman's), the effect you will undoubtedly see is that there will be a new substitute drug with even more danger. Then, we'll be back here in another decade with you defending MOAR government mandates to solve that problem.

And this goes with all those other issues as well.

[presence]

..

[dannno]

It's all the same, Dannno. You recognize big government is bad, and yet when government causes a problem, you want even MOAR government to fix the problem.

As to this topic, you correctly identified the problem, but your solution is just MOAR of what caused the problem in the first place. By taking your approach (and the Orange conman's), the effect you will undoubtedly see is that there will be a new substitute drug with even more danger. Then, we'll be back here in another decade with you defending MOAR government mandates to solve that problem.

And this goes with all those other issues as well.

That isn't right at all.

If we are going to have a government, I want a government that protects the most amount of rights as possible and gives us the most freedom possible. If that means asking, or voting or hoping that politicians - who I recognize are the problem in the first place - to form policies that maximize my rights, I'm ok with that.

If that means sitting back and watching the government create a situation that is going to turn us into a commie hell hole, then I am opposed.

The government exists, so rights are going to be violated. The question is how do we maximize our freedom and minimize rights violations.

Allowing unfettered immigration while we have a huge welfare state is going to maximize rights violations and minimize freedom. A much better alternative is border security, even though that includes a small amount of rights violations, it is far fewer than the alternative. An even better alternative to border security would be getting rid of the welfare state. But I'm not going to sit back and do neither, then end up with the worse rights violations you can possibly imagine. That is the worst decision you can possibly make.

[CCTelander]

It's all the same, Dannno. You recognize big government is bad, and yet when government causes a problem, you want even MOAR government to fix the problem.

As to this topic, you correctly identified the problem, but your solution is just MOAR of what caused the problem in the first place. By taking your approach (and the Orange conman's), the effect you will undoubtedly see is that there will be a new substitute drug with even more danger. Then, we'll be back here in another decade with you defending MOAR government mandates to solve that problem.

And this goes with all those other issues as well.

As usual your analysis is spot on. This is precisely the kind of behavior on the part of "liberty advocates" over the last half century or so that got us where we are today. So, naturally, the wisest course of action now would be to double down on it?!?!? I can't quite put my finger on it but there seems to be a tiny little flaw inthat plan.

[presence]

Wrong. The large military expenditures causes the blowback.

wait so you're saying free cheese for everyone isn't causing an invasion of commie rats?

[CCTelander]

That isn't right at all.

If we are going to have a government, I want a government that protects the most amount of rights as possible and gives us the most freedom possible. If that means asking, or voting or hoping that politicians - who I recognize are the problem in the first place - to form policies that maximize my rights, I'm ok with that.

If that means sitting back and watching the government create a situation that is going to turn us into a commie hell hole, then I am opposed.

The government exists, so rights are going to be violated. The question is how do we maximize our freedom and minimize rights violations.

Allowing unfettered immigration while we have a huge welfare state is going to maximize rights violations and minimize freedom. A much better alternative is border security, even though that includes a small amount of rights violations, it is far fewer than the alternative. An even better alternative to border security would be getting rid of the welfare state. But I'm not going to sit back and do neither, then end up with the worse rights violations you can possibly imagine. That is the worst decision you can possibly make.

One massive false dilemma fallacy. There are many more possible options beside the two extremes you're trying to portray as the only possible choices. But I'm pretty sure you already know that.

[dannno]

wait so you're saying free cheese for everyone isn't causing an invasion of commie rats?

Of course it is.. and that would be the preferable way to deal with it. If I could press a button and deal with it that way, that would be awesome.

But that isn't a practical reality at the moment.. protecting the border is somewhat of a practical reality. The question is whether protecting the border is better than not. Protecting the border is government action. But it's also Constitutional government action, which doesn't excuse it entirely, but it also happens to be preferable to not protecting the border, draining our resources and turning the country even more leftist.

[dannno]

One massive false dilemma fallacy. There are many more possible options beside the two extremes you're trying to portray as the only possible choices. But I'm pretty sure you already know that.

You think that ending entitlements/welfare is potentially a practical reality in our current system?

I would love for it to happen, I just don't see a path to it. I see a path to protecting the border - a constitutional path, and a practical path.

[fcreature]

My first, longest and best friend of 25+ years died very recently from an unclean heroin overdose. He was also a libertarian, an early 2006 Ron Paul supporter and champion of personal freedom.

He had his fair share of personal struggles and mental health problems which put him on this path - but he was keenly aware of his problems and was actively and purposefully working on bettering himself and improving his condition. One slip after 6 months of complete sobriety and a bad batch of heroin ended his life. And this was someone who was educated about safe drug use.

To this day, the entire situation seems unreal and unbelievable.

I don't know how this has affected my views on these issues as I'm still working through that but it has certainly made an impact on me.

The fentanyl problem is very, very real.

[Ender]

Some of you wankers don't get it.

What if the government made all food illegal, except for poisonous foods? Then the government started producing and handing out poisonous foods to the population?

If I said they should be prevented from handing out poisonous foods in that situation, would you say people should have the freedom to buy and sell poisonous foods that are going to kill them?

Of course they should have that freedom, in a free market, but there isn't really a market for poisonous foods from a human consumption standpoint when regular food is available. So from a human consumption standpoint, those foods wouldn't exist in a free market. They only exist because the government is producing them and handing them out, and they are only demanded because regular food is illegal by those very same people. These are evil people, and this is their plan. And you are willing to undergo self-destruction because they tricked you into doing something absolutely retarded because you are mindlessly clinging to an ideology.

Eh....most all the "legal" food in 'Murika IS poisonous.

Try buying or selling raw milk.

[Swordsmyth]

Users are rarely if ever on clean 100% poppy sourced heroin;
since the 90's most of the junk on the streets is at least cut with synthesized "research".

There are are thousands of known fentanyl analogues; perhaps 100,000's more unknown opiods:

https://isomerdesign.com/PiHKAL/tabl...anyl&sort=name

The same is true in mj, cocaine, meth, and psychedelic markets; times have changed. The research spectrum is very broad and its market penetration deeper than one would think; the streets are full of unknowing - I got it from a friend - test subjects who believe they're taking established, well known substances.

As they say,

"Moonshine production shot up in the 1920s,
with many of the new cooks having no idea what they were doing.
As a result, some of the product contained toxic compounds."

And with both moonshine and drugs the feds have been known to taint them on purpose.

[presence]

Of course it is.. and that would be the preferable way to deal with it. If I could press a button and deal with it that way, that would be awesome.

I could fix the whole problem with one small sign:

Welcome to USA:
You may work, pray, travel, marry, and keep a home
You may not claim benefits




hocus pocus, no budget, no taxes, nothing to upkeep, problem solved

next?

[dannno]

I could fix the whole problem with one small sign:

Welcome to USA:
You may work, pray, travel, marry, and keep a home
You may not claim benefits




hocus pocus, no budget, no taxes, nothing to upkeep, problem solved

next?

Ya, that's called pressing a button. If I could do that, I would.

Getting rid of welfare/entitlements, we should absolutely be working toward that.. but it's really not a practical reality at the moment. There are way too many people dependent on them, and way too many other people who think we need a government safety net.

On the other hand, the majority of the population wants to protect the border.. Normally I'd be in the minority, but in this case if we don't, well, we certainly won't end entitlements.. in fact they will just get bigger, and we will have a bigger leftist voting block to deal with.

[Wooden Indian]

I could fix the whole problem with one small sign:

Welcome to USA:
You may work, pray, travel, marry, and keep a home
You may not claim benefits




hocus pocus, no budget, no taxes, nothing to upkeep, problem solved

next?

I like it, but one small addition....

"You may not vote or claim benefits"

Otherwise, 4 years after the sign went up, it would be replaced with, "Welcome to USA:
You are entitled to Equality of Outcome and Free $#@!."

[Swordsmyth]

I like it, but one small addition....

"You may not vote or claim benefits"

Otherwise, 4 years after the sign went up, it would be replaced with, "Welcome to USA:
You are entitled to Equality of Outcome and Free $#@!."

Add "your children won't be citizens and you can't stay forever" or it will just take a few decades longer.

[Ender]

I could fix the whole problem with one small sign:

Welcome to USA:
You may work, pray, travel, marry, and keep a home
You may not claim benefits




hocus pocus, no budget, no taxes, nothing to upkeep, problem solved

next?

Perfect.

[Swordsmyth]

Originally Posted by presence

I could fix the whole problem with one small sign:

Welcome to USA:
You may work, pray, travel, marry, and keep a home
You may not claim benefits




hocus pocus, no budget, no taxes, nothing to upkeep, problem solved

next?

Perfect.

Because signs work by themselves?

[enhanced_deficit]

Some things about fentanyl you probably didn't know.

It turns out that it has been illegal to export fentanyl from China, but under their laws chemists were able to make slight variations to the molecular structure that did not fall under the law. They were able to legally export them across the globe.

No more. China has changed their laws so that it is no longer legal to export fentanyl or their variations.

It probably won't disappear, but at least it will be a lot less common.

Bold leadership in war on drugs.

Cops rethinking Swat raid tactics due to fentanyl.........



Trump wants to spend more on opioid task force that found 0.2 grams of heroin in week-long sting

The White House wants to quadruple the budget for a Department of Interior policing effort modeled on dead-ender Drug War ideas.

Alan Pyke Apr 17, 2019


Click here to view the original image of 979x652px.
President Donald Trump, pictured here at a dope-on-the-table press conference with immigration officials in January, is seeking a fourfold increase in funding for a federal task force with dubious results. CREDIT: JIM WATSON/AFP/Getty Images A week-long specialized opioid policing operation in Arizona seized 0.2 grams of heroin in March, inadvertently illustrating the shortcomings of the Trump administration’s response to the overdose and addiction epidemic.
Officers from a half-dozen agencies also netted more meaningful quantities of marijuana and methamphetamine in the eight-day crackdown, which was convened under the aegis of the Interior Department’s (DOI) Opioid Reduction Task Force.

https://thinkprogress.org/trump-want...-5344fe5fb552/



China announces new crackdown on fentanyl in win for US President Trump
By Steven Jiang and Ben Westcott, CNN
Mon April 1, 2019
Beijing (CNN)The Chinese government will add fentanyl-related substances to their list of controlled drugs from May 1, in a move aimed at curtailingthe manufacturing and distribution of one of the world's most powerful opioids.