Skip

Narc!
April 8, 2005 1:29 PM   Subscribe

High school kids. Doing drugs! A 23-year-old female undercover agent posed as a student at Milford High School. The investigation culminated Friday with the arrest of 16 students on drug-trafficking charges. Twelve are juveniles. Public opinion is running 20 - 1 in favor of the sting.
Sandy Howdyshell, a 34-year-old Milford graduate who has an elementary school student in the district, said she was undecided on the school district's $108.6 million bond issue that will appear on ballots May 3 - until she heard about the undercover investigation... "I think it was a brilliant idea to put an undercover cop in the high school," Howdyshell said. "This event certainly has made an impact in my eyes. Now I know I'll be voting to support Milford schools."
posted by trharlan (93 comments total) 1 user marked this as a favorite

 
You'd better be ready to
be ready to jump
21 Jump........Street!

posted by Asparagirl at 1:36 PM on April 8, 2005


"This event certainly has made an impact in my eyes. Now I know I'll be voting to support Milford schools."

Huh? You mean, before they arrested sixteen teenagers for selling pot, she didn't support the school?
posted by Clay201 at 1:39 PM on April 8, 2005


$60,000'll buy a lot of doughnuts, which is too bad considering how underfunded most public school districts are these days.
posted by item at 1:41 PM on April 8, 2005


well thank god, one battle won in the War on Drugs. "Mission Accomplished" indeed good show gentlemen.
posted by plexiwatt at 1:46 PM on April 8, 2005


Public opinion is running 20 - 1 in favor of the sting.

sweet . . . I'm down to being in sync with 5% of the population. Now I can get with some Supreme Mathematics.
posted by hackly_fracture at 1:46 PM on April 8, 2005


We had undercover police infiltrate our dorm in college. Two 30-something year olds, moving into a dorm room midterm, with sleeping bags. I broke the story in our local underground rag, after inquiring about the two men to student housing and recieving a suspicious response for an otherwise innocous question. Also, whenever they asked for drugs, we just asked them to buy us beer.

The four 18-year-olds arrested on felony aggravated drug-trafficking charges were Kyle Dewitt, Jackson Tubbs, Andrew McAllister and Jared Schwartz. The four were jailed in Clermont County and will have hearings Monday.

Because felony charges really help people clean up their act.
posted by iamck at 1:47 PM on April 8, 2005


The most annoying aspect from this end is to read the fawning police-state propaganda in what I can safely say has the worst editorial page of any daily paper I've ever read. The Cincinnati Enquirer.
Their use of an undercover private investigator who posed as a student is controversial and may trigger a legal challenge. But it's a bold rebuke of the denial and excuse-making that takes place in too many families, schools and communities. Milford took action on behalf of kids. We applaud the message and leave it to the Milford community to debate the means.
That's right, make felons of those pot smokers, because, God knows, there isn't any other way...
posted by airguitar at 1:50 PM on April 8, 2005


Some students at the school, and one of the parents of an arrested student who didn't want her name used, said they are concerned about the tactics used during the investigation - that some of the students arrested were caught up in drug transactions they wouldn't have participated in without the prodding of the private detective.

Raise your hands if you're a non-pot-smoker and you've ever found yourself 'caught up in' a drug transaction against your will. I've been in the same room as some shady deals much more serious than this, but no one was forcing me to be there, or to purchase anything. I wonder what actually went down.

Never been supportive of the War on Drugs™, but c'mon.
posted by dhoyt at 1:51 PM on April 8, 2005


Raise your hands if you're a non-pot-smoker and you've ever found yourself 'caught up in' a drug transaction against your will.

When I was 16, a hot 23-year-old dealer could have created in me whatever will she chose.
posted by Kwantsar at 1:56 PM on April 8, 2005


Have you ever watched Cops? They badger poor suckers in front of gas stations until they follow some lady to the back, where about 5 police pounce on him and arrest him for solicitation. They wake sleeping truckers up and do the same thing.
Of course the victim has to actually eventually say "yes" to something, but, if you're anything like me, sometimes you do agree to things you wish you hadn't.
posted by sonofsamiam at 1:57 PM on April 8, 2005


Teaching the next generation that trust is dead and experience is overrated and best left to the previous generation.
posted by UseyurBrain at 1:57 PM on April 8, 2005


Dhoyt: I'm no expert, but I do believe, in most places, that a drug transaction is when drugs are given from one person to another. There doesn't need to be an exchange of money. In that sense, it is conceivable that a person could get caught up in a drug transaction and not even really think that what they were doing was particularly wrong.
posted by Doug at 1:58 PM on April 8, 2005


What? Kids doing pot? Shock! Horror!

I thought that the purpose of schools were to make sure that students grow up to become well-educated citizens that contribute to the community.

Busting them for dealing pot and shrooms, whether you agree morally with it or not, gives them a record and will most likely further harden these kids against society.

No one wins in this kind of crap.
posted by Hot Like Your 12V Wire at 1:58 PM on April 8, 2005


I'm not surprised by the pot, X, and prescription drugs, but shrooms? I thought those went out of style a long time ago.
posted by Suparnova at 1:59 PM on April 8, 2005


aw... man. Friggin' NARCs... harshing my buzz...

Hey, speaking of NARC [warning: flash, addictive (no pun intended)]
posted by indiebass at 2:00 PM on April 8, 2005


But sooner or later,
Her new friends will realize that
Julie's been working for the drug squad
Oh, Julie's been working for the... DRUG SQUAD!
posted by Mayor Curley at 2:00 PM on April 8, 2005


$60,000'll buy a lot of doughnuts, which is too bad considering how underfunded most public school districts are these days.

mmmm... thousands of donuts.

Sorry, I'm hungry right now, and the thought of light, flakey orbsits of donut cake with thin flakes of frosting melting in my mouth has subsumed my outrage.

Raise your hands if you're a non-pot-smoker and you've ever found yourself 'caught up in' a drug transaction against your will. I've been in the same room as some shady deals much more serious than this, but no one was forcing me to be there, or to purchase anything. I wonder what actually went down.

Sure, but they wouldn't have sold her the drugs if they knew she was a cop, now would they?

Anyway, I don't know exactly what the motivation behind entrapment laws are, but we have them, and if the kids sold this woman drugs because she was asking for them then that seems like entrapment to me.

---

As far as I know, most people only sell drugs to their friends, people they know and trust. Which means this woman probably spent weeks and weeks getting to be good friends with the "criminals". It just seems sleazy to me.
posted by delmoi at 2:00 PM on April 8, 2005


I'm not surprised by the pot, X, and prescription drugs, but shrooms? I thought those went out of style a long time ago.

What!??! Heresy!

Mushrooms rock!
posted by delmoi at 2:02 PM on April 8, 2005


*sigh*
I'm sure any worried kid who's thinking of trying drugs will now happily waltz up to the school counsellors/teachers to discuss their problems and options and feel that warm fuzzy feeling of safety. Strange way to instil trust not to mention positive role modelling. Gah.
posted by peacay at 2:03 PM on April 8, 2005


Busting them for dealing pot and shrooms, whether you agree morally with it or not, gives them a record and will most likely further harden these kids against society.

Not unless they're tried as adults, which they probably wont be. They might get expelled, and have trouble gaining employment, but hopefully this won't derail their lives.
posted by delmoi at 2:04 PM on April 8, 2005


And here I was, all armed and ready with a 21 Jump Street joke, only to find out that Asparagirl beat me to it....

Damn you Asparagirl!!!!!!!!
posted by spilon at 2:07 PM on April 8, 2005


Christ man, Isn't anyone "cool" any more?
posted by AllesKlar at 2:07 PM on April 8, 2005


(Requisite 'cutting heads off hydras' comment here.)
posted by blendor at 2:09 PM on April 8, 2005


They might get expelled, and have trouble gaining employment, but hopefully this won't derail their lives.

Four of them are older than 18 and are being tried as adults.
posted by airguitar at 2:09 PM on April 8, 2005


It just seems sleazy to me.

Agreed. The whole arrangement is sleazy, to be sure. But as for this particular case—it's done, and the kids have already been busted doing something they knew was illegal. Is there really any way to fight your way out of it? It's hard to tell from the article whether protests of 'entrapment' are going to stick or not.

And, yeah—who does shrooms anymore?
posted by dhoyt at 2:11 PM on April 8, 2005


Some, however, have cried foul, saying those arrested are just kids, and kids make mistakes. Now, some students face felony charges, putting college and scholarships in peril.

Well, boo hoo! I am really crushed that teenage drug dealers might lose their college scholarships because they got caught dealing drugs in high school!
posted by Durwood at 2:13 PM on April 8, 2005


Shrooms are huge. Y'all are just out of the loop.
posted by sonofsamiam at 2:13 PM on April 8, 2005




You're not a cop, right?
posted by airguitar at 2:13 PM on April 8, 2005


As far as I know, most people only sell drugs to their friends, people they know and trust. Which means this woman probably spent weeks and weeks getting to be good friends with the "criminals". It just seems sleazy to me.

Exactly. NARCs are one of the lowest forms of humanity - people willing to lie, cheat, and betray, all to punish non-violent people (in this case, non-violent kids). In a just society, they would be the ones who couldn't vote or get a decent job, not the "felons" they've set out to destroy.
posted by vorfeed at 2:14 PM on April 8, 2005 [1 favorite]


I wonder if the mayor is running for reelection soon.
posted by Mean Mr. Bucket at 2:15 PM on April 8, 2005


I'm not surprised by the pot, X, and prescription drugs, but shrooms? I thought those went out of style a long time ago.
Probably the small time dealers, want-a-bees, the real dealers may have figured her out to be a narc. Looking at the drugs is why I say this, not much.
posted by thomcatspike at 2:18 PM on April 8, 2005


A drug conviction means no money for college, right?
posted by thirteenkiller at 2:20 PM on April 8, 2005


Shrooms are huge. Y'all are just out of the loop.
Does this school have a 4H club? Funny if they were growing in the poop on the school's property.
posted by thomcatspike at 2:22 PM on April 8, 2005


Milford? Isn't that where Gil Thorpe coaches?

-m
posted by Mcable at 2:25 PM on April 8, 2005


prescription drugs,
Ritalin is often passed around. Heck, think an aspirin could warrant the same now. The problem here is not the students being arrested. It's this program fully working which means catching the supplier. Mostly likely these suppliers are not attending high school nor were caught here looking at the drugs confiscated. From reading other stories like this, you just nabbed the chess club’s president handing out a prescription sinus medication, whoopee!
posted by thomcatspike at 2:27 PM on April 8, 2005


Shrooms are huge. Y'all are just out of the loop.

And they apparently come in foil wrapped chocolate hearts--judging from what I've seen transpire at Capitol Hill rummage sales--'Shroom candy hearts. Now, if they only came in a low-carb format.
posted by y2karl at 2:27 PM on April 8, 2005


thirteenkiller: that's right. You become inelegible for federal loans or grants if you have had a drug conviction.
posted by exlotuseater at 2:32 PM on April 8, 2005


Does this school have a 4H club? Funny if they were growing in the poop on the school's property.

Shrooms arn't grown on poop. They're grown on a mixture of vermiculite and brown rice. The spores can be legaly purchased off the 'net. You can get yourself an ounce or two for about $30 in equipment (all of which can be reused if you want to do it again).
posted by delmoi at 2:33 PM on April 8, 2005


delmoi, around my parts, you find them in the cow pastures, ymmv.
posted by thomcatspike at 2:45 PM on April 8, 2005


I am really crushed that teenage drug dealers might lose their college scholarships because they got caught dealing drugs in high school!

Yes, because nothing says "don't do drugs" like preventing someone from getting an education. These little punks need to be punished for the horrendous crimes they have committed. I, for one, think they should have the tips of their tongues cut off, so they can't lick their filthy marijuana cigarettes closed. Afterall, we all know that people who smoke pot in high school inevitably grow up to be rapists and murderers, or even worse, beggars.
posted by TheSpook at 2:49 PM on April 8, 2005


Is there anybody at all here except people who think a) teenagers taking street drugs is no big deal, nothing to worry about; and b) acting to stop it is an outrage? Anybody at all? Just curious.
posted by jfuller at 2:58 PM on April 8, 2005


No, because those things are true.
posted by sonofsamiam at 2:59 PM on April 8, 2005


Since we're being sarcastic.
posted by sonofsamiam at 3:00 PM on April 8, 2005


thirteenkiller: that's right. You become inelegible for federal loans or grants if you have had a drug conviction.

For five years on trafficking (versus a year for possession).
posted by Hot Like Your 12V Wire at 3:01 PM on April 8, 2005


Zounds! Narc-ing on adults is one thing, but children?! Such a morally bankrupt moral pretense. I may, at present, be a part-time pothead, but were I not, I would much prefer my children experimenting with substances while they still lived with me, in a safer environment, instead of waiting until they were in college. This is not a tactic that will inspire abstaining from drug use, this is a tactic that will inspire, as aforementioned by others, abstaining from trusting peers. And that's just ... wrong!
posted by The Great Big Mulp at 3:11 PM on April 8, 2005


"Anybody know where I can get some drugs? I'm looking to score some drugs."



Seriously, this is a complete farce on the whole concept of justice. Anyone who thinks this is anything but absurdly paranoid and counterproductive must be on drugs.
posted by [expletive deleted] at 3:17 PM on April 8, 2005


"Well, boo hoo! I am really crushed that teenage drug dealers might lose their college scholarships because they got caught dealing drugs in high school!"

One of the smartest kids I know in my school (where everyone has a full-tuition scholarship) smokes pot like a champ, does shrooms, and drinks like the storied fish.

There was actually an interesting study done on alcohol and GPA: If you drank instead of studying, there was a substantial negative effect on GPA, but if you both studied and drank there was a slight positive effect.

These kids also probably weren't "drug dealers." If someone gave you fifty cents when you were going to the store and you got them a bag of chips, that doesn't make you a grocer.
posted by TheOnlyCoolTim at 3:19 PM on April 8, 2005


Now we can all sleep safely at night, knowing that our overlords are watching out for us.
posted by theorique at 3:29 PM on April 8, 2005


One thing's for certain: That 23-year-old female undercover agent is totally fucking lame.
posted by Peter H at 3:34 PM on April 8, 2005


Is there anybody at all here except people who think a) teenagers taking street drugs is no big deal, nothing to worry about; and b) acting to stop it is an outrage? Anybody at all? Just curious.
Those were school drugs, current street drugs are; ice, heroin, crack...
posted by thomcatspike at 3:34 PM on April 8, 2005


jfuller, not knowing your age. Are you aware what goes on today? Visit a club or other activity where teens hang in masses. No, not all teens do drugs, yet it not a big deal when you have TV commercials hawking pills to their parents. Have witnessed many teens who are drug free yet deal drugs. It's almost like the college graduates becoming a sports’ bookie.

The problem is not in the school system. It's at a federal level which allows it to trickle down into our society. Then it makes busts which are part of the overall racket in it all.
posted by thomcatspike at 3:41 PM on April 8, 2005


yet it IS not a big deal when you have TV commercials
posted by thomcatspike at 3:42 PM on April 8, 2005


Is there anybody at all here except people who think a) teenagers taking street drugs is no big deal, nothing to worry about; and b) acting to stop it is an outrage? Anybody at all? Just curious.

Yeah, there's c) People whose brains were cracked hard against a frying pan in middle school, only then to have said brains dumped irreversibly into hot brain-frying heat. As children of abuse we want nothing but the same for the innocent still-eggshelled youth.
posted by Peter H at 3:46 PM on April 8, 2005


Please don't be blinded by these teens arrest regarding their life is over. The judicial system may put them in a drug program which will clear their name when completed.
posted by thomcatspike at 3:46 PM on April 8, 2005


I've been reading through these comments looking for someone who would say the first thing that ran through my mind. This detective took eight months to accumulate info for 16 arrests. In a high school. This has got to be the most incompetent inefficient moronical detective on earth. I was not part of the drug crowd while in high school, but I could have found a sixteen in the first month. I'm guessing 16 were passing drugs around on the football team.
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 4:06 PM on April 8, 2005


Wasn't there a movie like this? With Drew Barrymore?
posted by rhapsodie at 4:15 PM on April 8, 2005


The judicial system may put them in a drug program which will clear their name when completed.

God knows they need rehab. I'm in a complete downward spiral. Excuse me while I go light up.
posted by iamck at 4:20 PM on April 8, 2005


I've been reading through these comments looking for someone who would say the first thing that ran through my mind..

In a high school. This has got to be the most incompetent inefficient moronical detective on earth.
No, the teens are more informed.
As I said earlier when I speculated by the drugs that were rounded up -- the bigger dealers knew she was a narc. Imagine; Hi’, you don’t know me and I have more facial hair than you; will you sell me some drugs since we sit near each other in class. Also, around peers, until you partake of the drugs in a group, seems no one is above suspicion that they may narc the druggies out. Adding, since these adolescents may still be at an age in their lives where telling mommy on each other it may happen.
posted by thomcatspike at 4:29 PM on April 8, 2005


Out of curiousity, is this the same Milford where a local church raised a quarter of a million dollars to buy out and shut down a sex-toy shop, only to have Penthouse set down an EROTIC SUPERSTORE in town a few months later?
posted by ilsa at 4:31 PM on April 8, 2005


Different Milford.
posted by airguitar at 5:30 PM on April 8, 2005


I think it's disgusting and immoral both as a police tactic and a waste of the taxpyers' money. And I think people who approve of such things should be taken out and shot.

(Well, okay, maybe not shot.)

These kids also probably weren't "drug dealers." If someone gave you fifty cents when you were going to the store and you got them a bag of chips, that doesn't make you a grocer.

That too. "But Mikey, I really need two grams of weed for my big date Friday! Please? Please? Please find me some?"
posted by davy at 5:33 PM on April 8, 2005


NARCs are one of the lowest forms of humanity

People living near a crack house or shooting gallery might disagree with you.
posted by jonmc at 6:05 PM on April 8, 2005


People living near a crack house or shooting gallery might disagree with you.

Nah. Now if the narcs could actually DO something about the crackhouse or shooting gallery. All a bust does is move the action somewhere else. Notice that while narcs get credit for closing down one drug house, they never get blamed for opening another.
posted by telstar at 6:55 PM on April 8, 2005


There are two things we can do about pot in high school: (a) legalize it, or (b) arrest high school kids who have it. We haven't damned well done (a) yet, so we have to do (b).

That's what the rule of law dictates. The earlier people learn about the rule of law, the better off the whole of society will be. As difficult as this may make the lives of a few, it will be better for the many.
posted by koeselitz at 7:18 PM on April 8, 2005


Damn right ! - Put those kids in a panopticon and watch 'em day and night.

Strap little video cameras around their wrists and give 'em electric shocks when they break the rules.

Idle hands be the Devil's playground, and remember - you're either with us or against us.
posted by troutfishing at 8:32 PM on April 8, 2005


there's a point the pro-legalization people here are missing ... even if pot and such was legal, wouldn't that be just for adults? ... is it really alright to sell drugs to minors? ... even if the people doing it are minors themselves?

i don't support pot laws or the war on drugs at all ... but at what age should people be considered to be responsible enough to make that choice for themselves? ... and if they're under that age, what should we do with people who are supplying them with things we don't think they should have?

this is not necessarily a simple pro/con situation here
posted by pyramid termite at 8:40 PM on April 8, 2005


Tricky. I'm all for it.

But then again, kids are so impressionable that if a cool kid came into town asking where he could get drugs even I might try to point him in the right direction - and I've never touched the stuff.
posted by tomplus2 at 8:51 PM on April 8, 2005


16 yr olds. the absolute bottom of the barrell. this is like going to war and blowing up a couple trees that might be made into a raft that might be used to sail across the atlantic that might be used to buy a scary weapon.
posted by Satapher at 9:34 PM on April 8, 2005


I swear I've seen this before.
posted by SirOmega at 10:27 PM on April 8, 2005


There are two things we can do about cutting class in high school: (a) legalize it, or (b) arrest high school kids who do it. We haven't damned well done (a) yet, so we have to do (b).

That's what a false dichotomy dictates.
posted by Bort at 10:31 PM on April 8, 2005


wait, so in the states if a highschooler has smokes or beer they get arrested and sent to prison?

I think probably a reason the steps are not A) Do nothing B) convict of felony and send to jail
posted by Iax at 12:01 AM on April 9, 2005


It's this program fully working which means catching the supplier. Mostly likely these suppliers are not attending high school nor were caught here looking at the drugs confiscated

Well said - if the undercover cop had used the relationships built at the school to move further up the dealing chain, this might at least have done some good, rather than just criminalising some daft kids.

but shrooms? I thought those went out of style a long time ago.

They're back bigtime, in the UK at least, after enterprising types spotted a (recently closed) loophole in the law and started selling them from market stalls, headshops and the like. I also think it's a general trend prompted by a lot of older ecstasy/speed/coke people turning mushroomwards when nightclubbing - gurning over 30 is undignified, after all.
posted by jack_mo at 3:25 AM on April 9, 2005


Never Been Spliffed.
posted by longbaugh at 4:19 AM on April 9, 2005


And, yeah—who does shrooms anymore?

My days of recreational drug use are long since past (don't really like x or even pot; never have) but I've often maintained that if there were a healthy batch of shrooms around, hell yeah, I'd do 'em.
posted by psmealey at 4:56 AM on April 9, 2005


Milford, Ohio was a rural community that's about to qualify as a suburb due to Cincinnati's eastward sprawl. It's a far cry from a crack house or shooting gallery situation, so this is actually not a "crime prevention" effort. It's moralizing against the evils of drugs.

I think it's heavy handed, and criminalizes kids who might have had a chance to go to college and get on with life. And yes, the Enquirer's snarky editorial makes me nauseous.
posted by tizzie at 5:47 AM on April 9, 2005


And this cartoon pretty much illustrates the real problem.
posted by tizzie at 5:51 AM on April 9, 2005


Raise your hands if you're a non-pot-smoker and you've ever found yourself 'caught up in' a drug transaction against your will. I've been in the same room as some shady deals much more serious than this, but no one was forcing me to be there, or to purchase anything. I wonder what actually went down.dhoyt

//the late John Delorean raises his hand...


posted by beelzbubba at 6:58 AM on April 9, 2005


It's a far cry from a crack house or shooting gallery situation, so this is actually not a "crime prevention" effort. It's moralizing against the evils of drugs.

I realize that, tizzie, and I agree with you. I was just responding to the "NARC's are the lowest form of humanity," blanket statement made up thread by pointing out situations where that wouldn't be so.
posted by jonmc at 10:15 AM on April 9, 2005


I'm all for arresting dealers, regardless their age. A kid I often take care of was introduced to pot at age 10 or younger. If I could know for a fact who it was that was dealing to him, there'd be a new cripple in town.

It's taken a couple years and several counsellors to get to the point where I'm confident he's going to be clean until an appropriate age. There are all sorts of historical reasons for him to be interested in the drugs in the first place; but such does not discount the responsibility of the dealer in the first place.
posted by five fresh fish at 11:12 AM on April 9, 2005


Shorter Jfuller: I like big government!

Longer, perhaps slightly sillier, and farcicle interpretation of jfuller: I want police officers to regularly monitor my offspring because, god knows, we can't have people smoking pot. Think, if a large portion, say 40%, of the american population smoked pot, civilization as we know it would crumble! I mean, thank god we made alcohol illegal, look how well that worked out for everyone! Really, those people who sell alcohol, such criminals and gangsters all of them!
posted by Freen at 12:53 PM on April 9, 2005


I'm all for arresting dealers, regardless their age.

Maybe you should be in favor of arresting pushers. There is a difference.
posted by Kwantsar at 1:04 PM on April 9, 2005


People don't sell drugs, drugs sell themselves.
posted by schyler523 at 1:55 PM on April 9, 2005


This actually happened in my high school back in 1992. It ended up in cops chasing a girl across the campus, wrestling her to the ground and hauling her away in handcuffs in dramatic fashion. She was just a kind of loner girl who occasionally smoked a little weed and who was impressed by this hot guy paying attention to her. The two students who were well known for dealing massive amounts of heroin and cocaine around the school never even met the narc. The whole thing was a joke to everyone except her. Monumentally injust.

The two big dealers in my school supposedly had fathers who were drug dealers and that's why they were involved in the trade in the first place. Kids aren't making or importing this stuff, they're just easy to blame.

I firmly believe that dropping the drinking age to 18 would do more to reduce the use of illegal drugs than anything. I quit doing drugs right around the time I could actually go to bars or clubs like a normal person instead of sneaking around to raves or house parties.
posted by fshgrl at 5:22 PM on April 9, 2005


I firmly believe that dropping the drinking age to 18 would do more to reduce the use of illegal drugs than anything.

Actually, nothing will reduce the use of drugs, illegal or otherwise. Man-made laws vs. the innate human desire to wipe out/alter/obliterate consciousness? who's gonna win that one, ya think?

What legalization will do is take the drug trade out of the hands of thugs and gangsters, thus reducing the body count associated with the business. Of course, those same thugs might just move on to the next profitable illegal venture like they did after prohibition was lifted, so I could be wrong on that score, too.
posted by jonmc at 5:41 PM on April 9, 2005


It won't take the drug trade out of the hands of thugs and gangsters (it hasn't in the entire rest of the world) but it would mean that every kid in the US didn't become a criminal. Kids want to go out and mingle and party at that age, pretty much to the exclusion of all else. If booze and drugs are equally illegal and drugs are a hell of a lot easier to get then kids are going to use them.
posted by fshgrl at 5:57 PM on April 9, 2005


I firmly believe that dropping the drinking age to 18 would do more to reduce the use of illegal drugs than anything.

No, it won't. That's the drinking age in BC, and drug use runs rampant throughout the province.
posted by five fresh fish at 10:41 AM on April 10, 2005


People living near a crack house or shooting gallery might disagree with you.

I used to live across the street from a crack house, dhoyt. I had to duck and cover in my front yard once, because somebody's girlfriend was over there shooting wildly. Sorry, but I still think NARCs are the lowest form of humanity.

Crack users are very low, shooters even lower. People who falsely befriend them in order to put them in a destructive, abusive prison system, one designed to break them down even further? They're the lowest of all.
posted by vorfeed at 12:21 PM on April 11, 2005


shoot, I meant johnmc. Sorry, dhoyt.
posted by vorfeed at 12:22 PM on April 11, 2005


vorfeed, I can't get my head around your bizarre hatred of those in law enforcement who put their lives on the line in an attempt to clean up your community and mine from the amoral filth who peddle poisons in various forms to children and adults alike. I have little sympathy for kids or anyone else who deal drugs and get busted for it. Granted, the sentencing guidelines are ridiculous in many cases, but that does not change the fact that it's easy to not break the law.
Drug dealers are among the lowest of the low - hovering right around nazi skinheads and car bombers in terms of moral offensiveness and lives damaged/destroyed. Regardless of whether you think smoking the occasional doobie is harmless or not, these kids were DEALING FELONY WEIGHT of various illegal substances, as well as prescription medications. That last point makes them almost certainly thieves as well. At 18, the older ones certainly knew better.
As for whether this was an effective use of police time, I can't think of a place more important to keep free of criminal corruption than a school - assuming that the investigation caught the big players (after that long, one would hope so) it was time well spent.
posted by BigLankyBastard at 12:54 PM on April 11, 2005


these kids were DEALING FELONY WEIGHT of various illegal substances, as well as prescription medications.
What is felony weight!?! Oklahoma has the strictest laws if I recall. A $25 dollar bag of coke or pot is a felony. Iirc in California, an ounce or more of pot is a felony. And prescription medication, as I said above; think an aspirin can be a drug charge now because it was not handed out by a doctor.

If you think children can out smart the government by obtaining these drugs easily to sell. Then you have more faith in our government properly trying to rid the schools of drugs. It’s all about the money, the sellers and the governments.

assuming that the investigation caught the big players (after that long, one would hope so) it was time well spent.
In a previous comment I mentioned my thought about the drugs they found showing it was not a big bust. In a post after it, I mentioned the street drugs which may show a bigger bust.
posted by thomcatspike at 2:49 PM on April 11, 2005


the amoral filth who peddle poisons in various forms

Whoa, slow down there, Anslinger.
I have a lot of respect for police and realize that they don't make the laws, they only enforce them. And I'm really glad that there are people willing to risk their own safety to try and keep me safe. But does that make me love the people that abuse their authority? The people that see their job as fulfilling a quota rather than aiding the public good? The people that lie, manipulate, and sell the drugs they jail others for selling (numerous documented cases of police selling unrecoverable and large amounts of drugs in conjunction with undercover operations exist)? The people that confiscate or destroy property that doesn't belong to them (formerly known as theft and vandalism, respectively)? The people that end up pushing these pathetic souls further down? I'm sorry, but the things that law enforcement often engage in while pursuing the unreachable, unrealistic, and fantastical goal of elimination of certain types of matter frequently disgust me. Once you embrace immorality in your fight for morality, you've lost, and you no longer deserve the respect of anyone.

Actually, nothing will reduce the use of drugs, illegal or otherwise.

Although there's certainly nothing that will unequivocally reduce the use of certain substances anywhere, I think it's overly defeatist to take the point that there's nothing that can reduce it anywhere. And I think many pro-prohibition folks see this as "there is nothing a society can do to reduce the harm effected on it by drug use", which I wholly disagree with.

Anyway, I don't know exactly what the motivation behind entrapment laws are, but we have them

However, the government has made exception after exception for law after law in cases of the pursuit of drug crimes and the likelihood of this being an effective defense is about zilch.

thirteenkiller: that's right. You become ineligible for federal loans or grants if you have had a drug conviction.

For five years on trafficking (versus a year for possession).


AFAIK, any drug offense during high school makes one ineligible for federal college loans according to the Higher (heh, heh) Education Act of 1998; apparently the denied applicants number ~140,000. There's an amendment to the act to remove that provision, however; hopefully it'll pass.

For those that regard dealers with such disdain, do you also regard bartenders in a similar light? I'm sure some bartenders get people drunk and let them drive home, but I think dismissing all bartenders as bad people would be a little...overboard? Every dealer I've known wouldn't even think of pushing drugs on children.
posted by nTeleKy at 3:43 PM on April 11, 2005


Doesn't the best way to keep kids from participating in risky behaviors have something to do with fostering trust, love, and respect so the kid will listen to what you have to say about said behaviors, and if they end up participating anyway and something goes wrong they'll tell you about it instead of trying to cover it up and possibly making the situation worse?

Just sayin'.
posted by schroedinger at 2:57 PM on April 12, 2005


Is there anything wrong with doing both good parenting and good policing?
posted by five fresh fish at 3:05 PM on April 12, 2005


« Older Because Businesses Don't Care Enough About Profits   |   7,000 year old sex-artifact Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments



Post