He should watch Soft White Underbelly on YouTube instead.
Lol
I've never heard of that. Are there boobies?
He should watch Soft White Underbelly on YouTube instead.
Lol
Just an underbelly.I've never heard of that. Are there boobies?
This video takes place on a stretch of 6th and 7th Streets in downtown Los Angeles. At it's closest point, it is six blocks from the LAPD Headquarters (which is located on 1st Street). The federal building in Los Angeles (which is where the DEA, FBI, US Marshals, etc all have offices) are one further block away from the LAPD Headquarters. Between those two buildings is City Hall.
The stretch of tents in this video represent what is probably the highest percentage of drug addiction in the United States. It is well north of 99% drug addicted. It is six blocks from LAPD headquarters and seven blocks from every federal law enforcement agency in existence.
The first time I was in this area was 38 years ago. It did not look like this. Yes, there were some homeless and yes, many of those homeless were drug addicted ... but you did not have tents set up, you did not have garbage everywhere, the cops didn't just ignore it, and the area was generally safe and generally clean. The next time I was in this area was 20 years ago ... at that point, you had some tents. But they were few and far between. You had a lot of homeless, but purchasing drugs was still a process. If you wanted to buy drugs, you had to know a guy, who would present you to another guy, who would tell you about a guy in a building down the street, and maybe at the end of the process you'd find a guy actually selling. Today? Tents are endless. Everyone is drug addicted. Every single one of those tents has drugs inside it (or a human being who just ingested the last of the drugs that were inside it). You can purchase from basically anyone (because they know they can charge more and just go buy more at the "regular" price from an endless amount of sources on the same street).
This exists because the politicians (federal, state and local) want it and because these politicians have ordered the police not to do anything about it. These people are treated worse than animals, but nobody cares. The residents in the area hate it, but they are powerless to do anything about it other than move (which anyone with the money to move has already done) out of the city.
This video takes place on a stretch of 6th and 7th Streets in downtown Los Angeles. At it's closest point, it is six blocks from the LAPD Headquarters (which is located on 1st Street). The federal building in Los Angeles (which is where the DEA, FBI, US Marshals, etc all have offices) are one further block away from the LAPD Headquarters. Between those two buildings is City Hall.
The stretch of tents in this video represent what is probably the highest percentage of drug addiction in the United States. It is well north of 99% drug addicted. It is six blocks from LAPD headquarters and seven blocks from every federal law enforcement agency in existence.
The first time I was in this area was 38 years ago. It did not look like this. Yes, there were some homeless and yes, many of those homeless were drug addicted ... but you did not have tents set up, you did not have garbage everywhere, the cops didn't just ignore it, and the area was generally safe and generally clean. The next time I was in this area was 20 years ago ... at that point, you had some tents. But they were few and far between. You had a lot of homeless, but purchasing drugs was still a process. If you wanted to buy drugs, you had to know a guy, who would present you to another guy, who would tell you about a guy in a building down the street, and maybe at the end of the process you'd find a guy actually selling. Today? Tents are endless. Everyone is drug addicted. Every single one of those tents has drugs inside it (or a human being who just ingested the last of the drugs that were inside it). You can purchase from basically anyone (because they know they can charge more and just go buy more at the "regular" price from an endless amount of sources on the same street).
This exists because the politicians (federal, state and local) want it and because these politicians have ordered the police not to do anything about it. These people are treated worse than animals, but nobody cares. The residents in the area hate it, but they are powerless to do anything about it other than move (which anyone with the money to move has already done) out of the city.
^^^^ Way too many facts in that post.Weed was legalized in CA after the 2016 referendum. Skid Row existed long before that.
Here is how you provide proof: numbers. In year before legalization the rate was X, post it was Y.
That would be an easy thing to do if you had proof. But you do not.
And PS, in the proof I provided, NJ has a lower rate of homelessness than unfree states like Texas and Florida. One of the states with the most homelessness is Hawaii which has no gambling or weed.
Could it be that- get this- homeless people congregate in places with a high combined COL and non-lethal weather to sleep outside?
I have lived in NJ the bulk of my life, it's always been expensive, and especially in my city- but there's no tents here despite weed being prolific.
^^^^ Way too many facts in that post.
Proof that homelessness is worse than it was 20 years ago? Open your window and look around.Should I post the videos of those camps in Texas and Florida or is it just easier to concede you have no proof?
That's interesting because the DEA in Los Angeles, during the Bush presidency, was ordered not to start any investigations into medical marijuana clinics (to just leave them alone). And the US Attorney's Office in Los Angeles had prosecution thresholds (in the early 2000s) of 100 lbs of marijuana (or 100 plants); so if DEA Agent X or FBI Agent Y arrested a drug dealer with 99 lbs of marijuana, the AUSA would order his release and refuse to bring charges. In the mid-2000s, this threshold jumped to 200 lbs and/or 200 plants. The only way the federal government would close down a medical marijuana clinic in Los Angeles in the 2000s was if a violent crime could be directly tied to that specific clinic.Weed was legalized in CA after the 2016 referendum. Skid Row existed long before that.
Could it be that- get this- homeless people congregate in places with a high combined COL and non-lethal weather to sleep outside?
I have yet to hear a good argument for regulating marijuana any differently than alcohol. I would tell a kid to use either in moderation, and never to drive while under the influence of either.
That's interesting because the DEA in Los Angeles, during the Bush presidency, was ordered not to start any investigations into medical marijuana clinics (to just leave them alone). And the US Attorney's Office in Los Angeles had prosecution thresholds (in the early 2000s) of 100 lbs of marijuana (or 100 plants); so if DEA Agent X or FBI Agent Y arrested a drug dealer with 99 lbs of marijuana, the AUSA would order his release and refuse to bring charges. In the mid-2000s, this threshold jumped to 200 lbs and/or 200 plants. The only way the federal government would close down a medical marijuana clinic in Los Angeles in the 2000s was if a violent crime could be directly tied to that specific clinic.
At the same time, the Los Angeles County Prosecutor's Office was willing to prosecute any provable drug dealer that could be caught (regardless of the amount of marijuana they were caught with), but the LAPD was told to leave all marijuana crime alone. So if there were no arrests, there were no prosecutions. The Sheriff's Department generally followed whatever the DEA policy was at the time. And non-drug dealer marijuana users (and the medical marijuana clinics) were ignored completely by the county prosecutor, the LAPD or the LA sheriffs.
And Skid Row exploded right after this Bush-era policy went into effect. And it wasn't 2016. That's a fact.
Other factors that didn't help included the psych holds (5150) being released in front of City Hall every Friday at 5 PM (so they wouldn't have to take care of the patients on the weekends), the massive influx of illegal immigration, the import of homeless from other areas of the country (who were being told they could do almost anything in LA and not be arrested), and of course the weather.
Now explain the homeless explosion in "non-lethal weather" resort towns of San Francisco, Seattle and Portland.
The best sellable-to-the-public argument is because it is much harder for a police officer to prove a driver is driving under the influence of marijuana than it is to prove a driver is driving under the influence of alcohol. The second best argument is because it is a gateway drug to harder controlled substances.
I don't subscribe to either of these arguments, but they are the best ones you can pitch to the general public.
The actual best argument is because every drug dealer in the United States selling fentanyl, heroin, cocaine, meth, or MDMA are also selling marijuana. And it's a lot easier to catch them with the marijuana than it is to catch them with the other drugs. So a prosecution for a small amount of marijuana can get a guy selling MDMA to kids in your local high school off the streets.
The argument you make in your third paragraph is a good one, assuming that what you say about drug dealers is true (and I don't know either way). But it seems to me that it shows only a need to prosecute dealing, not possession. It also seems to me that the last thing New Jersey would want is for there to be anyone other than authorized retailers selling marijuana.So efforts against unauthorized dealers will continue -- and in fact perhaps get even more aggressive so that the state doesn't lose potential revenue.The best sellable-to-the-public argument is because it is much harder for a police officer to prove a driver is driving under the influence of marijuana than it is to prove a driver is driving under the influence of alcohol. The second best argument is because it is a gateway drug to harder controlled substances.
I don't subscribe to either of these arguments, but they are the best ones you can pitch to the general public.
The actual best argument is because every drug dealer in the United States selling fentanyl, heroin, cocaine, meth, or MDMA are also selling marijuana. And it's a lot easier to catch them with the marijuana than it is to catch them with the other drugs. So a prosecution for a small amount of marijuana can get a guy selling MDMA to kids in your local high school off the streets.
The argument you make in your third paragraph is a good one, assuming that what you say about drug dealers is true (and I don't know either way). But it seems to me that it shows only a need to prosecute dealing, not possession. It also seems to me that the last thing New Jersey would want is for there to be anyone other than authorized retailers selling marijuana.So efforts against unauthorized dealers will continue -- and in fact perhaps get even more aggressive so that the state doesn't lose potential revenue.
You might want to consider the huge jump in the cost of housing on the West Coast over the last generation. That strikes me as a more likely cause of the increase in homelessness than marijuana.That's interesting because the DEA in Los Angeles, during the Bush presidency, was ordered not to start any investigations into medical marijuana clinics (to just leave them alone). And the US Attorney's Office in Los Angeles had prosecution thresholds (in the early 2000s) of 100 lbs of marijuana (or 100 plants); so if DEA Agent X or FBI Agent Y arrested a drug dealer with 99 lbs of marijuana, the AUSA would order his release and refuse to bring charges. In the mid-2000s, this threshold jumped to 200 lbs and/or 200 plants. The only way the federal government would close down a medical marijuana clinic in Los Angeles in the 2000s was if a violent crime could be directly tied to that specific clinic.
At the same time, the Los Angeles County Prosecutor's Office was willing to prosecute any provable drug dealer that could be caught (regardless of the amount of marijuana they were caught with), but the LAPD was told to leave all marijuana crime alone. So if there were no arrests, there were no prosecutions. The Sheriff's Department generally followed whatever the DEA policy was at the time. And non-drug dealer marijuana users (and the medical marijuana clinics) were ignored completely by the county prosecutor, the LAPD or the LA sheriffs.
And Skid Row exploded right after this Bush-era policy went into effect. And it wasn't 2016. That's a fact.
Other factors that didn't help included the psych holds (5150) being released in front of City Hall every Friday at 5 PM (so they wouldn't have to take care of the patients on the weekends), the massive influx of illegal immigration, the import of homeless from other areas of the country (who were being told they could do almost anything in LA and not be arrested), and of course the weather.
Now explain the homeless explosion in "non-lethal weather" resort towns of San Francisco, Seattle and Portland.
It's definitely a factor. The house I rented in Los Angeles was purchased in 2001 for approximately $350,000. In 2004, I had guys knocking on my door (walking door to door) offering $800,000 to buy it. Due to the cost of living, some first year federal agents around this time (making $60k/year) qualified for welfare - it was a big office scandal when someone in HR sent an email out to the entire office suggesting those having difficulty contact various welfare programs in the area.You might want to consider the huge jump in the cost of housing on the West Coast over the last generation. That strikes me as a more likely cause of the increase in homelessness than marijuana.
I should also add that perhaps the best way to deal with meth and other drugs is to legalize possession of them, too, thus destroying the illicit market and driving out of business the murderers (there's no better word) who lace their products with deadly substances like fentanyl.The argument you make in your third paragraph is a good one, assuming that what you say about drug dealers is true (and I don't know either way). But it seems to me that it shows only a need to prosecute dealing, not possession. It also seems to me that the last thing New Jersey would want is for there to be anyone other than authorized retailers selling marijuana.So efforts against unauthorized dealers will continue -- and in fact perhaps get even more aggressive so that the state doesn't lose potential revenue.
Duh.You might want to consider the huge jump in the cost of housing on the West Coast over the last generation. That strikes me as a more likely cause of the increase in homelessness than marijuana.
There was a lot less homeless before legalization. Fact
This video takes place on a stretch of 6th and 7th Streets in downtown Los Angeles. At it's closest point, it is six blocks from the LAPD Headquarters (which is located on 1st Street). The federal building in Los Angeles (which is where the DEA, FBI, US Marshals, etc all have offices) are one further block away from the LAPD Headquarters. Between those two buildings is City Hall.
The stretch of tents in this video represent what is probably the highest percentage of drug addiction in the United States. It is well north of 99% drug addicted. It is six blocks from LAPD headquarters and seven blocks from every federal law enforcement agency in existence.
The first time I was in this area was 38 years ago. It did not look like this. Yes, there were some homeless and yes, many of those homeless were drug addicted ... but you did not have tents set up, you did not have garbage everywhere, the cops didn't just ignore it, and the area was generally safe and generally clean. The next time I was in this area was 20 years ago ... at that point, you had some tents. But they were few and far between. You had a lot of homeless, but purchasing drugs was still a process. If you wanted to buy drugs, you had to know a guy, who would present you to another guy, who would tell you about a guy in a building down the street, and maybe at the end of the process you'd find a guy actually selling. Today? Tents are endless. Everyone is drug addicted. Every single one of those tents has drugs inside it (or a human being who just ingested the last of the drugs that were inside it). You can purchase from basically anyone (because they know they can charge more and just go buy more at the "regular" price from an endless amount of sources on the same street).
This exists because the politicians (federal, state and local) want it and because these politicians have ordered the police not to do anything about it. These people are treated worse than animals, but nobody cares. The residents in the area hate it, but they are powerless to do anything about it other than move (which anyone with the money to move has already done) out of the city.
The best sellable-to-the-public argument is because it is much harder for a police officer to prove a driver is driving under the influence of marijuana than it is to prove a driver is driving under the influence of alcohol. The second best argument is because it is a gateway drug to harder controlled substances.
I don't subscribe to either of these arguments, but they are the best ones you can pitch to the general public.
The actual best argument is because every drug dealer in the United States selling fentanyl, heroin, cocaine, meth, or MDMA are also selling marijuana. And it's a lot easier to catch them with the marijuana than it is to catch them with the other drugs. So a prosecution for a small amount of marijuana can get a guy selling MDMA to kids in your local high school off the streets.
Here is a very interesting piece on how police detect marijuana use by drivers and, more important, on the development of a breathalyzer for marijuana. You'll note that it was developed by researchers at Pitt, so for the first time in my life, I will say "Hail to Pitt!"https://www.addictioncenter.com/news/2019/09/new-breathalyzer-marijuana/The best sellable-to-the-public argument is because it is much harder for a police officer to prove a driver is driving under the influence of marijuana than it is to prove a driver is driving under the influence of alcohol. The second best argument is because it is a gateway drug to harder controlled substances.
I don't subscribe to either of these arguments, but they are the best ones you can pitch to the general public.
The actual best argument is because every drug dealer in the United States selling fentanyl, heroin, cocaine, meth, or MDMA are also selling marijuana. And it's a lot easier to catch them with the marijuana than it is to catch them with the other drugs. So a prosecution for a small amount of marijuana can get a guy selling MDMA to kids in your local high school off the streets.
You might want to consider the huge jump in the cost of housing on the West Coast over the last generation. That strikes me as a more likely cause of the increase in homelessness than marijuana.
The person i get my ganja from....and have for many, many years....only sells herb...and only to people she knows.Not all weed dealers sold other stuff. That’s false.
So you basically don’t want weed to be legal because it makes cops’ jobs harder. Aka because you were lazy and not good at your job. Thank god you’re retired. Not only are you delusional but you weren’t very good at your job. And who cares about MDMA…..another relatively harmless drug. Focus on fentanyl, heroin and meth.
I can tell how lazy you were when you were a DEA. Get the low hanging fruit (marijuana) to hit your quota because fentanyl is too hard. Wow, thank god we legalized marijuana to focus the DEA. What a joke.
No, that's the exact opposite of what I said. I said all dealers of everything else also sell weed. It's not as easy to catch a guy with a baggy of 50 ecstasy pills as it is to catch them putting 10 lbs of weed in their trunk.Not all weed dealers sold other stuff. That’s false.
Sounds like the police might actually need to do real work, the horrorNo, that's the exact opposite of what I said. I said all dealers of everything else also sell weed. It's not as easy to catch a guy with a baggy of 50 ecstasy pills as it is to catch them putting 10 lbs of weed in their trunk.
Yeah, but you said there hadn't been any increase in homelessness ... and then quickly shifted the goal posts to "prove homelessness was caused by marijuana legalization" (paraphrase) after I posted videos demonstrating the increase in homelessness. You've got 70,000 homeless people in Los Angeles and you think it's normal; it wasn't always like this.Couldn't be. Hawaii is ranked #4 in homelessness and has no legal weed, but it must be because skid row and Bush 1 not cracking down on medical marijuana, not the weather there and COL.
And still he hasn't addressed NJ being 32 in homelessness while having legal weed, which is actually pretty impressive when you consider NJ has to be top 10 if not top 5 in COL.
It's not my fault you have poor reading comprehension.Sounds like the police might actually need to do real work, the horror
Tough to understand your posts tbh.It's not my fault you have poor reading comprehension.
Wait, you’re still trying to make the case for weed causing homelessness? Take the L buddy. Boomers are absolutely insaneYeah, but you said there hadn't been any increase in homelessness ... and then quickly shifted the goal posts to "prove homelessness was caused by marijuana legalization" (paraphrase) after I posted videos demonstrating the increase in homelessness. You've got 70,000 homeless people in Los Angeles and you think it's normal; it wasn't always like this.
The answer to your question about homelessness in NJ is simple and three-fold: (a) The homeless congregate in NYC because of the available social services, (b) the state has only had legalized marijuana for a year and a half, unlike LA that has had it for over two decades, and (c) far less illegal immigration because it is 2,000 miles from the southern border.
It's a gateway drug. The hard drugs (particularly anything opiate-based) result in increased homelessness.Wait, you’re still trying to make the case for weed causing homelessness? Take the L buddy. Boomers are absolutely insane![]()
Smoke a bowl. It'll clear your mind.Tough to understand your posts tbh.
Alcohol is a gateway drug. Caffeine is too. Living is certain to lead to a bad outcome.It's a gateway drug. The hard drugs result in increased homelessness.
To a certain extent, they are - alcohol far more than caffeine; marijuana far more than alcohol.Alcohol is a gateway drug. Caffeine is too. Living is certain to lead to a bad outcome.
To a certain extent, they are - alcohol far more than caffeine; marijuana far more than alcohol.
Careful, he might become a homeless heroin addict.Smoke a bowl. It'll clear your mind.