Subway

GoKunming Articles

Laos extradites drug suspects to Yunnan

This article was posted by in News and published

Yunnan has long been the country's main entry point for illegal drugs. Despite increased interdiction efforts, international law enforcement cooperation and recent large-scale busts, it appears the province's 'Drug War' is becoming more costly and having only a small effect on the overall flow of narcotics across the border.

Last week, Lao police transferred five suspected members of a drug ring to Kunming in a display of cooperation between the two countries. Authorities originally detained the suspects in a joint police raid conducted on March 19, 2013, when a naval patrol seized more than 500 million yuan (US$82.3 million) worth of methamphetamines on the Mekong River.

China has been conducting patrols such as this with the help of Thailand, Laos and Myanmar since the "Mekong River Massacre" of October 2011. The attack, which killed 13 Chinese sailors, spurred Beijing to begin interdiction patrols along the river. Institution of the policy, although sanctioned by neighboring Southeast Asian countries, was the first time in three decades that Chinese forces have operated outside the nation's borders without a United Nations mandate.

Although the drug lord responsible for the killings, Naw Kham, was sentenced and publicly executed in Kunming last year, illegal drug trafficking continues to run rampant in the border regions between Yunnan, Laos, Myanmar and Thailand. Known as the Golden Triangle, the area supplies an estimated 60 to 70 percent of all drugs consumed in China. A United Nations survey conducted last year reported that opium cultivation in the Triangle rose by 22 percent in 2013, largely driven by mounting demand from the mainland.

Yunnan's 4,060-kilometer border with Golden Triangle nations presents a grim challenge for anti-drug personnel. According to Yunnan Net, 70 percent of methamphetamines confiscated in China last year were seized in Yunnan. Currently, there are 1.7 million registered drug addicts in the province, although the government acknowledges the actual numbers are much higher.

While heroin remains the most commonly smuggled drug on the border, methamphetamines — also known as 'ice' — are a fast-growing second. In Ruili, a border town infamous in the past for its heroin trade, methamphetamines now dominate the market. One dose of the crystals — known as bingdu (冰毒) in Chinese — reportedly costs as little as five yuan.

Yunnan's narcotics officials, meanwhile, claim they have redoubled efforts to combat the drug trade. Provincial courts sentenced more than 5,020 suspects for drug crimes in 2013. Yet some officials have complained that the record numbers on trial have led to more lenient judgments. "A suspect who would get the death penalty elsewhere [in China] only gets several years of jail in Yunnan," said a National People's Congress deputy. "The judicial system should be punishing these people with an iron hand."

Image: China Radio International

© Copyright 2005-2017 GoKunming.com all rights reserved. This material may not be republished, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

Share this article

Comments

Death penalty for all drug users. This is the only way to win the war on drugs. Smugglers are just businessmen who are supplying the customers with what they demand. Get rid of the demand - just execute all drug users since they serve no purpose in any society.

are you talking about people who do nothing but inject heroin all day long? so you're saying it would be better just to execute them than help them get back on their feet? would you also execute casual drug users? and what about non-drug users who serve no purpose? and how do you measure "purpose" exactly? thanks in advance. and..... thank god you're not running things.

@HFCAMPO: Alcohol and cigarettes are also drugs.

'they serve no purpose in any society' you have to be very careful when you say somehting like that. It's very similar to what some people said between 1933 and 1945 in Germany about certain groups in society!

no, cigarettes do serve a purpose. they're calming and soothing. unfortunately, they contain thousands of chemicals which are pretty bad for the body.

A drug user is a drug user. Casual use or addictive use is of no consequence. There are many alcoholics who do not think they are alcoholics. Execute them all and the drug problems will be resolved. Mao did a great job geting rid of the opium addicts in the 50s and 60s.

I dont think this article is about alcohol and cigarettes.

@HFCampo: First of all, you'd better define 'drugs'. Do you want to kill all the pot smokers in Colorado? How about beer drinkers next?

And who are you going to trust, in a world in which rich parasites exert tremendous power, to decide who does & who does not contribute to society?
Death for disobedience, huh?

@HFCampo (edit button gone again): I can only think you're joking.

To understand this dilema one must first understand that:
1- The drug problem is a govt sponsored program in most countries of the world.
2 - Cannabis is an illegal drug because it interferes with another govt sponsored program - disease and death (Medicine) - this is why pot is considered worse than cocaine.
3 - There is no rehabilitation from drug addiction - there is just substitution from one illegal addiction to another legal addiction.
4 - There is no need to define drugs because the govts already define it for all of us. This article is not about beer and cigaretts because the govt has already deemed these addictions necessary.
5 - Govts do not care about health, they are only interested in profit.

So I was just driving East a few months ago from Colorado into Kansas, with my 3 buddies who were all smoking their perfectly legal joints. Police stopped me just before I crossed the border on a minor traffic infringement and saw my friends smoking their joints. He asked if I was smoking, as the driver, and tested me with a breathalyser which showed I was well under the limit. So he didn't care, gave me a ticket for my broken tail light, which I told him I would fix when I got to the next town. Coming up to the border my friends all chucked their joints out the window because we knew it was illegal in the Kansas. Little did we know though that Lisa had spilled some leaf when she was rolling her joint!

Crossed over the border into Kansas, drove around the next town looking for a auto shop. But a cop pulled me over AGAIN for my broken tail light. I got out of the car to try and explain I just got a ticket and he smells pot, pulls out his gun, slams me to the ground, arrests me and my friends, searches my car and finds a tiny piece of leaf on the floor.

Anyway, I am writing this after my last meal while the priest delivers my last rights, just before I am led off to be strapped down for my lethal injection. My friends have all been executed already which makes me pretty upset when I think about it. They killed Billy, Lisa and Ken for something that is legal only 300m away! I wonder why the line between state sponsored killing and simple drug control has become so indiscriminate? I keep telling them that I wasn't under the influence and wasn't even smoking anything, but the THC drug test showed trace amounts in my system because my friends were in the same car and I guess I inhaled when I shouldn't have. Oh well, I guess I deserve this, I have to accept that I am a hardened criminal that has to be got rid of. I am the same level as serial killers, murderers, war criminals and child rapist/killers.

I heard this idea came from China! I hope whoever suggested it is happy.

Govts are already full of rich parasites who exert tremendous power, to decide who does & who does not contribute to society? Can anyone name a benevolent ruler other than King Arthur (legend) and Hugo Chavez who is truly interested in the welfare of its people.

It is obvious that Blobbles did not read my last post before entertaining us all with his ridiculous story.

And you have the temerity to call others trolls HFCAMPO?

@HFCampo: Are you serious? This is not a rhetorical question.
1. What do you mean by point 1.?
2.I can't understand what interference you're talking about.
3. Not necessarily true. And one might argue that life is an addiction.
4. Why would you want to accept government definitions?
5.Profits is what private corporations get and what they are interested in; governments are interested in power, which they get largely thanks to its considerable degree of interchangeability with the money of th0ose who haul in the profits.
But again, I really can't take what you wrote seriously - I mean it, this is not backhanded dismissal or contempt. If, indeed, you are not trying to put us all on then I suggest you do a little thinking, which might well include a consideration of the opinions of others.

If you read what I wrote about cannabis you would know that I do not consider pot a drug. But now that you made a fool of yourself you call me a troll. Very mature!

I live in China because China is a much better place to live in than most of other places. Yes, there are some problems but what country does not have its share of problems. But overall, China is a great place to live and China is genuinely trying to resolve this problem.

Alien, I know you are sincere in your questions. But my God, what dont you understand about the 5 items I listed. It is impossible to explain all this in detail if you truly do not know about all these govt projects.

A troll HFCAMPO is someone who posts something on a thread in order to deliberately cause a reaction. Clearly your first 2 posts were exactly that, you somewhat clarified your position in the third post, but not at all clearly, it appears you were being sarcastic?

You have started an inflammatory discussion, appeared to have changed your mind, insulted me for simply adding an anecdote after reading your first posts...

And you still have the temerity to call others trolls?

It appears you get a buzz out of being a troll yourself then pretending you are not. The only one who is laughing is yourself, in your own head, the rest of us are shaking our head in wonderment. I guess the joke is on me for being your troll bait.

Bolbbles, If you think you can get a complete explanation about a complicated topic via a forum then you are being unreasonable. I am not being sarcastic at all. I truly mean what I wrote here because it is the only solution to this problem. The 5 items I posted is a reality of life. I admit they are absurd but this world is absurd. The govts that control the world are insane. I have been to Colombia, as a civilian and also via the Marine Corps. I know the scam. I have friends who work in border Patrol, drugs and illegal immigration are both a scam. Afghanistan is up to full production of Opium thanks to the USA who has armed guards to protect the oipum. More than 50% of violent crimes are alcohol related. Smoking kills millions every year worldwide. Banks launder money for the drug cartels and the govt knows it. Air America is still a reality and contniues to this day. This is not sarcasm, this is all true.

@HFCampo: trouble is that I don't think you wrote very clearly. E.g., drug 'problems' are government projects: are you talking about governments running program that encourage drugs, or government conducting programs to suppress them, or what? And what do you mean to say that governments sponsor disease and death - you seem to mean a conflict with health/medical programs, and that pot somehow interferes with them. Or do you mean something about doctors wanting the right to prescribe drugs restricted to themselves?
@blobbles & anybody else who might listen: for God's sake get out of the habit of turning (or faking) honest disagreement with somebody into personal attacks and insults. And who the hell cares about the word troll, or how it might be defined, anyway? Put me down as a committed volunteer troll, however defined, and be done with it.

@HFCampo: Your original comment: maybe what you say is the best argument for not thinking about everything, including drug policy, as a 'war', which is largely an American weirdness, doubtlessly associated with the nature of US foreign policy on too many occasions to need giving examples (oddly enough, US authorities very often disguise their actual wars (invasions, hired soldiers, weapons, bombs, death, etc.) as something else (police actions, military assistance, pacification, etc.)).

Govt sponsored means the govts control the drug trade. From what I can tell, China is truly trying to stop this and does not sponsor the drug trade. The USA controls the drug trade 100% in Colombia and 100% in Afghanistan as well as many other places. There is enough evidence to support this. Simultaneously, it uses drugs to destroy society. Read crossing the Rubicon, the author, Michael Ruppert now lives in Venezuela to get away from the USA.

Cannabis is a medicine but the USA via the FDA and the AMA does not want this to be common knowledge. If anyone needs treatment for cancer, just go to Tijuana, Mexico because that is where all the Real doctors went to evade further harrasment and prosecution from the FDA. Cannabis is medicine and the patents will prove this, but the USA still classifies this as an illegal drug.

Govts define what is safe and unsafe. There is nothing we can do about this because the govt is run by the most evil and crimminal people on the planet. I certainly do not agree with their definitions but it will not change. 70% of the entire planet protested the Iraq war but they still went to war. Codex Alimetarius is another list of definitions made by the evil govt. Vitamins are bad and poison is good according to them. Smoking is good because it kills millions every year.

Portugal has legalized all drugs but no one wants to use this example of how ridiculous the war on drugs is. Drug use and crime in Portugal has declined sharply.

Bolivia legalized cocaine and the USA is not happy. Colorado legalized cannabis but the federal govt still persecutes people in Colorado.

Alien, how can I properly explain everything without writing a book.

Alien, there is a clear definition of a troll, look it up. Because others use it here when they should not, is not my problem.

HFCAMPO posted that all drug users should be put to death and he has just said that the statement is not sarcastic. If you do not believe that fits into a category of being "deliberately inflammatory to provoke reaction", I aren't sure what is. He has stated a zero tolerance, capital punishment extremist viewpoint. He then insulted me for telling a simple anecdote, in another attempt to provoke a reaction.

This would be fine if he framed his statements as a matter of opinion. But he has done it with a tone which brooks no argument so that it is not a matter of opinion, it is a matter of fact. You can tell this because he simply insults anyone who disagrees with him, even in the slightest. He then stated that he is an expert on the matter as he willingly joined an army and worked in the area. And this army was controlled by a government which exhorts the exact opposite of the values he purports to uphold. Either he holds two different viewpoints simultaneously or holds one and deliberately posts the other to provoke a response. I am fairly certain it is the latter.

Is it your genuine opinion HFCAMPO that all drug users should be put to death? My anecdote still holds, just replace "smoking a joint" with "popping a tab of acid". Do you believe all young people who are peer pressured into taking LSD, for instance, should be put to death?

"3 - There is no rehabilitation from drug addiction - there is just substitution from one illegal addiction to another legal addiction."

really?

Alien may not agree with all that I wrote but he can understand what I mean because he asked a serious question rather than jumping to conclusions or making sarcastic remarks and name calling.

Magnifico, if you disagree with #3 then give us examples of how this statement is not true.

Again, to understand a complicated topic one must first understand the difference between a functinal (F) addict and a (D) dysfunctional addict. A functional addict seems to live a normal life, never arrested or no run ins with the law. This is the obvious evidence most people see. What people do not see is what happens in the background which is the same for both F + D addicts. The DSM will list these factors and most people know what these are. Problems in the family, divorce caused by the addiction, loss of income caused by the addiction and so on.

There are millions of people who use illegal drugs and never get arrested. And there are millions who use illegal drugs and DO get arrested. We only hear about the ones who get arrested.

For those of you who believe drugs are a victimeless crime, then you failed to consider the mother, the husband, the wife, the children and you are just looking at the fact that the addict did NOT rob a liquor store to get money to support his/her habit.

sorry, but your argument falls apart on several levels.

you forgot to mention casual drug users who do not negatively affect anyone. these people probably make up a large percentage of users. and that's one reason some legislators legalize drugs.

which brings us to problem #2. how can you make such draconian execution laws when most people cannot even agree on whether drugs should be legal in the first place?

and problem #3 is this: even if heroin addicts are beyond help (which i seriously doubt), isn't it possible that someone might come up with a cure for their addiction in the future? in that case, you'd have a lot of innocent deaths on your hand as legislator of this draconian barbarian law of yours.

casual drug users who do not negatively affect anyone - Read what I just wrote, you are 100% mistaken in this premise. Casual drug users do affect others you just don't know about it.

most people cannot even agree on whether drugs should be legal in the first place? People dont make laws, govts make laws and the govts are filled crimminals. Govts do NOT do the will of the people, they only do what is good for themselves.

Cannabis is listed as a Schedule I substance under the Controlled Substances Act of 1970, the highest classification under the legislation. This means that the substance has a high abuse potential and no safe medical use.

This is a lie because:
1 - Patent # 6630507 – Oct 2003
2 - No one ever overdosed or murdered on Cannabis.

i did read what you wrote. i'm not so sure how you can be convinced that all casual users have marriages that end in divorce or lose their jobs. it's the same as alcohol. it can spiral out of control, but it doesn't for most people.

"Govts do NOT do the will of the people, they only do what is good for themselves."

yes, but if you believe that this startement is TRUE 100% of the time, then you'll have to trip all over yourself to prove it. so if govts make drugs illegal, then it must mean that drugs being legal is good for the people. but wait. some govts make drugs legal, therefore it must be bad for the people....

the moral of the story is that you cannot take complex issues and use black and white arguments.

and besides, you used Mao Zedong to support your case, a govt guy. have fun untangling yourself from your contradictions.

@HFCampo: Everybody affects everybody else, what's so special about casual drug users?
When you want drug users all to be killed, do you want the state you don't respect to do the killing?
I'm still not sure whether you are just putting us on.
And if this is indeed 'the only solution to the problem', I suggest we not solve it.
As for drug users contributing nothing to society, how many artists, musicians, writers and scientists would I have to name? Perhaps you'd suggest that they'd contribute more if they weren't using 'drugs' - I'm not sure you'd be right about that, but I'll entertain it as a possibility. Killing them will put an end to their drug use, that's for sure - at what cost?

@HFCAMPO:
As I said before. You have to be very careful when you use sentence like "Get rid of the demand - just execute all drug users since they serve no purpose in any society."
This statement is inhuman! In my country the freedom of speech ends where human dignity is violated! Millions of people were killed because people said they dont serve any purpose. Shame on you, seriously!

I have taken drugs before, LSD when I was younger. My friends did also. That was over 15 years ago now and all of us are now fully capable and contributing members of society today. Not one of us had our relationships break down or adverse affects of our drug taking, which occurred 1-3 times for all of us before we all made a pact not to ever do it again after a bad experience.

So we should all be executed HFCAMPO? Or is there a statute of limitations for your new law? Or do you decide how it is implemented? What if you found out your son/daughter was peer pressured into taking a drug. Instant execution? You are OK with that?

Your broad sweeping assumptions "Casual drug users do affect others you just don't know about it." should be the downfall of your argument.

But to the story - I had no idea that different provinces could implement laws differently! There should be no way for Yunnan to be more lenient than other provinces, that is a severe failure of the Chinese justice system (or the Chinese guanxi based punishment system, whichever you prefer!).

Now the truth comes out. You defend this cause because you are one of the many that do take drugs. I dont care if you took drugs once or 100 times. I dont care if you are useful or not to society. No one is going to execute you. Grow up fool. Dont you realize where you are? This is a forum where people discuss topics and all people have different opinions. This is not a personal battle between Hugo and Blobbles. How old are you? Perhaps the LSD you took as an adolescent has impaired your judgement and left you with the maturity of a 13 year old.

HFCampo: perhaps you should note that the laws you refer to about cannabis are only US laws - brings up a suspicion I have that at least some of the Americans on these forums seem often to be unconsciously assuming that foreigner = American. Are they living in an American bubble in Kunming? I'm not accusing anyone in particular, but I see evidence of this syndrome here quite a lot, sometimes almost to the point where it seems that foreigner = westerner = US American.
As for drugs, I think that killing people is a bigger problem than drug use, which doesn't usually involve killing anybody, though it often does when substances are made illegal (e.g., people with brutal attitudes involved in the illegal drug business, rather than, say, legal corporations making drones, napalm, etc.)

But you said "Death penalty for all drug users... just execute all drug users since they serve no purpose in any society."

When asked if you were being sarcastic, you said "I am not being sarcastic at all".

I can only assume you believe I am not a useful member of society as a person who once took drugs and I deserve to be executed. Which is it? Off with my head or not? So many contradictions, I aren't sure how you keep it straight.

we all made a pact not to ever do it again after a bad experience. - So even casual drug use does have negative affects on people.

And this terrible effect (when one of our friends fell off a swing and knocked herself unconscious requiring a hospital visit and stitches) deserves a firing squad? Or is execution only for the original crime of wilful drug taking, not for the negative effects?

And after we swore to each other to never do it again and none of us have since, are we still all miscreants that deserve the death penalty?

Hate to tell you, but you would likely be executing a third of the population of most developed nations if you decide everyone that has ever done drugs deserves death. We won't have much of a society left if such a plan was implemented, but maybe complete anarchy and civil war is what you want? In the US alone it is estimated that 125 million people have taken illicit drugs in their lifetime: www.drugwarfacts.org/cms/Drug_Usage#sthash.0EZTAoMC.dpbs

No problem with executing 125 million in the US alone?

@HFCampo: Now accept the fact that you were mistaken in literally calling for the death of all drug users and get back to a reasonable argument about drugs and the death penalty. It's really okay to do this, HFCampo, everybody overstates things without thinking sometimes, and there will be more damage done to your ego by not rethinking and restating your position than by admitting you went over the top. Other people's opinions and arguments really can improve your own thinking, they are not necessarily personal attacks - the point is not about 'winning', it's about mutual learning.
I write this not only for HFCampo, but for others who seem to think discussions, even arguments, are duels to the death, or perhaps will lead to ego-dissolution or something.
Right: it's off topic. Maybe somebody will think I shouldn't have said this. Maybe they are right - if so, say so, I'll probably pull through the enormous shame of having made a mistake, I've been getting used to it for years.

I like turtles.

I like frogs and squirrels.

How about putting a very powerful poison in all illegal drugs so when the drug user take the drug they will literally kill themselves. This way no one must bear the responsibility of their own deaths. After some time, all drug users will die off and the drug demand will end all drug wars. With good education, young people will not fall into this problem.

Or how about this? Every time someone logs onto Gokunming to post something in the forum, their computer explodes in their face. Execute ALL GoKm forum users!

You really made me Laugh. I admit that was a GREAT one. Very good Magnifico. Time for a truce. You got me.

@HFCampo: The point about illegal drugs is that they are not subject to such a program - i.e., they're uncontrolled, illegal. So who would be able to do this? Anyone who did would be knowingly responsible for the death of another - i.e., random murder of drug users.
The main problem here, of course, is that most of us would not condone such murder, as I think most of us, most of the time, at least when not defending our own lives, consider that the lives of millions of human beings are more important than the control of illegal drugs. You may have a different moral point of view, which you'd have to explain, but I don't know how you could make any stable society out of one, unless you assume totalitarian control of populations, which is ultimately impossible and the members of which would scarcely be human anyway - mere objects. Then maybe it wouldn't matter to anyone whether they lived or died, and they might not know the difference.
As for all drug users dying off, I don't think you understand why people choose to use drugs.
finally, you still haven't told us what an illegal 'drug' is, except that it seems to be whatever some government, which you don't respect and which you say pushes drugs, says it is.

You may be volunteering to enforce fascism, for all you to know.

Alien, I know you mean well but we already live in a world were millions of people are murdered (on purpose) every day and the entire world condones it.

The UN is a useless entity that serves the rich. Israel has violated so many UN resolutions yet the world has done nothing for over 60 years. They murder people and all the UN does is pass resolutions and tell Israel they broke a law. Iraq broke 1 rule and they were on Saddam in a minute. Millions killed in Iraq, Chile, Argentina, Guatemala and the list goes on and the world does what? Nothing. So please do not say it would not be condoned.

Totalitarian control is very possible because there are many countries with this type of govt and it is not Syria or North Korea, or Cuba. The EU is now totalitarian, the peole have no way to vote for their leaders just as in the USA. Billions are given to bankers and the majority of the population disagree but there is nothing they can do because if they try to protest they are beaten and arrested. Am I insane or is this not a fact? How many countries object to austerity measures yet the people can do nothing.

Many people are put on the no-fly list and see what happens to them. They have no legal rights and they are guilty until they can prove themselves innocent. Last I heard there was a 5 year old on the list - Haha.

The USA is a fascist country and this did not happen because of me.
Finally, drugs are NOT uncontrolled. They are in fact very much controlled by the govt. Talk to border Patrol agents (not rookies) and they are told when to search and when not to search. Everyone knows the schedule of the border patrol in San Onofre near Camp Pendleton. Drugs go by in trucks as innocent people are stripped searched at borders in search of drugs while the drugs pass through in huge trucks. It is an illusion.

I am trying to be very clear - it does not matter what I think or you think is an illegal drug - It does not matter because we are dictated what is legal or illegal. We have no choice. If the USA was a democratic contry then many things would change but they never do because it is no longer a republic and it is in no way democratic.

If there was a vote tomorrow, who would vote for spending trillions on war and weapons and who would vote for education, health and so on. Of course, the overwhelming majority would vote for education, infrastructure and NOT war or weapons. So why doesnt it happen???

Alien, I read your posts and you seem logical and intelligent from what and how you write. Is anyhting I am stating here untrue or is it not factual. Look at the condition of the world, the entire world, not just a few countries. Everything is purposely set to fail and cause chaos. Everything!

since you're a conspiracy guy, you might be interested to know that these two films allude to govt conspiracy regarding drugs. 1) American Gangster (CIA was involved in bringing in drugs) and 2) Sid & Nancy

But basically, regarding your draconian laws, I think anyone can and should be helped out of negative circumstances.

I have seen American Gangster, I will look for Sid and Nancy.

HFCampo: The EU, whatever its problems, is not totalitarian.
People are murdered everyday - perhaps so, why do you want to contribute?
The US is not a fascist country, at least not yet.
If 'we' have no choice about US-government decisions about what is a drug and what should be illegal, why do you want to kill more people based on these definitions?
If the US government, border police etc. are all in on the drug racket (and at least some of them have to be), then what authority is it that you think would be able to go around killing illegal drug users?
Finally, why are you more interested in some totalitarian control of illegal drug users than you are in the lives of enormous numbers of people?
Your whole approach is frightening. What do you value here?

@Magnifico: I don't see American Gangster, which is a film I really like, as alluding to government conspiracy regarding drugs - it alludes to the operations of certain criminal individuals within the US military in Southeast Asia who make use of US coffins etc. to bring drugs into the US for organized crime - not US government policy or that of any government-established black box operations located within it. Anyway, the film is fictionalized, although based on real events, and the facts concerning drug movements etc. are not quite the facts of the events. Great film though.

ok alien. you may be right.

Air America and Barry Seal

The Air America film is very heavy fictionalized. However, the book on which it was based does mention that the opium grown by the Hmong people in Laos (the Chinese call them Miao) who were corralled into being the CIA's 'secret army' in the 1960s, did indeed often go out in Air America planes. There are some who suggest that this means that the CIA was financing its 'secret' guerrilla war with Hmong opium. This doesn't necessarily follow and is far from proven,. At any rate it does not help your argument much one way or the other.

And dont for get the nasty smokers. Include them when the firing squad is set up.

OK, now I see that you're putting us all on. Had me worried there for awhile.

My god, Yes, I am a Conspiracy Theorist but I am not a lunatic. You can all rest now since I am Not going to exterminate anyone. Maybe just a the big roach I found in the kitchen.

And all those who think 911 was done by Bin Laden and his 19 friends should also be strung up.

I feel better already.
Concerning the article: I'm glad that Yunnan authorities are perhaps a little more human than those in the rest of the country.

I recently read that the UK is now going to ban Khat, and call it a class C narcotic substance - despite the fact that the governments own research shows no harmful effects. So who's pulling the strings there? Seems like it's disgruntled Somali wives?

Regarding the comment "Death penalty for all drug users... just execute all drug users since they serve no purpose in any society.". Serving a purpose in society is not a prerequisite for the right to live. If it was, well, I think most of us would not be around..

@faraday: seems to me the most important function of society is to allow & enable us to do so.

here hfcampo, this story might put a smile on your face:

www.echinacities.com/[...]

A teenager has died after she was denied medical assistance at a boot camp for recovering internet addicts. Another was left seriously injured.

Nineteen year old Lingling was seen to be bleeding abdominally during a particularly rigorous military inspired training session. She apparently begged to be allowed to stop but was forced to continue for two hours. She later collapsed and died.

Treatment centers like this are more and more common as internet addiction has taken over China's youth, prompting officials to brand the struggle, the 'third Opium war'. They prompted controversy earlier in the decade as several resorted to using electronic shock therapy both as a deterrent and as punishment for rule breaking.

Online gaming is often referred to as 'electronic heroin' due to the level of addiction it inspires;

@faraday: Khat is not harmless. There are a couple of studies from various organizations and from different countries that prove the opposite of what you just said.

And for HFCAMPO: Coming from a country without death penalty and where death penalty is also considered murder, your attitude makes me sick. But hey, only developing countries like Europe, Russia, Ruanda, Ukraine and so on banned the death penalty.
Well at least advanced countries like the States, Yemen, China and North Korea still keep it. And because Europe is not exporting lethal injections to the States anymore, you are even considering using the electric chair again and think it's ok to use some lethal injections without prior testing? As a convict has no right to get a painless death. C'mon even every vet from the countryside can put a dog to sleep...

And how do you define purpose? What about the obese, the sick, the disabled, the old, the homeless? The street children in East Europe and Russia sniffing glue and other things to life on the streets. People esp. women trapped in human trafficking are forced to take drugs to stop them from running away. Ampethamines and crystal meth were given to American, British, German and Japanese soldiers so that they can fight much longer and care less about the risks.
I suggest for next time, just think before you write something. It gets into this mmteacher kind of attitude.

I love how stupid people make a big deal over an idiotic comment on a ridiculous forum. Yet with all that talk Kate, you say nothing about what is happening in real life all over the world. No idea where you are from but all the crap you talk about coming from a country without the death penalty. Well where the hell is that place you come from. The garbage that comes from your mouth makes me sick. Wake up and smell the coffee. See the condition of the world and go join an NGO so you can bark at someone else.

@Kate: Almost nothing is harmless - how harmful is khat?

Hi Kate, I know that some countries and orgs find Khat harmful, but the point is that the UK government's own studies, performed by specially appointed and well qualified personnel, concluded otherwise and recommended NOT banning it. Yet the UK bans it anyway. What other countries and organizations find, is completely irrelevant. My pondering on this subject is not medical, but political.

Sweden was exporting Guillotines to Irak only a few years ago, I think they stopped now. And Denmark exported the lethal injections, also recently stopped (2014?). Nobody's innocent.

@faraday: Now I see your point about khat. These sort of political decisions happen quite a lot. You never know if they were and to what extend they were influenced by the lobby.

Comming back to the point of discussion. I just believe, that no one has the right to decide who should live and who should be put to death. Especially supporting it by saying everyone should serve a purpose. That's faschist logic. I personnally dont think it's appropriate to say things like that neither in a forum nor in real life whether it's a joke or meant serious.

I just believe, that no one has the right to decide who should live and who should be put to death. Especially supporting it by saying everyone should serve a purpose.

The right, the ability, the people who control us and do whatever they want with the people of the world, they kill whoever they want and they never ask you or I for permission. This happens every day all over the world, regardless of what country you come from or what people they kill.

Perhaps you are as frustrated and feel helpless as I do about this issue. Perhaps you are empowered in some way by directing your comments to me.

People are dieing all around the world in real life yet you voice this problem to me as though I am the one doing this. Just to let you know, I am a nobody. I am not the president of any country or the UN. I have no guns or weapons of mass destruction in my back pocket, and I have no means or desire to kill anyone.

I do not have veto power to decide who should live or who should die. I am not on a panel to make decisions about who lives or who dies. This is a public forum. Perhaps you should write a letter to the US president, or UN president, or the leaders of the EU in Brussels. As a matter of fact, the headquaters of NATO is also in Brussels. Govts, NATO, the coalition of the willing, the CIA and MI5 and 6 are resposnsible for most of the murders that take place all over the world. These people have given themselves the right to decide who lives and who dies. They decide who is useful and serves a purpose and who does now, NOT me!

I am happy that you are passionate about this issue but I hope you can realize now how ridiculous you seem when you direct this comment to me. This is a public forum. People say many things here. Some people will even debate for hours about how McDonalds is better then Burger King.

Just to let you know, I have never tried, experimented or used any illegal drug in my life. I dont smoke cigaretts or cigars and I think Canabis is a very special medicine that can save lives. Unfortunately, the potheads have a bigger mouth and msirepresent the people who see cannabis as a medicine rather than a way to get high.

I want you to realize that when any person makes any comment about any issue on a public forum, the ones who reply have a vested interest in why they reply. So perhaps you are offended or hurt because you are or were a drug user and you feel persecuted by comment or think I am roaming the streets waiting to catch you so I can execute you. Or perhaps you are offended or hurt by people who are killed by others. I am neither of these so come back to reality.

A friendly suggestion. The most ridiculous person is NOT the one who makes stupid comments on a public forum, but the other person who takes it seriously and responds as though it was real, truth or reality. Sometimes - it is better to be thought a fool rather than open your mouth and prove it.

@HFCAMPO: I dont take drugs or smoke and never did. Back home I worked for an institution that takes care of drug addicts.

@kate, so can you confirm that drug addicts can be rehabilitated?

I can certainly confirm it.

i trained as a counsellor more than 20 years ago, for dope and for bereavement. Saw lots of turnarounds, some permenant, some temporary.

I'm not too sure about rehabilitation for DEALERS though. Thats a different kettle of fish altogether...

so that officially puts a nail in the coffin of HFCAMPO's argument then?

maybe you can put your counseling skills to use in china?

So what puts a nail on my coffin? What evidence is so overwhelming for you to come to this conclusion? The fact that 2 other people put their opinions which happen to agree with yours?

So let me tell you about rehabilitation. First understand what it means to be an addict and what it means to be in remission and what it means to be in recovery. So a cocaine addict stops using drugs but his smoking and pot use increases. He claims he is rehabilitated from cocaine. Next you must understand what it means to have multiple addictions and other undiagnosed addictions. Like a cocaine addict with a sex or food addiction or is also an alcoholic. He claims he is rehabilitated because he stopped using cocaine. Sorry!

Then we have the term Dry Drunk, this is a person who stopped drinking - we call it white knuckling it. He no longer drinks but he is still or even meaner then he was before when he was drinking.

Next we have the addicts who substitute an illegal addiction for a legal addiction. The cocaine addict no longer uses cocaine but he is now a 12 step addict. Everywhere he goes he must get his 12 step fix or he falls off the wagon in an instant. Or the one who becomes a bibble thumping Jesus Freak. He longer uses drugs but you can not get him to shut up about Jesus and how he saved his life and only Jesus is the answer. Same for those who become runners and now get a natural high. They still ignore their wife and kids and he must run a 10K every day, like a mailman, neither rain, nor sleet nor hail will stop him from running his daily 10K.

Just so you know, there are 12 step programs for any addiction. AA, NA, SLA and the list goes on.

So before you make a claim about rehabilitation you better take a look at the case file before you make such a sweeping comment.

"we call it white knuckling it."

who is we?

sorry, but people have all sorts of issues that have nothing to do with being a former cocaine addict, so i don't follow your logic.

Kate, when you engage with those addicted to trolling on the internet, it's best not to engage. Only feeds their habit.

@HFCampo: Your major argument was that drug users should be killed - you lost that one.

You affirmed that rehabilitation of addicts was just a matter of substituting one addiction for another.
Now you seem to be saying that all rehabilitated addicts are a-holes, offering no proof.
Are you still saying that you have some solution to 'win' some 'war' on drugs? If so, what is it? If not, then you're simply pointing out that illegal drug use - defined as using drugs that evil governments decide should be illegal - can involve lots of problems. Fine: I think we can all agree to that, and then argue about the details if we want to; we could also discuss possible advantages to the use of some drugs. But I doubt if this is the place to do either.

@HFCampo: I suggest that if we can't come up with something a bit more original then we all drop it, or start a forum, where I can tell you about my fantastic acid trip of many years ago, which I've never regretted; as well as another one some time later that was a real horror show. I would suggest that most such stories that people might tell will be a lot less dramatic or important, and quite a few might be funny.
At any rate, enough with the idea of a 'war on drugs'. Problems not all solved absolutely, finally and forever, with an iron hand? Then it's like almost everything else. And iron hands usually turn out to be bigger problems than the ones they are supposed to deal with.

I suggest that if we can't come up with something a bit more original then we all drop it -

You can drop it any time. No one is forcing you to reply. Do not put words in my mouth because I never said addicts are Aholes. Those are your words. I just stated that rehabilitation is NOT as easy as many people here make it sound as it is a much more complicated issue. I offered many examples of what rehabilitation is NOT.

I never worked as a counsellor, just did the trainings. I think the key thing to remember is that addiction is a sickness, not a crime. It can be cured, though I'd say that HFCAMPOs claim about substitution is pretty much on the mark, too. Many do indeed become compulsive dogooders, sporters, etc etc. But I think this sort of substitution, as long as its not harmful to the person or his/her surroundings, should not be seen as a bad thing. This substitution COULD be viewed in the same way as a person with kidney failure substituting sickness with dialysis...

As long as it is not harmful to the person or his surroundings. This is the most important fact - I beleive people have the right to hurt themselves as much as they want - go at it - knock yourself out and take all the drugs you want. However, All, not some, take others with them. It is never a victimless crime. When a father spends his time and money drinking rather than spending time with his family, he is causing undue pain on others not only himself. Especially in times of economic hardship. When anyone spends money on any drug rather then using that money to benefit spouse or children than there certainly is an adverse effect on others. I believe all people have the right to do whatever they want, AS LONG AS THEY DO NOT HARM OTHERS. Unless, a drug user is an only child, with deceased parents and no living relatives, then that person can take all the drugs they want. But anyone with a family (spouse + kids) is definitely hurting his immediate family. I dont see myself as a good father when I am buying drugs for myself yet neglect my son and deny buying him food, medicine, books, etc.

Yes, those who substitute illegal addictions with legal addictions are no longer drug addicts but can you honestly say that they have been rehabilitated and free of addicition? The answer is clearly NO!

When you see a loud mouth drunk yelling and fighting we call him an alcoholic but when you see an obese person you dont call him a food addict. The fact is that person does have an addiction. For those who disagree, then you are not educated on the real meaning of an addiction.

you're right, and there's no use denying it: sickness causes hardship.

problems arise when you judge a persons value as a human based on which particular ailment they do or dont suffer from. you can call a drunk 'alcoholic', sure. the folly however is to associate the term 'alcoholic' with 'bad quality person'. this is ignorance (my use of the word is also not to be associated with 'bad quality person'!). in fact i think it could be argued that recovered alco's add tremendous value to society! including those that substitute dope with compulsive dogoodmanship etc! :)

im just thinking about a friend whos son was recently diagnosed with adhd. its an easier example to draw paralells with addiction than my kidney disease example, because a sympthom of adhd is to affect the behaviour - just like alcoholism. not so many years ago, this kid would have been called a 'bad' kid, he would hav been beaten, slapped, an the parents would have been blamed. in fact before being diagnosed he was already thrown out of playschool for violent behaviour. i understand that the treatment for adhd is speed! anyway, i think the public at large have learned to see behaviour as a symptom of mental illness in the case of adhd...but not quite there yet in the case of addiction.

HFCAMPO, how do you know so much about drug addicts?

@faraday: I agree with you about addiction as illness etc. However, I do think that recent, especially US, concentration on seeing many things as 'illnesses' sometimes leads to the idea that they should not be considered responsible for their own behaviour, and that going too far down that road can lead to complete irresponsibility and denial of the idea of human freedom/responsibility entirely. Easy enough to look at past events & analyze them in terms of cause/effect - but in the present, where we all always are, choice and self-direction are necessary or we simply reduce both ourselves and others to the status of objects - e.g., we are no longer human.
OK, this leads off into philosophical considerations and perhaps too far from the subject at hand to go into in detail here - however, I think they're relevant. Addiction is not freedom, but self-deception: the addict CAN stop, can choose to stop, often, perhaps, tells himself he IS stopping - but he doesn't, may tell himself he CAN'T; lies to himself. I speak as a nicotine addict. Cf. J-P Sartre's concept of Bad Faith.

I mean it's also worth looking at such 'illnesses' as self-enslavement - and I don't mean to be substituting one perspective for another - both are important in any treatment - this is not either/or.

I friend took me to an Indian Casino on a reservation when I lived in Southern Cali. I was amazed at the cigarette smoking, alcohol drinking, and how so many people repeatedly went to break a $100.00 so they can continue with their gambling addictions.

On another ocassion I went to a Bingo Hall. My god, I was overwhelmed trying to blot out the numbers on just 2 Bingo cards and I could not believe how the Obese (food addicts) women with a cigarette (Tobacco addict) in their mouth could blot the numbers on 20+ Bingo cards (Gambling addict) while simultaneously stuffing donuts and apple fritters in their mouths.

yapp, agreed. can't force someone to be free. i think id need to be high before i could continue down that line of thought :)
kafka & lou reed vs huxley & sartre in a king-of-the-ring tag team match? :)

So anyone who plays Bingo is a gambling addict? It's a GAME, for Christ's sake. It's a social event for little old ladies who would otherwise stay at home and do nothing.

I think you enjoy putting labels on people and being judgmental.

Bingo and the Wang Ba (Internet Bars) here in China. Full of addicts. Bingo halls are not only full of little old ladies. Plenty of addicts in Bingo Halls and Indian Casinos. Hehe!

What about the people who sit around playing Mahjong all day long? Mahjong addicts? How do these people pay their bills?

you should see puerto rico :)

american gothic was a fantastic tv show, 90's i think. great fun and entertainment, as well as a latent, intelligent philosophical proposal. sheriff calebs proposal was, more or less, everyone is guilty.

therefore...tolerance.

disclose.tv = propaganda garbage

i've tried to watch some of the videos you've linked. i really have. but i can't watch for more than 2 seconds without feeling like an aneurism is coming on.

if you're genuinely interested in the drug problem, maybe you can find a good book that deals with the issues addicts face. good luck.

I'll admit, I skipped most of the posting... But I thought smoking provided a "false" calming effect. In that the person feels much more anxious because they are addicted to nicotine. They would feel much less calm if they had never started smoking in the first place.

Err.. feel much more calm if they never smoked. Smoking provides a calm feeling, but it's probably the reason they feel so anxious in the first place.

Nicotine is an addictive substance that directly affects the levels of dopamine and noradrenaline in your brain. It quickly causes physical as well as psychological dependence on the substance and in a very short time a person will develop Tolerance to this substance which means they need it more and more to continue to get the desiried effects. This is why smokers will continually need to smoke more and more.

So if you want to ruin your life and be hooked on this garbage, go right ahead. I see some people who are always complaining about how expensive things are getting. How the price of food is so expensive and how fruit prices are soaring, but they will never stop paying over 500 per month for their precious cigarettes.

Ask a smoker how much they pay for a pack of cigs and ask them how much they smoke each day/week/month. Then you can figure out the cost of their addiction and how they are selfishly stealing from their own family!

@HFCampo: Your description of smoking/nicotine addiction is ok but most smokers do not continually need to smoke more & more - I don't smoke any more now than I did decades ago.
Also, I don't understand why this is stealing from one's family.
I agree with you that nicotine addiction is a problem, and that this legal drug (nicotine) does more damage than some (not all) of the illegal drugs that you are so against.

Seems to me that, if, as you say, we cannot define which drugs should be illegal and which illegal, as the governments that you don't respect have all the power in this regard, it would also be the case that we have no power to oppose drugs like nicotine that are legal.
So - there are problems with drugs, both legal and illegal. What to do?

Hfcampo over and over tries to insinuate that being addicted to something is a choice that an individual makes. And a further implication is that the addict continues to decide to be addicted on an ongoing basis.

I dont think thats correct at all. Nobody ever decided 'im gonna try to be a junkie/chainsmoker/alco/obese'. Nobody. But how to formulate another counterargument escapes me at the minute. There are various opinons on whether the tendency to be addicted is genetic. However i think hfcampos post adequately describes why nicotine addiction is not (just) genetic, but also chemical. So on the one hand we have the chemical element (treat all drugs as poisons, and the addicts as victims) and on the other hand we have the physiological/psychological element (treat addicts as mentally/physically allergic to a 'harmless' substance). In neither of these arguments can i see a case for legal OR SOCIAL persecution of users. Dealers, however, including cigarette companies, knowingly expose substances to the public, in full knowledge that their profits generate hardship yet contribute absoloutely nothing to society. Except tax dollars and a need for rehabilitation.

Then there's the social element. disclose.tv had a great show about a drug called crocodile which is methodically destroying some russian border towns, and everyone in them. Even in that case I could'nt distinguish any justification for legal OR SOCIAL persecution of the users. In the russian case, they were their own dealers, manufacturing the drug themselves according to recipies found on facebook and ingredients bought OTC at 24 hour pharmacies. So indeed, what to do? Suggest to start by seeing the users, ALL of them, as victims. ?

Buddhism states that all life is suffering and that suffering stems from desire. Letting go of these desires should be one's purpose in life. Addiction is viewed as being stuck in the physical realm and life continues like a scratched record until a person can let go of these physical obstacles to freedom (nirvana - to extinguish desire). If not, you'll be back next lifetime with the same or another addiction until you get it right.

Yes, the question remains - is an addict a victim or does he have power or control over his addiction? If an addict is a victim than he can not be rehabilitated because he has no control over the addiction.

Now we venture into Nature vs Nurture. My daddy made me do it, Its in my jeans. I inherited this addiction so there is nothing I can do about it.

Meanwhile, every time you go purchase a pack of cigs, you are stealing from your own family because you are not buying food for the family but rather just cigs for me, me, me and only me. Unless, your spouse is also an addict and then you can share your cigs with her and wait until your kids are old enough so you can share your cigs with them.

the issue of smoking might actually be more complex than saying "smoking is bad for you". PURE tobacco may actually be good and it MAY have medicinal value, or at the very least not be harmful. the problem is all the chemicals added. but i have heard of people smoking pure tobacco. but the point is that maybe tobacco is something the body NEEDS and that's why so many people are hooked on cigarettes, in spite of the harmful effects. and maybe the solution is to have farmers growing and selling pure tobacco cigarettes. more studies should be conducted on pure tobacco and its effects rather than dismissing smoking altogether.

Ive smoked pure tobacco in a villiage in turkey. I was drunk at the time but thats not why i puked.

the farmers take it in from the fields in cars, tuktuks, bikes, lorries, horseback, whatever. The schoolyard is covered with black plastic and the raw tobacco is spread out on it. Some sections are mixed with fruit, to be used for shisha pipesmoking. Anyhow, its not really dry before all the kids come and walk all over it. Up and down they walk, all day long, trampling and mixing the tobacco. An utterly disgusting stench rises and its everywhere. I think, it must be possible to smell this shit from miles away. Well, many of the 'real men', myself included, smoked it while its still moist. Using bits of coal to keep it burning. The coal enters the lungs as vapour but inside it crystallizes - after a few years smoking arabic pipes i had to quit, HAD to, because of the coal in my lungs. Well, i only saw the harvesting process once but the one thing that sticks in my mind is the kids feet. Surely they must be discoloured for the rest of their lives. Maybe even stinking raw tobacco for a lifetime, i dont know.

haha. that's a good story for the grandchildren...

@HFCampo: If your wife likes coca-cola and drinks it regularly and you never do, is she stealing from the family?

@HFCampo: the Buddhist viewpoint is indeed a good one in many ways, though I'm not sure I agree about the reincarnation or necessary addiction in yr next life - however, the Buddhist idea is pretty much that its all about an addiction to life, per se, in the material realm etc. Not too far from that of the US writer William Burroughs, who was a serious junky and a serious writer - his sometimes hard-to-read literary approach used his own addiction to junk as a metaphor for life itself - it's all addiction (to sex, food, money...you name it). Trying to break out of the cycle of birth & rebirth etc. - all about karma, both within one's present life and within any rebirths. However, in these terms I'm still addicted to life and so am neither quite convinced nor unconvinced of the validity of this argument nor, at any rate, enlightened enough to get beyond it.

hfcampo is now quoting buddhist philosophy to support his argument, but i don't think buddhist philosophy advocates the death penalty for someone who doesn't live up to an ideal of abstinence from all addictive substances.

Read article 1 of the Georgia Guidestones.

haha, this thread is not dead yet? you talkin' to me? (impersonating robert de niro). yeah ok, i'll look it up when i get a chance!

actually, wasn't hard to find. article 1 of the georgia guidestones is:
1. MAINTAIN HUMANITY UNDER 500,000,000 IN PERPETUAL BALANCE WITH NATURE

so now your point is what?

500 million = 1/2 Billion

How can you keep humanity under 1/2 billion if there are 7 billion people?

Who decides who are the 500 Million who get to live?

I guess we have to purchase a ticket like in the movie 2012.

I have a better question. Who decided that humanity needs to be kept under 1/2 billion? I was never consulted on this. I never got that memo.

You ask a very good question. I was not asked either. So the question remains, Who made the Georgia guidestones? I know that in the USA, you need a work permit for everything. So who constructed this? Why is it that no one knows and there are no records? No asked but yet this policy is dictated to all.

What would be the nature of the Nature with which humankind would be in balance with?
Snake swallowing tail.

This is the purpose of the UN and why they designate places as UNESCO sites. So the elites can enjoy these places after they cull the useless eaters.

the film 2012 is hollywood propaganda bs. that fat russian billionaire who made his money breaking people's knee caps is not getting on the getaway spaceship.

Seems like you missed the entire purpose of the movie.

possibly. you brought up the georgia guidestones and the film 2012. in my estimation, both of these things are propaganda.

did the world end in 2012? why were there so many articles about the end of the world in the media (many of which chinese people i spoke to were believing) and a blockbuster hollywood film to further add to the propaganda?

The film 2012 was not about the world ending in 2012. However, the predictive programming message in the film is that only the elite will be saved and the remaining (95%) population will die. The Georgia Guridestones clearly states that humanity will be maintained at 500 million. How do you maintain population at 500 million when there are 7 billion human beings on this earth?

This was my point in purposely making my absurd comments about executing the drug addicts. I got so many arguements from many drug users (except Kate) about my comments yet as millions as murdered around the world all most can talk about is KFC, Burger King and if drinking in public is legal in China.

haha, tonyaod is right. this forum is (loosely) entertaining!

Yes, you entertain us all the time.

Login to comment Register to comment